What did Kofi know?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Headache in a Suitcase

Site Team
Staff member
Joined
Jul 16, 2000
Messages
75,734
Location
With the other morally corrupt bootlicking rubes.
UNITED NATIONS - Investigators of the U.N. oil-for-food program said Tuesday they are "urgently reviewing" new information that suggests U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan may have known more about a contract that was awarded to the company that employed his son.

The December 1998 memo from Michael Wilson, then a vice president of Cotecna Inspections S.A., mentions brief discussions with Annan "and his entourage" during a summit in Paris in 1998. "We could count on their support," the memo said.

If accurate, the memo could contradict a major finding of the Independent Inquiry Committee — that there wasn't enough evidence to show that Annan knew about efforts by Cotecna, which employed his son, Kojo, to win a contract under oil-for-food. Cotecna learned it won the contract on Dec. 11, 1998.

The statement from the Independent Inquiry Committee, led by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, said it would "conduct additional investigation regarding this new information."

In a statement released earlier Tuesday, Cotecna again denied that it committed any wrongdoing in obtaining the $10 million a year contract.
 
OK....I have watched CNN...for almost the entire afternoon...

No mention of OIL for food...

but ya know....Mike Jackson is doing a fine job at keeping the Iraq bombing off the wire.
 
I know that I would bury my distracting story away in a small article in the world news pages, nobody pays attention to the picture of a naked human pyramid or a bloodied and bombed out street on the front page.
 
barbrady.jpg


move along people, nothing to see here.
 
There hasn't been a damn thing about the unsavory activities of Kofi's son in my newspapers. This is interesting because it has a conservative orientation and you'd think they'd have more of an interest in exposing this sort of thing, but no, Michael Jackson has been keeping every damn policy story off of our front pages. This newspaper has a real weakness for sensationalism, which really sucks.
 
Considering that this has been going on for well over a year now with relatively little attention is not surprising really, the UN being corrupt is a real 'dog bites man' story. The issue I find is that the regime was so expertly able to manipulate the sanctions to their own ends; Saddam managed to starve his people of food and make them suffer for want of medicine, blame it on the west, and then have the added bonus of recieving over 20 billion dollars in illegal oil revenue over the course of the program which was used to purchase arms smuggled into the country. He was not being adequately contained by the policy and it was causing a lot of damage.
 
I find it amusing the lack of response in this forum.....

Could we turn this into a gay abortion thread?
 
I don't think it will ever be realised to it's full extent. There are plenty of people gunning for the UN to get their arses kicked, but to get there involves opening a can of worms that many don't want opened. I'm all for it being blown right open, and those who deserve it getting exposed and punished, but I can't see that happening because there'll be too much pressure to keep the lid on.
 
Once there are large sums of money involved and once controls are insufficient, there is going to be fraud because a certain kind of person will take advantage of the situation. That is human nature.Take my word for it, I have 4 years experience as a fraud investigator, a job which turns you into a kind of amateur psychologist!

And yes, the exact same applies to the situation in Iraq regarding money allocated to development seemingly going missing.

(Happy now, Dreadsox? :wink: )
 
Oh, gosh, yes, take any situation involving large sums of money and you're going to have all sorts of corruption and stuff because some people will do anything to get more money.
 
Memos: U.N. Knew Saddam Violated Sanctions

By EDITH M. LEDERER
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 21, 2005; 8:32 PM

UNITED NATIONS -- The U.N. Security Council had detailed knowledge of how Saddam Hussein was violating U.N. sanctions, but was so divided that many violations went largely unchecked, according to documents released Tuesday by a congressional panel.

Despite the divisions in the council committee monitoring sanctions, the Security Council managed to institute a pricing policy under U.S. and British pressure to cut lucrative surcharges on oil sales that Saddam was pocketing.
The committee's divisions and Saddam's sanctions violations were widely reported starting in the late 1990s and until the program ended in 2003. But the documents released Tuesday, which include U.S. memos and reports on committee meetings, provide a more comprehensive picture of the political dynamics at play and the difficulty in enforcing sanctions.

The council imposed sanctions after Saddam's 1990 invasion of Kuwait and authorized the oil-for-food program in 1996 to help Iraqis cope with the impact of the embargoes. Under the program, Iraq was allowed to sell oil _ provided most of the proceeds were used to buy humanitarian goods.

Thomas Schweich, chief of staff at the U.S. mission to the United Nations, released a statement Tuesday to the House Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight and investigations panel, saying that the atmosphere in the sanctions committee as the oil-for-food program evolved during the late 1990s "became increasingly contentious."

Saddam "cleverly exploited" sanctions in a variety of ways, granting "oil and humanitarian supply contracts to those willing to bend the rules in Iraq's favor." Iraq's supporters on the Security Council included Russia, China and France until mid-2001 when it backed a U.S.-British sanctions proposal. Other supporters included Iraq's neighbors _ Jordan, Syria and Turkey _ who received smuggled Iraqi oil.

Among other violations, Saddam imposed surcharges, topped off oil loadings, and created phony service contracts, phantom spare parts, shell corporations, and used "plain old-fashioned bribery and kickbacks involving millions of dollars," Schweich said.

He said U.S. and British efforts to address those problems were often "negated by other members' desires to ease sanctions on Iraq."

In 2000, Iraq was reported to have eroded sanctions and resumed commercial and diplomatic ties with many countries. Saddam got more than a dozen countries to start commercial flights to Baghdad, reopened a long-closed oil pipeline to Syria and illegally imposed a surcharge on its oil customers.

Many of the documents focus on U.S. and British efforts to end the illegal surcharges, which ranged between 20 and 70 cents a barrel of oil, according to a Feb. 13, 2001, letter from U.N. oil monitors.

Washington and London eventually succeeded in getting the sanctions committee to set the price of Iraqi oil at the end of every month _ rather than the beginning _ to prevent Iraq from taking advantage of fluctuations in the oil market to impose the surcharges.

The two countries said the policy cut illegal payoffs to Saddam's government. But U.N. officials and council members, including Russia and France, demanded an end to the retroactive pricing policy because it led to a sharp drop in oil exports, which meant less money for the oil-for-food program.

In a separate sanction, a June 28, 2002, memo from U.S. deputy ambassador James Cunningham reported a meeting with a Jordanian diplomat to express dissatisfaction that Royal Jordanian Airlines was flying frequently to Baghdad.

The same memo said Washington was still debating "whether we would raise Syrian noncompliance issues on the pipeline, illicit shipment of goods and flights in the council."

In addition, a memo from March 2000, with the author and recipient whited out, quoted an unnamed industry analyst as saying Saddam's government had started charging an "in-land transportation fee" on oil-for-food contracts _ and was also giving some contracts as gifts.
link
 
Back
Top Bottom