It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

oil for food U.N. scandal, is it real or just propraganda

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 01:20 AM
link   
OK let me admit I have not read too much on it but found it just amazingly too good for the Bush administration that this big scandal of oil for food came out just as the Bush administration was under pressure from all sides to work through the UN to settle the problems of Iraq through the UN and then this big scandal came out and now I hear the people at the UN are totally denying it, is it true? What do you think? What concrete evidence have you heard? If you believe it to be true do you think the corruption goes all the way to the top echelon of the UN? TIA




posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 05:41 AM
link   
It's for real, alright. And it didn't just surface at election time. And it goes up to the top of the UN, including Benon Sevan, the head of the UN Oil for Food program. He's been on TV several times, being pursued down the streets of Manhattan, refusing to answer any questions.

Latest updated figures are that Saddam skimmed $21.3 billion from the program, which has been running since 1997.

There is mounting evidence that the reason France and Germany, supposedly two of our allies, refused to back the US entry into Iraq is that they were making big bucks off of this fiasco. Sounds reasonable to me.




posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 05:57 AM
link   
It's real. I've started my own research into this. Here is the first voucher recipient I've looked into and I'm planning to just work down the list. This first one is a company that has Swiss/French connections:

ADDAX and now, under the auspices of the U.N.'s UNDP (development program) which has made itself the consultant to the majors in the development of African petroleum fields, ADDAX produces almost all of the petroleum in Nigeria.

It's worth noting that the Swiss and the French are the two European countries that IBIS claimed to have new intell on and were told by the U.N. committee to drop off their investigation:

Details on IBIS report



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 06:07 AM
link   
Concrete evidence you ask? Well, I, for one, do not beleive any exist; the U.S. government, in utter haste, as usual, coincided the inability of the UN to observe one of many of it's endevours in humanitarious efforts, with Saddam Hussain milking as much money as he kid from this fiasco. I have yet to see any solid evidence other than speculations, allocated billions, and ignorant forsight.




It's for real, alright. And it didn't just surface at election time. And it goes up to the top of the UN, including Benon Sevan, the head of the UN Oil for Food program. He's been on TV several times, being pursued down the streets of Manhattan, refusing to answer any questions.



That does not insinuate that he had a hand in the corruption. He simply did not feel like answering any questions. We all are guilty of this; celebraties, politicians, and your average citizen under sever stress will usualy convey a great deal of umbrage. Now, I do not see any of these "documents" on the internet and the public's eye informing us of corruption, nor do I see any names being linked with documents also being linked to the corruption. Unless we can observe, first hand, the official documents insinuating that the U.N, from top to bottom, was responsible and had partaken in this scandal, I'm privy to such denotions of corruption in the U.N, in it's entire totality.




Latest updated figures are that Saddam skimmed $21.3 billion from the program, which has been running since 1997.


Where did you derive that number from, and where did those who derived that number, derive it from? I would like to see exactly where that money is being kept, how it was spent, and who exactly spent it.




There is mounting evidence that the reason France and Germany, supposedly two of our allies, refused to back the US entry into Iraq is that they were making big bucks off of this fiasco. Sounds reasonable to me.


The refused to partake in an illegal war, simple as that. The same way Canada refused to, along with many other countries. Other than Britian, the "mighty coalition of the willing" is made up of very mediocre countries -- economicly, and military wise -- ( United States, Britain, Spain, Australia, Kuwait, Poland, Albania, Romania, Czech Republic, Portugal, Japan, South Korea, Denmark, Netherlands, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Macedonia, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Georgia, Philippines, Uzbekistan, Colombia, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Honduras, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Uganda, Iceland, Singapore, Mongolia, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Panama. ) who simply joined the bandwagon after saturating the same propanganda the U.S. gave to us -- some are leaving though...

I would not want to risk my sons and daughters over a war like this.

Deep



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 08:01 AM
link   
I know is real but as why was allowed to go on for so long is a question that many beside UN has to answer.

The thing is that it has die out on the prime media but not on Fox.



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Hmm,

A huge scandal is a great way for Bush's conservative/republican administration to disenfranchise themselves from the "corrupted" united nations. With the republicans controlling every branch of the government over the next four years, removing the US from the ball & chain like restrictions of being a UN member might be a goal of this administration. Already we're seeing partisan commercials and advertisements from conservative groups gathering up unity to support this goal of disenfranchisement.

Once Bushes America is out of the United nations then our war mongering moral government will have greater ability to attack non Nato countries, instead of wimpy diplomatic solutions.

fabulous isnt it..



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 10:11 AM
link   

as posted by ZeroDeep
Well, I, for one, do not beleive any exist...


Where you been?

More evidences and sourcings to befound and had within ATS archives then Mr. Kofi Annan and company can swallow:
POLITICS: U.N. Oil For Food Scandal Grows. Possibly the Largest in Human History.
Iraq, the U.N. and oil-for-food
POLITICS: Oil for Food Probe Includes Annan's Son
NEWS: Probe: Saddam Made $21B From U.N. Oil For Food Program
U.N. Impedes Oil For Food Investigation
BBC: UN Knew Saddam was Abusing the Oil for Food Program but did nothing.

And I'm sure that I can and could find more, but hey, the internet itself has tens of thousands of legit sourcings and evidences for this UN scandal, that is increasing looking like the bunny from the Duracell battery commercial....it just keep's going and going, and going.....


What is the motto of ATS again, someone?




seekerof



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

as posted by ZeroDeep
Well, I, for one, do not beleive any exist...


Where you been?

More evidences and sourcings to befound and had within ATS archives then Mr. Kofi Annan and company can swallow:
POLITICS: U.N. Oil For Food Scandal Grows. Possibly the Largest in Human History.
Iraq, the U.N. and oil-for-food
POLITICS: Oil for Food Probe Includes Annan's Son
NEWS: Probe: Saddam Made $21B From U.N. Oil For Food Program
U.N. Impedes Oil For Food Investigation
BBC: UN Knew Saddam was Abusing the Oil for Food Program but did nothing.

And I'm sure that I can and could find more, but hey, the internet itself has tens of thousands of legit sourcings and evidences for this UN scandal, that is increasing looking like the bunny from the Duracell battery commercial....it just keep's going and going, and going.....


What is the motto of ATS again, someone?




seekerof




Um, yeah, thanks for those links. First off, not a single one of those links are to a news site that isn't completely biased. I mean come on, FOX news and the WA Times? Even the link supposedly from the BBC was to something completely different. What exactly is heritage.org?? I am not saying that the UN is completely free of this scandal, but to assume that EVERYONE from the top down is involved = IGNORANCE!! Just because a topic has been discussed and rediscussed has no bearing on whether or not it is true. I heard a whole lot of crap about WMD and such (actually still am) but have any been found?? Where are the stockpiles?? You are quick to label us liberals when all we want is the TRUTH. Why is that so hard to understand????????????



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogansRun
Um, yeah, thanks for those links. First off, not a single one of those links are to a news site that isn't completely biased. I mean come on, FOX news and the WA Times?

What sources would be acceptable to you?


I am not saying that the UN is completely free of this scandal, but to assume that EVERYONE from the top down is involved = IGNORANCE!!

I don't think anyone said that. Scandals of this magnittude usually stop pretty close to the top of a corrupt organization.




posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 08:37 PM
link   
LogansRun....
Source issues?
BTW, Kofi Annan is what to the United Nation's? The top-dog?

Ignorance indeed, huh?



seekerof



posted on Nov, 25 2004 @ 02:30 AM
link   
I hope this is the endevour that allows the US to separate from the UN (which is really a collaboration of the EU and OPEC) and the UN from the US. It's real. And it is true they (suspected embezlers) are denying it, in the same sense that Orenthal Jay Simpson denied the murder of Nicole Simpson.




top topics



 
0

log in

join