Put Kofi Annan on Trial for Crimes Against Humanity

The UN is corrupt and the purging must start with it's corrupt Secretary General, Kofi Annan. $21.3B was siphoned from the Iraqi people because of his complicity in the greatest theft in history. History will record his role in the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi children because he, along with his co-defendants the French, stole money from them to build palatial residences and to fund terrorism.

How can anyone defend a man whose adulation for one of the world's worst terrorists was an embarassment to the free world? Annan is decidely pro-terrorist and anti-American and I hope he burns in Hell with his evil spawn Kojo for eternity.

Those who are comparing Annan with Halliburton are out of ammunition and are simply trying to deflect the attention away from their master. Halliburton is giving the Iraqi people something in return for the money they receive. Annan's return for the money he stole from them was his middle finger.

And don't try to bring Bush into this. Your antics are transparent and childish. This topic is about Annan, not Bush. If you want to bash Bush, start another thread or join one of the dozens that the grackles have already started.



[edit on 1-12-2004 by jsobecky]

The UN is in serious need of reform if it's ever to get back to it's original purpose. The Oil For Food program paid the entire UN budget for 7 years, with kickbacks and siphoning rampant.

The obvious fact is that the UN had no incentive for enforcing the resolutions, or ending the sanctions. That would have been the end of the cash cow, not just for Kofi and Kojo, but for Benon Sevan, France, Russia, Syria, Jordan, etc. It's hard to come to the conclusion that the UN didn't utterly fail the Iraqi people.

There hadn't been inspections for 5 years prior to the US invasion. Nobody knew what was going on with Saddam's weapons programs, even Saddam's own Generals didn't know the WMD's were gone. Saddam thought he could make up with the US right up until the end. He saw Iraq as a valuable counter to Iran for the US. He just didn't understand that Bush was dead serious, and he knew that any war resolution would be vetoed.

France had sold it's SC veto to Iraq by May of 2002, it's documented in the Duelfer report. What good is it to have a Security Council if veto wielding countries are willing to sell their power to dictators?

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Kofi Annan was the original author of the Oil for Food scam. He and the entire UN should be put on trial for crimes against humanity for funding terrorism through the Oil for Food Scam. Opinions?

[edit on 29-11-2004 by DrHoracid]

Yea, and at the sametime, put Bush and his entire adminstration on trial aswell .

Originally posted by engineer
The obvious fact is that the UN had no incentive for enforcing the resolutions, or ending the sanctions. That would have been the end of the cash cow, not just for Kofi and Kojo, but for Benon Sevan, France, Russia, Syria, Jordan, etc. It's hard to come to the conclusion that the UN didn't utterly fail the Iraqi people.

There hadn't been inspections for 5 years prior to the US invasion. Nobody knew what was going on with Saddam's weapons programs, even Saddam's own Generals didn't know the WMD's were gone.

Many members of the Security Council wanted to end the sanctions.
That would have been the end of their 'cash cow' but they still wanted it.

Also, the Weapons inspectors went in in November 2002 and remained there until they were asked to leave by the US in March of 2003.

If you read my previous post, you'll see the US had a big hand in ignoring what was going on with the Oil For Food program. Especially illegal smuggling to Jordan. Read up on it: www.alternet.org...

Group to file war crimes suit against U.S. over Abu Ghraib abuse in German courts
Filed under: General� site admin @ 3:30 pm Email This
By John Byrne | RAW STORY Editor

Now this is almost as funny as when a belgian lawyer tried to charge Bush for war crimes under belgian law. What is it about these tiny european countries that makes them thnk they can charge US officials with anything?

Yeah right next to every single American president EVER!!

Originally posted by AceOfBase
Many members of the Security Council wanted to end the sanctions.
That would have been the end of their 'cash cow' but they still wanted it.

Yeah, Syria, China, lol. Read resolution 1441 here:

www.itmweb.com...

Doesn't sound like they were ready to lift sanctions, does it?

Originally posted by AceOfBase
Also, the Weapons inspectors went in in November 2002 and remained there until they were asked to leave by the US in March of 2003.

And while they were there, they sat in their hotel in Baghdad waiting for permission to go to the sites that they had "unrestricted" access to. Same old game, different day.

Read the Duelfer report. It's pretty long, but the key findings part is only 14 pages.

www.cia.gov...

Originally posted by engineer
Yeah, Syria, China, lol. Read resolution 1441 here:

www.itmweb.com...

Doesn't sound like they were ready to lift sanctions, does it?

Resolution 1441 was written by Colin Powell so why are you naming Syria and China?

France, Russia and China did want the sanctions removed or relaxed from years ago.

democracynow.org 1999
...some Security Council members, led by France, are criticizing the bombings and working on a resolution to end the economic sanctions that are responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis every month. France and the US could come to a head at the Security Council over this issue.

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Kofi Annan was the original author of the Oil for Food scam. He and the entire UN should be put on trial for crimes against humanity for funding terrorism through the Oil for Food Scam. Opinions?

A scam is not a crime against humanity. Ther eis about as much reason to try annan for this as there is bush or any one else.

flyers fan
He should be put on trial for allowing the mass murders in Rwanda and Iraq,

Who is not guilty of that?

[edit on 2-12-2004 by Nygdan]

You helped make my point very well, thanks. If Billary backed Annan something is very wrong. The age of corporate scams and false accounting was 1992-2000. Maybe Arthur Anderson set up the books for Kofi.

Seriously, this can not be mere coincidence. The UN short of Money and "Oil-For-Food" just happens to come along. This all makes even "ENRON" look small.

[edit on 2-12-2004 by DrHoracid]

Originally posted by AceOfBase
Resolution 1441 was written by Colin Powell so why are you naming Syria and China?

And UNANIMOUSLY approved by the SC. And Iraq had PLENTY of opportunity to avoid a war.

I find it astonishing that so many people here will justify any level of corruption, ineffectiveness, ineptness, and graft that comes out of the UN. The UN gives credibility to dictators like Assad, Khadaffi, Hussein, etc. by giving them equal status to democracies. This is completely counter to the charter.

France sells it's veto to Iraq, and not a peep out of the people here who condemn the US for going against the SC when it came down to enforcing a cease fire agreement that the UN failed for 12 years to enforce.

I listen to the Canadians here, and I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I used to do a lot of business in Canada, no more. You rant and rave against out elected leader, call him names, call the US names, etc. US citizens are no longer welcome in Canada to a large extent, my friends in BC and Quebec tell me stories about the way Americans are being treated, and it's just plain pathetic. Thank God we do not treat you the way you are treating us.

Americans have been listening to this "righteous indignation" for three years now, and we are fed up with it. Don't like it? Oh, well. Deal with it.

We will not sell our security to the UN or anyone else. The UN had plenty of opportunity to enforce the resolutions on Iraq, but they failed. Just like they are failing in the Sudan and the Ivory Coast. Just like they failed so many times, in so many places in the past. Somalia, Yugoslavia, Rwanda.

And where do these countries turn when the UN fails them? You got it. And we always come to the rescue, without asking for reparations or redress of any sort. And you know what? WE ALWAYS WILL. We spend more money on foreign aid than the rest of the world combined.

So go ahead with your US bashing, have fun. Call us war criminals, terrorists, etc. Accuse us of trying to take over the world. Whatever. You sound like a bunch of drama queens.

And to all you US haters, no matter what country you live in;

Are we perfect? NO. Are you? One thing you can count on is that when it's YOUR COUNTRY in a pinch, we'll still be there, fighting and dying for YOUR rights. And we won't ask for anything in return, because we are AMERICANS.

Originally posted by DrHoracid
You helped make my point very well, thanks. If Billary backed Annan something is very wrong.

Actually, the Republican Congress, Jesse Helms the first, agreed with Bill (or Bill agreed with the Republican Congress) that Boutros-Ghali had to go.

Kofi Annan was backed, as a candidate, by the United States and Britain, while France, at first, blocked him. France finally relented, Annan was chosen, and proceeded to smoothe out relations with the U.S. - including Jesse Helms, a Republican.

So it's funny that no matter how many links I post, people will still say that Kofi Annan was on France's side all along, and that Boutros-Ghali was ejected not by the U.S., but by Bill Clinton.

Oh, and that Halliburton smells like roses.

What I believe is that the UN is the last obstacle in the United States' way when it comes to true world domination. It's obvious that the US wants to rebuild the UN so that it walks on a tight American leash, and accusing it of being corrupt and committing "crimes against humanity" is just the way to do that.

Chew on this:

From G. Monbiots website www.monbiot.com


"The secret deals in Iraq for which the United Nations is currently being attacked by US senators were in fact overseen by the US government. It ensured that Saddam Hussein could evade sanctions by continuing to sell oil to its allies in Jordan and Turkey.(3) Republican congressmen are calling on Kofi Annan to resign for letting this happen, apparently unaware that it was approved in Washington to support American strategic objectives. The United States finds the monsters it seeks, as it pecks and flutters at its own image."


3. Leading article, 5th December 2004. The UN Oil Scandal. The New York Times; Susan Sachs and Judith Miller, 13th August 2004. Under Eye of U.N., Billions for Hussein In Oil-for-Food Plan. The New York Times.

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Kofi Annan was the original author of the Oil for Food scam. He and the entire UN should be put on trial for crimes against humanity for funding terrorism through the Oil for Food Scam. Opinions?

[edit on 29-11-2004 by DrHoracid]

I was not gonna reply to this piece of childish attempt of diverting attention from the real facts and Blame someone else,like Kofie Anann.Just to give you an Idea of what the Imbargo,you know the one Big Bush imposed of 'All' Iraqi citizens ;500,000 kids died of treathable diseases that's without mentioning the huge numbers of people who died of starvation..If I understand You correctly You're saying We The rest Of the World who happens to have a 'Heart' should have turned our heads the other way...Man you just can't seize to impress me with your Hypocritical Holiness....Goes to show you're all talk but walk the widow's walk...

...If you polled the US with the question "If your children were starving and their rights were severly violated, would you give your own life for them to have food and liberty again?" Most would answer YES. If you extended that question to "If when you died, you had to take some enemy civilians with you, would you do it?", a smaller group would say yes. This small group in the Middle East make up terrorists. The US treds into these foreign lands under the false cover of Defense to keep gas prices at under 2$ a gallon at home. The children in Iraq are starving and are without medical care because of the US's sanctions on trade. This imbargo is because Iraq is uncooperative when it comes to oil. Indirectly, the Soccer mom who fills up her all terrein SUV to drive in suberbia twice a week paid for terrorism more than those drug users did, but there are no ad's for this.

For those who call a terrorist cowardly. I would have to disagree. What should a discontent arab do? Write a letter to our congressman? They obviously cannot declare war on the US because they will be beaten down by F16's and Carpet bombs. So they attack the infrastructure of America. Before you say that Civilians are not suppose to be in war, imagine how many arab civilians were killed during the Gulf War, and the current War on Terrorism. You call these civilians collateral damage. The terrorists job was not to murder 3000 innocents, their job was to send the United States a message. Their message was recieved, and responded to, in the form of an asskicking.

These people are not doing this out of self-gain. The only person who has gained from 9/11 is Georgie W. Bush. His political administration is untouchable now. His only regret is that 9/11/01 didn't happen in 9/11/03. He will definately be elected a 2nd time. The religious part of islam gives them the courage to do what they do, but the reasons stem from something much more.

I am not saying that terrorism is justified, but i can understand that these are not crazed arabs with hatred against civilians. America herself has gotten her hands dirty. They have killed thousands of civilians and covertly provided these terrorists with the resources to do this. We kill their people with cruise missiles and Supersonic jets and we are suppose to assume that our people are untouchable? everyone is fair game.

For Your Eyes Only.....
Origins: In August 1990 the Security Council adopted resolution 661, imposing comprehensive sanctions on Iraq following that country�s invasion of Kuwait. In the immediate aftermath of the Gulf War in 1991, the Secretary-General dispatched an inter-agency mission to assess the humanitarian needs arising in Iraq and Kuwait.
The mission visited Iraq from 10 to 17 March 1991 and reported that "the Iraqi people may soon face a further imminent catastrophe, which could include epidemic and famine, if massive life-supporting needs are not rapidly met." .
Throughout 1991, with growing concern over the humanitarian situation in the country, the United Nations proposed measures to enable Iraq to sell limited quantities of oil to meet its people's needs. The Government of Iraq declined these offers, contained in particular, in resolutions 706 (1991) and 712 (1991), adopted, respectively, in August and September 1991.
Resolution 986: On 14 April 1995, acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Security Council adopted resolution 986, establishing the "oil-for-food" programme, providing Iraq with another opportunity to sell oil to finance the purchase of humanitarian goods, and various mandated United Nations activities concerning Iraq. The programme, as established by the Security Council, is intended to be a "temporary measure to provide for the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people, until the fulfillment by Iraq of the relevant Security Council resolutions, including notably resolution 687(1991) of 3 April 1991".

Mandate: The Office of the Iraq Programme administers the programme as an operation separate and distinct from all other United Nations activities within the context of the sanctions regime, which fall within the purview of UNMOVIC, IAEA and the United Nations Compensation Commission.
Coordination: The Office of the Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq (UNOHCI) is an integral part of the Office of the Iraq Programme (OIP). The Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq reports directly to the Executive Director of OIP, and is responsible for the management and implementation of the programme in the field.

Implementation: There are nine United Nations agencies and organizations involved in the programme. They are: FAO, UNESCO, WHO, ITU, UNICEF, UNDP, WFP, UNOPS, UN-Habitat.

Pre-War and Post-War Developments (2003): On 17 March 2003, the United Nations Secretary-General announced that in view of warnings received from the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States, regarding the prospect of war and the continued safety and security of UN personnel present in the territory of Iraq, he was no longer in a position to guarantee their safety and security. All remaining UN international staff in Iraq were evacuated on 18 March 2003 and the President of the Security Council asked the Secretary General to submit proposals to adjust the mandate of the Oil-for-Food Programme so that it would have flexibility to meet new humanitarian challenges presented by the prospect of war in Iraq.

On 19 March 2003, the war in Iraq began with the bombing of Baghdad and on 20 March 2003, the Secretary General pledged to do his utmost to ensure that the UN rose to the challenge of shielding the civilian population "from the grim consequences of war."

A resolution (1472) was adopted unanimously by the Security Council on 28 March 2003 adjusting the Oil-for-Food Programme and giving the Secretary-General authority to facilitate the delivery and receipt of goods contracted by the Government of Iraq for the humanitarian needs of its people. On 24 April 2003 those provisions were extended to 3 June. The extension under resolution 1476,(2003)gave the Office of the Iraq Programme and UN agencies, valuable time to identify and ship additional goods and supplies.


[edit on 22-12-2004 by Horus_Re]

The 500,000 children that died were as a direct result of diverting money to military purposes by Saddam. These are the facts you refuse to aknowledge.

Next, you seem to leave out the $21 billion that was scammed. Again this was done by Saddam to divert funding to the military. Only this time he had the help of the UN, France, Germany, Russia and many others.

Koffi's expertise is ECONOMICS read his bio on the UN website. I find it hard to believe he didn't know what was going on.

Yet again you are defending sawing off heads..........Stealing money from the mouths of children. awe whats the use. you'll never get-it.

Originally posted by DrHoracid
The 500,000 children that died were as a direct result of diverting money to military purposes by Saddam. These are the facts you refuse to aknowledge.

They died as a result of the sanctions, not as a result of Saddam diverting money.

The figure of 500,000 dead children is from 1996.
Here's a clip with Medeline Albright talking about the sanctions, from '60 minutes' that aired in 1996.
mixallow.blogdns.net...

That was before the Oil for Food program.
At least Oil for Food saved some lives.

$8.1 Billion Transferred to Development Fund for Iraq...

This is what The U.N. is doing for Iraq....
The UN Controller has transferred a total of US$8.1 billion to the Development Fund for Iraq. The latest transfer of $500 million was announced on 19 April. Transfers of $1 billion each were made on 28 May, 31 October and 18 November from the United Nations Iraq escrow account, at the request of the Security Council contained in paragraph 17 of resolution 1483(2003) of 22 May 2003. Another $2.6 billion was transferred on 31 December 2003 and a further $2 billion on 31 March 2004.

I'll be back with the 'Exact figures of Child deaths caused by the Imbargo.

Those Kids died because of Medication that was held up because of fear that they might be used in creating WMD's..sounds Funny...Well that's what went down...my friend...

[edit on 22-12-2004 by Horus_Re]