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.

 

ATS: Russians Benefited The Most From Oil For Food Program Corruption.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 01:16 AM
link   
According to a new report, Kremlin operatives and Russian politicians benefited the most from the OFF program. This new report states that Saddam was trying to buy support from several countries to end the sanctions against Iraq, and used the OFF program to try to buy his way out from the sanctions, and that Saddam bought weapons, among other things, instead of food and other necessities that the Iraqi people needed. The report also states that Saddam favored Russian, France, and China, but that some U.S. companies also bought oil from these countries as they sought to reap from the program also by buying directly from companies from Russia, France and China. Some of the people who used the program to make illegal deals are even Americans and Brittish, such as Brittish lawmaker George Galloway who got oil allocations in return for backing Saddam's regime and for a campaign against U.N. sanctions on Iraq.
 



www.washingtonpost.com
The documents outline a trail of oil and money that leads directly from Iraq to the Kremlin and the former chief of staff to Russian President Vladimir Putin and former president Boris Yeltsin. The report said Iraq sought to influence and reward the Russian government because it sits on the powerful U.N. Security Council that oversaw sanctions against the Hussein government. Russia repeatedly sided with Iraq on issues before the Security Council.
....................
In addition, the reports allege that Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky, several Russian entities and a Houston-based oil trading company, Bayoil, "paid millions of dollars in illegal, under-the-table surcharges to the Hussein regime in connection with these oil transactions." U.S. officials say Hussein used illicit proceeds from oil sales to buy weapons, among other things.
.................
Iraq's U.N. ambassador, Feisal Amin Istrabadi, said Russia was one of dozens of countries that took advantage of Iraq's oil wealth. "There were certainly commercial and political interests involved, and Russia behaved like any other state in looking after itself," he said.





Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The money trail leads to many people, most of whom are Russian politicians, but also Chinese, French, American, and Brittish business people and politicians who were trying to profit from the OFF program.

In the US, David B. Chalmers, owner of the Texas oil company Bayoil is being indicted on charges related to the program.

All of the politicians that are being accused of involvement in the corrupted program are obviously denying their involvement.

Related News Links:
www.msnbc.msn.com


[edit on 17-5-2005 by Muaddib]




posted on May, 17 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   


Some of the people who used the program to make illegal deals are even Americans and Brittish, such as Brittish lawmaker George Galloway


I did not see the name George Galloway in the Washington Post article that you cite. Mr. Galloway has been accused but by no means found guilty. He is here defending his good name. It strikes me as grossly unfair for you to put that statement forth as though it is an established fact when it clearly is not established and is vigorously disputed by the accused.

But, then, he disagrees with the Bu#es' agenda and, for some, that's enough without more to make him guilty of any accusation they may throw at him. It's the old game of deflecting attention by accusing others.


[edit on 5/17/2005 by dubiousone]



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Galloway TOTALLY takes on the accusations at this link.

Make this guy an honorary US citizen.



WATCH THIS!

www.democraticunderground.com...


jako



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by dubiousone

I did not see the name George Galloway in the Washington Post article that you cite. Mr. Galloway has been accused but by no means found guilty. He is here defending his good name. It strikes me as grossly unfair for you to put that statement forth as though it is an established fact when it clearly is not established and is vigorously disputed by the accused.
..................
[edit on 5/17/2005 by dubiousone]


It is on the other link I gave....

i was going to add the information from the other link, but then I would be breaking the format for submitted news and it wouldn't have been accepted.....but you can find the information in the second link i provided....



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Here is part of the accusation against Galloway and former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua....


Former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua, also accused by U.S. lawmakers of involvement in corruption in the oil-for-food program, denied the allegations and said he was caught in the crossfire of what he called an American campaign against France, which opposed the U.S.-led war to oust Saddam.

“I have never been to Iraq. I have never met Mr. Saddam Hussein. I never received anything from the Iraqis, in any domain,” Pasqua said at a news conference in Paris. “If my name appears on documents as having benefited from allocations, it can only be the result of fraudulent behavior committed by certain people who used my name.”

Last week, the U.S. Senate committee presented what it said was evidence that Pasqua and British lawmaker George Galloway got oil allocations from Saddam in return for backing his regime and its campaign against U.N. sanctions on Iraq.

British lawmaker to defend self before Senate
Galloway planned to defend himself at a Senate hearing on Tuesday.

“The truth is, I have never bought or sold a drop of oil from Iraq, or sold or bought a drop of oil from anybody,” Galloway told the British Broadcasting Corp. before boarding a flight at London’s Heathrow Airport.


Excerpted from.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Perhaps before you start accusing people in these forums you should read all links being provided.... i only gave two...they shouldn't have been that hard to read...

I excerpted the accusation and Galloway's response...


[edit on 17-5-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo

Galloway TOTALLY takes on the accusations at this link.

Make this guy an honorary US citizen.



WATCH THIS!

www.democraticunderground.com...


jako




Glad I got that link! This guy definately deserves US citizenship. Doubt he'd want it now, though


-koji K.



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
The US Administration also turned a blind eye to the dealings, even though they were well aware.

www.guardian.co.uk...


The scale of the shipments involved dwarfs those previously alleged by the Senate committee against UN staff and European politicians like the British MP, George Galloway, and the former French minister, Charles Pasqua.

In fact, the Senate report found that US oil purchases accounted for 52% of the kickbacks paid to the regime in return for sales of cheap oil - more than the rest of the world put together.

"The United States was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions," the report said. "On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales...

...Yesterday's report makes two principal allegations against the Bush administration. Firstly, it found the US treasury failed to take action against a Texas oil company, Bayoil, which facilitated payment of "at least $37m in illegal surcharges to the Hussein regime".

The surcharges were a violation of the UN Oil For Food programme, by which Iraq was allowed to sell heavily discounted oil to raise money for food and humanitarian supplies. However, Saddam was allowed to choose which companies were given the highly lucrative oil contracts. Between September 2000 and September 2002 (when the practice was stopped) the regime demanded kickbacks of 10 to 30 US cents a barrel in return for oil allocations.

In its second main finding, the report said the US military and the state department gave a tacit green light for shipments of nearly 8m barrels of oil bought by Jordan, a vital American ally, entirely outside the UN-monitored Oil For Food system. Jordan was permitted to buy some oil directly under strict conditions but these purchases appeared to be under the counter.

The report details a series of efforts by UN monitors to obtain information about Bayoil's oil shipments in 2001 and 2002, and the lack of help provided by the US treasury.



Or just ignore all that and blame the Russians.



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   
I'd like to see some of our own politicians and administrative watchdogs indicted and impeached for their role in this. Take it as far up the ladder of influence as the trail leads! Who is the traitor? A good housecleaning is in order. Ah, but it doesn't involve illicit sex, so all is well and, as usual, a few scapegoats will get busted but the really dirty hands will go free and continue business as usual. Same story, different day.

[edit on 5/17/2005 by dubiousone]



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo

The US Administration also turned a blind eye to the dealings, even though they were well aware.


You obviously ignored that one of the people that is being indicted is David B. Chalmers.....

One more thing, if the US was profitting so much from this, instead of being some Americans such as Chalmers who were profitting from this program...why start a war with Iraq?....

Oh no wait, the liberals always have to claim that the US is behind everything that happens in the world...

The US was not the one trying to stop the war in Iraq...it was other countries whose politicians were the ones profitting from the dirty deals that were made through OFF.. Russia, CHina, France, and Germany among others...



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Muaddib:

The US was not the one trying to stop the war in Iraq...it was other countries whose politicians were the ones profitting from the dirty deals that were made through OFF.. Russia, CHina, France, and Germany among others...




So, um, you are saying that Germany, France, Russia, Canada, and all those other countries that didn't join the war did so because they were profitting from Saddam's Oil For Food fiasco??

? It was PUBLIC PRESSURE that forced Germany, France and Canada to take their stance. Were all these people doing business with Saddam?


jako



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo



So, um, you are saying that Germany, France, Russia, Canada, and all those other countries that didn't join the war did so because they were profitting from Saddam's Oil For Food fiasco??

? It was PUBLIC PRESSURE that forced Germany, France and Canada to take their stance. Were all these people doing business with Saddam?


jako



Um, no. Public pressure? Nice try, but I don't think so. The above countries were actively trying to block US action in Iraq and allow the corrupt UN to drag the issue on. The above countries weren't even on the roster as part of the coalition. They were trying to kill it before it even started.

I knew even before the Iraq war that the opposition was as corrupt as the supporters. This was obvious. So please, don't insult my intelligence by saying somehow public pressure in opposition countries had anything to do with their desire not to get involved. They were fighting it before it even became a public issue.

Maybe the whole Oil For Food scam might have been another reason for the invasion. Perhaps shrub and company felt left out of the scam, and decided to take direct action to put them in full control of the cash cow that is Iraq, cutting their thieving friends out of the loop. Its quite possible.

And there was hardly what I call "public pressure" against the action in Russia. The population there was relatively neutral on the whole thing.

Face it. The German, French, and Russian govornments were milking Iraq for all it was worth, and didn't want that golden goose slaughtered by the US, who had other plans for where that wealth was gonna get distributed.

Corruption is not the exclusive territory of the Bush administration. Seems to me both sides were wallowing quite deeply in a large sewage pit.



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo



So, um, you are saying that Germany, France, Russia, Canada, and all those other countries that didn't join the war did so because they were profitting from Saddam's Oil For Food fiasco??

? It was PUBLIC PRESSURE that forced Germany, France and Canada to take their stance. Were all these people doing business with Saddam?


jako



Um, no. Public pressure? Nice try, but I don't think so. The above countries were actively trying to block US action in Iraq and allow the corrupt UN to drag the issue on. The above countries weren't even on the roster as part of the coalition. They were trying to kill it before it even started.

I knew even before the Iraq war that the opposition was as corrupt as the supporters. This was obvious. So please, don't insult my intelligence by saying somehow public pressure in opposition countries had anything to do with their desire not to get involved. They were fighting it before it even became a public issue.

Maybe the whole Oil For Food scam might have been another reason for the invasion. Perhaps shrub and company felt left out of the scam, and decided to take direct action to put them in full control of the cash cow that is Iraq, cutting their thieving friends out of the loop. Its quite possible.

And there was hardly what I call "public pressure" against the action in Russia. The population there was relatively neutral on the whole thing.

Face it. The German, French, and Russian govornments were milking Iraq for all it was worth, and didn't want that golden goose slaughtered by the US, who had other plans for where that wealth was gonna get distributed.

Corruption is not the exclusive territory of the Bush administration. Seems to me both sides were wallowing quite deeply in a large sewage pit.



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Face it. The German, French, and Russian govornments were milking Iraq for all it was worth, and didn't want that golden goose slaughtered by the US, who had other plans for where that wealth was gonna get distributed.


Boy, I think we need a reality check. The volume of sales was simply not large not enough to justify an altercation that followed. Russia has a lot of its own oil to boot.



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita

Boy, I think we need a reality check. The volume of sales was simply not large not enough to justify an altercation that followed. Russia has a lot of its own oil to boot.


No, but Saddam breaking the sanctions, acquiring banned technology and weapons, keeping documents which dealt on how to work with wmd programs, keeping unrefined uranium and refined yellow cake, plus hiding centrifuge parts to pick up the wmd programs once the scrutiny of the US and coalition lessened is more than enough of a justification "for the altercation that followed."

We are now finding the reasons why these countries didn't want the coalition to go to war with Iraq.

[edit on 17-5-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Skadi:

So please, don't insult my intelligence by saying somehow public pressure in opposition countries had anything to do with their desire not to get involved.


Maybe public protests in the US are looked at laughably by the American government, but it's a FACT that Canada bowed to public pressure to stay out of the war. MILLIONS of people worldwide took to the streets for the first time in history to protest a war BEFORE it started, and it effected change in some government's policies.

Was France going to join the Coalition if there weren't protests? Doubtful. But people actively taking to the streets in protest gave far more leverage to those in other country's governments who wanted to stay out of it.

Germany's Gerhard Schroeder CAMPAIGNED on the fact that he would keep them out of Iraq. Because he knew he had popular public support.

Turkey bowed to pressure from within and didn't allow any US fighters to launch sorties from their territory.

Don't assume that just because public pressure is useless in the US that it is useless in other democratic countries.

Muaddib:

No, but Saddam breaking the sanctions, acquiring banned technology and weapons, keeping documents which dealt on how to work with wmd programs, keeping unrefined uranium and refined yellow cake, plus hiding centrifuge parts to pick up the wmd programs once the scrutiny of the US and coalition lessened is more than enough of a justification "for the altercation that followed."

We are now finding the reasons why these countries didn't want the coalition to go to war with Iraq.


Excellent example of you rewriting history.

Saddam acquired banned technology? Like what? Incubators? Garbage trucks? Please provide a brief list.

Keeping unrefined yellowcake and unrefined uranium? WTF? Is the absolute only use for these things to be used in WMDs? Do you even have any clue whatsoever what unrefined uranium is? Do you think you can pack it into a warhead like cotton candy and voila? Please explain.

Hiding centrifuge parts? Again, WTF? Is a centrifuge solely used for making WMDs? Exactly how?

The reason why these countries didn't want to go to war is because, and please, pay attention here:

The WORLD believed that the reasons for attacking another Iraq were INSUFFICIENT to justify armed invasion. The reasons given were that Saddam 100% was certain to have Weapons of Mass Destruction and that he could launch an attack within 45 minutes if necessary.

The reasons for going to war have all been proven to be lies and propaganda. That you either don't know this or don't want to know is none of my concern, but I can't read your history revision knowing that it is just more propaganda, just this time filtered through you instead of the media.

I hope people realize that and what I'm saying here is just painfully obvious and should go unsaid anyway.

Thanks.

jako



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Excellent example of you rewriting history.


I did not rewrite history, you just want to hide facts for your own reasons.

I look at the information that is available from many sources and see that the media normally underreports the evidence, when in fact they should be giving the whole story in any report instead of hiding information because it fits their agenda, and because it sells more when they don't report the whole story and change it a bit here and there....

When the media reported on the findings of the 9/11 Commission about Iraq's involvement in terrorism, the media was quick on changing the story. When the 9/11 report stated that there was no definite proof that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks the media quickly used this statement, without providing the rest of the information, saying that Saddam was not harboring terrorists and had no links to Al Qaeda.... Which is quite the contrary to what the reports were saying.

The same things is happening with the reports of wmd programs in Iraq, and the banned meterials that have been found in Iraq...




Originally posted by Jakomo
Saddam acquired banned technology? Like what? Incubators? Garbage trucks? Please provide a brief list.


Your are unbelivable.... The UN sanctions were in place to stop Saddam from acquiring and starting any wmd programs... I doubt that "incubators, and garbage trucks" would be among those things that would be banned from Iraq....

BTW, other members and I did have given a list, several times, of some of the banned equipment that Saddam acquired... You obviously do not want to listen to reason and use logic...instead you prefer to use this for your own bashing contest against the US government.

BTW...if you would take some time from your US bashing contest and instead read the link that i gave, which is part of the UNMOVIC report, you will find that even thou they did not find any weapons ready and pointing towards the US or any other country, the evidence does suggest there was a wmd program still going on in Iraq... We add that to the fact that Russian military who had worked in these wmd programs, and on how to hide them if the west ever found out, have been talking about this even before we went to Iraq.



Originally posted by Jakomo
Keeping unrefined yellowcake and unrefined uranium? WTF? Is the absolute only use for these things to be used in WMDs? Do you even have any clue whatsoever what unrefined uranium is? Do you think you can pack it into a warhead like cotton candy and voila? Please explain.

Hiding centrifuge parts? Again, WTF? Is a centrifuge solely used for making WMDs? Exactly how?


You really have got to be kidding, or very naive to have even stated what you say above.....



Originally posted by Jakomo
The reason why these countries didn't want to go to war is because, and please, pay attention here:


It is because they were having business deals with Saddam, who was using the sanction to sell oil and get military technology, weapons, and getting rich instead of getting what was necessary for the Iraqi people.


[edit on 18-5-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Jakomo, I voted a "way above" for your last post on this thread. Don't get worked up over the position taken by Muaddib in any thread. Be assured, even before reading a single line, that he will support the government, defend authority, praise our "leaders", and support anything that emanates from Washington. If he's not on DC's payroll, he ought to be.


[edit on 5/19/2005 by dubiousone]



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:42 AM
link   
I also voted Jacomo for WATS.

I was thinking this morning that people often get hysterical about centrifuge parts. There are lightyears between having a centrifuge part and using it. It's even more difficult to use it for enriching uranium, as the latter needs to be converted to a gaseous form, and that gas it highly toxic and corrosive, i.e. can eat through most metals.

I did a lot of reading on various nuclear programs and tech a while ago, and it appears that Saddam was not nearwhere capable of pulling this one off, given the state of his industry. I'm pretty sure the policymakers in Washington knew that full well.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   
What I find odd is that the UN arms inspectors actually did find a whole lot of equipment Saddam was using to create WMDs. I posted this in a thread some time back:

For those who think the UN was sitting on their hands in Iraq:

A State Department summary issued on November 16, 1998, indicates that UNSCOM has supervised the
destruction of:
� 48 operational missiles;
� 14 conventional missile warheads;
� six operational mobile launchers; 28 operational fixed launch pads;
� 32 fixed launch pads;
� 30 missile chemical warheads;
� other missile support equipment and materials, and a variety of assembled and non-assembled supergun
components.
� 38,537 filled and empty chemical munitions;
� 90 metric tons of chemical weapons agent;
� more than 3,000 metric tons of precursor chemicals;
� 426 pieces of chemical weapons production equipment; and,
� 91 pieces of related analytical instruments.
� The entire Al Hakam biological weapons production facility and a variety of production equipment and
materials

Source: www.csis.org...


Saddam must have taken pains to destroy whatever he had left after the UN inspectors were kicked out following the discovery of a CIA plant in their party by the Iraqi authorities. Either that, or the US army isn't so great at finding what the UN inspectors could.

Just thought I'd chuck this in since a few people mentioned a list of what's been found.

That said, Jakomo, you speak the truth for the most part, and I'd give you a vote if I had any left to give this month.

Countries which occupied Iraq have billions of dollars of expected revenue from reconstruction contracts, and, further down the line, expected favorable oil trading terms. But even if you are blind to the oil aspect, the reconstruction profits alone will be far more sizeable than any paltry 8 digit figures gained from kickbacks with Saddam. If profit were the sole reason countries based their decision to invade and occupy Iraq, most countries would be squealing for a piece of the action.

Russia's case is somewhat more complex than the situation just described, but the decision not to invade was based more on holdover strategic thinking than their supposedly being in total cahoots with Saddam.

-koji K.

[edit on 19-5-2005 by koji_K]

[edit on 19-5-2005 by koji_K]

[edit on 19-5-2005 by koji_K]



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 12:35 PM
link   
The former Soviet Union now today called Russia is by far the world largest terrorist country.

They call themselves a free country, but are still governed by the old communist cronies

For a time after the fall of the wall, the bear was silent but now times have changed.

News story after news story you hear of a Russina involvement.

At the begining of the Gulf War, stories came out of a Russian plot to supply the Iraqi military with night vision and gps jammers,

Now its Russia selling Iran / North Koera cruise missiles and suppling Hugo Chaves with supersonic anti ship missiles to be launched from Russian Migs based in Cuba to stop a US invasion of Ven and to protect her oil feilds.

Things are starting to get scary, Someone in the former Soviet Block just tried to take out our President, and had they accomplished this God help us all.

The oil for food program is a crime against humanity, and yes a bunch of European Countries are nose deep in this crime, will anyone go to prison for this, not in our life time. And does it really surprise anyone that Russia was involved in the Oil for Food scandal.

Sorry for rambling, but I just dont trust Russia at all !



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join