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.

 

Anti-war nations 'took bribes' before war began.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2004 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Read and learn:

"NO OIL FOR BLOOD"
Link:
www.newsandopinion.com...

"Kofi Annandersen
Enron-style accounting at the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program."

Link:
www.opinionjournal.com...

"No Blood for Oil?"
Link:
mdcurrington.tripod.com...

"Saddam's regime helped friends beat UN oil embargo"
Link:
timesofindia.indiatimes.com...


regards
seekerof

[Edited on 31-1-2004 by Seekerof]




posted on Jan, 31 2004 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Read and learn:


Someone was going to get these contracts, and it was certainly not going to be America. These articles are making rationalized connections.

By default it was going to be these nations who got the contracts for developing the oil fields. It was going to be someone, but not America, or England.

As they were not ever exercised due to the sanctions how can they constitute a bribe? No money was made off the ventures because work was never done.



posted on Jan, 31 2004 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Blind? How the hell do "vouchers" equate to contracts?
Its apparent you don't read, despite your misconceptions.....wasted breathe and time arguing points with you.



regards
seekerof



posted on Jan, 31 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Blind? How the hell do "vouchers" equate to contracts?
Its apparent you don't read, despite your misconceptions.....wasted breathe and time arguing points with you.



A word search for "voucher" yields zero results on all of the articles you presented in the post I referenced.

It is apparent that you are the one not reading.

[Edited on 31-1-2004 by ArchAngel]



posted on Jan, 31 2004 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Do we also attribute the word "bribe" to the countries that are rewarded financially for their participation in our "coalition of the willing"?
Some of those countries like Turkey, Greece, Poland and Italy disregarded the "will" of their people who almost unanimously refused military action in Iraq.
Yet we disregarded their "democratic" will on our rush to establish "democracy" in the middle east.
Turkey alone received 8 Billion dollars along with a promise to increase weapon contracts. Also Turkey was promised that the Kurdish people in Iraq would NEVER be allowed to establish a soveriegn government... democratic... or otherwise.

May the judeo-christian god continue to bless america!



posted on Jan, 31 2004 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Some of those countries like Turkey, Greece, Poland and Italy disregarded the "will" of their people who almost unanimously refused military action in Iraq.

Quite right to point this out. America has far outspent Saddam in 'buying' governments.

That the people of the other nations were against the war shows that the leaders actions were representative of the will of the people.

That would be democracy at work, even in non-democratic nations.

What of all the money the Israeli lobby gives to American leaders?

Could they have been 'bribed' into supporting UN vetoes for Israel, and billions in 'aid' monies?

Has our own government been bought of by foreign interests?



posted on Jan, 31 2004 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Some of the posts in this thread are the most UNEDUCATED, uninformed bullroar I have seen on this board YET! (you know who you are so I won't name names)

Let's review...DICTATORSHIP/DESPOTISM, POWER GAINED BY THE MURDER OF THE OPPOSITION, OPPRESSION, DESPERATION, BRIBERY TO AVOID CONQUER, WAR, LIBERATION, FACTS COME OUT...

NOW our cadre of America haters come out in defense of those who accepted the bribes in the hope of keeping the oppression of the Iraqi people thriving so they could turn a buck...

SICKENING Truly sickening... NOT surprising however...

M...



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 12:04 AM
link   
I see from the index that Springer has posted here, but since he is on my ignore list I can't see what he has posted.

Let me guess. He accused me of being anti-American followed by a rant?



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
I see from the index that Springer has posted here, but since he is on my ignore list I can't see what he has posted.

Let me guess. He accused me of being anti-American followed by a rant?


LOL...no you are much worse than anti-american, you are an "america hater".



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Amazing how well one can know oneself is it not? The only question is WHY do they try to hide it from themselves and others through dishonest, intillectually disingenuous diatribe?

Wonders never cease... I have so much MORE respect for one who is man/woman enough to openly state their convictions without regard for being "popular"...

I find it VERY gratifying and an HONOR to be on the ignore list of an intillectual pervaricator and coward such as this too.

M...

[Edited on 2-1-2004 by Springer]



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 12:18 AM
link   
LOL...no you are much worse than anti-american, you are an "america hater".


I was close. Do I read minds, or are his posts predictable. I assume nothing about the issues of the thread were brought up. Only slander against other posters.



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
I see from the index that Springer has posted here, but since he is on my ignore list I can't see what he has posted.

Let me guess. He accused me of being anti-American followed by a rant?



Ya! And he said it with REALLY BIG type. BIG TYPING means your point wins! Its really that simple kiddies. Just TYPE REALLY BIG and you automatically get to be right...about everything.
You don't even have to make "sense". The trick is to just string along "provacitive" words in a nonsenscial rant like this, "ANTI AMERICAN-COMMUNIST-SADDAM LOVER-PINKO-LIBERAL-TYRANNY SUPPORTING-SATANIST"
and there you go. Easy ain't it?!
Then accuse everyone who disagrees with you, whether they provide facts or not, as uneducated. In fact, its most effective if you say its the MOST UNEDUCATED POSTINGS YOU'VE EVER READ! (notice the big typing again?)
Then you follow it up like a cool hipster signature like a beatnic writer from the 50's. (as stated below)

Peace...
m...
n...
o...
p...
q...
r...
s...
t...
u...
v...
w...
x...
y...
zzzzzzzzzzzzz(snore)


(everything is permissable children



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
Ya! And he said it with REALLY BIG type. BIG TYPING means your point wins! Its really that simple kiddies. Just TYPE REALLY BIG and you automatically get to be right...about everything.
You don't even have to make "sense". The trick is to just string along "provacitive" words in a nonsenscial rant like this, "ANTI AMERICAN-COMMUNIST-SADDAM LOVER-PINKO-LIBERAL-TYRANNY SUPPORTING-SATANIST"
and there you go. Easy ain't it?!
Then accuse everyone who disagrees with you, whether they provide facts or not, as uneducated. In fact, its most effective if you say its the MOST UNEDUCATED POSTINGS YOU'VE EVER READ! (notice the big typing again?)
Then you follow it up like a cool hipster signature like a beatnic writer from the 50's. (as stated below)

Peace...
m...
n...
o...
p...
q...
r...
s...
t...
u...
v...
w...
x...
y...
zzzzzzzzzzzzz(snore)


(everything is permissable children




Now THAT is sheer BRILLIANCE! Why do you waste your time with us peasants?!

Your utter lack of imperfection is grandiose to the extreme! Your majestic intillect is widely known and lauded in all the major circles of profundity!

Your pulchritude is universal and your wit is systemic! Lothe be the logical thinker in the face of such banality!

PEACE...
m... (there's no need for additional letters after this BTW)



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
LOL...no you are much worse than anti-american, you are an "america hater".


I was close. Do I read minds, or are his posts predictable. I assume nothing about the issues of the thread were brought up. Only slander against other posters.


*WRONG* AGAIN, Arch, you old faux basher... Intillectual dishonesty is your crime slick. Not to worry though there is more brain power on this site than in most nations and it knows what is what...

m...



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Ya! And he said it with REALLY BIG type. BIG TYPING means your point wins!

The big type is digital shouting.

I would guess that in his two previous posts he abandoned the large type, ranted about people posting, has no comment on the issue present, and misspelled at least one word.



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 02:10 AM
link   
I'd love to make a buck on the backs of the poor and subjected.

Where do I sign up?

China?
Korea?
India?
Mexico?

Or should I just go work for Abercrombie.

The war was more profitable to run then not to.

We do not give two #s about the Iraqis. And they are slowly not caring about us too.

I don't sleep with Bush so I don't know all the back ground (but neither do you), so I'd say it's about even.

If we really care so much, why don't we just take over all the screwed up countries.



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 03:11 AM
link   
I don't understand why we need commentary on the posting behaviors of our members by Springer. I think such information is best left to another thread somewhere other than this particular forum where it can be debated properly without derailing the topic at hand.



posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 12:48 PM
link   
This just in....


"10 cents a barrel: how Iraqi oil fuelled UK campaigns"
politics.guardian.co.uk...

Excerpt:

".... "If I'm doing a service, I'm entitled to a reward," he said.

After the Baghdad visit, Mr Tahir said, he became a director of Bula, an Irish oil exploration firm chaired by Mr Reynolds. The company received one further separate oil allocation from Iraq.

Another UK-based "friend of Iraq" now followed in Mr Tahir's successful footsteps. This was Burhan Chalabi, who lives in Richmond, also with a British wife. He has an 11m London property company, and was a stalwart of the Tories in Kensington, donating 5,000 to Michael Portillo's abortive leadership bid.

On December 29 1999, the oil ministry documents of which we possess copies say that Mr Chalabi was granted involvement in the sale of 3m barrels of oil. It was to be sold on to a Finnish oil company, Fortum, which was officially registered with the UN."


"Iraq oil cash funded MPs' campaigns"
politics.guardian.co.uk...

Excerpt:

"The three businessmen are alleged to have received money from Saddam via oil allocations. They sold the oil rights on at a profit of more than $1m (about 530,000), in an exploitation by Saddam of loopholes in the UN's then oil-for-food programme.

Mr Tahir agrees he profited from the oil deals. Mr Chalabi refuses to comment. Mr Zureikat confirmed to Agence France Presse in Jordan last week that he had made the oil deals.

The oil-for-food programme was set up in 1995 amid fears of a humanitarian disaster after the first Gulf war. Under the scheme, Saddam was allowed to sell limited quantities of oil to pay for food and medicine for the Iraqi people.

The contents of the new documents shed light on Mr Galloway's libel battle with the Daily Telegraph. Last year newspaper reports based on purported Iraqi intelligence files led to him being accused of receiving an annual 375,000 in secret personal payments from Saddam."




regards
seekerof



posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

With the possibilities that this report may be forged, and the silence from Washington over this, will this blow out of proportion?
Was Saddam really involved in a programme of "No War for Oil" or "Your Vote for Oil"?

Interesting find, nonetheless.






regards
seekerof


What about the nations who were bribed into war by the Bush administration? Turkey almost joined the coalition of the "willing," but the public outcry was just too intense.

The coalition members weren't nearly as willing as the Bush administration makes it sound. I'd just like to know an exact figure of the total amount paid out. That would be interesting.


[Edited on 19-09-2003 by EastCoastKid]



posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Two things spring to mind.

Firstly: sanctions were in place against Iraq. No trade or financial deal was allowed under UN law. Comparisons with American deals with other nations are therefore invalid.

Secondly: The French governement is corrupt and already has a long track record of receiving bribes. Chirac had to change the law guaranteeing him immunity from prosecution because of his undertaking of financial skullduggery.

To defend the French by stating that they are whiter than white is hilarious. The French are no strangers to illegal deals and are probably the worst culprits in the world when it comes to corruption.
In most democratic societies, politicians are prosecuted and barred from office if caught with their hand in the cookie jar. Not in France though.......

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...[url]

[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3244148.stm

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...







[Edited on 17-2-2004 by Leveller]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join