| Submit your comments on this article | |
| International-UN-NGOs | |
| Saddam's illicit trade was no secret to US officials | |
| 2004-12-12 | |
| Saddam Hussein was dead broke, the result of U.N. penalties. Or so it was thought. So where did the Iraqi president find the money to pursue missile technology from North Korea, air defence systems from Belarus and other prohibited military equipment. The CIA's top weapons inspector in Iraq said Saddam carried out much of that trade with proceeds from illegal oil sales to Syria, one of three Iraqi neighbours that bought oil from Baghdad in defiance of the United Nations. Trade with Syria, Jordan and Turkey was the biggest source of illicit funds for Saddam, more so than the much-maligned U.N. oil-for-food program, according to investigations of Saddam's finances. Though considered smuggling, most of the trade took place with the knowledge - and sometimes the tacit consent - of the United States and other nations. With Republican-led congressional committees investigating allegations of oil-for-food corruption, some Democrats are pressing for answers about why the United States did little to stop the smuggling. The issue is part of a series of broader questions these lawmakers have about what US officials knew about Saddam's overall illicit finances. "I am determined to
| |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #10 IOW, it once again occurred and was likely "known" during the Clinton administration but only was discovered during the Bush 2 admin., ergo its Dubya's and only Dubya's fault!? NO surprise here - the Failed Left and Clintonian Commies, as America's Party of Propriety, is still out to "justisfy" domestic/national Regulation, Governmentism, and Bureacratism. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2004-12-12 9:53:02 PM |
| #9 Re #6 (Mrs. Davis) .... it was only $6 billion. That still makes it a huge scandal. And when are we going to learn how much went into Kofi's pocket? And Kojo, and Jacques, and Sevan's and Pooties's and on and on. It's a huge scandal, but even the $5 billion related to the OFF Program is not all improperly accounted. Most of the money corresponds to oil that was sold for money that was used to buy food and medicine, as intended. Some percent (yet undetermined) of the $5 billion was diverted corruptly. By the way, for many decades before the UN became involved in monitoring Iraq's oil trade, much of Iraq's oil earnings were diverted corruptly to Saddam Hussein and to his family and favorites. For all we know, such corruption was worse before the UN became involved than after the UN became involved. And when are we going to learn how much went into Kofi's pocket? I recently heard Senator Norman Coleman, the senator who has most prominently demand Kofi Annan's resignation, state in an interview that he has no evidence that Kofi Annan personally profited from the OFF program. (Senator Coleman also said in that interview that he wants to strengthen the UN, which is why he has asked Annan to resign.) And Kojo, and Jacques, and Sevan's and Pooties's and on and on. I believed Cotecna's published claim that its employment of Kojo Annan had nothing to do with the UN. I now understand that I was misled about that, and I am sorry if I subsequently misled others. It might still turn out that Kojo played practically no role in Cotecna's acquisition of the OFF contract, but I personally am not going to present Cotecna's or Kojo's arguments in the matter. I have never had or expressed an opinion about Sevan, etc. It's obvious that .... half the State Department have been bought off Iraq is a corrupt society, like most other Third-World societies are corrupt societies. When Iraq sells oil, much of the payment is diverted to the ruling clique. These societies are very backward, but they are very clever about such corruption. Officials in the US State Department are not much of a match for this cleverness and so don't have to be paid off for the corruption to succeed. Not too long ago, many US businesses participated in such corruption. When US businesses sold weapons systems to Saudi Arabia, Iran (during the Shah's regime), Iraq (during the Iran-Iraq War), and to many, many other such countries, then the US businesses participated in schemes to divert money to elites. It's an old problem, and it's a problem that is not limited to officials in organizations like the State Department or the UN. . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-12-12 9:42:58 PM |
| #8 Re #6 (Mrs. Davis) ... liberals like Mikey .... My parents are still alive, and they have seven children. Out of the nine people in our family, I voted for Bush and the other eight voted for Kerry, very emphatically. All of them consider me to be a right-winger. Many here consider me to be a left-winger. I suppose I have been well exposed to a wide range of political opinions. . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-12-12 9:13:11 PM |
| #7 Re #4 (.com) I think a lot of the oil was "smuggled out" through pipelines that were supposed to be shut down. I heard those numbers on "The News Hour" in a discussion of the controversy. I had also heard them earlier on the "Charlie Rose Show" in an interview with Paul Volcker. On that occasion, though, I was distracted by some family matters and so missed some key details. If I do see the numbers in a website, I certainly will provide the link. . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-12-12 9:06:50 PM |
| #6 I love the way liberals like Mikey try to minimize UNSCAM by saying it wasn't $21 billion, it was only $6 billion. That still makes it a huge scandal. And when are we going to learn how much went into Kofi's pocket? And Kojo, and Jacques, and Sevan's and Pooties's and on and on. It's obvious that these guys and half the State Department have been bought off by Saddam or the MK. Let it all out in public now! Stop the stonewall, Kofi. If Spitzer really wants to be President he should indict Kofi now. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-12-12 8:28:51 PM |
| #5 ...some Democrats are pressing for answers about why the United States did little to stop the smuggling. Oh, gee, I don't know...ya suppose something about how the Dems, their media allies, the academic Left, the European Union and Saddam's water-carriers on the Security Council would not have allowed anything substantive to be done about it? |
| Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2004-12-12 8:17:38 PM |
| #4 Funny, that doesn't mesh with what I've read and seen reported since the early 1990's - i.e. value of oil smuggling in the $100M / year range - let's do some rough calculations: a) Sanctions imposed 1991. b) Iraq War March 2003 c) Sanction period: 2002 - 1991 = 11 years. d) $15B / 11 = $1,363,636,363/yr e) / $25 bbl = 54,545,454 bbls/yr smuggled* f) x 42 gal/bbl = 2,290,909,091 gals/yr g) / 365 = 6,276,463 gals/day h) / 7500 gal tanker volume = 837 tanker loads/day** i) x approx 18 ft tanker truck length = 15,064 ft j) / 5280 ft/mile = line of tankers over 2.85 MILES long everyday for 11 years * generous avg price/bbl of oil during sanctions period **non-superhighway size I saw in normal use in SA Nahhh, I don't buy it Mike - I think you have the numbers reversed, or, actually, much worse - Links. I'll buy it if you can prove it - with believable links - no questions asked. Otherwise, this was just a brain fart. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-12-12 7:45:07 PM |
| #3 And the U.S. will say "go fund yourself" or something very close to that. |
| Posted by: Tom 2004-12-12 7:26:57 PM |
| #2 The trivial smuggling with Jordan, a time-honored tradition, and Syria, their Ba'athist brothers, does not hold a candle to what the UNSCam OFF program amounted to. The last time I heard the numbers related to Paul Volcker's investigation, they were that the investigaton covers about $21 billion, of which about $15 billion is the value of the Iraqi oil smuggled to neighboring countries and about $5 billion is the value of the oil sold through the Oil-for-Food program. Keep in mind that the $15 billion relates to a much longer period of time -- the entire period of the UN's economic sanctions. The $5 is limited only to the last four or so years of the UN sanctions, when the OFF program was established. It was common knowledge that Iraq was smuggling oil to its neighbors despite the UN sanctions. The OFF program was an attempt to re-enforce the UN sanctions by removing the moral argument that the smuggling was justified by the lack of adequate food and medicine in Iraq. It will probably be a very long time before the UN cooperates again with the USA's desire for economic sanctions on any country. The UN will basically say, go ahead and apply your own sanctions by yourself and with your friends, and leave the UN out of your effort. . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-12-12 6:51:19 PM |
| #1 The trivial smuggling with Jordan, a time-honored tradition, and Syria, their Ba'athist brothers, does not hold a candle to what the UNSCam OFF program amounted to. Compare the quantity of smuggled oil that can be ferried by truck across the desert (without notice) vs. the UN game... There aren't enough tanker trucks in the entire ME, lol - they would have to be bumber to bumper to both borders to compare to the 10-20% margins the OFF game offered on everything imported into Iraq. Oil is a very visible commodity - and the OFF scam was designed to solve that problem. Pfeh. Drop in the bucket, relatively speaking, and Lantos & Co know it. This is just Lantos and Dhimmidonk grandstanding, again. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-12-12 5:33:05 PM |