Jump to content
Clubplanet Nightlife Community

Saddam's Oil for Food scam worse than originally stated


igloo

Recommended Posts

I can sit here and show you articles all day long Too. All you guys are missing is the NY times. Here is the problem - If the U.S was involved like you would have us believe why didnt the U.N (who had a seperate investigation) pick up on it?? Or did the CIA silence them too?

By Bill Gertz

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The French bank that handled funds for the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq made tens of millions of dollars in fees and did not properly monitor transactions involving Saddam Hussein's oil sales, congressional investigators said yesterday.

The New York branch of the Banque Nationale de Paris-Paribas, or BNP Paribas, was the sole bank for administering the $64 billion U.N. program and did not have adequate checks on whether money was being funneled to terrorists, a House International Relations Committee probe found.

"We have uncovered what appears to be serious malfeasance on an international scale," said Rep. Henry J. Hyde, Illinois Republican and chairman of the committee. "There are indications that the bank may have been noncompliant in administering the oil-for-food program. If true, these possible banking lapses may have facilitated Saddam Hussein's manipulation and corruption of the program."

Committee investigators uncovered evidence that BNP Paribas made payments without proof that goods were delivered and sanctioned payments to third parties not identified as authorized recipients, Mr. Hyde said at a hearing yesterday.

Mr. Hyde said investigators think the bank "facilitated improper payments to companies that were shipping illegal goods to Iraq."

Investigators estimate that the bank received more than $700 million in fees under the U.N. program that began in 1996 and ended after the ouster of Saddam in March 2003, Mr. Hyde said.

"This is a lot of money, and it is reasonable to ask if BNP Paribas adequately supervised its compliance programs overseeing the administration of the oil-for-food program," he said.

Mr. Hyde said problems with the oil-for-food program prompted him to introduce legislation yesterday to require greater accountability at the United Nations. "We need international institutions that are transparent, answerable to outside scrutiny and beyond reproach," he said. The bill was co-sponsored by Rep. Tom Lantos, California Democrat.

The House inquiry is one of at least three congressional investigations into the oil-for-food program. In addition, the Bush administration is investigating the program, and the United Nations has started its own probe, led by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker.

Everett Schenk, the chief executive officer of BNP Paribas in North America, told the committee that the bank followed the direction of the United Nations in issuing letters of credit under the oil-for-food program.

He denied that the bank improperly made payments under the program. Apart from "temporary backlogs" in administering letters of credit, the bank acted within U.S. laws and regulations, he said.

However, committee investigators said that in at least one case, the bank issued three U.N.-approved payments for Al Riyahd International Flowers that instead were paid to a company known as East Star Trading Co. Ltd.

"These third-party payments were an exception to BNP's procedures relating to the assignment of letter of credit proceeds," one investigator said. "BNP explained that a senior manager at BNP authorized this exception based on the request of Al Riyahd International Flowers and did so in accordance with BNP's procedures for the escrow account."

Committee investigators said eight government agencies notified the French bank about "deficiencies" in handling money in the U.N. program. Four internal audits and memoranda also found problems with the bank's procedures.

Mr. Hyde said some U.S. allies "did all they could to facilitate business" with Saddam's regime, and that committee investigators think Saddam used money obtained through oil sales to fund terrorists.

"According to the information provided to this committee, Saddam paid $25,000 rewards to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers through the Iraqi ambassador to Jordan out of accounts in the Rafidain bank in Amman, which held kickback money Saddam demanded from suppliers to his regime," Mr. Hyde said.

Mr. Lantos, the committee's ranking Democrat, said Russia and France were involved in helping the regime through commercial transactions and political support within the United Nations. He also said the State Department failed to act against illegal activities in the U.N. program.

"I'm stunned at the failure of our own State Department to put a halt to Saddam's larceny," Mr. Lantos said, adding that the committee should "turn our attention as far as Moscow and Paris, and as near as Foggy Bottom."

The panel investigators say Saddam was allowed to set the sale price of Iraqi oil 50 cents per barrel above market prices. That added amount was then paid back to his aides by oil purchasers and placed in banks in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

The U.S. and British governments first uncovered the kickback scam in 2001 and, through a diplomatic battle at the United Nations, ended the "spot-pricing" of oil.

Russia and France opposed the U.S. and British effort because both countries were making money from the illicit oil sales, the investigators said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I can sit here and show you articles all day long Too. All you guys are missing is the NY times. Here is the problem - If the U.S was involved like you would have us believe why didnt the U.N (who had a seperate investigation) pick up on it?? Or did the CIA silence them too?

By Bill Gertz

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The French bank that handled funds for the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq made tens of millions of dollars in fees and did not properly monitor transactions involving Saddam Hussein's oil sales, congressional investigators said yesterday.

The New York branch of the Banque Nationale de Paris-Paribas, or BNP Paribas, was the sole bank for administering the $64 billion U.N. program and did not have adequate checks on whether money was being funneled to terrorists, a House International Relations Committee probe found.

"We have uncovered what appears to be serious malfeasance on an international scale," said Rep. Henry J. Hyde, Illinois Republican and chairman of the committee. "There are indications that the bank may have been noncompliant in administering the oil-for-food program. If true, these possible banking lapses may have facilitated Saddam Hussein's manipulation and corruption of the program."

Committee investigators uncovered evidence that BNP Paribas made payments without proof that goods were delivered and sanctioned payments to third parties not identified as authorized recipients, Mr. Hyde said at a hearing yesterday.

Mr. Hyde said investigators think the bank "facilitated improper payments to companies that were shipping illegal goods to Iraq."

Investigators estimate that the bank received more than $700 million in fees under the U.N. program that began in 1996 and ended after the ouster of Saddam in March 2003, Mr. Hyde said.

"This is a lot of money, and it is reasonable to ask if BNP Paribas adequately supervised its compliance programs overseeing the administration of the oil-for-food program," he said.

Mr. Hyde said problems with the oil-for-food program prompted him to introduce legislation yesterday to require greater accountability at the United Nations. "We need international institutions that are transparent, answerable to outside scrutiny and beyond reproach," he said. The bill was co-sponsored by Rep. Tom Lantos, California Democrat.

The House inquiry is one of at least three congressional investigations into the oil-for-food program. In addition, the Bush administration is investigating the program, and the United Nations has started its own probe, led by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker.

Everett Schenk, the chief executive officer of BNP Paribas in North America, told the committee that the bank followed the direction of the United Nations in issuing letters of credit under the oil-for-food program.

He denied that the bank improperly made payments under the program. Apart from "temporary backlogs" in administering letters of credit, the bank acted within U.S. laws and regulations, he said.

However, committee investigators said that in at least one case, the bank issued three U.N.-approved payments for Al Riyahd International Flowers that instead were paid to a company known as East Star Trading Co. Ltd.

"These third-party payments were an exception to BNP's procedures relating to the assignment of letter of credit proceeds," one investigator said. "BNP explained that a senior manager at BNP authorized this exception based on the request of Al Riyahd International Flowers and did so in accordance with BNP's procedures for the escrow account."

Committee investigators said eight government agencies notified the French bank about "deficiencies" in handling money in the U.N. program. Four internal audits and memoranda also found problems with the bank's procedures.

Mr. Hyde said some U.S. allies "did all they could to facilitate business" with Saddam's regime, and that committee investigators think Saddam used money obtained through oil sales to fund terrorists.

"According to the information provided to this committee, Saddam paid $25,000 rewards to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers through the Iraqi ambassador to Jordan out of accounts in the Rafidain bank in Amman, which held kickback money Saddam demanded from suppliers to his regime," Mr. Hyde said.

Mr. Lantos, the committee's ranking Democrat, said Russia and France were involved in helping the regime through commercial transactions and political support within the United Nations. He also said the State Department failed to act against illegal activities in the U.N. program.

"I'm stunned at the failure of our own State Department to put a halt to Saddam's larceny," Mr. Lantos said, adding that the committee should "turn our attention as far as Moscow and Paris, and as near as Foggy Bottom."

The panel investigators say Saddam was allowed to set the sale price of Iraqi oil 50 cents per barrel above market prices. That added amount was then paid back to his aides by oil purchasers and placed in banks in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

The U.S. and British governments first uncovered the kickback scam in 2001 and, through a diplomatic battle at the United Nations, ended the "spot-pricing" of oil.

Russia and France opposed the U.S. and British effort because both countries were making money from the illicit oil sales, the investigators said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the conection to the white house was to show that as a country we should not throw stones.

IF you want to look at it another way.

chaney was in charge of halliburton untill 2000, the year they stopped dealing with iraq.That seems funny right?

BUt this has to do with us as a country and how we look at the world and how they look at us. We sit here and say the un is bad those countries are bad, while everyone looks at us and sees that we do the same shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the conection to the white house was to show that as a country we should not throw stones.

IF you want to look at it another way.

chaney was in charge of halliburton untill 2000, the year they stopped dealing with iraq.That seems funny right?

BUt this has to do with us as a country and how we look at the world and how they look at us. We sit here and say the un is bad those countries are bad, while everyone looks at us and sees that we do the same shit.

Just a couple of quick thoughts....

I think some of you are trying to imply an equivalency to the actions of the U.S. versus Russia, France, and the U.N in this whole mess....and that would be just wrong and grossly ignorant......

I would also point out that some of these foreign GOVERNMENTS opposed this war in significant part to protect their "role" in this little profit scheme that is the biggest international scandal of all time....

I would also point out that this scandal was being used by Saddam Hussein and his foreign stooges to erode support for sanctions, and according to Duelfer reports: so Saddam could rebuild his WMD shit ..

I would also llike to point out that so far, American involvement in this has been LEGAL, and the thing being probed right now is if American involvement crossed the line (and there should be an investigation of U.S. companies or individuals). Remember, some of this activity was LEGAL under the Oil for Food Program.........(American involvement is also very small has an overall percentage of the oil purchases versus others)

Conversely, there is overwhelming evidence of ILLEGAL activity by you know who, and perhaps even worse...a possible cover-up by the U.N.

And let's not diminish, discount, or marginalize the U.N's role is this mess by throwing around Chevron or Exxon Mobil, which unfortuntately some of you are doing..........if some U.S. companies get implciated, so be it. If Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny is involved, so be it. This does not diminish, discount, or marginalize the U.N's role is this mess[/b.......Stay focused my beloved protectors of a useless, outdated, corrupt instituition......

Now I understand where some of you have made the point that the U.S. should not throw stones if we were involved too....understood.

If U.S. companies were illegally involved, it will come out, and action should and will be taken. HOWEVER, the scale and scope of this U.N. scandal, and foreign companies and GOVERNMENTS involved is enormously one sided.

I would also like to point out that Congress is investigating participation.....France, Russia, and the U.N. are active in cover-up........How about that getting pointed out to the world as the difference between us and them, and why we are in a position to throw stones at the CORRUPTION,a dn those involved....

I would also like an investigation as to why the U.S. State dept, which apparently knew of some of this, did not make a bigger stand against this (I know--"diplomacy" means sometimes turning a blind eye)...

On another note, I read something interesting today how oil from Iraq, that was purchased by whoever through the Oil for Food program, can makes its way to refineries around the world, get blended with other oil purchases, and then get purchased by the U.S. used in our war planes, that were used to bomb Iraq throughout the 90's and the war..

Saddam financing his own destruction.......

P.S....some of you have to give it up with the selective use of the Bush-Cheney_halliburton evil empire connection....unless you want to cite similar Halliburton "evil" deals during the Clinton administration as well.

ps2--I am hammerred right now, so bring it on :gang:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All i was saying is that we as a country have been involved in fucked up shit like this before. You know the saying glass houses and stones and all that shit.

Also i agree that the us government was not involved compared to the french and russian government. Halliburton has been around and getting government contracts since ww1 but things get blurred because of the VP. :type:

I just do not want to sit here and damn the world and find out 6 months from now that the us was involved. I think i will wait and see how this plays out and when i am sure we have nothing to do with then i will damn everyone involved.

maybe we went to war with iraq because we were not getting the money lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All i was saying is that we as a country have been involved in fucked up shit like this before. You know the saying glass houses and stones and all that shit.

Also i agree that the us government was not involved compared to the french and russian government. Halliburton has been around and getting government contracts since ww1 but things get blurred because of the VP. :type:

I just do not want to sit here and damn the world and find out 6 months from now that the us was involved. I think i will wait and see how this plays out and when i am sure we have nothing to do with then i will damn everyone involved.

maybe we went to war with iraq because we were not getting the money lol

You can damn the world because the U.N. and Russia and France WERE involved in this disaster.......this is the biggest international scandal of all time......through a world body that should be of the highest standard......and because two countries were against removing a brutal dictator because of the dollars they were making through this scam, and the dollars they would make after the sanctions were lifted.......

If U.S. companies were inolved in any way, iit will be nothing in comparison to what these countries, their GOVTs, and their companies have done.....nothing.

Damn away my friend with confidence......because it is something worth damning.......this is a moral outrage what happened...

Also, from an American point of view.....The U.S. took so much heat for being "unilateralists" (I disagree, but that is another arguement) and ignoring the U.N. (i disgaree, but that is another arguement)..........yet, for some, a vote in the Secuity Council by France and Russia for the Iraq War would have changed everything for them (both for people here in the U.S. and around the world)....it would have provided that "legitimacy" (I disagree, but for another debate)......

Think about that for a minute.......and how it relates to the U.S., and some of the backlash we have recieved......

Whether you were for the war or not, as an American citizen you should be outraged.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

damn them all. government involved make it worse i wish we could impeach them. Russia seems to be falling back to the old russia and that ain't good.

but halliburton is still deal with fucking iran, who are building a nuclear weapon. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want to talk about scams and immoral buisiness dealings ??!!!

Angola : country in SW africa, for those that never left the continental US .

The oil and gold industry there are controlled by american companies , they make billions upon billions in profits , now i want you to see how much the people of this resource rich third world country make in return ?!!? I guarantee it's pocket change (millions) .

"don't throw stones when UR roof is made out of glass " :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want to talk about scams and immoral buisiness dealings ??!!!

Angola : country in SW africa, for those that never left the continental US .

The oil and gold industry there are controlled by american companies , they make billions upon billions in profits , now i want you to see how much the people of this resource rich third world country make in return ?!!? I guarantee it's pocket change (millions) .

"don't throw stones when UR roof is made out of glass " :)

What about all the aid that goes to those countries from the U.S and other countries that never makes it to the people - Please....tell me if those american companies werent there the countries of Africa would prosper. This is so rediculous - Without U.S aid do you realise the widespread famine and ethnic cleansing that would go on. Its bad enough as it is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can damn the world because the U.N. and Russia and France WERE involved in this disaster.......this is the biggest international scandal of all time......through a world body that should be of the highest standard......and because two countries were against removing a brutal dictator because of the dollars they were making through this scam, and the dollars they would make after the sanctions were lifted.......

If U.S. companies were inolved in any way, iit will be nothing in comparison to what these countries, their GOVTs, and their companies have done.....nothing.

Damn away my friend with confidence......because it is something worth damning.......this is a moral outrage what happened...

Also, from an American point of view.....The U.S. took so much heat for being "unilateralists" (I disagree, but that is another arguement) and ignoring the U.N. (i disgaree, but that is another arguement)..........yet, for some, a vote in the Secuity Council by France and Russia for the Iraq War would have changed everything for them (both for people here in the U.S. and around the world)....it would have provided that "legitimacy" (I disagree, but for another debate)......

Think about that for a minute.......and how it relates to the U.S., and some of the backlash we have recieved......

Whether you were for the war or not, as an American citizen you should be outraged.......

They dont care - they just want to blame America andd Bush for everything - its all George Bushs fault. F them - They should all move to Canada or better yet Mass.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about all the aid that goes to those countries from the U.S and other countries that never makes it to the people - Please....tell me if those american companies werent there the countries of Africa would prosper. This is so rediculous - Without U.S aid do you realise the widespread famine and ethnic cleansing that would go on. Its bad enough as it is.

Have you ever heard the expression...."hungry mouths care not about luxery "

Well this is the case here , tons of rice and corn is not a fair trade for billions of dollars in profits ......hey,i realize that it's the angolans own fault for agreeing for such dealings , but whatever way you look at it , it is EXPLOITATION .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want to talk about scams and immoral buisiness dealings ??!!!

Angola : country in SW africa, for those that never left the continental US .

The oil and gold industry there are controlled by american companies , they make billions upon billions in profits , now i want you to see how much the people of this resource rich third world country make in return ?!!? I guarantee it's pocket change (millions) .

"don't throw stones when UR roof is made out of glass " :)

I dont know enough about this example but a few questions came to mind. When and how did the US companies get control of the industries? My guess is they came in, hired local workers and pay the govt a share. Would Angola be able to accomplish this w/o outside help/investmen? My second thought is that they were incapable or lacked the technology to do what the American companies are doing. Is Angola better off w/ some money flowing in from outside sources mining there or would they be better off w/ no outside income and no mining(assuming they couldnt put together the technology/financing themselves?

Im not debating this issue w/ you b/c Im not that familiar with the struggles of Angola(but did know it was located in Africa ;) ) However, I think these are important points to consider when looking at the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They dont care - they just want to blame America andd Bush for everything - its all George Bushs fault. F them - They should all move to Canada or better yet Mass.

No , thats not it .....it's just a question you one realizing that every country in the world will try and put its hand in the "cookie jar" including the US if given the chance.

It's about being realistic and truthful , and not live in the illusion that the US is the ultimate moral and ethical good and does no one harm .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever heard the expression...."hungry mouths care not about luxery "

Well this is the case here , tons of rice and corn is not a fair trade for billions of dollars in profits ......hey,i realize that it's the angolans own fault for agreeing for such dealings , but whatever way you look at it , it is EXPLOITATION .

You are not getting what I am saying - If those Governments did have controll over the Natural resources do you think they will be benevolent and give back to the people so the country will prosper?? Doubt it. The fat cats in those countries get their share the problem is they do not care about their people. The U.S cares more when we send aid. Rice and corn - thats what we send. Hmmmm why bother then - "let them eat cake". Its so rediculous - The U.S aid is hundreds of million of dollars and its not enough.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No , thats not it .....it's just a question you one realizing that every country in the world will try and put its hand in the "cookie jar" including the US if given the chance.

It's about being realistic and truthful , and not live in the illusion that the US is the ultimate moral and ethical good and does no one harm .

Noone said the U.S is perfect but for now its the best this world has to offer. And what these countries (like France) that we have supported in every war because they are incapable, despise the U.S and we have citizens and media in this country that do nothing but fuel the fire of contempt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know enough about this example but a few questions came to mind. When and how did the US companies get control of the industries? My guess is they came in, hired local workers and pay the govt a share. Would Angola be able to accomplish this w/o outside help/investmen? My second thought is that they were incapable or lacked the technology to do what the American companies are doing. Is Angola better off w/ some money flowing in from outside sources mining there or would they be better off w/ no outside income and no mining(assuming they couldnt put together the technology/financing themselves?

Im not debating this issue w/ you b/c Im not that familiar with the struggles of Angola(but did know it was located in Africa ;) ) However, I think these are important points to consider when looking at the situation.

All this occured in 1975 , during the same time Apparteid (sp) was occuring in South Africa ......my mom is from Mocambique which along with Angola were Portuguese colonies at that time .

US interest wanted angola along with mocambique to decolonize.(i wonder y ! ? lol)..and when that happened and the lands (including my families) were given back to the native blacks , did all of a sudden american companies come in and put a strangle hold on its natural resources .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know enough about this example but a few questions came to mind. When and how did the US companies get control of the industries? My guess is they came in, hired local workers and pay the govt a share. Would Angola be able to accomplish this w/o outside help/investmen? My second thought is that they were incapable or lacked the technology to do what the American companies are doing. Is Angola better off w/ some money flowing in from outside sources mining there or would they be better off w/ no outside income and no mining(assuming they couldnt put together the technology/financing themselves?

Im not debating this issue w/ you b/c Im not that familiar with the struggles of Angola(but did know it was located in Africa ;) ) However, I think these are important points to consider when looking at the situation.

Many countries in Africa are governed by the leader who is the best shot with a gun - Ethnic cleansing - Famine its crazy over there - One of the Reasons we were in Somalia during the clinton administration is because our food and aid never reaches the people, and all the libs can talk about is corrupt america - Look at this piece of crap Arafat whom the media is glorifying (I know not Africa but he is a good example of corruption) The guy dies with Billions in the bank from foriegn aid while his people are suffering. And People are worried about our companies taking advantage - what are they to do go in and deal with such regimes because they are so concerned for their people??
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure everyone knows that it is better living here then 99.9% of the world.

I dont consider you to be a propaganda spewing idiot. But there are some on here who just hate everything about our country except living here. So funny to me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only place i would want to lie besides here would be aruba its pretty nice there. Or if i had my own island in the south pacific and i could be king.

I might not like some of the shit that goes on here, but i undersand we are the good guys overall.

I was stoned as hell yesterday and was watching something on the cold war and it is remarkable how much the war against communism and the war on terrorism has in common. From the propaganda and drawing a line in the world stand point. If you are not with us then your with them type stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only place i would want to lie besides here would be aruba its pretty nice there. Or if i had my own island in the south pacific and i could be king.

I might not like some of the shit that goes on here, but i undersand we are the good guys overall.

I was stoned as hell yesterday and was watching something on the cold war and it is remarkable how much the war against communism and the war on terrorism has in common. From the propaganda and drawing a line in the world stand point. If you are not with us then your with them type stuff.

Boy I was Regan was alive - He would be able to handle the terrorist and the Libs with one hand :pint:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...