[vmarks]

Kofi Annan, that graceless apologist for murderous thugs and OFFP scandal-member, is stepping down.

Next up: Some other OIC apologist to fill his shoes.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

...and yet, many think he will probably be remembered as one of the better UN leaders since its inception.



greg

[IceBreaker]

lol good riddance ....

realistically I don't expect much better in his replacement though.

[Nicko]

Graceless? That sounds a little bitter as well as baseless.

I wager Kofi is one of the most eloquent diplomats to ever grace the world stage in what is really the most thankless job.

As he appears quite healthy, it would be cool to see him run for president of Ghana, though I wouldn’t blame him if he wanted a break from politics.

---

edit:

Almost forgot, Kofi jointly won the nobel peace prize in 2001.

[Sherman Homan]

Criminal. Can't wait to see what thug-lover replaces him.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by Nicko 

Graceless? That sounds a little bitter as well as baseless.

I wager Kofi is one of the most eloquent diplomats to ever grace the world stage in what is really the most thankless job.

As he appears quite healthy, it would be cool to see him run for president of Ghana, though I wouldn’t blame him if he wanted a break from politics.

---

edit:

Almost forgot, Kofi jointly won the nobel peace prize in 2001.

Rwanda, Kosovo, Darfur, Oil for Food, child-sex scandals, twelve years of unenforced resolutions against Saddam, paralysis in the face of an accelerating Iranian nuclear program, a North Korean bomb test this summer, and an antagonism towards Israel so relentless as to border on the persecutional. Oh, did I forget to mention Srebrenica?

And his farewell speech blasts his hosts, the US.

Bitter? No, of course not. What's a little sweeping-genocide-under-the-rug for a fine statesman like Annan?

Graceless? No, of course not, What's a little insulting-your-hosts for the world's-most-eloquent-diplomat?

Edit: Kofi won the Nobel Peace Prize? So did that repugnant terrorist Arafat. So Kofi should feel right at home in that sort of company.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Doesn't surprise me that Kofi is so loved by the "blame the US" for everything, while apologizing for / supporting every other ruthless regime and tinhorn dictator on the planet crowd. He's the perfect spokesman for them.

I can't really be glad that the useless ringleader of an organization that's long since outlived its usefulness is gone- another (most likely even worse) will just pop up and take his place.

[Nicko]

So you don't like the guy, I get it. As for Kofi criticizing his host, the US (ie. Bush and co), how could he not? The US has never had less credibility in the world than now. Kofi would be doing his job a great disservice if he didn't point out the obvious

I look forward to reading his tell-all biography that will inevitably be released in a year or two. I’m sure it will be full of insight and tales about how the US bugged his telephone during the run up to the invasion of Iraq and other such juicy details.

Actually I was kind of holding out hope that Clinton would have a shot at Kofi's job, but that doesn't look like it will be in the cards. However, now the spotlight will really be on Asia. The rise of China and other Asian countries will compliment the incoming Ban Ki-moon. The US is really going to have to kiss some ass to get back some credibility

[BRussell]

This is what I don't get about the anti-UN crowd: The UN either does everything the US wants, or the US ignores them. Mostly they do whatever we want. They're about as close to a wholly-owned subsidiary of the US as you can get. Yet they're terrible evil criminals?

[Sherman Homan]

Almost forgot, Kofi jointly won the nobel peace prize in 2001.

Yeah, that puts him in such august company as Communist dictators, punks, thugs and losers.
Le Duc Tho, Yassir Arafat, Mohamed ElBaradei, Jimmy Carter.
Wow, what an honor!

[villalobos]

Originally Posted by Sherman Homan 

Yeah, that puts him in such august company as Communist dictators, punks, thugs and losers.
Le Duc Tho, Yassir Arafat, Mohamed ElBaradei, Jimmy Carter.
Wow, what an honor!

oooh, losers..... What an horrific thing to be. LOL

[Spliffdaddy]

Can we prosecute him for murder now?

Does he get to keep the money that he and his son embezzled?

[Powerbook]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Doesn't surprise me that Kofi is so loved by the "blame the US" for everything, while apologizing for / supporting every other ruthless regime and tinhorn dictator on the planet crowd. He's the perfect spokesman for them.

I can't really be glad that the useless ringleader of an organization that's long since outlived its usefulness is gone- another (most likely even worse) will just pop up and take his place.

In other news, fascist ex-dictator Pinochet, long-time U.S. backed ally in the "war on communism" ( ) finally dead.
Chileans both mourn, celebrate Pinochet's death - CNN.com

PB.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

This is what I don't get about the anti-UN crowd: The UN either does everything the US wants, or the US ignores them. Mostly they do whatever we want. They're about as close to a wholly-owned subsidiary of the US as you can get. Yet they're terrible evil criminals?

The UN's other role is scape-goat for everything the US can't blame on Clinton.

[Atomic Rooster]

There just isn't any great people around anymore. Everyone seems corrupt.

Maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

There just isn't any great people around anymore. Everyone seems corrupt.

Maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age.

Hahaha...you just didn't hear about it as much back in the day...less "global media" and all...

And Annan hasn't been corrupt as far as I know. And the oil-for-food scandal that the anti-UNers around here like to talk about was a complete blowover that was far less of an issue than they'd like it to be. It hasnt hurt his image one bit o the international stage, because he wasn't involved in it.

Those likening him to Arafat are irresposible and silly.

greg

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by IceBreaker 

lol good riddance ....

realistically I don't expect much better in his replacement though.

 


took the words from my keyboard. . .

[Sherman Homan]

Those likening him to Arafat are irresposible and silly.

I gotta agree with that. Arafat didn't preside over a fraction of the slaughters of innocent people nor a percentage of the billions of dollars in corruption that Kofi did.

[mac1896]

No Kofi.

Tea.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

There just isn't any great people around anymore.

Yes there is. I'm fantastic...

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

Everyone seems corrupt.

...and completely incorruptible.



I hear ya. It's just that the system isn't set up to allow folks with integrity to rise to the top. Politics, by its very nature, requires everyone to be a bunch of corrupt, backstabbing arseholes.

[Spliffdaddy]

Kofi's son. Kojo, made $485,000 from the "oil for food" program. And when the investigation took place, he was "uncooperative".

When asked to do a thorough investigation, Kofi complied. He had it investigated for one day. Then, mysteriously, a bunch of records got shredded - hampering efforts to investigate further.

The UN had a lot of work to do when the Iraqi government was toppled by coalition forces. Seems there were quite a lot (743) of "oil for food" contracts that didn't seem to have a contractor. All of the mystery contractors were paid, according to UN records. But the UN decided not to release the budget figures anymore. It's likely that those contractors never existed, and the payments to them were funneled elsewhere.

Yeah, $60billion spent on the "oil for food" program - fully $15billion given by the US - and the UN feels it's nobody's business how they spent it.

We only know where $485,000 went.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

There just isn't any great people around anymore. Everyone seems corrupt.

Maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age.

You have someone that agrees with you. People suck.

[Troll]

It's obvious to the rest of the world that the US has tried to play the petty internal politics that it's politicians play all the time, on the international stage. Karl Rove and his boys have tried to do to Kofi Annan what they have done to countless people that opposed Bush in the US. It was a smear campaign based on pure lies. Unfortunately, many Americans have bought into the lies without thinking.

Of course Annan is critical of the US. The US is the biggest threat to the UN and world peace in general that exists on the planet today. It ignored UN resolutions, it ignored a process that had been set up in the UN to peacefully resolve the Iraq issue and it illegally invaded Iraq on a false pretence thereby creating a situation that today represents one of the biggest threats to peace on the planet. The US deserves every bit of criticism it gets and it should note that Kofi Annan was the US's choice for Secretary General. THIS is what this Administration has done to its allies in general. The only group anywhere in the world to call for Annan's resignation was the US Republican Party. Coincidence that they were also the group that was most pissed off that the UN had not rubber-stamped their war? I think not. Annan had been their man and he had resisted them. They smeared him. That's how Rove works.

Now Spliffdaddy has posted the biggest load of trash I have ever read so I would like to respond in some detail.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

When asked to do a thorough investigation, Kofi complied. He had it investigated for one day. Then, mysteriously, a bunch of records got shredded - hampering efforts to investigate further.

What utter crap! Where did you get that from? An independent commission was set up under the auspices of an AMERICAN diplomat and it found Kofi Annan to be completely innocent of any personal involvement in corruption. It never said that he had had records shredded.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

The UN had a lot of work to do when the Iraqi government was toppled by coalition forces. Seems there were quite a lot (743) of "oil for food" contracts that didn't seem to have a contractor.

What utter crap. Where do you get this from. Certainly not the Vockler Report.

Do you know how the OFFP contracts worked? I didn't think so. The UN civil servants themselves didn't sign off on a single contract. They were signed by the 661 Committee of which the US was a member. Every single one of the disputed contracts was signed by the United States of America.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Yeah, $60billion spent on the "oil for food" program - fully $15billion given by the US - and the UN feels it's nobody's business how they spent it.

Again, complete and utter nonsense showing that you haven't got the faintest grasp of the facts.

The OFFP was a $100Bn programme not a $60Bn programme.

The OFFP didn't cost the US one single cent never mind $15Bn. The OFFP was an exchange of oil for food and humanitarian supplies. The whole beauty of the program was that it was not charity, that no one had to put any money into it. Iraq sold the oil through contracts that were approved by the members of the UN. The OFFP collected the money and bought supplies through contracts approved by the members of the UN. The cash came back to the UN who then took some of that money and gave it to Kuwait and the US to pay war reparations. It took 2.2% to cover administration of the programme and it gave the rest back to Iraq in the form of approved contracts for the supply of humanitarian goods. The OFFP did not cost the US one single cent!! In fact, the US MADE MONEY out of the programme because some of the profits went to the US to pay for its expenses in conducting the First Gulf War.


Corruption in the OFFP
The allegation is that in certain cases, the supplies that went back to Iraq weren't exactly what the UN thought they were and that individuals (unrelated to the UN), including individuals from Russia, France, the United States and the United Kingdom manipulated the programme with the result that Iraq could have got up to $1.8Bn of profit illegally through the programme. The amount that the individuals in question may have received themselves is unknown but is thought to be no more than 5% of that amount.

The French government has instituted legal proceedings against one of the accused. The American government hasn't done anything about it. The only government official accused is a national of the UK. I remind you that the US and the UK were pro-war and that the only government official implicated is British so the implication that France resisted the war because members of the government were getting a few hundred thousand dollars through the OFFP is without merit. France probably resisted the war, oh I don't know, because they knew it was based on a false pretense (that force had to be used before inspections ended).

So, let's recap, up to 1.8% of the total amount that passed through the programme went missing to corruption. Compare that to the US's adventure in Iraq where corruption levels are WAY more than that. Americans in some cases helped themselves to the entire education budget, for example. 1.8% loss is a remarkably low figure. A figure the US Government and practically any NGO would be proud of.

By contrast, Iraq got $11Bn through illegal smuggling. Nearly ten the amount they smuggled through the OFFP! Who was responsible for preventing this. Not the UN. Not the OFFP. The United States of America. The US controlled Iraq's airspace and borders. So why did it allow Iraq to smuggle? Because the US Congress said that it was in the US National Interest to allow smuggling!!

So riddle me this. How can the UN be said to have conspired with Iraq by allowing Iraq to get $1.8Bn of illegal revenue through the OFFP but the US didn't conspire with Iraq by allowing Iraq to get $11Bn through smuggling operations? Answer: it can't. The real problem during sanctions was not the OFFP; it was the illegal smuggling that the US allowed because the smuggling to happen.

Kofi's son. Kojo, made $485,000 from the "oil for food" program. And when the investigation took place, he was "uncooperative"
Again, utter crap!

Kojo Annan was worked for Cotecna between 1995 and 1997. His employment ended way before the war. He was an external consultant in 1998. His job was liaison officer and marketing manager in company’s office in Lagos, Nigeria.

As in common in almost any industry, Cotecna asked Kojo for a 5-year “non-competition” agreement (1999-2004). In most European countries, these agreements are only legal if the employee is compensated for agreeing not to compete. According to the Volcker Commission, Kojo Annan was paid $178,187 in non-competition payments over five years. Not $485,000, $178,187 that he received as compensation for not being able to work for anyone else in the same field for a period of 5 years. If I left my job today, I would get more than that in respect of "gardening leave".

Even if Kojo were dirty (which the IIC said he wasn't), there still is no link between him and Kofi Annan. They are two different people. Just as George W Bush is not the same person as George Bush Snr. The IIC investigated the possibility that Kojo Annan used his contacts to UN officials, including his father, to secure the award of the inspections contract for Cotecna and it concluded that, “There is no evidence that the selection of Cotecna in 1998 was subject to any affirmative or improper influence of the Secretary-General in the bidding or selection process. Based on the record and lack of evidence of impropriety, it is the finding of the Committee that Cotecna was awarded the contract in 1998 on the ground that it was the lowest bidder." Go that? Cotecna was the lowest bidder. In fact, the IIC even noted that, in keeping with the normal United Nations policy and practice, the Secretary-General is not involved in procurement decisions.”

Ergo, Cotecna itself didn't do anything wrong. It's marketing guy didn't do anything wrong. And the father of its marketing guy didn't do anything wrong. However, people like Rove think that just pointing out that two people are related is enough to prove that they are corrupt. Jeb, George and George anyone?

Irrespective of how pissed off the Bush Administration is that Kofi Annan didn't turn out to be their bitch, he is not judged by the Bush Administration alone. In the eyes of the world, Annan has been one of the most successful UNSGs ever.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Troll 

It's obvious to the rest of the world

Dishonest from the start.

BTW Bush wasn't mad because Koffi wasn't his Bitch. Bush was mad because Koffi was the terrorists Bitch. And he was.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Nicko 

Graceless? That sounds a little bitter as well as baseless.

Baseless? Bitter maybe, but then I can't think of too many "sweet" things this man has been involved in. Let's examine his record by the events he's overseen, the only way to gauge a UN leader;

- Darfur
- Rwandan genocide of 1994
- the Angolan war
- Yugoslavia
- Balkan conflicts
- sexual abuse of women and children by UN peacekeepers in Congo
- worst financial scam in the UN's history

Is it "baseless" to hold him accountable for the above?

I wager Kofi is one of the most eloquent diplomats to ever grace the world stage in what is really the most thankless job.

"eloquent" is the racist slur made by hopeless liberals in shock that a black man can speak at all.

Almost forgot, Kofi jointly won the nobel peace prize in 2001.

Henry Kissinger is a nobel peace prize winner also and happens to disagree with just about every aspect thinkable of this most ineffectual leader of a failed international body. Kofi is the poster-child of failed leadership. Good bye Kofi. I can only hope the next leader does not make you look good.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Let's examine his record by the events he's overseen, the only way to gauge a UN leader;

- Darfur
- Rwandan genocide of 1994
- the Angolan war
- Yugoslavia
- Balkan conflicts
- sexual abuse of women and children by UN peacekeepers in Congo
- worst financial scam in the UN's history

Is it "baseless" to hold him accountable for the above?

Yes. The UN isn't involved in Darfur. Annan is no more accountable for Darfur than you or I are and certainly LESS to blame for the situation there than Tony Blair, or Chirac or Bush. At least they have armies that could have done something.

The Angolan war started in 1975! It ended in 2002. Annan was UNSG from 1997-2006. No idea what you were thinking with your statement!

Yugoslavia has never been stable. It was an amalgamation of states that were always ethnically separate. The West used it as a staging area for the Cold War and wanted it to be split up. Austria was even warned in 1991 by the EC that if it didn't stop stirring war in Yugoslavia, it would be excluded from the EC. Yugoslavia broke up in 1991 - a full 6 years before Annan became UNSG. During the time Annan was UNSG, the war ended. What was the UN's role? Primarily prosecuting war criminals dozen of which have gone to jail. But no, Yugoslavia is Annan's fault right! Spin another!

Sexual abuse. I'll agree that Kofi Annan is responsible for sexual abuses committed by African Union blue helmets if you'll agree that George Bush is responsible for sexual abuse of little boys by Mark Foley ... even though Bush's control over Foley is way more direct than Annan's control over AU troops.

As for the OFFP, well I've already gone into that. It has been blown completely out of proportion by a bunch of rabid Republicans that want to make the UN look bad and were hoping they could get rid of Annan. Backfired though because the UN process worked better than it ever has and the fact that the illegal Iraq invasion has turned into the disaster it was has strengthened the UN. To the extent that the rest of the world sees a battle between Bush and Annan, no one outside of the American right sees Bush coming off better than Annan.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

"eloquent" is the racist slur made by hopeless liberals in shock that a black man can speak at all.

Of course eloquence means nothing to you. You voted for George W Bush!!

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by Troll 

It's obvious to the rest of the world that the US has tried to play the petty internal politics that it's politicians play all the time, on the international stage. Karl Rove and his boys have tried to do to Kofi Annan what they have done to countless people that opposed Bush in the US. It was a smear campaign based on pure lies. Unfortunately, many Americans have bought into the lies without thinking.

It's either that or *you* are wrong. I'm here to show everyone that you are indeed wrong. Which will come as no surprise to anybody, since you are wrong on a daily basis.

Of course Annan is critical of the US. The US is the biggest threat to the UN and world peace in general that exists on the planet today. It ignored UN resolutions, it ignored a process that had been set up in the UN to peacefully resolve the Iraq issue and it illegally invaded Iraq on a false pretence thereby creating a situation that today represents one of the biggest threats to peace on the planet. The US deserves every bit of criticism it gets and it should note that Kofi Annan was the US's choice for Secretary General. THIS is what this Administration has done to its allies in general. The only group anywhere in the world to call for Annan's resignation was the US Republican Party. Coincidence that they were also the group that was most pissed off that the UN had not rubber-stamped their war? I think not. Annan had been their man and he had resisted them. They smeared him. That's how Rove works.

Yes, it stands to reason that those countries are against terrorists and terrorist support organizations, such as the UN.

Now Spliffdaddy has posted the biggest load of trash I have ever read so I would like to respond in some detail.

You're about to get your ass handed to you. And I plan to have a lot of fun doing it.

What utter crap! Where did you get that from? An independent commission was set up under the auspices of an AMERICAN diplomat and it found Kofi Annan to be completely innocent of any personal involvement in corruption. It never said that he had had records shredded.

omg, an "independent" commission? You mean the "Volcker commission" that was paid for by the UN and appointed by the UN? Please define the word "independent" for me, because I'm pretty sure they were dependent on the UN for their existence and their salary. Why don't you cite any facts from the other investigations that *weren't* paid for and appointed by the UN? Not that it matters, since I'm going to use the Volcker report myself - so you can't whine about it.

The most significant finding in the Volcker Report is undoubtedly the revelation that Kofi Annan's then-Chief of Staff Iqbal Riza authorized the shredding between April and December 2004 of thousands of UN documents--the entire UN Chef de Cabinet chronological files for the years 1997, 1998 and 1999, many of which related to the oil-for-food program.

Significantly, Kofi Annan announced the retirement of Riza on Jan. 15, 2005, exactly the same day that Riza notified the Volcker Committee that he had destroyed the documents.

Riza was chief of staff from 1997 to 2004, almost the entire period in which the oil-for- food program was in operation, and would undoubtedly possess an intricate knowledge of the UN's management of the program. He was a long-time colleague of Kofi Annan, and served as Annan's deputy in the Department of Peacekeeping Operations from 1993 to 1996.

What utter crap. Where do you get this from. Certainly not the Vockler Report.

No that information was straight from the UN's own website. I'm laughing so hard right now it's gonna be hard to continue handing you your ass.

Do you know how the OFFP contracts worked? I didn't think so. The UN civil servants themselves didn't sign off on a single contract. They were signed by the 661 Committee of which the US was a member. Every single one of the disputed contracts was signed by the United States of America.

tsk tsk. Let me explain to you how those contracts worked. Since you don't seem to understand.

But the program itself was designed by members of the U.N. Security Council following protracted negotiations with the government of Saddam Hussein. It was the Security Council, for example, that approved Saddam's right to choose the companies, contractors and middlemen with whom Iraq would do business, and through which the entire program was corrupted.

See, Saddam Hussein got to choose which companies the UN could do business with. Brilliant!

Saddam added a 10% surcharge to oil sales - which he pocketed - then dictated which corrupt companies the UN could purchase from. Thanks Kofi!

But wait! The UN needed somebody to 'oversee' these contracts - so what better place than the company Kofi's son worked for, Cotecna. Sure, they were the low bidder, but only after Kofi met with the leadership of the Swiss company, Cotecna. I'm not one to go around spreading rumors, but Cotecna was under investigation by Swiss authorities for bribery. What a perfect match! Two corrupt organizations doing business with each other.

Again, complete and utter nonsense showing that you haven't got the faintest grasp of the facts.

I know, right.

The OFFP was a $100Bn programme not a $60Bn programme.

Prove it. No wait, you can't. The UN doesn't have all the records. Any dollar figure you put on it is just a guess.

The OFFP didn't cost the US one single cent never mind $15Bn. The OFFP was an exchange of oil for food and humanitarian supplies. The whole beauty of the program was that it was not charity, that no one had to put any money into it. Iraq sold the oil through contracts that were approved by the members of the UN. The OFFP collected the money and bought supplies through contracts (with companies Saddam approved of - spliff) approved by the members of the UN (nope, the members only approved of the committee. The committee handled all contracts thereafter - spliff) . The cash came back to the UN who then took some of that money and gave it to Kuwait and the US to pay war reparations. It took 2.2% to cover administration of the programme and it gave the rest back to Iraq in the form of approved contracts for the supply of humanitarian goods (most of which went to the Iraqi military- spliff). The OFFP did not cost the US one single cent!! ( In fact, the US MADE MONEY out of the programme because some of the profits went to the US to pay for its expenses in conducting the First Gulf War.

Corruption in the OFFP
The allegation is that in certain cases, the supplies that went back to Iraq weren't exactly what the UN thought they were and that individuals (unrelated to the UN), including individuals from Russia, France, the United States and the United Kingdom manipulated the programme with the result that Iraq could have got up to $1.8Bn of profit illegally through the programme. The amount that the individuals in question may have received themselves is unknown but is thought to be no more than 5% of that amount.

The French government has instituted legal proceedings against one of the accused. The American government hasn't done anything about it. The only government official accused is a national of the UK. I remind you that the US and the UK were pro-war and that the only government official implicated is British so the implication that France resisted the war because members of the government were getting a few hundred thousand dollars through the OFFP is without merit. France probably resisted the war, oh I don't know, because they knew it was based on a false pretense (that force had to be used before inspections ended).

Good thing all the data was shredded, huh? Makes it hard to prove corruption when the UN decides to shred years worth of files that pertained to the "Oil for Food" scandal. Maybe I'll shred all my tax documents - that way there'll be no proof I committed tax fraud.

So, let's recap, up to 1.8% of the total amount that passed through the programme went missing to corruption. Compare that to the US's adventure in Iraq where corruption levels are WAY more than that. Americans in some cases helped themselves to the entire education budget, for example. 1.8% loss is a remarkably low figure. A figure the US Government and practically any NGO would be proud of.

Let's talk about government corruption in Africa. That would be interesting, too. But since we're talking about the UN, let's try to stay on topic. We're all well aware that you envy the US. It's pretty much all you talk about.

By contrast, Iraq got $11Bn through illegal smuggling. Nearly ten the amount they smuggled through the OFFP! Who was responsible for preventing this. Not the UN. Not the OFFP. The United States of America. The US controlled Iraq's airspace and borders. So why did it allow Iraq to smuggle? Because the US Congress said that it was in the US National Interest to allow smuggling!!

You kill me. The UN made the $11billion windfall possible for Saddam to acquire. But, somehow, you think that the UN isn't responsible? In fact, you blame the USA. But if you didn't blame the USA, you wouldn't bother posting here. I'll wager you've never made a post that didn't blame the USA for something. If you did, then you blamed Israel.

So riddle me this. How can the UN be said to have conspired with Iraq by allowing Iraq to get $1.8Bn of illegal revenue through the OFFP but the US didn't conspire with Iraq by allowing Iraq to get $11Bn through smuggling operations? Answer: it can't. The real problem during sanctions was not the OFFP; it was the illegal smuggling that the US allowed because the smuggling to happen.

You've been pwned.

Kofi's son. Kojo, made $485,000 from the "oil for food" program. And when the investigation took place, he was "uncooperative"
Again, utter crap!

Kojo Annan was worked for Cotecna between 1995 and 1997. His employment ended way before the war. He was an external consultant in 1998. His job was liaison officer and marketing manager in company’s office in Lagos, Nigeria.

As in common in almost any industry, Cotecna asked Kojo for a 5-year “non-competition” agreement (1999-2004). In most European countries, these agreements are only legal if the employee is compensated for agreeing not to compete. According to the Volcker Commission, Kojo Annan was paid $178,187 in non-competition payments over five years. Not $485,000, $178,187 that he received as compensation for not being able to work for anyone else in the same field for a period of 5 years. If I left my job today, I would get more than that in respect of "gardening leave".

Even if Kojo were dirty (which the IIC said he wasn't), there still is no link between him and Kofi Annan. They are two different people. Just as George W Bush is not the same person as George Bush Snr. The IIC investigated the possibility that Kojo Annan used his contacts to UN officials, including his father, to secure the award of the inspections contract for Cotecna and it concluded that, “There is no evidence that the selection of Cotecna in 1998 was subject to any affirmative or improper influence of the Secretary-General in the bidding or selection process. Based on the record and lack of evidence of impropriety, it is the finding of the Committee that Cotecna was awarded the contract in 1998 on the ground that it was the lowest bidder." Go that? Cotecna was the lowest bidder. In fact, the IIC even noted that, in keeping with the normal United Nations policy and practice, the Secretary-General is not involved in procurement decisions.”

Ergo, Cotecna itself didn't do anything wrong. It's marketing guy didn't do anything wrong. And the father of its marketing guy didn't do anything wrong. However, people like Rove think that just pointing out that two people are related is enough to prove that they are corrupt. Jeb, George and George anyone?

Irrespective of how pissed off the Bush Administration is that Kofi Annan didn't turn out to be their bitch, he is not judged by the Bush Administration alone. In the eyes of the world, Annan has been one of the most successful UNSGs ever.

The Volcker report also found that Kojo Annan and Cotecna actively concealed from Kofi Annan both their ongoing relationship and payments to Kojo that totaled as much as $485,000 over five years.

pwned.

Look, dude. It's pretty obvious that you're corrupt when you appoint and pay your own investigators - and you still appear to be corrupt when they issue their report. Between the shredded documents, Kofi's lying, and Kojo's refusal to be questioned - it's no miracle that solid proof is hard to come by.

Kofi is about as innocent as OJ Simpson.

[Sherman Homan]

Kofi Annan is personally responsible for implementing the Oil for Food program. He proposed it, his son was a manager in it. Kofi kept Saddam in power. The Oil for Palaces program kept in UN awash in cash for its other utterly corrupt activities.

As far as Paul Volcker's investigation...Volcker was appointed directly by Kofi. Interesting, considering that Volcker at the time was the head of The United Nations Association of the United States of America. United Nations Association of the USA | UNAUSA.org
Then tell me how Volcker's "investigation" turned out.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Yes, it stands to reason that those countries are against terrorists and terrorist support organizations, such as the UN.

90% of the countries on the planet were against the war. If these are all terrorists and terrorist supporters, then the US has a way bigger problem than they ever thought!

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

omg, an "independent" commission? You mean the "Volcker commission" that was paid for by the UN and appointed by the UN? Please define the word "independent" for me, because I'm pretty sure they were dependent on the UN for their existence and their salary.

You're not really as dumb as you're making out Spliffdaddy. If you really need enlightenment, you can read all about what makes the commission independent. The Volcker Commission is the only comprehensive investigation that was done into the OFFP and it WAS independent.

The IIC is not a UN office. It is completely independent. It was set up by the UN Security Council (which includes the United States of America). It was given the money to complete the investigation before it even started work so it does not depend financially on anyone. By your logic, the US Supreme Court is not independent because the judges are appointed and paid by the State! Read about the Commission here. Independent Inquiry Committee

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

[i]The most significant finding in the Volcker Report is undoubtedly the revelation that Kofi Annan's then-Chief of Staff Iqbal Riza authorized the shredding between April and December 2004 of thousands of UN documents--the entire UN Chef de Cabinet chronological files for the years 1997, 1998 and 1999, many of which related to the oil-for-food program.

Significantly, Kofi Annan announced the retirement of Riza on Jan. 15, 2005, exactly the same day that Riza notified the Volcker Committee that he had destroyed the documents.

You said that Kofi Annan had records destroyed when he found out that there was to be an investigation. That finding is not contained anywhere in the Volcker Report.

The Second and Third INTERIM reports dealt with the question of Riza having shredded chron files. Those reports did not say what you said they said. They said that Riza had acted "imprudently".

Here is what the Commission found happened.

On 22 April 2004, Annan appointed a Commission of Enquiry. On the same day, Mr. Riza's assistant wrote to him telling him that they needed filing space and requesting permission to shred chron files for 1997, 1998 and 1999. If you've ever worked in a large office, you know what a chron file is. It is a file containing COPIES of outgoing correspondence in chronological order for quick reference. These were not documents related only to the OFFP. It was copies of all correspondence that went out of their office. Under UN rules, Chron files are supposed to be destroyed annually so they were well within their rights to do this. Mr. Riza approved the request. In true UN fashion, it took them until 7 December to finish the shredding. In the interim (in June), Annnan gave a directive that no documentation relating to the OFFP should be destroyed. Riza failed to stop the destruction of his chron files because he didn't link the two. Of course he should have done so because amongst his chron files were copies of documents relating to the OFFP.

NOWHERE in ANY of the reports did anyone say that Kofi Annan ordered shredding. Nor was there even a vague suggestion that all of the records for '97, '98 and '99 were destroyed. It is completely ludicrous to suggest that Riza destroyed all documents relating to the OFFP. For one thing, the US had copies of every single contract!!

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

No that information was straight from the UN's own website.

Yeah right, so why are you not able to post the link then?

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

tsk tsk. Let me explain to you how those contracts worked. Since you don't seem to understand.

But the program itself was designed by members of the U.N. Security Council following protracted negotiations with the government of Saddam Hussein. It was the Security Council, for example, that approved Saddam's right to choose the companies, contractors and middlemen with whom Iraq would do business, and through which the entire program was corrupted.

See, Saddam Hussein got to choose which companies the UN could do business with. Brilliant!

Saddam added a 10% surcharge to oil sales - which he pocketed - then dictated which corrupt companies the UN could purchase from. Thanks Kofi!

It's YOU who doesn't understand how this worked. Kofi Annan didn't design the OFFP. In fact, if you go back and look at the program design, you'll see that the UN consistently criticised the design of the program because it left a huge gaping hole called Jordan which the US was given the task of filling and which the US publicly stated it did not intend to fill. Iraq made TEN TIMES as much money through smuggling that the US Congress said was not in the US's national interest to stop. The $1Bn that Saddam may have got through the OFFP pales in comparison to the cash he got through smuggling.

That aside, when you divert from the quotes, that's where you go wrong. Iraq did not do business with anyone. Iraq chose the people it wanted to do business with and then it sent a copy of the proposed terms to the UNSC who approved or rejected those terms. The UN received the cash NOT Saddam. If there was a 10% surcharge, the OFFP would have been enriched not Saddam. The allegation is that the proposed price at which the oil was sold was less than market price so people like the American accused of corruption could on-sell the oil immediately for a profit. The thing is though that the UN didn't approve the price at which the oil was sold - the SECURITY COUNCIL did. And the US had a permanent member on the relevant committee and that member signed off on every single one of the disputed contracts. If the US had thought the price was too low, all they had to do was reject the price. However, the US was operating on the basis that it was in their national interest for Iraq to smuggle as much cash as they possible could. So, even if the US had had a problem with the price, they never would have said anything. In any event, the money was paid to the UN NOT to Iraq and the UN then dished out the money to the US, to Kuwait and kept 10% to cover admin. They took the rest of the cash and bought humanitarian goods that were delivered to Iraq.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

But wait! The UN needed somebody to 'oversee' these contracts - so what better place than the company Kofi's son worked for, Cotecna. Sure, they were the low bidder, but only after Kofi met with the leadership of the Swiss company, Cotecna. I'm not one to go around spreading rumors, but Cotecna was under investigation by Swiss authorities for bribery. What a perfect match! Two corrupt organizations doing business with each other.

Nonsense. The Volcker Report found that Kofi Annan didn't know that the contract had been awarded to Cotecna until 1999. Kojo wasn't even in a position where he could have affected anything. He was their marketing person in Nigeria for God's sake; not the CEO!

THIS is what the Commission found:
"There is no evidence that the selection of Cotecna in 1998 was subject to any affirmative or improper influence of the Secretary-General .... Cotecna was awarded the contract in 1998 on the ground that it was the lowest bidder ... The Secretary-General is not involved with procurement decisions." pg 77 of the 2nd Interim Report

BTW, a criminal investigation was under way in 1998 against the CEO of Cotecna not the company itself. It was in relation to a bribe paid to the President of Pakistan for a contract there. Wrong but common in this business. Most of Halliburton would be in court if everyone was as vigilant as the Swiss. AFAIK, he was not found guilty.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Prove it. No wait, you can't. The UN doesn't have all the records. Any dollar figure you put on it is just a guess.

Of course the UN has records! Some copies of correspondence went missing. There is no allegation that any contracts were destroyed. Besides, the members of the UNSC all have copies of all the contracts which they signed. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) can tell you it was a $100Bn program; the biggest ever.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

You kill me. The UN made the $11billion windfall possible for Saddam to acquire. But, somehow, you think that the UN isn't responsible? In fact, you blame the USA.

The UN didn't make the windfall possible. What is your basis for saying that? Iraq drove trucks filled with oil over the borders mostly into Jordan and got cash and drove back to Saddam and handed the cash over. Through these operations, Saddam collected $11Bn - about ten times the worst case scenario for money he may possibly have got through the OFFP. If the UN had had its way, the OFFP would have been extended to cover smuggling operations. The UN wanted smuggling operations stopped and it proposed putting blue helmets in place of the US soldiers to stop those trucks and to take action against Jordan. The US refused to stop them because it said smuggling was in its national interest. I don't know what part you didn't understand here.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

The Volcker report also found that Kojo Annan and Cotecna actively concealed from Kofi Annan both their ongoing relationship and payments to Kojo that totaled as much as $485,000 over five years.

Saying he got up to $485,000 and saying he did get $485,000 is not the same thing. If you show me the page of the report in which the Commission said Kojo got $485,000, I'd be most happy. I'd point you to page 70 of the second interim report where there is a nice little diagram and where they say Actual Payments - $178,187.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Sherman Homan 

Kofi Annan is personally responsible for implementing the Oil for Food program. He proposed it, his son was a manager in it. Kofi kept Saddam in power. The Oil for Palaces program kept in UN awash in cash for its other utterly corrupt activities.

I see, so the $11Bn that Saddam got through smuggling because the US allowed him to get it (nay, the US Congress encouraged) had no impact at all on keeping Saddam in power but the $1.8Bn that he MAY have got through the OFFP did! Nice logic.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Troll 

Yes. The UN isn't involved in Darfur...

Thanx for defining "derelict". 2003; 2 million people displaced, and over 400,000 dead from conflict, disease, and malnutrition. Perhaps it's time the UN became "involved in Darfur".

Can you provide for me the official UN plan for force there? They could start by approving a UN peacekeeping force. Bush has called for it, McCain has called for it, certainly the African people are calling for it.

The Angolan war started in 1975! It ended in 2002. Annan was UNSG from 1997-2006. No idea what you were thinking with your statement!

He was under-secretary prior and his fumbled he-said/she-said "communication" with B. Ghali has been noteworthy, notwithstanding the fact that he was head of UN peacekeeping at the time? Still confused?

Yugoslavia has never been stable. It was an amalgamation of states that were always ethnically separate. The West used it as a staging area for the Cold War and wanted it to be split up. Austria was even warned in 1991 by the EC that if it didn't stop stirring war in Yugoslavia, it would be excluded from the EC. Yugoslavia broke up in 1991 - a full 6 years before Annan became UNSG. During the time Annan was UNSG, the war ended. What was the UN's role? Primarily prosecuting war criminals dozen of which have gone to jail. But no, Yugoslavia is Annan's fault right! Spin another!

No spin necessary. Kofi was a special representative to the former Yugoslavia (1995–96), overseeing the transfer of peacekeeping duties from UN forces to NATO and watched Yugoslavia deteriorate before his very eyes. His concern was not cost in lives, but cost in dollars. His "cautious" efforts at damage control cost most too much of both. Of course, by your reasoning, we should not speak of starvation and poverty in Africa for example, after all it's never been exactly boom-town right?

Sexual abuse. I'll agree that Kofi Annan is responsible for sexual abuses committed by African Union blue helmets if you'll agree that George Bush is responsible for sexual abuse of little boys by Mark Foley ... even though Bush's control over Foley is way more direct than Annan's control over AU troops.

Nice try. I'll agree that Kofi is not responsible for sexual abuses committed by UN soldiers if you'll agree Bush is not responsible for abuses in Gitmo.

Of course eloquence means nothing to you. You voted for George W Bush!!

Who did you vote for??? Someone much more eloquent I'm sure.

[Sherman Homan]

Yugoslavia has never been stable.

Sigh.

Such a breathtakingly silly comment can not go unchallenged.

google this: Winter Olympics 1984

1984 wolympics logo.png: Information from Answers.com

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Troll 

I see, so the $11Bn that Saddam got through smuggling because the US allowed him to get it (nay, the US Congress encouraged) had no impact at all on keeping Saddam in power but the $1.8Bn that he MAY have got through the OFFP did! Nice logic.

I notice that when proven wrong about the Oil for Food scam, the UN apologists always fall back on the ruse of blaming Iraqi oil smuggling on the US.

I recall that the last time this ruse was trotted out, it was revealed that much of the oil actually left Iraq over land, and guess who was responsible for monitoring that? Yup, the Useless Nations. Also much of the rest left Iraq via Iranian waters that weren't even possible for the US to police.

More nonsense from the obsessed blame the US for everything crowd.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Thanx for defining "derelict". 2003; 2 million people displaced, and over 400,000 dead from conflict, disease, and malnutrition. Perhaps it's time the UN became "involved in Darfur".

Can you provide for me the official UN plan for force there? They could start by approving a UN peacekeeping force.

No they can't. The UN cannot approve peacekeeping forces because the UN is not a decision-making body. The UN is a forum. I don't understand why people on the right are so incapable of understanding this. A peacekeeping force can only be authorised by the members of the United Nations Security Council. If you want to know why nothing is happening in Darfur, start looking at what is happening in each of those member states. If it's anyone's fault that nothing is happening in Sudan, it's the fault of leaders of the members of the Security Council.

Kofi Annan and others at the UN have been calling for UN involvement in Sudan for years.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

He was under-secretary prior and his fumbled he-said/she-said "communication" with B. Ghali has been noteworthy, notwithstanding the fact that he was head of UN peacekeeping at the time? Still confused?

In 1975, when the Angolan War started, Kofi Annan was the Director of Tourism in Ghana. It wasn't until 1993 that he started working in peacekeeping.

And your inability to understand what a peacekeeping role at the UN means is part of the reason why you blame him for every war that happened between 1975 and 2006.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

I notice that when proven wrong about the Oil for Food scam, the UN apologists always fall back on the ruse of blaming Iraqi oil smuggling on the US.

I recall that the last time this ruse was trotted out, it was revealed that much of the oil actually left Iraq over land, and guess who was responsible for monitoring that? Yup, the Useless Nations. Also much of the rest left Iraq via Iranian waters that weren't even possible for the US to police.

More nonsense from the obsessed blame the US for everything crowd.

Well Troll is a major UN fanboy.. soo..
We let him slide on it.

When good things happen when the UN is involved they did it! When Bad thing happen the UN is just a front for other people to do bad things!11

And when all else fails, blame the US!

Rinse, and repeat.