[Troll]

After having smeared Clinton for his entire Presidency and having gone after Kerry during the election, it seems that the Republican smear team is now targetting Kofi Annan. The rest of the world doesn't appear to buy this kind of tactic though and there is a visible backlash to Republican suggestions that Annan should go.

On 9 December Annan received an unusual standing ovation in the 191-nation General Assembly following calls for his resignation from conservative US lawmakers. Annan has been accused by some Republicans in the US Congress of presiding over corruption in the UN oil-for-food program for Iraq, administered by the United Nations but supervised by the 15-nation Security Council. The central allegation made is that Annan's son continued to receive payments from the Swiss company that was charged with monitoring, together with the UNSC, compliance with the UNOFFP. As it turns out, Annan's son resigned before the contract was awarded to the Swiss company and the only payments he received thereafter were payments of about EUR 2,000 per month being the statutory minimum payable under Swiss law when an ex-employee is banned from working for competitors under a non-compete clause.

"I interpret this long ovation as an acknowledgment of your actions and also an expression of confidence in yourself and also of the work you have undertaken at the helm of the United Nations," Jean Ping, the assembly president from Gabon, said after the applause, which lasted nearly a minute.

"In a world that is held hostage to doubt, by confusion and at times to confrontation, you have always remained a point of reference as well as a source of wisdom and of inspiration for millions of individuals worldwide," Ping said. Many European, Asian and African leaders had already come to Annan's defense. Patrick Kennedy, the US diplomat, was among those standing in the General Assembly hall, although the White House has issued no statement of support. "It was merely a sign of respect," a US official said.

And today an open letter will be published from a number of Southern African leaders in support of Kofi Annan. The letter is signed by inter alia, Nelson Mandela, Bishop Desmond Tutu, Gra�a Machel (who is a former President, a member of the UN Foundation and Chairman of the Board of the Vaccine Fund) and Nadine Gordimer. That's three nobel laureates in case no one noticed.

The letter reads: "This letter strongly condemns attempts to bring about the resignation of the Secretary-General of United Nations Kofi Annan." The letter says that those advocating Annan's resignation were using the pretext of his son's alleged involvement in the programme to get rid of him. The real reason, however, was Annan's criticism of some of the United States' actions in Iraq.

"The secretary-general's statement was fully in accord with the fundamental principle and purpose of the United Nations that, as it appears a reminder is needed, is to promote and maintain human rights irrespective of what nation or country breaches them.

This is within the United Nations' founding objective of attaining world peace and justice.

Those who call for his resignation betray the objectivity his position as secretary-general demands and regard United Nations as a mouthpiece to extol and exonerate the policies of the United States of America, right or wrong."

This instance of the reprehensible and unjust attack on the secretary-general for doing his job with integrity and admirable courage is the latest example of the attitude."

"Kofi Annan has done a great deal to create high morale within the United Nations, devoting his life with all his energy, intellect and deep human understanding, to the enormous task of justifying the ever-increasing necessity of the United Nations in a world of continuing conflict."

The group said they joined 54 African nations, the European Union, Britain, France, Russia and China who have already voiced their support for Annan in the face of the American attacks.

[Spliffdaddy]

lol

"the Republicans did it"

[SimeyTheLimey]

We've got to protect our phoney-baloney jobs!

-- Governor William J. LePetomaine

[Randman]

I think Kofi & Co. are doing a quite right job of cocking everything up without assistance.

[joelcpa]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
lol

"the Republicans did it"

Of course, everything is their fault, everybody knows that...

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

"B-but... Karl Rove made me do it!"

[Troll]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
lol

"the Republicans did it"

Sorry, I may have missed something, but it looks to me like the only people who have called for Kofi Annan's resignation are members of the Republican Party. The rest of the world believes in him and understands the baselessness of the accusations being made by the Republicans. All of which is rather ironic since Annan was criticised in the beginning precisely because he was the US's appointee.

What the responses to this thread shows though is how the Republican yes-men immediately get behind their smear team. All you have to do is suggest a link between Iraq and 9/11 or suggest that Kofi Annan is giving his son contracts and the yes-men will turn it into fact.

What astounds me is how many Americans lap this stuff up. What was the figure, something like 65% of Americans that bought the Iraq-9/11 link when virtually no one in the rest of the world did.

Anyway, my point here was to show once again how the American reality is diverging from the rest of the world. The rest of the world stands resolutely behind Annan at this point in time. He's not going anywhere.

[Spliffdaddy]

That's the difference between Americans and foreigners.

It parallels the difference between success and failure. Apparently.

Only goes to show that popular opinion is usually wrong.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Troll:
Anyway, my point here was to show once again how the American reality is diverging from the rest of the world. The rest of the world stands resolutely behind Annan at this point in time. He's not going anywhere.

I agree that someone's reality is diverging.

But really, does it matter that the delegates to the General Assembly applauded him? That's like a convention of Mafia dons applauding Al Capone.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Troll:
Sorry, I may have missed something, but it looks to me like the only people who have called for Kofi Annan's resignation are members of the Republican Party. The rest of the world believes in him and understands the baselessness of the accusations being made by the Republicans.

You are kidding right?

The rest of the world?

Why do people always revert to extreme exaggerations to try to support their point is beyond me.

It only makes people chuckle. No Troll, The Repubs aren't the only ones.

Anyway, my point here was to show once again how the American reality is diverging from the rest of the world. The rest of the world stands resolutely behind Annan at this point in time. He's not going anywhere.

Nonsense. All you have done in this thread is ridicule and throw out FUD.

Lets see some facts on his innocence.

You know Troll, I speak with "the rest of the world" daily. There are various different opinions on the matter.

I've spoken with many non-Americans that think they guy is a crook.

Something I have seen. The people that were extreme pro UN support the guy.

The people that were extreme against the UN don't.

Now, there have been people in the middle, that now doesn't trust the UN. And think the guy is a crook.

So enough with your "rest of the world" exaggerations.

[Spliffdaddy]

Perhaps the difference of opinion is rooted in the fact that America doesn't need the UN to provide their protection - but the rest of the world seems to need the UN.

[Troll]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
[D]oes it matter that the delegates to the General Assembly applauded him?

Uhmm, the Secretary-General of the United Nations is appointed by the General Assembly.

[Zimphire]

Kofi has done a good job smearing himself.

Anyone that is a good judgment of character and has the discernment to see these things it is obvious.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Troll:
Uhmm, the Secretary-General of the United Nations is appointed by the General Assembly.

And a good proportion of the General Assembly is appointed by completely undemocratic and illegitimate regimes. This goes a long way to explaining their long track record of farcical votes.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
No Troll, The Repubs aren't the only ones.

Instead of making bald assertions, why don't you back up your statement. Who else is calling for his resignation? Hmm? There are probably some Democrats joining the fray now too but I haven't seen any evidence of that. Outside the USA everyone is rushing to Annan's defence. Because the guy has integrity in spades. He's one of the finest Secretary Generals there has ever been.

Let's see what the US's most significant ally says about this whole thing. Tony Blair said criticism of Annan was "unfair" and that he was doing "a fine job". "I believe Kofi Annan is doing a fine job as United Nations Secretary-General, often in very difficult circumstances."

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Lets see some facts on his innocence.

Brilliant. Zimphire invents the guilty until proven innocent principle!

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Something I have seen. The people that were extreme pro UN support the guy.

The people that were extreme against the UN don't.

Another revelation. Those who think the UN is a bad idea don't like Kofi Annan. Wow! I don't care about the guy in the pub who like many people on this board, probably doesn't even know what the UN is. Show me a leader outside the United States who thinks Kofi Annan should resign.

[Troll]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
And a good proportion of the General Assembly is appointed by completely undemocratic and illegitimate regimes.

That doesn't make any difference does it? You tried to downplay the GA's relevance and your argument fell right on its face.

[Spliffdaddy]

"Show me a leader outside the United States who thinks Kofi Annan should resign."

First you'll have to show me a leader outside the US.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Kofi has done a good job smearing himself.

Anyone that is a good judgment of character and has the discernment to see these things it is obvious.

The man has more integrity in his left pinky than the entire Bush Administration. You might want to read up on Kofi Annan before you make stupid statements like that.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
"Show me a leader outside the United States who thinks Kofi Annan should resign."

First you'll have to show me a leader outside the US.

Tony Blair??

[SimeyTheLimey]

Annan will survive, and this scandal will be brushed under the carpet. It penetrates far too deeply for it to be exposed. The Administration has already distanced itself from Norm Coleman, and signalled it will support Annan (at least for now). The scandal itself is in the past. It centered on a regime that is gone, and a corrupt bribary system that is closed down.

Unfortunatley, this exposes yet again the essentially pragmatic nature of the UN. It's a tool, nothing more. It has no moral legitimacy, because it rests on the lie that all nations are equal, and all governments are equally valid. of course, the Kleptocrats will rally behind Annan, and equally clearly, the western govenments that occasionally feel the need to use the rotten structure won't rock the boat over this. The US isn't going to unilaterally throw Annan overboard, or force him to deal with the corruption inside the Secretariat any more than it would cut off funds to the body. All that does is strengthen the hand of the anti-Americans and makes a crook a hero. It's not worth destroying the UN to prove a point. The UN is occasionally useful. It's just not worthy of its romantic conceit.

The better question would be whether Annan will be reelected in 2006. There is a good argument for replacing him then. He took Boutros Boutros Ghali's second term. If reelected, his would be a third African turn when by tradition, it is time for an Asian. Let him quietly retire then.

In the mean time, the US should continue to pressure the UN to reform its corruption and become more transparent. And additionally, work to make the world a more democratic place. The UN wouldn't be half as problematic if it weren't so much a club for dictators and their sycophants.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Troll:
That doesn't make any difference does it? You tried to downplay the GA's relevance and your argument fell right on its face.

No, I just think you misunderstood the depth of my contempt for the GA. It's a shameful body, and an embarrassment. It has no relevance except as an illustration of what is wrong with the UN.

The fact that you think it is relevant that they applauded Annan bespeaks the difference.

[macintologist]

Originally posted by Troll:
Tony Blair??

SMACKDOWN




..sorry Zimph.. I had to say that

[Spliffdaddy]

Tony Blair already criticized Annan.

*smackback*

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Troll:
Instead of making bald assertions, why don't you back up your statement. Who else is calling for his resignation? Hmm? There are probably some Democrats joining the fray now too but I haven't seen any evidence of that. Outside the USA everyone is rushing to Annan's defence. Because the guy has integrity in spades. He's one of the finest Secretary Generals there has ever been.

Troll there you go against "Everyone else" Nonsense.

Brilliant. Zimphire invents the guilty until proven innocent principle!

Um no Troll. I am saying there are SERIOUS allegations against him. Things that look to be sticking. There is something foul going on there. His son was in the middle of it.

We don't know yet what is all going on. He isn't cooperating very well.

You seem to believe he is innocent without proof either.

Another revelation. Those who think the UN is a bad idea don't like Kofi Annan. Wow! I don't care about the guy in the pub who like many people on this board, probably doesn't even know what the UN is. Show me a leader outside the United States who thinks Kofi Annan should resign.

Oh so it's gone from "THE REST OF THE WORLD" to "CERTAIN LEADERS OUTSIDE OF THE US"

At least you are toning down the exaggeration. Good.

[itistoday]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
That's the difference between Americans and foreigners.

It parallels the difference between success and failure. Apparently.

Only goes to show that popular opinion is usually wrong.

You sir have your head up your ass.

[koogz]

Originally posted by itistoday:
You sir have your head up your ass.

ha-ha-ha-ha-ahem.

Ignorance didn't win the election. The ignorant lost the election.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by itistoday:
You sir have your head up your ass.

As opposed to the rest of the world having their heads up Annan's ass?

[itistoday]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
As opposed to the rest of the world having their heads up Annan's ass?

Annan is a great guy, he deserves his post, and he has done nothing wrong, as opposed to the vomit that comes out of the monkey's mouth.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by itistoday:
Annan is a great guy, he deserves his post, and he has done nothing wrong, as opposed to the vomit that comes out of the monkey's mouth.

I'm sure Annan's great, in fact, I wish he and I were buds.... I could have used some of that Oil4Food kickback that his family and friends enjoyed over the years. *sigh* Too bad I can't stomach maggots like him for long without getting that "dirty feeling". Oh well.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Um no Troll. I am saying there are SERIOUS allegations against him. Things that look to be sticking. There is something foul going on there. His son was in the middle of it.

Why don't you tell us what the serious allegations against him are then? Huh? Because you don't know. Because there aren't any! Because when the Republican smear machine gets going, people like you jump on the band wagon.

Even the accusation against his son isn't serious. The accusation against his son is similar to the one made against Cheney. That he continued to receive payments after he no longer worked for a company. Bear in mind that Kofi Annan is a whole level removed so he is even less guilty than Cheney ever could have been even if the charges against Kofi's son were true. I told you that the payments he got from the company weren't even of the nature Cheney received. All he got was a monthly amount of less than 2000 Euros (which is Switzerland is NOTHING) that his ex employer is forced by law to pay him for the non-compete clause in his old employment.

Originally posted by Zimphire:

We don't know yet what is all going on. He isn't cooperating very well.

Where do you get this nonsense from? He is co-operating perfectly well. He's formed an independent commission with an American at the helm to look into the accusations! He has co-operated fully with that Commission.

Originally posted by Zimphire:
You seem to believe he is innocent without proof either.

That's the way it works in a democratic system - it's called the presumption of innocence!!

[CreepingDeth]

This man has put himself in quite the hotspot. Well, who's the next puppet for the SG of this corrupt International joke called the UN?

[Zimphire]

Troll I am going to bookmark this thread.

In about 4 months or less I will come back to it.

We will see what has happened since then.

Deal?

[macintologist]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Troll I am going to bookmark this thread.

In about 4 months or less I will come back to it.

We will see what has happened since then.

Deal?

Speaking of old threads, it would be interesting to go back to some pre-war threads and see what folks were saying about Iraqi's WMD

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Troll I am going to bookmark this thread.

In about 4 months or less I will come back to it.

We will see what has happened since then.

Deal?

My whole point is the noise being made by Republicans about this right now. It's disgusting to see them trying to sully international politics with their traditional approach to US domestic politics.

What happens in 4 months time is completely irrelevant to the point which is that right now Kofi Annan has done nothing wrong and yet because he didn't act as the US's puppet, the Republicans are making things up in an attempt to get rid of him. And a lot of Americans won't ever bother to find out whether Annan was guilty of corruption. People like you have already made your decision.

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by Troll:
The group said they joined 54 African nations, the European Union, Britain, France, Russia and China who have already voiced their support for Annan in the face of the American attacks.

i'd say that's about 90% of the world's population right there. get india in the mix and we're almost complete.

[Anders]

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:

Oh so thats the proof. Drawings. Somehow they really don�t have the persuading potential as these:





"Hey look at that. We may not know what they are used for really (but we pretend we do) but there is so much mud that sticks to this case"

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
i'd say that's about 90% of the world's population right there. get india in the mix and we're almost complete.

Ah-ah - not so fast.

It's the New American �-ury�, after all.

[Spliffdaddy]

*bookmarks thread*

this is gonna be invaluable the day Annan is convicted and imprisoned.

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
*bookmarks thread*

this is gonna be invaluable the day Annan is captured and thrown into a PNAC� concentration camp.

fixed.�

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by macintologist:
Speaking of old threads, it would be interesting to go back to some pre-war threads and see what folks were saying about Iraqi's WMD

Oh yeah! - Has Bush been impeached yet, like moki demanded?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Oh yeah! - Has Bush been impeached yet, like moki demanded?

No. He was reelected. Back by popular demand.

[Spliffdaddy]

Rest assured, however, that if we ever catch Dubya with his pants down in front of a chubby intern - we'll be sure to impeach his cheating ass ASAP.

Double-standards are all but absent in the Republican ranks.

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Rest assured, however, that if we ever catch Dubya with his pants down in front of a chubby intern...

we will know that rush limbaugh is looking for a new day job.

[Spheric Harlot]

[OldManMac]

Published on Sunday, December 12, 2004 by the Independent / UK

The Oil-For-Food 'Scandal' is a Cynical Smokescreen

by Scott Ritter


United States Senators, led by the Republican Norm Coleman, have launched a crusade of sorts, seeking to "expose" the oil-for-food programme implemented by the United Nations from 1996 until 2003 as the "greatest scandal in the history of the UN". But this posturing is nothing more than a hypocritical charade, designed to shift attention away from the debacle of George Bush's self-made quagmire in Iraq, and legitimise the invasion of Iraq by using Iraqi corruption, and not the now-missing weapons of mass destruction, as the excuse.

The oil-for-food programme was derived from the US-sponsored Security Council resolution, passed in April 1995 but not implemented until December 1996. During this time, the CIA sponsored two coup attempts against Saddam, the second, most famously, a joint effort with the British that imploded in June 1996, at the height of the "oil for food" implementation negotiations. The oil-for-food programme was never a sincere humanitarian relief effort, but rather a politically motivated device designed to implement the true policy of the United States - regime change.


Through various control mechanisms, the United States and Great Britain were able to turn on and off the flow of oil as they saw best. In this way, the Americans were able to authorise a $1bn exemption concerning the export of Iraqi oil for Jordan, as well as legitimise the billion-dollar illegal oil smuggling trade over the Turkish border, which benefited NATO ally Turkey as well as fellow regime-change plotters in Kurdistan. At the same time as US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was negotiating with Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov concerning a Russian-brokered deal to end a stand-off between Iraq and the UN weapons inspectors in October-November 1997, the United States turned a blind eye to the establishment of a Russian oil company set up on Cyprus.


This oil company, run by Primakov's sister, bought oil from Iraq under "oil for food" at a heavy discount, and then sold it at full market value to primarily US companies, splitting the difference evenly with Primakov and the Iraqis. This US-sponsored deal resulted in profits of hundreds of million of dollars for both the Russians and Iraqis, outside the control of "oil for food". It has been estimated that 80 per cent of the oil illegally smuggled out of Iraq under "oil for food" ended up in the United States.

Likewise, using its veto-wielding powers on the 661 Committee, set up in 1990 to oversee economic sanctions against Iraq, the United States was able to block billions of dollars of humanitarian goods legitimately bought by Iraq under the provisions of the oil-for-food agreement. And when Saddam proved too adept at making money from kickbacks, the US and Britain devised a new scheme of oil sales which forced potential buyers to commit to oil contracts where the price would be set after the oil was sold, an insane process which quickly brought oil sales to a halt, starving the oil-for-food programme of money to the point that billions of dollars of humanitarian contracts could not be paid for by the United Nations.

The corruption evident in the oil-for-food programme was real, but did not originate from within the United Nations, as Norm Coleman and others are charging. Its origins are in a morally corrupt policy of economic strangulation of Iraq implemented by the United States as part of an overall strategy of regime change. Since 1991, the United States had made it clear - through successive statements by James Baker, George W Bush and Madeleine Albright - that economic sanctions, linked to Iraq's disarmament obligation, would never be lifted even if Iraq fully complied and disarmed, until Saddam Hussein was removed from power. This policy remained unchanged for over a decade, during which time hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died as a result of these sanctions.

While money derived from the off-the-book sale of oil did indeed go into the purchase of conventional weapons and the construction of presidential palaces, the vast majority of these funds were poured into economic recovery programmes that saw Iraq emerge from near total economic ruin in 1996. By 2002, on the eve of the US-led invasion, Baghdad was full of booming businesses, restaurants were full, and families walked freely along well-lit parks. Compare and contrast that image with the reality of Baghdad today, and the ultimate corruption that was the oil-for-food programme becomes self-evident.

Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq (1991-1998) and the author of 'Frontier Justice: Weapons of Mass Destruction.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Scott Ritter was on the take himself.

[Altix]

They're also now attempting to damage the respectability of El-Baradei, probably because he didn't give the US what they wanted, Iran.

Having worked at the UN for the British Government, I've seen what goes on amongst the Americans behind the scenes, what they attenpt to do in some cases. So none of this surprises me, and I'd sooner trust Saddam Hussain than the Bush Government.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by Altix:
... I'd sooner trust Saddam Hussain than the Bush Government.

What a moronic conclusion.

I'm all for people having their own opinions, but it's going to be difficult to take anything you post here seriously.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
What a moronic conclusion.

I'm all for people having their own opinions, but it's going to be difficult to take anything you post here seriously.

What a moronic conclusion.

I'm all for people having their own opinions, but it's going to be difficult to take anything you post here seriously. After all, Bush is a "Christian," isn't he?

[koogz]

Originally posted by KarlG:
What a moronic conclusion.

I'm all for people having their own opinions, but it's going to be difficult to take anything you post here seriously. After all, Bush is a "Christian," isn't he?

And, John F(ing) Heinz Kerry thinks he is a Catholic.... riiiiiight.