Submit your comments on this article |
International-UN-NGOs |
Annan: Iraq War Done Little to Halt Terrorism |
2004-10-17 |
The Iraq war has done little to increase security across the world or halt the activities of international terrorists, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Sunday. Annan said in a British television interview that the international community now had a lot to do to improve security. "I cannot not say the world is safer when you consider the violence around us, when you look around you and see the terrorist attacks around the world and you see what is going on in Iraq," he told the Dimbleby program on ITV television. "We have a lot of work to do as an international community to try and make the world safer." A transcript of Annan's interview, due to be broadcast later Sunday, was made available to media. Annan also dismissed suggestions that France, Russia and China had, before the recent Iraq war, been prepared to ease sanctions on Iraq in return for oil contracts. Disputing claims made in the final report of the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group which suggested Saddam Hussein had manipulated the U.N.'s oil-for-food program in an attempt to win Security Council support for lifting sanctions, Annan said it was "inconceivable" the three countries were influenced. "I don't think the Russian or the French or the Chinese government would allow itself to be bought because some of his companies are getting relative contracts of the Iraqi authorities. I don't believe that at all," he said. "It's inconceivable. These are very serious and important governments. You are not dealing with banana republics." Annan said he believed Iraq was now on track to hold elections at the end of January, but stressed that he would speak out if they were not conducted satisfactorily. "If that sort of judgment or any decision which is made which we think detracts from the credibility and viability of the elections, we will be duty bound to say so," he said. Asked about Iran, which the United States has accused of pursuing a nuclear weapons program, Annan warned against considering any kind of military action. "To undertake an operation of that kind would not be helpful at all. I don't even want to contemplate it because I think it would be very unwise." He said if Washington were to decide to go for military action against Iran, it would probably be illegal under the U.N. charter. "I think that would be the view of the members of the council," he said. |
Posted by:Destro |
#73 You're assuming he still has hands. We find only mouths! For greedy input and idiotarian output. |
Posted by: wits0 2004-10-18 12:01:26 AM |
#72 Re #69 (Zenster): The one billion dollar figure is .... ample demonstration of just how awash with cash the UN's oil-for-palaces scam was. I don't know what the billion-dollar figure comprises. I am sure, though, that it's more than just auditing expenses. Keep in mind that this oil-for-food program was part of the UN's sanctions on Iraq. Although the UN sanctions were not perfect, they also were not trivial. Ever since the first Gulf War, I think the USA has been much more satisfied than not that the UN imposed and maintained the sanctions on Iraq for so many years. Keep in mind also that the UN didn't give out the oil vouchers. Saddam Hussein gave them out, and he did it secretly. He hid this voucher business from the world in general and from the UN in particular. Only the individual recipients were supposed to know about them. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 11:59:29 PM |
#71 . Without wishing to be too cynical, the UN's inability to find any mismanagement within their own extraordinarily inept executive structure is about as likely as a male inmate not being able to find his @ss with both hands in a Turkish prison. You're assuming he still has hands. |
Posted by: Charles 2004-10-17 11:29:08 PM |
#70 3Dc Thank you so much for posting the U.N./Saddam Oil-for-Food data! |
Posted by: Mark Espinola 2004-10-17 11:19:01 PM |
#69 In other words, the billion dollars in the sentence is totally meaningless as a measure of the expenditure for the audits. The one billion dollar figure is not without merit. It is ample demonstration of just how awash with cash the UN's oil-for-palaces scam was. Without wishing to be too cynical, the UN's inability to find any mismanagement within their own extraordinarily inept executive structure is about as likely as a male inmate not being able to find his @ss with both hands in a Turkish prison. |
Posted by: Zenster 2004-10-17 10:29:16 PM |
#68 Re #66 (2b) the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group which suggested Saddam Hussein had manipulated the U.N.’s oil-for-food program in an attempt to win Security Council support for lifting sanctions, [but] Annan said it was "inconceivable" the three countries were influenced Saddam Hussein's vouchers did not significantly influence the UN votes of any Security Council members. If that's what Kofi Annan meant in this passage, then he is right about that. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 10:14:43 PM |
#67 Re #65 (Zenster): The audits were paid out of $1 billion collected to administer the food-for-oil program. That doesn't mean the audits cost $1 billion. If the audits cost one cent, then that one cent was paid out of $1 billion collected to adminster the program. If the audits cost one dollar, then that one dollar was paid out of $1 billion collected to adminster the program. And so on and so forth. In other words, the billion dollars in the sentence is totally meaningless as a measure of the expenditure for the audits. Were the auditors negiligent in not knowing that Saddam Hussein was giving vouchers to individuals throughout the world? How were the auditors to know? If you, Zenster, come and audit my personal finances, would you necessarily know that I am secretly giving out vouchers? I take a piece of paper and write an IOU on it, and I secretly give that piece of paper to my good friend Frank G. This voucher entitles Frank G to siphon some gas out of my gas tank sometime in the future. How, Zenster, would your audit catch this subtrifuge? You might look in my gas tank, and it would be full. I didn't give Frank G any gasoline, I gave him only a voucher -- a piece of paper -- an IOU. Also, keep in mind that these vouchers seem to represent a lot of petroleum to us mere mortals. In the scale of Iraq's petroleum output, though, they represented petty cash. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 10:04:52 PM |
#66 65 posts! Acck..i can't read them all. I just wanted to note; Annan also dismissed suggestions that France, Russia and China had, before the recent Iraq war, been prepared to ease sanctions on Iraq in return for oil contracts. Disputing claims made in the final report of the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group which suggested Saddam Hussein had manipulated the U.N.’s oil-for-food program in an attempt to win Security Council support for lifting sanctions, Annan said it was "inconceivable" the three countries were influenced HA!!! I can't believe I reading this from Reuters!! Even if it is because the are just trying to explain it away...it is veddy interesting, as Reuters would never peddal this thought unless they believed it was already CW that they felt obligated to debunk. *snicker* |
Posted by: 2b 2004-10-17 9:52:23 PM |
#65 It is odd, indeed, that all these audits, paid for from $1 billion collected by the UN to administer the program, could not find one of the several infringements of the program that had been noted two years earlier by MEMRI – which has no access to official records. Sort of leaps out from the page at you. Mike, if you are seriously suggesting that the UN continues to deliver anything of the remotest value in return for however many untold BILLIONS of dollars it continues to suck out of the world economy, such an assertion casts suspicion upon either your rationality or intelligence. I'll permit you to choose which. |
Posted by: Zenster 2004-10-17 9:30:35 PM |
#64 Re: #59 (Old Patriot) About 4/5 of them were not deferential to the current UN Secretary General. The general concensus is, he was either in on the take (most likely) Maybe 4/5 of them are presumptuous, since so far I haven't seen any evidence that Kofi Annan is on the take. The only "evidence" I've seen is that his son Kojo 1) worked on the Cotecna staff 13 months before the UN contract and then 2) worked for a consulting firm that did consulting firm for Cotecna. That's all the evidence there is. There isn't one bit of evidence beyond those vague associations. So far, there isn't even the slightest bit of published evidence that Cotecna did anything wrong. So, Saddam Hussein secretly gave out all these vouchers. Did he give them out through Cotecna? Did Cotecna know about these vouchers? Did Kofi or Kojo Annan know? I don't think so. As I understand, Saddam's this voucher business was revealed after the USA invaded Iraq and seized Iraqi secret documents. Until then, practically nobody knew about this scheme. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 9:06:00 PM |
#63 Re: ## 49, 52 and 54 (3dc) Gee, thanks for the long posts, 3dc. I appreciate your enthusiasm! How do they show that Kofi and Kojo Annan personally skimmed money off the food-for-oil program? Help me out here, buddy. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 8:52:04 PM |
#62 We are at Priss Factor 4. |
Posted by: Nelson 2004-10-17 8:47:55 PM |
#61 Re #50 (Crusader): Thanks for your opinion about the UN, Crusader. I believe there is such things as 1) international law and 2) practical limitations on "taking out despots and tyrants". If the UN disappeared tomorrow, there would still be international law and there would still be such limitations. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 8:43:46 PM |
#60 Re #47 (Ed): I already read Rosetts' article. You posted it for me once before. It doesn't have the details I want (see #45). I assume that Cotecna is a long-established company that has done and continues to do a lot of business besides the food-for-oil program. I assume Cotecna occasionally hires consulting firms for all kinds of reasons that have nothing to do with the food-for-oil program. Really, Rosett's article has no evidence, except for a general smear, that incriminates Kofi or Kojo Annan. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 8:36:47 PM |
#59 A quick Google Search turned up over 28,000 hits for "Oil for Food" +Annan. About 4/5 of them were not deferential to the current UN Secretary General. The general concensus is, he was either in on the take (most likely), or he's the most inept, brain-dead walking empty suit to have ever existed. Here are just a FEW of the links I checked: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2004/04-19-2004/un.htm http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/rosett200403212155.asp Wikipedia Link http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/bg1748.cfm http://acepilots.com/unscam/ The best of the bunch: http://www.krg.org/986/index.asp Follow all the links. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133371,00.html http://www.cbn.com/CBNNews/News/040513a.asp http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/436zhuju.asp?pg=2 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/898433/posts http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13140 http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/bg1772.cfm http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pdupont/?id=110004968 |
Posted by: Old Patriot 2004-10-17 8:09:29 PM |
#58 SHIPMAN: That's not evidence unless we all agree it's evidence 3dc... See how it works?
|
Posted by: 3dc 2004-10-17 7:35:26 PM |
#57 Fair enough. I smell payrolla. |
Posted by: Shipman 2004-10-17 7:33:40 PM |
#56 Hellllooo! Don't follow my steps - Let Mike S do his own homework. If I post and say "the world is flat - check back at 1PM PST to see if you refute it, please provide sources/links" ......? Let Mike S. "Annansucker" play by himself, as he usually does |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 7:31:44 PM |
#55 The punctuation on one citation is incorrect, therefore the argument is moot. |
Posted by: Shipman 2004-10-17 7:31:11 PM |
#54 Mike here is #172:
|
Posted by: 3dc 2004-10-17 7:30:30 PM |
#53 That's not evidence unless we all agree it's evidence 3dc... See how it works? |
Posted by: Shipman 2004-10-17 7:29:36 PM |
#52 Number 164 runs as follows:
|
Posted by: 3dc 2004-10-17 7:28:15 PM |
#51 That's too long, it needs to be shorter and make me happier. The UN Cafeteria is an excellent value isn't it Mike? Show us the axe Mike. What's your pure dime? |
Posted by: Butros Butros Catuah 2004-10-17 7:28:03 PM |
#50 Mike: To be brief, I believe the UN's best days are long past. It has devolved into an organization that allows the uneducated of the world to believe that "international law" exists. That *myth* then makes it that much harder for countries to take out despots and tyrants. It would be a different matter entirely if the UN were composed of nations truly interested in democratic principles and the eradication of terror. Its plain to see however that the UN has no stomach for such ideals (or the hard work that is required to achieve them). |
Posted by: Crusader 2004-10-17 7:24:44 PM |
#49 Mike Sylwester.. Start here with this search of translations of the Oil For Food documents on Memri. MEMRI Search: Vouchers
|
Posted by: 3dc 2004-10-17 7:24:05 PM |
#48 Re #43 (Crusader) do you seriously believe that the UN has any redeeming qualities? Sure. Do you really believe it has none? . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 7:13:04 PM |
#47 It was Claudia Rosett. Here is one link. Turtle Bay’s Carnival of Corruption According to Annan's spokesman, Kojo held a staff job at Cotecna in a junior position from December 1995 through February 1998. Just two months later, Kojo reappeared on Cotecna's payroll as a consultant, via a firm called Sutton Investments, from April 1998 to December 1998, resigning from that consultancy just before Cotecna clinched the U.N. contract on December 31, 1998. In addition, I like this punch line: Ultimately, the big questions here are not just who profited from graft under Oil-for-Food, but the extent to which the U.N. setup of secrecy, warped incentives, and lack of accountability allowed it to supervise the transformation of Oil-for-Food into a program of theft-from-Iraqis, cash-for-Saddam, and grease-for-the-U.N. |
Posted by: ed 2004-10-17 7:12:40 PM |
#46 Title should read: Annan Done Little to Halt Terrorism. |
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-10-17 7:08:08 PM |
#45 I'm looking for details about what Kojo Annan did at the consulting firm and about what the consulting firm had to do with the food-for-oil program. I read somewhere that Kojo Annan was involved in consulting about some project in Subsaharan Africa that had nothing at all to do with the food-for-oil program. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 7:06:12 PM |
#44 I will look it up. I think it was a Laurie Mylorie(sp?) article. I included the link in a similar comment a few days ago. |
Posted by: ed 2004-10-17 7:05:57 PM |
#43 Mike Sylwester: I'm late to the party for this thread, but in a nutshell, do you seriously believe that the UN has any redeeming qualities? |
Posted by: Crusader 2004-10-17 7:04:31 PM |
#42 Thanks, Ed. I'd appreciate a link, when you have time to find one. I'd like to look at the details. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 7:02:25 PM |
#41 Mike S. 1. Kojo Annan worked on the staff of Cotecna. He left Cotecna 13 months before Cotecna won a UN contract to monitor the food-for-oil program. Cotecna won the contract by submitting the lowest bid. Just skimmed the comments, so I may be repeating what someone already wrote. The problem is that Kojo went back to consult with Cotecna a few months before the contract was awarded. But that was also the time when contract bids were being put together. That is the critical time when inside UN info on competitors will do the most damage. Then he left just before the contact award was announced, but the results were already known within the UN. This would be like Rumsfeld's son going to consult with Lockheed while they are putting together the final bids on the JSF. |
Posted by: ed 2004-10-17 6:55:28 PM |
#40 "Cash this check ONLY in my Swiss back, okay Kofi?" "Okay, mum's the word." |
Posted by: Mark Espinola 2004-10-17 6:52:13 PM |
#39 Frank, your right I dont... |
Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-10-17 6:21:52 PM |
#38 Hey, where was everybody at 6 pm?! I assume you all were busy collecting evidence. I'm anticipating some good evidence at our 7 pm meeting!! |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 6:14:34 PM |
#37 I don't think so, UN-Boy. Do your own research, if Kofi will let you without a subpoena by congress (that's what it takes, now) |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 5:12:33 PM |
#36 Re #28 (Frank G): why the "no discussions with news orgs" prohibition? Frank G, I pursued this lead you suggested, but I haven't come up with any evidence that Kofi Annan declared this policy as new or unique for the food-for-oil program. It seems to be an old, standard policy that applies to all investigations. (Also, it seems that Donald Rumsfield had a similar policy in effect for the investigation about Abu Ghraib. Kind of disturbing, but I suppose that is another issue.) Trailing Wife, do you have those links about Kofi Annan 1) denying wrongdoing and 2) stonewalling? Do you need some help finding them? Can anyone help out Trailing Wife with this? See you all again at 6 p.m. EST. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 5:04:30 PM |
#35 Re #31 (Trailing Wife) In the case of Oil For Food, Kofi Annan is still denying any wrongdoing took place, and still stonewalling both internal and external investigations. You might be onto something, Trailing Wife. Do you have a link to a statement by Kofi Annan denying that any wrongdoing took place? Also, a link to an article with evidence that he is stonewalling internal and external investigations? It looks to me like you're well informed about this, with the info at your fingertips. I expect to see these links by the 5 pm meeting. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 4:50:03 PM |
#34 But it has done lots to halt flux of money into Annan's pockets. |
Posted by: JFM 2004-10-17 4:49:23 PM |
#33 CF - you don't agree with Mike |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 4:44:10 PM |
#32 Mike, I agree. If Kerry wins then there certainly will be a muslim Secretary General -- and Kerry will be right there with his pants to his knees bending over. "A reach around is not necessary..". The U.N. has outlived its usefulness and its time that we replace that den of theves with something better. Let the kleptomanics have it - they can steal from each other - dont give the UN another dime. |
Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-10-17 4:40:07 PM |
#31 Mike, Bush and Rumsfeld didn't need to be criminally oblivious to the Abu Ghraib situation. The misbehaviour only lasted a few days before the actors were turned in by a comrade, and the Court Martial system immediately investigated and punished the perpetrators. In the case of Oil For Food, Kofi Annan is still denying any wrongdoing took place, and still stonewalling both internal and external investigations. Why are you defending Koji Annan anyway? Is he a personal friend or something? I don't have any new evidence for you -- I've got home stuff that needs to be taken care of. |
Posted by: trailing wife 2004-10-17 4:29:13 PM |
#30 if the Kofi and the UN are so innocent then answer why there spending 17million dollers (i think) announced the other day to look into this huge global SCAM! |
Posted by: Shep UK 2004-10-17 4:24:31 PM |
#29 Re #28 (Frank G): why the "no discussions with news orgs" prohibition? You might be onto something there, Frank G. I'm gonna go look for some evidence that this prohibition originated with and is unique to the food-for-oil program. See you all at 5 p.m. EST !! . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 4:24:12 PM |
#28 Mikey - if your beloved UN (were you high school pres. of the model UN club?) is innocent, why the "no discussions with news orgs" prohibition? |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 4:21:14 PM |
#27 Re #24 (Trailing Wife): Kofi &/or Son were .... criminally oblivious I want to stay focused on our research topic today, Trailing Wife, but let me ask an unrelated question: Would you say that George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfield were "criminally oblivious" about the mistreatment of prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison? . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 4:19:20 PM |
#26 Re #24 (Trailing Wife): Kofi &/or Son were .... criminally oblivious Thanks for your input, Trailing Wife. I'm intrigues by your suggestion that Kojo Annan was "criminally oblivious." Does this mean that you have some evidence that Kojo Annan's employment or consulting had anything at all to do with the food-for-oil program? Give us a hint about where your research today is leading you. Was Kojo criminally oblivious while he was employed at Cotecna 13 months before Cotecna got the contract, or was he criminally oblivious while he was working for a consulting firm that did some consulting work for Cotecna? . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 4:13:42 PM |
#25 #23 was posted by me, Mike Sylwester. I kind of like the ring of Clavith Ebbereling, though. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 4:08:27 PM |
#24 As I see it, with all the Oil For Food bribe money floating around either a) Kofi &/or Son were too ethical to take any, but not ethical enough to stop it; b) criminally oblivious c) on the take, but the paperwork hasn't been found yet Remember Mike: (absence of evidence) != (evidence of absence) The various investigations are early days, yet. Mr. Annan was revealed to have reminded all contractors of the no-revelation clause, which is one reason why Volker's in-house investigation is going so slowly. On the other side, there are truckloads of Iraqi papers to be translated from Arabic before they can be analyzed. Although, what's been revealed so far appears pretty damning to me. Certainly, the French are up in arms about it! |
Posted by: trailing wife 2004-10-17 4:04:14 PM |
#23 OK. It's 4 p.m. I didn't find anything yet, but I'm still looking. Anybody have any progress to report? GK, I'm especially counting on you, buddy. I know you've got some evidence somewhere up your sleeve. Don't tease us by making us wait all day. . |
Posted by: Clavith Ebbereling2475 2004-10-17 4:01:12 PM |
#22 I'll wait for Volker's report. If Kofi didn't get $, then he's just an anti-American no-morals/ethics POS, not a corrupt one. Not surprisingly, you're in his corner, Mikey |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 3:29:20 PM |
#21 OK, let's summarize the evidence that Kojo Annan skimmed money off the oil-for-food program: 1. Kojo Annan worked on the staff of Cotecna. He left Cotecna 13 months before Cotecna won a UN contract to monitor the food-for-oil program. Cotecna won the contract by submitting the lowest bid. 2. Kojo Annan subsequently worked for a consulting firm that did some consulting work for Cotecna. That's a good start! Let's all work together to gather some more evidence!! Ladies and gentlemen, start your Google engines!!! We'll meet back here to compare our findings through the rest of the day, on the hour. So, our next meeting here will be at 4 p.m. EST. See you then!! . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 3:20:11 PM |
#20 There is no evidence that Kojo Annan's employment or consulting for Cotecna had anything at all to do with the food-for-oil program. None. That applies to your article too, Frank G. The only reason that I mentioned the UN's review of the matter was that there was so little about Kojo Annan in the article, just a couple of sentences, that I pointed out that sentence too. Well, everyone is so sure that the Annans skimmed money from the oil-for-food program, that I'm sure there's some good evidence out there. Where there's smoke, there's fire. Thanks in advance to whoever points out the evidence. I'll be looking for it. I'm very sure it'll be really good evidence, since everybody knows these accusations are well founded and true. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 2:50:14 PM |
#19 1st google hit and I find a contract for Kofi's son = contract for the oil program for the hiring company. If you believe the UN's word, then do your own research....try UN.org, they'll say I'm wrong, of course |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 2:42:24 PM |
#18 Re: (#11, Frank G) how about "Saybolt getting a Oil-for-dictator's-whores contract after they hired Kojo?" How qualified was he for that, Mikey? The article is titled, "UN inspector 'took £60,000 Iraq bribes". The article does not name the UN inspector, but says he was contracted through a Dutch company called Saybolt. The article doesn't indicate that Kojo Annan had any relationship at all to Saybolt. The article says another company, a Swiss company called Cotecna, employed Kojo Annan as a consultant. The article says the UN looked into that relationship and found no conflict of interest. The article says Saybolt and Cotecna deny any wrongdoing. The article provides no evidence that Saybolt and Cotecna did anything wrong, except that one person contracted by Saybolt is accused of taking bribes. That's your evidence? I'm, well, kind of disappointed. I kind of expected something more substantial. Oh, well. I supposed there's some evidence out there somewhere. Thank you in advance to whoever points it out. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 2:33:12 PM |
#17 At least we all have sufficient common sense not to wonder why Annan's eyes are brown. "I cannot not say the world is safer when you consider the violence around us, when you look around you and see the terrorist attacks around the world and you see what is going on in Iraq ..." One simple equation: Compare the fatalities in Darfur with those involved in the entire global war on terror. End of story, period. What's the ratio: 5:1? 10:1? Anna's impotent meddling and dithering has killed far more people than America's world-wide efforts to halt Islam's psychotic murdering thugs. Regardless of how Annan meets his end, I can only hope it is extremely slow and exceptionally painful. He is a silk-shirted killer making a pretense of diplomacy while he knowingly condemns thousands to their grueling deaths. May he rot in Hell. |
Posted by: Zenster 2004-10-17 2:19:46 PM |
#16 You have many nations in the UN that support or allow terrorists to use their territory for their activities. Then you ask the same UN to help fight terrorism. Ask the fox to take care of the chicken coop. It is insane. The first step to a solution to the problem is to get a Jean Kirkpatrick type of person to rub their noses in it and hold up a mirror. The next step is to start drying up the funding that is enabling this behavior. That will do more to solve the problem than anything. |
Posted by: Alaska Paul 2004-10-17 1:42:20 PM |
#15 ...You know, I'm starting to get a sneaking suspicion that our buddies in the UN might be trying to set us up for a showdown they think they're going to win. First, I believe they believe that despite the best efforts of the Left, GWB will be re-elected, so they're laying the groundwork now for a try at stopping the Iran action that will almost certainly come soon afterwards. Second, I think you are going to see a STRONG attempt at a Muslim Secretary General when Annan leaves. That will almost certainly set off the final showdown - but the kleptocracies that unfortunately make up the bulk of UN membership will be betting we'll cave, and even if we don't, they can still beat us. The real problem there is that President Kerry would be on his knees in NYC within 30 seconds to kiss the new SG's ring. Mike |
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2004-10-17 1:36:21 PM |
#14 The Iraq war has done little to increase security across the world or halt the activities of international terrorists, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan saidThat might be because the Explain to me why anyone with even an ounce of common sense thinks it's a good idea to give any kind of legitimized voice to dictators and thugs. Fuck the UN. And the limousines they rode in on. |
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2004-10-17 1:10:23 PM |
#13 Has Kofi & his son hidden all of those Saddam Oil-for-Food 'profits'..yet? |
Posted by: Mark Espinola 2004-10-17 1:04:06 PM |
#12 WHAT THE HELL HAS THE U.N. EVER DONE ABOUT TERRORISM Encouraged it, of course. Giving the PLO observer status as if they were a proto-government instead of a terrorist organization ejected from two countries; voting to sanction the only nation that prior to 9/11 was actively engaged in fighting terrorists; voting to put terror-sponsoring nations on human rights issue committees; appointing inspectors who are constitutionally incapable of effectively inpecting (IAEA and Iraq weapons inspectors); putting on the ground Blue Helmet troops who are inadequate for the task of protecting an embattled populace, and not permitted to interfere in any case; and this latest, Kofi Annan insisting that the bribees don't even have the honor to remain bribed. Kofi Annan is a diplomat, not a lawyer. He is not qualified to comment on the [il]legality of an invasion of Iran -- that is a matter between two States in an undeclared state of war since Ayatollah Khomeini started playing his little games. I'm sure Mr. Annan is correct though, that the UNSC would take a negative view of invading Iran. I think Secretary Powell should make a presentation explaining our actions, but not submit it to a vote. |
Posted by: trailing wife 2004-10-17 12:46:19 PM |
#11 how about Saybolt getting a Oil-for-dictator's-whores contract after they hired Kojo? How qualified was he for that, Mikey? That took 1 google hit |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 12:18:29 PM |
#10 Gee, Mike, didn't you once tell me to do my own research when I asked you just for a link to something you claimed? Wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, now would we? |
Posted by: .com 2004-10-17 12:13:33 PM |
#9 "It’s inconceivable. These are very serious and important governments. You are not dealing with banana republics." You know, like... Ghana? Or the UN? |
Posted by: tu3031 2004-10-17 12:01:11 PM |
#8 Re: (Frank G): Kojo's name has already been implicated in Iraqi docs. Thanks for the heads-up about the evidence, Frank G. Please provide a link and explain briefly how it implicates Kofi (or even Kojo) Annan. Thanks in advance for your evidence!! . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 11:59:06 AM |
#7 The Iraqi war has done quite a bit to halt terrorists......we killed about a hundred of them there last week, and about a hundred a week before that, and so forth....do the math Kofi. The more we pull these assholes into Iraq the less they do in other countries while we slowly suffocate their financial backings, pretty simple process, I'm not surprised he doesn't get it. |
Posted by: Jarhead 2004-10-17 11:27:52 AM |
#6 "We have a lot of work to do as an international community to try and make the world safer." Packing your sh*t up so it can be moved to Paris will be hard work, Kori. |
Posted by: badanov 2004-10-17 11:17:57 AM |
#5 not surprised that you wrote that, Mike S. - useful defender of the UN. Kojo's name has already been implicated in Iraqi docs. Think Dad didn't know or share in the ill-gotten wealth? |
Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-17 11:15:20 AM |
#4 Re #1 (GK)): Maybe you could use some of the money you and your son skimmed off the Iraqi oil for food program. Please explain how much money they skimmed off and how they did it. I can find no evidence at all for either of these allegations. I already know that Kojo Annan worked for Cotecna 13 months before Cotecna won the UN contract for submitting the lowest bid. And I know that Kojo Annan worked for a consulting company that provided consulting services for Cotecna. But what is your evidence that the two Annans skimmed money off the food-for-oil program? And can you say approximately how much money they skimmed? Thank you in advance for your evidence. . |
Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-10-17 10:50:13 AM |
#3 At this point, I think it could be fairly said that the War on Terrorism, *more* than stopping terrorism, has stopped at least half a dozen WARS, with one or more of them being nuclear. |
Posted by: Anonymoose 2004-10-17 10:41:23 AM |
#2 "The Iraq war has done little to increase security across the world or halt the activities of international terrorists, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Sunday." Pardon me for posing what might be construed as an awkward-- or even insensitive-- question, but WHAT THE HELL HAS THE U.N. EVER DONE ABOUT TERRORISM???????? "He said if Washington were to decide to go for military action against Iran, it would probably be illegal under the U.N. charter. "I think that would be the view of the members of the council," he said." In that case, bye-bye U.N. And good riddance. |
Posted by: Dave D. 2004-10-17 10:37:32 AM |
#1 Annan:"We have a lot of work to do as an international community to try and make the world safer." You could start by doing something other than talking about the genocide in the Dafur province of Sudan, Kofi. Maybe you could use some of the money you and your son skimmed off the Iraqi oil for food program. |
Posted by: GK 2004-10-17 10:20:16 AM |