home

Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Thu Apr 14, 2005 at 01:17:53 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A federal grand jury has returned Indictments in the UN Oil for Food Program scandal.

A Texas businessman, as well as a British and a Bulgarian citizen, have been indicted in New York for reportedly paying millions of dollars in secret kickbacks to Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq as part of the United Nations oil-for-food program.

The company indicted is Bayoil. Austin Bay has been live-blogging the Indictments. The Counter-Terrorism blog has links to the Indictments:

HERE is the indictment of David Chalmers,Texan who runs Bayoil, and the company itself; John Irving, the British citizen; and Ludmil Dionissiev, the Bulgarian citizen. HERE is the indictment of Tongsun Park, a South Korean also indicted for acting as Saddam's agent.

[links via Instapundit.]

Some have charged that this is a Bush manufactured scandal to take down the U.N. and distract us from focusing on the lack of WMD and a valid reason for the War in Iraq. Russ Baker in the Nation writes about Judith Miller's allegedly biased reporting on the issue. The Christian Science Monitor reports on a far bigger Bush administration emerging scandal.[Link via Cut to the Chase.]

Here is Kofi Annan's 2003 statement to the Security Council on the termination of the program.

< Texas Senate Approves Life Without Parole Option | Operation FALCON: Publicity Stunt? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case | 13 comments (13 topical)
    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#1)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Apr 14, 2005 at 03:57:14 PM EST
    Anybody seen a Frenchman around here?

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Apr 14, 2005 at 06:03:07 PM EST
    Surprise, Suprise. Is there a simple diagram to show how the players linked to each other. I understand that the oil was obtained through vouchers given to Russian, French, and other politically powerful people (including perhaps some in the US), bought by a variety of middlemen through the corrupt scheme from which the indictments come (again, there seem to be ties to the US oil industry), then sold to a variety of US firms for refining in Texas, all with the connivance of the US government (because it is the handmaiden of the US oil industry). Do we have names yet, do we have numbers?

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Apr 14, 2005 at 06:09:55 PM EST
    Salmo writes - "all with the connivance of the US government (because it is the handmaiden of the US oil industry)." That quite a charge. Got anything to show that the government was involved? I mean other than being handmaiden.... Meanwhile, back at the UN, even those who have been fired remain employees for $1 a year. I hope Bolton pops some jaws. And I hope these dudes rat out the others.

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#4)
    by Johnny on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 12:36:43 AM EST
    I hope Bolton pops some jaws too-I just don't think the jaws he pops will be anywhere near those who actually profited from this crap. Jim, anyone who thinks our gov't is not representing the very foundation of our economy is at best deluded, but most likely an idiot. Without petroleum, our civilization collapses, period. The power structure will do everything it can to protect the petroleum grid. Sorry, no links. Just look out your window and try and pretend that oil is not everyting on our economy. If you can do that, then I will provide you with links proving that without oil, our world ends. So quit with the "prove our gov't is not involved" Where there is oil, and profit to be made off of oil, large companies will be there with millions of dollars worth of campaign spending.

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#5)
    by Richard Aubrey on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 04:58:27 AM EST
    TL has probably seen the observation that this, fifteen times bigger than Enron and actually fatal to many, finally got some traction in the MSM when a Texan was involved. Well, whatever it takes. Johnny's comment that the world runs on oil is correct but beside the point. The point is not that we should have corked Saddaam's wells. The point is that illegality and corruption--much of it in the UN--were involved. It is also a reminderthat "sanctions" were not as severe a restriction on Saddaam as people like to pretend. He had a lot of wiggle room. Sanctions which don't sanction are hardly a way to manage an issue. Their formal existence gave many people cover while their porosity gave Saddaam the opportunity to do what he wanted. Oh, well. Whatever it takes to get you lefties to look at it.

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 07:23:25 AM EST
    Johnny - Call me an idoit, but at least I don't think we are capable of supporting a conspiracy as large as you posit. As a matter of fact, if you do, then please, get treatment for paranoia. And yes, oil is extremely important. And if we could reduce our reliance on foreign oil imports we would be better prepared to be less concerned about ME stability. Now, since you seem to understand that, to be consistent, do you: Support drilling for domestic oil wherever we can find it? That would include ANWAR, and off shore on all coasts. This assumes suitable oversight on environmental damages due to drilling, but n Support a crash program to build nucelar power? Support building dams for electrical generation? Support agriculture programs funded by the government to produce alcohol?

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#7)
    by Johnny on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 09:10:52 AM EST
    I support getting off of the petroleum grid completely. why waste time pursuing a non-renewqable resource? The dam building I fine on two conditions. 1. spring flow levels are maintained for reproduction of fish species and 2. recreational boat use of the resulting reservoir is strictly limited to prevent pollution. I have no problem with nuclear power plants except for the long term waste storage problem, otherwise, coal and oil generated power has killed many more people than nuclear ever has. Living in a state that has extensive development of ethanol based products, of course I would like to see more ethanol welfare from Uncle Sam. Taint gonna happen, oil runs thick in this countries psyche. Imagine... Opec cuts us off, just like that! Instantly this country is done for. When gas hits 8 or 9 bucks a gallon, most people in this country could not afford to drive to work, so they wouldn't go... Simplified version of the collapse. This is about oil and money. Oh, and... Not a conspiracy theory, all that info is right out in the open, we are just used to it being "the right way" to do business... Nope, the gov't is protecting them via rules and regulations that allow them to exist.

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 09:29:47 AM EST
    PPJ, Here's an extensively footnoted piece from FIVE YEARS AGO about how the US Govt. manipulated and exploited sanctions, oil for food, etc., to keep oil flowing and pockets filling.

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 09:32:54 AM EST
    PPJ Sorry, that link isn't pasting. Try this one and click on the story titled "US Using UN Program to Steal Iraq's Oil."

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#10)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 09:33:47 AM EST
    This link is a pain. Just go to mediafilter.org/caq/ click on that story. tougher than it should be.

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#11)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 15, 2005 at 09:36:19 AM EST
    PPJ, This is turning into a comedy routine. When you get to mediafilter.org/caq/ I realize now you have to click on "Archives", click "I Agree" to enter, then you want Issue #69. And that, as they say, is a wrap.

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Apr 16, 2005 at 01:45:23 AM EST
    You will see the bush family mix-up in this, but most of it will be covered up real well. Remember BCCI? The same players are in this show to, and bush was and is in this cast of characters. What is that old saying "money talks and Bull sh#t walks"?

    Re: Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Apr 16, 2005 at 07:42:41 AM EST
    dadler - The article doesn't come even close to proving a conspiracy by the US government. Good heavens. Johnny - Your reply is eat up in what is known as the "Yes, buts." i.e. Yes, you agree with nuclear power, but... Yes, I agree with more damns, but... As for ethanol, even if you could produce huge amounts, which you cannot without bring hundreds of thousands of new land under cultivation, the result is a fuel that produces much less power and would require major re-engineering all vehicles when it gets above about 20% of the fuel mix. At 10% it causes real problems in older motor's rubber gaskets, pipes, etc. But why not this? Let's drill here, reduce our demand for imports, and work like the devil on nuclear power, etc. Answer is: The environmentalist wackoos have been able to BS Congress with the aid of the Left wing of the Demo party to prevent drilling in ANWAR and other places. That is followed with horror tales about nukes, and concern about fish runs. Both aren't real issues, just horror tales.

    Indictments Returned in Oil For Food Case | 13 comments (13 topical)