UN Oil-for-Food Update

[Kennedy 0]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=4&u=/ap/20050212/ap_on_re_mi_ea/oil_for_food_no_audit_4

Quote

Oil-for-Food Chief Said to Block Audit

NEW YORK - The U.N. oil-for-food program chief under scrutiny for alleged corruption and mismanagement blocked a proposed audit of his office around the same time he's accused of soliciting lucrative oil deals from Iraq (news - web sites), according to investigators.

A U.N. auditing team, which was severely understaffed, said running the $64 billion oil-for-food program was "a high risk activity" and a priority for review. But Benon Sevan denied the internal auditors' request to hire a consultant to examine his office in May 2001 — an act top investigators of the program are now calling into question.

"I think the auditors thought they were steered away from some areas," Paul Volcker, who's leading the independent probe, told The Associated Press. "Our judgment is that the main office should have been audited. And that leaves the inference that perhaps the auditors were not encouraged to do the work. I think we draw the inference that it was at least suspicious."

Two months after Sevan refused the auditors' request, a Panamanian company, African Middle East Petroleum, purchased 1 million barrels of oil, which Iraq had allocated to Sevan — one of nine allocations made between 1998 and 2002 involving Sevan and believed to have netted the company $1.5 million, said an interim report Volcker's committee released this month.

The head of AMEP, Fakhry Abdelnour, a friend of Sevan, told investigators he paid $160,000 as a kickback to an Iraqi-controlled account in Jordan in October 2001 under one of the oil-for-food schemes under examination.

Volcker did not say that Sevan received kickbacks but expressed concern at $160,000 in cash that Sevan said he received from an aunt in his native Cyprus in 1999-2003. The investigative report questioned this "unexplained wealth," noting that the aunt, who recently died, was a retired government photographer living on a modest pension.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan last week suspended Sevan after Volcker accused him of a "grave conflict of interest," saying his conduct in soliciting oil deals for AMEP was "ethically improper and seriously undermined the integrity of the United Nations."

On the day Volcker issued his report, Sevan's lawyer, Eric Lewis, accused the panel of trying to make his client a "scapegoat," saying: "Mr. Sevan never took a penny." He said Sevan was proud of his 40-year U.N. career and of the oil-for-food program, which saved tens of thousands of Iraqis "from death by disease and starvation."

The oil-for-food program was the largest U.N. humanitarian aid operation, running in 1996-2003. It was designed to let Saddam Hussein's government sell limited amounts of oil in exchange for humanitarian goods as an exemption from post-Gulf War sanctions imposed in 1991.

Faced with a $64 billion program involving multiple U.N. agencies, the small team of auditors assigned to monitor it were overmatched and underfunded. For other programs, Volcker's investigators said, the United Nations mandated one auditor for every $100 million in funding. At that ratio, the oil-for-food program managers should have expected more than 160 auditors.

Instead, in 2001, they had only five, according to Volcker's report.

Volcker's report said structural problems within the U.N. audit system undermined auditors' authority. In many cases, auditors were forced to seek funding from the budgets of the programs they sought to monitor, giving the managers an implicit veto — which Sevan exercised.

A little-noticed portion of Volcker's report details how Sevan steered auditors away from his office and its regulation of the oil and humanitarian goods contracts that allegedly were the source for a massive kickback scheme run by Saddam's government, which investigators estimate brought in between $1.9 billion and $2.9 billion.

In April 2001, the head of the five-member U.N. auditing team, Esther Stern, wrote to Sevan requesting funds for an outside accountant to evaluate the management of the main oil-for-food office he ran at U.N. headquarters in New York, according to Volcker's report.

Because the auditors' own resources were insufficient for the $70,000 fee to the accountant Arthur Anderson — by protocol — they needed Sevan's approval. He declined.

After considering the matter for a month, Sevan responded to the letter, saying that because of uncertainty about how much longer the oil-for-food program would continue, he could not justify the expense. About the same time, Sevan and his team moved into a new office at a cost of more than $3 million.

After that exchange, the auditors, following the advice of Sevan's office, used their resources to review programs inside Iraq, the auditors told investigators in interviews.

"There were other instances where they were dissuaded from looking at the main office," said Mark Pieth, one of the two other committee members on Volcker's investigative panel and an expert on money laundering. "The problem we see is that there was no independent institution that regulated audits across the U.N. and could step in when these instances occurred."

Investigators told the AP they have no evidence Sevan's office coerced auditors to look the other way but instead steered them to other work outside his office.

"They were influenced in some cases, but whether they were influenced for nefarious purposes is another question" Volcker said. "They could always say, don't bother with us, your priority is to go investigate in Baghdad. The underlying problem was that the auditing force was so small, was so in demand and did not have strong enough reporting lines to overcome any problems."

Investigators suggested that if Sevan's office would have been audited alleged abuses of the oil-for-food program would have almost certainly been uncovered.

"There are some features of the contracts, that had they been audited, it could have brought the whole scheme into question," an official close to the investigation said on condition of anonymity.

The U.N. audit team did carry out more than 50 audits of U.N. agencies, which spent Iraqi oil revenues under oil-for-food or the U.N. Compensation Commission that was established to make payments to countries, businesses or individuals harmed by Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. The audits, which Volcker released last month, uncovered extensive mismanagement by the agencies of multimillion-dollar deals with contractors and fraudulent paperwork by its employees.

"The concrete work that they did was quite good," Pieth told the AP in a telephone interview Friday. "They were tenacious, but they had too few resources."

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[bodypilot90 0]

t just gets worse and worse, time to cut our funding this den of thieves.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

“Can I trust Saddam Hussein? I think I can do business with him,” the United Nations secretary-general told reporters at a Feb. 24, 1998 news conference.

I think we now know what he really was saying!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,147180,00.html

[randomdude 0]

I'd love to see somebody from DC tell the UN
that they were trespassing and they had 14
days to evacuate their property for violating
lease terms or something similar.
Oh, to dream.

[bodypilot90 0]

wouldn't that be something to see

[billvon 2,435]

>It just gets worse and worse, time to cut our funding this den of thieves.

Agreed.
----------------------
Treasury's Role in Illicit Iraq Oil Sales Cited

Senator Releases E-Mail From Parties Involved in Shipments Banned by U.N.

By Colum Lynch
Thursday, February 17, 2005

UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 16 -- The Treasury Department provided assurances that the United States would not obstruct two companies' plans to import millions of barrels of oil from Iraq in March 2003 in violation of U.N. sanctions, according to an e-mail from one of the companies.

Diplomats and oil brokers have recently said that the United States had long turned a blind eye to illicit shipments of Iraqi oil by its allies Jordan and Turkey. The United States acknowledged this week that it had acquiesced in the trade to ensure that crucial allies would not suffer economic hardships.

Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.) released e-mail showing that the U.S. government abetted illicit oil sales by Saddam Hussein's government for the benefit of such key allies as Jordan and Turkey.

But the e-mail, along with others released this week by Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Governmental Affairs panel's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, provides evidence that the Bush administration directly abetted Jordan's efforts to build up its strategic reserves with smuggled Iraqi oil in the weeks before the United States invaded Iraq in March 2003.
----------------------------

Of course, since this was done by the US instead of the UN, I expect nary a peep from the UN bashers. "Well, as long as the US did it, that's OK then."

[Trent 0]

Nope, it's still wrong. BUT (you smelled that coming, right?) turning a blind eye isn't as bad as directly profiting directly or being bribed. If it comes out that that has happened with people in our gov't, then they should be in line with the UN people when they're prosectuted.

Oh, hello again!

[Ron 7]

Quote

>It just gets worse and worse, time to cut our funding this den of thieves.

Agreed.

So instead of admitting the UN is fucked up you throw anti US crap in?

The UN is fucked up. The US is fucked up....One does not excuse the other.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 2,435]

>The UN is fucked up. The US is fucked up....One does not excuse the other.

I agree! Which is why I think we should fix the problems in both places. Saying "destroy the UN because they embezzled!" is as dumb as saying "destroy the US because they supported it!"

[Ron 7]

Quote

>The UN is fucked up. The US is fucked up....One does not excuse the other.

I agree! Which is why I think we should fix the problems in both places. Saying "destroy the UN because they embezzled!" is as dumb as saying "destroy the US because they supported it!"

Ah, but I never said destroy it...I said get out of it.

I can vote to change my government...I have no say at the UN.

I don't support the crooks in the US, nor the crooks in the UN.

Best way to not support the UN? Get out.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 2,435]

>Ah, but I never said destroy it...I said get out of it.

The South tried to get out of the US government too, as I recall.

>I can vote to change my government...I have no say at the UN.

Is it your contention that the US has no authority within the UN? Best read up on the UN charter. Again, if you don't like it, work to change it.

>I don't support the crooks in the US, nor the crooks in the UN.
>Best way to not support the UN? Get out.

Best way to not support the crooks in the US is to . . . support them?

Odd logic.

Very soon we are going to be the #2 power in the world. China is already the #1 consumer in the world. They will soon be the #1 producer, the #1 spacefaring nation and shortly after that will become the #1 military power as well. On that day you best pray that we have a solid international body where we can work out our disputes, and that nations like China do not have to resort to pre-emptive invasions to keep WMD's out of the hands of the Japanese, South Koreans and Australians - and eventually the Alaskans.

[Ron 7]

Quote

>Ah, but I never said destroy it...I said get out of it.

The South tried to get out of the US government too, as I recall.

What are you claiming that the UN would go to war to keep us in?

Thats silly at best.

You can't compare a Government having half of the country try to leave with an international Organization.

Quote

>I can vote to change my government...I have no say at the UN.

Is it your contention that the US has no authority within the UN? Best read up on the UN charter. Again, if you don't like it, work to change it.

I have read the UN charter..They don't follow it.

None of this explains your "He did it so can I"' Excuse. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I find it funny you want to support a crooked organization. That fails in doing its job.

Quote

>I don't support the crooks in the US, nor the crooks in the UN.
>Best way to not support the UN? Get out.

Best way to not support the crooks in the US is to . . . support them?

No if you had taken the time to READ my post I said I can vote crooks out. The US can't get rid of the crooks in the UN. And the crooks in the UN are in positions of power...so I doubt they will kick themselves out.

Quote

Very soon we are going to be the #2 power in the world. China is already the #1 consumer in the world. They will soon be the #1 producer, the #1 spacefaring nation and shortly after that will become the #1 military power as well.

So? The UN is not going to do its job then either.

Quote

On that day you best pray that we have a solid international body where we can work out our disputes

You mean like the did in Rowanda? The Inspectors in Iraq?

BTW people don't tend to invade the #2 power in the world. Plus never forget we have nukes...So MAD will return. No invasion.

Plus are you not the one of the ones bitching about how Bush has given China "Favored trading nation status"?

You don't tend to invade your friends...Even if they are friends on questionable terms.

Quote

and that nations like China do not have to resort to pre-emptive invasions to keep WMD's out of the hands of the Japanese, South Koreans and Australians

S.Korea will have Nukes in a few years...We will give them to them if NK does not play nice...Same with Japan.

Worse case:
At some point everyone will have Nukes. We will go back to the 60's where we had two major powers both afraid to use them or face MAD.

Since we have ~good relations with China, and we are working on making it better, that should not happen.

Also, China is going to face a shortage of females in the next 10 years....See the Gov't only allowed one child per family, and since Males were prefered, a good number of females were killed at birth.

Quote

and eventually the Alaskans.

Pure emotional ranting...I expect better from you.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[craddock 0]

what the fuck bill?
You need to go and eat some meat. I think you may be malnourished.

Your spinning

That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

[billvon 2,435]

>You need to go and eat some meat.

I just had some quite excellent buffalo chili! And I believe that buffalo counts as meat (unless they're sneaking toffulos or something into my chili.)

>I think you may be malnourished.

I don't think you've noticed my canopy loading lately . . .

[kallend 1,651]

latest:
www.nytimes.com/2007/10/01/us/01cnd-wyatt.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[1969912 0]

Quote

t just gets worse and worse, time to cut our funding this den of thieves.

But how could we survive? The WHO might disappear too, and there would be nobody to evaluate our health care system. We would all get sick and die.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[1969912 0]

Quote

>You need to go and eat some meat.

I just had some quite excellent buffalo chili! And I believe that buffalo counts as meat (unless they're sneaking toffulos or something into my chili.)

>I think you may be malnourished.

I don't think you've noticed my canopy loading lately . . .

Yet another example of white man killing off the buffalo.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Nope, it's still wrong. BUT (you smelled that coming, right?) turning a blind eye isn't as bad as directly profiting directly or being bribed. If it comes out that that has happened with people in our gov't, then they should be in line with the UN people when they're prosectuted.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5806_Page2.html

Quote

Democratic presidential hopeful Bill Richardson and a host of congressional candidates from both parties accepted cash from Oscar S. Wyatt Jr. and his wife, Lynn,since the federal government accused the Texas oilman of paying millions of dollars in kickbacks to Saddam Hussein.

Quote

Since the mid-1990s, they’ve cut checks totaling more than $670,000 to national committees and candidates for federal office, including donations to the earlier campaigns of four current presidential candidates in addition to Richardson: Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Joe Biden of Delaware and Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Sam Brownback of Kansas.

Overall, according to a Politico analysis of Federal Election Commission records, more than 70 percent of the Wyatts’ contributions have gone to Democrats — a pattern that has continued since Oscar Wyatt’s arrest.

Since then, they’ve given $4,600 (actually, $2,300 from him and $2,300 from her) to both Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) and Richardson, who served as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. during the early days of the oil-for-food program.

Oscar Wyatt also gave $600 to Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), and Lynn Wyatt gave $4,600 to Lautenberg and $4,500 to the campaign and leadership committees of Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas).

Quote

The federal government is arguing Wyatt’s kickbacks accorded him a privileged status in Iraq and that he tipped off Hussein’s government to the impending 2003 invasion.

Whom should we start with?

.

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

Quote

t just gets worse and worse, time to cut our funding this den of thieves.

But how could we survive? The WHO might disappear too, and there would be nobody to evaluate our health care system. We would all get sick and die.

Surely he refers to Texas, net recipient of federal taxpayer dollars, Wyatt's home.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

The WHO might disappear too, and there would be nobody to evaluate our health care system.

And if I swallow anything evil
Put your finger down my throat
And if I shiver please give me a blanket
Keep me warm, let me wear your coat.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Trent 0]

Meh... doesn't matter who we start with... at the end of the day 70% of them are still on the LEFT side of the aisle.

And we don't tax income here in Texas... so Wyatt's income tax goes to the feds.

Oh, hello again!

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

Meh... doesn't matter who we start with... at the end of the day 70% of them are still on the LEFT side of the aisle.

And we don't tax income here in Texas... so Wyatt's income tax goes to the feds.

Right, and TX receives some $13Billion more from the Feds than it sends to DC in Federal taxes.

Did I ever get to congratulate you on the win? Going to the World meet?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[1969912 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

t just gets worse and worse, time to cut our funding this den of thieves.

But how could we survive? The WHO might disappear too, and there would be nobody to evaluate our health care system. We would all get sick and die.

Surely he refers to Texas, net recipient of federal taxpayer dollars, Wyatt's home.

Why of course Wyatt is a rich Republican. Who else steals Oil? Figuratively speaking in this case

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[jgoose71 0]

Quote

> On that day you best pray that we have a solid international body where we can work out our disputes, and that nations like China do not have to resort to pre-emptive invasions to keep WMD's out of the hands of the Japanese, South Koreans and Australians - and eventually the Alaskans.

To late, Us Alaskans already have the bomb

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[Trent 0]

That's because we're just poor, hardworking country-folk. With LOTS of military bases. What better place to send your tax dollar?

Not sure about the world meet. That's a long way off!

Oh, hello again!