Skip to comments.Drip, Drip, Drip More Oil for Food details leak out. When will the U.N. come clean?
Posted on 07/13/2004 11:03:45 PM PDT by NavySEAL F-16
Kofigate continues. Another stack of secret United Nations Oil for Food documents has now reached the press, this batch procured by congressional sources and providing--at long last--a better view of Saddam Hussein's entire U.N.-approved shopping list. This huge roster of Oil for Food relief contracts fills in a few more of the vital details about Saddam's "humanitarian" partnership with the U.N., spelling out the names of all his U.N.-approved relief suppliers and the price of every deal.
We need no longer wonder which Russian company got the contracts, on the eve of war, in February 2003, to sell broadcasting gear to Saddam, or for how much. The U.N. list says Nord Star, from which Saddam--approved directly by Secretary-General Kofi Annan's office, in
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
So who will Annan kill off for this info leak?
Upon Bush's re-election, I hope that one of his first pronouncements, is to call on Kofi Annan to resign from the U.N., and declaring that the U.S. will withhold any and all funds to the U.N., unless he does. When will we start acting like the Moral, Ethical and Military Superpower that we are?
This bloated, corrupt, useless, collection of thugs, fools and con men will hide under a skirt of diplomatic rules and the acquiescence of the we-are-the-world mainstream media. Don't hold your breath that the whole truth or justice will prevail on these robber barons.
Don't confuse the issue with facts.
It's Haliburton, tied in with Bush/Cheney that's the problem. Kofi is busy whining that the U.S. doesn't spend enough taxpayer money to combat AIDs.
Perhaps he should have given some of the money that he swindled from the Iraqi's to his pet projects.
The real problem is, is that we need to give our sovierenty over to these looney toons and the world will be a better place.
If the U.N. could tax Americans at 80%, then we can all be third world nations, on equal footing, which should please Hanoi John, as long as he can keep the ketchup money.
Why in the world is the U.N. still in the U.S. and why does anyone pay any attention to these morons?
Why would you want to make withholding funds conditional on Kofi's resignation, he would be replaced with someone as bad or worse. I say lets just withhold the funds, maybe the corrupt from top to bottom Anti-American U.N. will just wither up, and go away.
That's Right folks......The UN supported terrorism.
Countries of the old world are no longer our freinds......Germany, France, Spain and many others are now lost to the Islamic cult and will never be able to be trust by us again.
They tried to stop the war in Iraq and would do anything to stop the US from exposing their dastardly scam the like of which the world has never seen before.
IT's the world's largest money scandal.
If Kofee resigns...look for Bill Clinton to take over the UN.
BTTT, but you forgot to check off editorial, so it won't get the hours it would normally get in the "editorial" sidebar. If you want to ask the admin moderator to make the correction in a timely manner, then use the "report abuse" option.
You're "Oil for Food" obsessed, don't you know we need more AIDS funding?
I agree, but I doubt the Dems and other socialists/internationalists would allow a unilateral withdrawal, without a major fight (probably an incited civil war, right here on our soil).
<< Kofi is busy whining that the U.S. doesn't spend enough taxpayer money to combat AIDs. >>
The evil little bastard even managed, during a BBC interview I watched a bit of yesterday, to draw a moral equivilency between AIDS "killing millions" and barbaric terrorism "killing only a few thousands" while castigating America's disparate levels of spending on the War on Terrorism and on the un's and the rest of the turd wurld's AIDS racketeers.
Please Dear Lord we can get the US the Hell out of the UN and the UN the Hell out of the US??!!!!!
The acquiescence of the we-are-the-world mainstream media means that Bush can get no traction on this issue. It means that if he tries he will assailed from every editorial page because the UN represents a way to change the rules of the game ad hoc which is the way the Left always wants to play. When the left is inconvenienced by state laws, it appeals to the feds. When the left is frustrated by a conscensus on the right, it tries to change the venue to the UN or the WTO or The World Court.
By forum shopping the left can win its cases and leave the part of the world which we represent, who think we ought to play by the rules of the game as written, so far out of the loop that we become consigned into a huge new fly-over country.
Usually the left forum shops upwards toward bigger government but sometimes, as with the issue of gay marriage, they will feint downwards, calling it a state issue. Inexorably, however, the drift is toward bigger government, where the people have no written constitution to rely on (the EU, UN world Court), no domocratic control over their rulers (EU UN WTO) and no financial accountability (UN).
Most Americans are unaware that their precious sovereignty is leeching away just as most of my neighbors in Germany are unaware they are losing their nation state, except in an abstract sense. Patriotism has been wrung out of the people here since 1945 so perhaps Germany is an exceptional state. But I must confess to a condition of ignorance for many years about the threat posed to America by the UN. Never took the trouble to understand what the flap about UNESCO was all about,for example. I was taught as a child in the fifties that the UN was a new hope for mankind. We took field trips to the shiny new UN building in NYC as though to a shrine.
Attacking the UN in America is a little like attacking the monarchy in England, we know it is only for show, internally corrupt, very expensive, and widely admired. But there is a general sense that if it did not exist we should have to invent the institution again.
So in the shadow of media protection the UN waxes ever more arrogant.
Oh boy,oh boy and will THIS ever see the light of day,in the MSM media? I doubt it.
FWIW, Safire at the NY Times cover's the story, it's just that the otherwise MSM chose not to watch.
Check the following stories on the link already provided:
July 12, 2004, Kofigate Gets Going
June 23, 2004, The Great Cash Cow
June 14, 2004, Tear Down This U.N. Stonewall
Safire is okay,but he's stuck on the editorial page.This kind of news belongs on the front page,above the fold!
True enough, but don't hold your breath. At times I'd like to throttle #41 for yapping about a NWO. This is why #43 needs to be re-elected, and Colin Powell denounces the UN's perfidy and hypocrisy. Don't worry. I don't hold my breath.
Well old Kofi is pulling a "liberal" move, coming out blaming the US for not doing enough for "AIDS".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.