Skip to comments.
Marc Rich Holding Refutes UN Oil Scandal Allegations
IWON ^
| 12/15/04
| Katharina Bart
Posted on 12/16/2004 4:41:48 PM PST by Libloather
Marc Rich Holding Refutes UN Oil Scandal Allegations
Wednesday December 15, 1:54 PM EST
ZUG, Switzerland -(Dow Jones)- Former American fugitive Marc Rich refuted media allegations Wednesday that his holding company was involved in illegal transactions as part of the U.N.'s Oil for Food program.
In a brief press statement, Marc Rich Holding said the allegations that Rich made illegal payments to Iraq in order to secure lucrative oil contracts are groundless. A spokesman declined to comment on whether a U.S. criminal investigation has been opened into the matter.
The allegations were first reported by ABC News in early December. Rich's holding company said it has asked to see ABC's documental evidence but that ABC has yet to provide it.
ABC also reported that several American oil companies, including ChevronTexaco (CVX) and ExxonMobil (XOM) are also under investigation.
-By Katharina Bart
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: allegations; holding; marc; marcrich; off; oil; oilforfood; refutes; rich; scandal; un
To: Libloather
And that has zero credibility. Absolutely zero.
2
posted on
12/16/2004 4:42:21 PM PST
by
Peach
(The Clintons pardoned more terrorists and international criminals than they ever captured or killed)
To: Libloather
In a brief press statement, Marc Rich Holding said the allegations that Rich made illegal payments to Iraq in order to secure lucrative oil contracts are groundless.Pardon me, speak up, I can't hear you.
3
posted on
12/16/2004 4:43:35 PM PST
by
dirtboy
(To make a pearl, you must first irritate an oyster)
To: Libloather
That's a refutation? Just saying you didn't do it?
To: Libloather
"In a brief press statement, Marc Rich Holding said the allegations that Rich made illegal payments to Iraq in order to secure lucrative oil contracts are groundless."They are groundless. The payments weren't made to Iraq, they were made to Saddam's middle men for later transfer to Saddam...
5
posted on
12/16/2004 4:48:34 PM PST
by
eureka!
(It will not be safe to vote Democrat for a long, long, time...)
To: Libloather
Marc Rich - lie, lie, and if that fails - deny.
6
posted on
12/16/2004 4:49:29 PM PST
by
Ginifer
To: proxy_user; aculeus; general_re; Happygal
That's a refutation? Just saying you didn't do it?Increasingly common, but indefensible.
Refute is not the same beast as deny.
7
posted on
12/16/2004 4:51:09 PM PST
by
dighton
To: Libloather
Former American fugitive Marc RichFormer what? American? Fugitive? Former Marc Rich?....I thought he was still wanted here.
FMCDH(BITS)
8
posted on
12/16/2004 4:55:07 PM PST
by
nothingnew
(Kerry is gone...perhaps to Lake Woebegone)
To: dighton
Refute is not the same beast as deny.Ahhh...the power of words is sublime. Do you know what the "meaning of is is?"
FMCDH(BITS)
9
posted on
12/16/2004 4:57:35 PM PST
by
nothingnew
(Kerry is gone...perhaps to Lake Woebegone)
To: nothingnew
Ahhh...the power of words is sublime. Do you know what the "meaning of is is?" Here is another one...
Ho, Ho, Ho!!!
Seasonal greeting or a string of nasty insults?
We have already lost the language.
Comment #11 Removed by Moderator
To: Libloather
Yeah. Why does an honest, forthright businessman need a presidential pardon?
To: dighton; aculeus; proxy_user; Happygal
The modern definition of the word "spin" remains blessfully unaffected, however.
13
posted on
12/16/2004 5:19:58 PM PST
by
general_re
("What's plausible to you is unimportant." - D'man)
To: nothingnew
Former what? American? Fugitive? Former Marc Rich?....I thought he was still wanted here.I believe NY and perhaps some other states want him. Clinton solved his Fed problem.
14
posted on
12/16/2004 5:55:49 PM PST
by
aculeus
To: general_re; dighton; proxy_user; Happygal
All Rich had to do was to arrange to have a Swiss bank finance some nominee who actually dealt with Iraq and then buy the oil from the nominee.
As simple as pie and as "legal" as anything else Rich ever did.
15
posted on
12/16/2004 6:09:58 PM PST
by
aculeus
To: dighton
"Refute is not the same beast as deny."
Don't tell that to the lapdog who wrote this article.
To: nothingnew
Do you know what the "meaning of is is?"That depends on what you mean by "meaning".
17
posted on
12/16/2004 7:40:54 PM PST
by
ApplegateRanch
(The world needs more horses, and fewer Jackasses!)
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson