Thursday, October 27, 2005

Volcker Report is hitting the fan today




CNN this morning has picked up an AP story about the latest report from the Volcker commission investigating the UN Oil for Food Program. According to the report, to be released in full later today, Saddam had about half the 4000+ companies involved in the program on his payroll. His shenanigans netted a billion and half for Ba'ath.

That was in addition to the under-the-table oil sales program, which netted about 11 billion. That's a lot of set-up money for a terrorist network if Saddam was inclined that direction. Or, a pretty decent get-out-of-jail rainy day bribe fund. Keep in mind, Saddam has still not faced justice. Wonder how many more continuances he'll get?

As to the report, c'est la vie, I reckon:

According to the findings, the Banque Nationale de Paris S.A., known as BNP, which held the U.N. oil-for-food escrow account, had a dual role and did not disclose fully to the United Nations the firsthand knowledge it acquired about the financial relationships that fostered the payment of illegal surcharges.


Notice the word "journalists" in this:

He allegedly gave former government officials, journalists and U.N. officials vouchers for Iraqi oil that could then be resold at a profit.

Tracing the politicization of oil contracts, the new report said Iraqi leaders in the late 1990s decided to deny American, British and Japanese companies allocations to purchase oil because of their countries' opposition to lifting sanctions on Iraq.

At the same time, it said, Iraq gave preferential treatment to France, Russia and China which were perceived to be more favorable to lifting sanctions and were also permanent members of the Security Council.


Wonder which journalists got vouchers? Maybe we'll find out later today. And dare we ask if this undermines the pre-war voting record of France, Russia and China on the security council? Hey, I'm just an uncultured hick asking a question.

I'm gonna make a prediction here. Even though Iraq blocked American companies from sharing in the scam, it will come out that Marc Rich-like intermediaries acted as conduits for US companies to participate. This will be what the MSM focuses on, in an attempt to diminish the impact. "We are just as guilty". My lefty friends have already been using this tactic for a year.

Here is the coup de grace:

According to the findings, the program was just under three years old when the Iraqi regime began openly demanding illicit payments from its customers. The report said that while U.N. officials and the Security Council were informed, little action was taken.


On the timing--I don't know whether this report was scheduled for a release today or not, but I can't see it getting top billing over Miers. Either the UN got lucky, or they pulled the ole "release the bad report during the hurricane" trick used by Aruba with the Natalee Holloway perp release during Katrina. And even if it does get some limited play today, if Fitzgerald releases indictments tomorrow, buh bye OFF scam.

Do you recognize the guy in the accompanying picture? It's Benan Sevan, the UN bureaucrat tasked with overseeing the program, who has also been accused of taking kickbacks. Anyone know where he is? Last I heard he had taken an extended vacation in Europe.

UPDATE. 11:45am 10/27

Well, I'm an idiot. I forgot to link to the original story. Now CNN has polished up their report, and there is no longer a mention of journalists. But, the quotes above were from the first story.

As predicted they pointed out Marc Rich's role and the fact that Security Council members were tasked with overseeing and approving the contracts. However, it appears both those lines of inquiry point a finger of blame to the Clinton adminstration. In regards to Rich, he was pardoned by Clinton (also defended by Scooter Libby in front of Congress, by the by) but the report suggests his financial dealings were with the French. It also hammers the Russians hard.

It's flat amazing to see the raw power of manipulation Saddam had, but it clearly provides a reason why some would not want their OFF can-o-worms opened by Bush.

No comments: