The Oil-for-Food Scandal – the Canadian Connection

[Shamus11]

Between high-court appointee Arbour and UN friend Maurice Strong, and Kofi Annan's job coming up for grabs later this year, there is a high probability that either Martin or Chretien might get this job as pay-back for sticking to Kyoto despit the Americans and the Australians pulling out and India and China excused.

[styky]

Is Mo's ManyOne.net ready for hack attack on world wide web?
By David Hawkins
Thursday, January 19, 2006

Short of a cataclysmic event, Canadians will elect a Conservative government on January 23rd and begin discovering the world wide reach of the UN Oil-for-Food kickback network, allegedly built for Maurice Strong by Saddam's bankers, BNP Paribas.

Three days before Spain's 2004 election, there was a cataclysmic event.

Al-Qaeda SWAT teams bombed Madrid's main railway station, shooting voters into the arms of Socialists who promptly pulled Spanish troops out of Iraq.

Running a typical protection racket, al-Qaeda helps maintain cash flow through kickback networks to joint-venture partners with bin Laden saying, "It matters not whether Muslims or Socialists destroy America" and Chairman Mo saying, "We have a duty to destroy the rich, industrialized countries".

With a few days grace before Canadian Auditor General, Sheila Fraser, is asked to look at the government books, the question is, "What will Maurice Strong do to protect his alleged Canadian-based money laundering and kickback networks?"

On Tuesday, Maurice Strong launched 'http://ManyOne.net' - a virtual war-room network apparently designed to bypass the world wide web in a joint venture with Lockheed Martin (builds hardened, underground military command and control centers) and Wesley Clark (former Democrat U.S. presidential hopeful and fired ex-NATO boss in Europe, who nearly started World War III in Kosvo).

Hanging out in China, Maurice Strong can deploy hackers who, since 2003, have been conducting wide-ranging assaults on U.S. government targets as part of a massive cyberespionage ring codenamed 'Titan Rain'.

The Titan Rain hackers use a scanner program to 'prime the pump' by searching web-enabled networks for computers with vulnerabilities which can be used to gather industrial information and test the hackers' ability to sabotage U.S. military systems, including those built by Strong's partner Lockheed Martin.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... 71,00.html

Has Strong built ManyOne as a virtual private network to hack the web, panic markets and share revenues with his partners in projects of mutual interest?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/hawkins011906.htm

[Shamus11]

Question Time at the UN

By

James Bredin

The greatest rip-off in the history of mankind,
And not one single dollar recovered this time,
Am I the only one who seems to give a shit?
Has the stink all blown away and no one gives a whit?

They shredded documents for years but who really cares?
Those who were involved are now all millionaires?
According to the Second Interim Report,
Will they be charged or are they all friends of the court?

UN immunity plus the legal fees paid by you,
All that paper shredded so we don’t have a clue,
And Kofi’s son denied being even involved,
His father’s the boss so he was completely absolved.

Has the Saddam oil-for-food stuff all been shut down?
Who got all that money -- anyone of renown?
Those millions and billions that up and disappeared,
Who was responsible for this – who engineered?


And is Kyoto the next boondoggle on their list?
How far will it go before the money is missed?
Is Canada forever locked in or can we get out,
And the adscam Liberals never had a doubt.

Sunday, January 22, 2006

[Shamus11]

Kyoto Boondoggle from Hell

By

James Bredin

The Kyoto government boondoggle from hell,
Chretien signed us up long before the Liberals fell,
Like their gun registry, it will cost an arm and a leg,
When we’re taxed to the eyes, we may have to beg.

They’ll need ten thousand more bilingual bureaucrats,
Global warming has to be stopped plus the world is flat,
Running around like a complete religious nut,
Special-interest activists who write reports and strut.

And we are like a great big herd of Canadian sheep,
Being herded here and there as though we’re half asleep,
No questions or referendums from their majority,
The UN agenda has the complete authority.

Americans or Australians not going down this hole,
China and India excused Kyoto control,
But our corrupt adscam Liberals were up to their tricks,
Think corrupt UN in the Saddam’s oil-for-food fix.

Friday, January 27, 2006

[Shamus11]

Misunderstood Kyoto Stuff

By

James Bredin

Adscam politicians looking for Kofi’s UN job,
Ratified and locked us in with the Kyoto mob,
But not the Americans or Australians -- no thanks,
So we will pay developing countries to buy tanks.

And China and India were of course excused,
But that’s no reason for Canada to feel abused,
We’re used to billion dollar boondoggle every day,
Plus taxed up to the eyes in deductions from our pay.

This is not like Saddam’s oil-for-food scam last year,
‘Cause they say that in Kyoto we have nothing to fear,
Stop the global warming or the sky might fall,
So say adscam politicians still free having a ball.

Both Kofi and Kojo denied they were involved,
That scandal has been completely forgotten and solved,
Anyway the paper trail was shredded and trashed,
Not enough evidence to the investigation crashed.

There is no graft or mismanagement in Kyoto stuff,
And we may go into debt if they don’t get enough,
And dictators with Swiss accounts will feel so good,
And none of this Kyoto stuff should be misunderstood.

Monday, January 30, 2006

[styky]

Angus Reid Global Scan : Politics In Depth
Australia's Oil-for-Food Predicament
March 1, 2006
http://www.angus-reid.com/analysis/inde ... emID/11048

The official inquiry into a purported kickback scheme has offered many surprising twists.

(Angus Reid Global Scan) Wilson Lam – Australian prime minister John Howard and his coalition government got a measure of relief this week when Iraq agreed to resume the purchase of Australian wheat so long as AWB Ltd. is not involved in any of the transactions.

Iraq had suspended the importation of Australian wheat earlier this month amid allegations that AWB was involved in a kickback scheme that paid Saddam Hussein some $221 million U.S. when the company operated under the auspices of the United Nations (UN) Oil-for-Food program.

Spurred by a UN report last year that appears to document links between AWB and Saddam Hussein by way of Alia, a Jordanian trucking company, the Australian government launched an inquiry into the scandal. Howard announced last week that AWB has temporarily relinquished its 67-year monopoly on Australia’s grain exports.

The AWB has denied any knowledge of the alleged connections, claiming that it had paid Alia only to transport wheat shipments throughout Iraq. However, extensive evidence has been presented in the inquiry that differs from the official account. For instance, a former manager at AWB, Michael Watson, testified last week not only that the company knew of the details of the payment but that it authorized the practice despite knowing that it was in contravention of the UN sanctions against Iraq.

"I understood that by the payment of ‘trucking fees’ to Alia, that the AWB was making a payment to…the Iraqi government," Watson stated. "I also understood that the payment of the trucking fees could not be made directly or openly to Iraq because of the UN sanctions," Watson added. "At all times I believed that the payment of trucking fees was made with the knowledge and consent of AWB senior management."

Originally created in 1939 as a government entity known as the Australian Wheat Board to oversee the country’s grain industry, AWB became a publicly-traded corporation in 2001 but maintained its statutory and exclusive right to market and export Australian wheat worldwide.

The stated purpose of the AWB is to prevent Australian wheat farmers from competing against each other for international business. Instead, all wheat destined for export is controlled by the AWB and growers are paid, when a sale is made, in accordance with the proportion of wheat each contributed to the collective.

Iraq had in recent years grown to become the second-largest importer for Australian wheat. Indeed, AWB was at one point the single largest supplier of goods to Iraq through the UN Oil-for-Food program. In its unstable condition, Iraq is a lucrative market because it is far from able to produce all the food it requires.

Even with regard only to wheat, Iraq is expected to import about 3.5 million tonnes of it in the year ending on Jun. 30, 2006, according the U.S. Department of Agriculture as reported by the New York Times. AWB, which had supplied as much as 2.5 million tonnes of Iraq’s wheat importation total, listed its benchmark grade wheat at between $144 to $151 U.S. per tonne for the upcoming crop year.

Earlier this month, the managing director of AWB, Andrew Lindberg, resigned his post during the fourth week of the ongoing official inquiry. Lindberg was at the centre of one particularly striking episode in the scandal that emerged during the investigation.

In July 2002, Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer endorsed U.S. government allegations that the Hussein regime was developing weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s subsequent decision to halt purchases of Australian wheat was reversed only after Lindberg went to the country to mend the frayed relationship. Among other provisions, the new deal struck included a $1.5 million U.S. refund to Iraq for a shipment of wheat that it claimed was contaminated. Lindberg stated that he believes the reimbursement was the retaliatory price for Downer’s comments.

On Feb. 27, the inquiry questioned the ex-head of the AWB, Trevor Flugge. Despite being presented with a slew of internal communications in which executives made references to his intimate involvement in the kickback scheme, Flugge maintained that he had no knowledge of it at all. Further, Flugge claimed that he has hearing problems—his left ear is "virtually ineffective," he said, while his right is "somewhat impaired"—and it was therefore possible for him to be present in meetings without having been engaged in the discussions.

Howard’s government continues to insist that it was ignorant of the kickback scheme. The federal administration in Canada tried the same defence amid a scandal last year. It is no longer the government.

[styky]

Cole Inquiry finds documents to DFAT detailed AWB concerns The World Today - Tuesday, 28 February , 2006 12:14:00
Reporter: Brendan Trembath
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/conten ... 580379.htm


ELEANOR HALL: Let's go now to the Cole Inquiry in Sydney, where secret diplomatic cables have been produced suggesting that the Department of Foreign Affairs had knowledge about payments to Saddam Hussein's regime as far back as March 2000.

The documents were tendered to the inquiry as the former Chairman of AWB Trevor Flugge continued to give evidence.

Our reporter Brendan Trembath is at the inquiry and joins us now.

So Brendan, what exactly do these documents say?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Well, there are two very important documents.

The first one is from the Australian Mission in New York to the Department of Foreign Affairs in Canberra, and it's basically passing on the concerns of the United Nations about the possibility that there could have been improper payments being made by Australia's wheat exporter to Iraq, under the oil for food program.

Just by way of background, the United Nations was penalising Iraq for invading Kuwait. Iraq was limited in how it could trade with the rest of the world. But it was able to use some of its oil money to buy humanitarian supplies, including food.

But this particular cable from the Australian Diplomatic Mission in New York, it says that the United Nations has warned about possible irregularities in the way the Australian Wheat Board may have received payment for wheat supplies to Iraq under this oil for food program.

It says that a third country, believed to be Canada, was negotiating a contract with the Iraqi Grains Board under this oil for food program.

It had been asked for an unusual payment: a payment of $US 14 per metric tonne of the wheat. And it would be paid outside the oil for food program.

It violated the United sanctions on two counts. It was in foreign currency and it was outside the food program itself.

ELEANOR HALL: Now Brendan, is there any indication that this cable made it to the Minister's desk?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: That's not clear, but certainly there appears to be a wide distribution list. This is one of several documents in an email traffic course.

But we do have a response from Canberra, from the Department of Foreign Affairs.

It says: "Thank you for your advice."

And says: "At this stage, we think it unlikely that AWB would be involved knowingly in any form of payment in breach of the sanctions regime."

It goes on to say: "We had reason last month to discuss the wheat exporters' strategy with regard to Iraq, at a very senior level."

And it mentions a senior officer at AWB who at the time was the General Manager in charge of sales and marketing.

And the Foreign Affairs response back to New York says: "We were told that while competition in the Iraq market was growing, and AWB had concerns about the effect on their long-term dealings with the Iraq Grains authority, that overall the position would remain strong.

"It was fully aware of and respected Australian Government obligations and United Nations Security Council sensitivities and would act accordingly."

So we have a warning from New York and then a response from Canberra, saying it didn't appear to be a problem.

ELEANOR HALL: So has all this helped refresh Mr Flugge's memory?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Not a great deal, considering he was actually sent to the United States to attend a meeting in Washington, where a number of concerns were discussed.

He was, at one point, the Chairman of AWB. He then went on to be a consultant for the wheat exporter, and after that, as we've heard today, an adviser to the interim Iraqi Government at the relatively great expense of almost a million dollars.

ELEANOR HALL: Now, Brendan, Earlier the Government revealed that it paid Mr Flugge close to a millions dollars for work in Iraq. But there was evidence to the inquiry that he was also working as a consultant for AWB.

What can you tell us about this?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: That's right. This was after he finished his term as Chairman of the company.

In August 2002 he went to Iraq on an official mission for AWB, but in his capacity as a consultant.

And the commission has heard that as a consultant his package was worth $100,000 a year, then two-and-a-half thousand dollars for each day of actual work as a consultant.

So he was sent to Iraq at a time when they had a dispute with the Iraqi Government about two wheat shipments held up, because the Iraqis had alleged they were contaminated with iron filings.

The Australian Wheat Board, or the AWB rather, has since said that it thought the claims were bogus at the time but knew that Iraq was bringing up this allegation to punish Australia for its support of the United States. Tensions were building at that time and Australia was siding with the United States.

ELEANOR HALL: And how long is Mr Flugge expected to be on the stand?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: It could well be at least another day because with diplomatic cables such as this being brought to the attention of the commission, he's been asked to comment on them.

Even though he might not have seen these particular cables, after all they were secret diplomatic cables between New York and Canberra, it still provides the context for what was probably known about the extent of the problem involving these payments to Iraq.

So he was in a very senior position at the time: Chairman of the wheat exporter, on the board, probably should have known, but it appears his memory has failed him on many occasions.

He can't even recall whether he was briefed before his trip to Iraq.

He says, "I don't recall going to Melbourne for a briefing."

He says he got on the plane in Perth, but really can't remember a specific briefing.

Even on the long trip into Iraq, at that time it was a trip by car because of the restrictions placed on Iraq, he can't recall being given the specific briefing by AWB colleagues about the nature of these contracts to Iraq or anything about the whole Iraq arrangement which he was going to discuss, this problem with the contaminated shipments.

ELEANOR HALL: Brendan Trembath at the Cole Inquiry in Sydney, thank you.

[Doug on The Right Side]

I would love to speak with someone who has published items on this story. It would be perfect for THE RIGHT SIDE. Thanks to Maurice Strong, Ontario's Hydro system is in tatters and we're paying through the nose.

[Doug on The Right Side]

I would love to speak with someone who has published items on this story. It would be perfect for THE RIGHT SIDE. Thanks to Maurice Strong, Ontario's Hydro system is in tatters and we're paying through the nose.

[styky]

I would love to speak with someone who has published items on this story. It would be perfect for THE RIGHT SIDE. Thanks to Maurice Strong, Ontario's Hydro system is in tatters and we're paying through the nose.

David Hawkins is the one you want to here from then. You'll find him over at www.canadafreepress.com

[styky]

Chairman Mo: The envoy who never left the UN
By Judi McLeod
Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Last July Canadian Maurice Strong resigned as a special advisor to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan on UN reform and as UN envoy to North Korea after his affiliation with South Korean Tongsun Park implicated his involvement in a bribery scandal connected to the UN oil-for-food program.

Now the United Nations is working to help the world prepare an economic package for North Korea and help resolve the dispute over the communist state's nuclear arms program.

And who's doing the shilling for the world economic package? Maurice Strong, who resigned as UN envoy to North Korea last July.

In the sometimes surrealistic world of the Land of the Blue Helmet, a resignation doesn't mean forever.

“The United Nations has concentrated on helping the international community to prepare an economic package (for the North) that could help resolve the nuclear issue,” Maurice Strong, former vice secretary general of the UN said on a special lecture here.” (The Korea Times, March 21, 2006).

“Strong, also a former special envoy of the UN on North Korea, said the preparation was still going on, although “not as rapidly as we'd like.”

The economic package, according to Strong, would at least include fuel for energy-starved North Korea, but the aid would not come directly from the United Nations.

Nothing ever seems to ever come directly from the UN where things like the notorious oil-for-food project came through a circuitous route.

In Strong's description, “It is not one that has to be done exclusively through the United Nations but one that can be done with the active support of the United Nations.”

The former UN envoy said the North would prefer to deal with international donors individually, but claimed no substantial commitment would be made by any foreign donors unless there is an international program, or framework, to oversee the process.

“It means the United Nations helps to provide a framework, then each country decides how much it will put in,” Strong said.

Unless you live on Mars, you'll know what happened the last time an international program or framework was offered by the UN.

According to Strong, the economic package being prepared by the United Nations would be separate from an economic package expected to be offered by countries involved in international negotiations over the North's nuclear programs, although the involved countries would be “key parties” in the UN package.

To date, South Korea, Japan, China, Russia and the United States have held five rounds of talks with the communist North since October 2002 to bring a peaceful end to the latest dispute over Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions.

The North has agreed to dismantle its nuclear programs in return for economic and diplomatic benefits, but has shied away from the talks since November.

“All of this work is being done to support the six-party talks, and all six parties would be key parties in the economic package,” Strong said.

Strong emphasizes that the United Nations' economic package would only come as “part of” the settlement of the nuclear dispute following its resolution.

Burning question of the New Year: Why is Maurice Strong still doing the talking for the UN?
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/cover032206.htm

[styky]

Vaile gives evidence at AWB inquiry
PM - Monday, 10 April , 2006 18:10:13
Reporter: Brendan Trembath
MARK COLVIN: The counsel assisting the bribes to Iraq inquiry has told reporters that if the Prime Minister John Howard appears in the witness stand at the Royal Commission he's hoping it will be on Thursday.

As we'll hear shortly, Mr Howard expects to have his written statement with the commission by 4pm tomorrow.

Today, though, it's been the Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile's turn to give evidence.

Mr Vaile's conceded that the Government should have investigated an allegation in early 2000 that the wheat exporter AWB might have been paying kickbacks to Saddam Hussein's regime.

Mr Vaile has told the bribes to Iraq inquiry that with the benefit of hindsight perhaps someone should have looked into the claim.

But Mr Vaile's told the inquiry that he and other ministers took the wheat exporter's word when it repeatedly denied making corrupt payments.

The reason: AWB was a highly respected major corporation.

Brendan Trembath has been at the Cole inquiry, and joins me now.

(to Brendan Trembath) Brendan, what sort of scenes surrounded Mr Vaile's arrival?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Quite an impression, because he made an arrival worthy of a rock star. Many members of the public were there with cameras, because with so much media attention it did appear as though perhaps the Rolling Stones were making an appearance at the Cole inquiry.

But here's what Mark Vaile has told reporters:

MARK VAILE: We've always maintained that we had set up an open and transparent process as far as the Cole inquiry is concerned.

My appearance here this afternoon following my submission to the inquiry is proof of that. And of course the Foreign Minister will be giving evidence tomorrow afternoon.

We've said that it is an open and transparent process that we've established in Australia that not too many other governments around the world have done. And this is proof positive of that.

Thank you.

MARK COLVIN: Perhaps a little disappointing for the passers-by who'd been hoping to see Mick Jagger, but that was the Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile.

(to Brendan Trembath) Brendan, how was the reception that he got inside the building?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Well, he was questioned by the main lawyer for the commission, John Agius, SC, a senior and veteran lawyer, who is asking most of the questions at this inquiry.

And he put Mr Vaile under some pressure. He didn't raise his voice but he persistently asked questions about the Australian Government's knowledge of kickbacks, or possible kickbacks, to the Iraqi regime.

Now, Mr Vaile's voice appeared to be under some pressure itself. He started fairly strongly, but as the questioning continued he found it harder to speak clearly.

MARK COLVIN: He became a little hoarse?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Indeed, a little hoarse. The voice was wavering a little there.

MARK COLVIN: And what did he recall about the many cables circulating in Government indicating that the AWB might have been paying kickbacks to Iraq?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Well, in his sworn statement, which accompanied his evidence, this is the one that was kept secret until today, more that 20 times he says: "I have no recollection of receiving or reading a particular cable." He can't recall the specific contents.

But there's an important cable that he was asked about. This is the one that was sent in January 2000 from Australia's diplomatic mission in New York to Canberra. And this was sent by the diplomat Bronte Moules, who's become quite a well-known diplomat.

In the cable she suggested that there were allegations that Australia's wheat exporter AWB might have been paying kickbacks.

There had been a complaint from another country, now known to be Canada, that the Iraqis had been putting the hard word on companies exporting food to Iraq to make payments in addition or outside the Oil-for-Food program.

But this particular cable Mark Vaile says, "I have no recollection of receiving or reading this cable."

He says he was aware in a very general sense that concerns had been raised by the United Nations about an AWB contract, and that the matter was being dealt with by the Department or Foreign Affairs and Australia's United Nations mission in New York.

MARK COLVIN: Does he concede that it is quite extraordinary for the Minister in the Department of Foreign Affairs, one of the two ministers in Foreign Affairs and Trade, would not have got a cable of that importance from somebody of that seniority, on a matter affecting his portfolio?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: On that issue of the cables, and whether or not they should have been brought to his attention, he says that with the benefit of hindsight they probably should have been brought to his attention, particularly because he was a senior minister in Government.

Sometimes he said that the Oil-for-Food program was not his direct ministerial responsibility, but all the same he was the Trade Minister at the time.

MARK COLVIN: And what about how he reflected on his evidence when he came out of the inquiry?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Well, he left the building and waded into a sea of reporters.

There were so many people covering this inquiry it was standing room only inside. So as soon as his evidence wrapped up, after about an hour, he waded into this throng.

Here's what he said outside the inquiry:

MARK VAILE: This is clearly an inquiry that has the ability to ask ministers questions, to get all the information together. And we should now leave it up to Commissioner Cole to complete his work, pull together his conclusions, which I understand will be reported back by the end of June.

BRENDAN TREMBATH: You said AWB was a highly respected Australian corporation. Do you still consider that to be the case?

MARK VAILE: I'm not prepared to make comment about any Australian companies in the middle of this inquiry. Let's just wait to see what the inquiry comes out with in terms of the companies involved. That's why it's been set up.

REPORTER 1: Are you embarrassed…

REPORTER 2: Were you wrong about the AWB Mr Vaile?

REPORTER 3: Mr Vaile, you went on believing AWB…

REPORTER 2: Mr Vaile, were you wrong about the AWB? Is that what you're saying today?

MARK VAILE: Well, I think that there is evidence coming before the Cole inquiry that indicates that there's some of the questions that need to be answered. And the Cole inquiry is going to find answer to those.

REPORTER 2: You were… Were you too trusting of them, sir?

MINDER: Guys, the car is here, so we're going to have to move for him. All right?

MARK VAILE: No, I was not too trusting.

MARK COLVIN: "Not too trusting", says Mark Vaile of himself.

Now, Felicity Johnson is a new name in all of this. She is the new witness thrown up by tonight's Four Corners program, a UN customs inspector, and what she's had to say has already been making headlines.

It now appears that the Cole Royal Commission may call her or has called her… asked her at least to give a statement. What's the significance of all that, Brendan?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Well, she has been given approval by the United Nations to give a statement. The Secretary-General has been asked, so has the British Foreign Office.

Her evidence is important because that January cable I mentioned, from Australia's diplomatic mission, was basically as a result of information from her.

So she was the one that first raised the allegation that Australia's monopoly wheat exporter might have been making payments outside the Oil-for-Food program.

She followed it up. She wanted a response from Australia. She didn't get one. And that's an important issue. Why didn't this woman, who was with the United Nations, not get a response when she raised some concerning allegations?

MARK COVLIN: Also a few question marks, I suppose, about why she's only appeared now through Four Corners rather than turning up in the Cole Commission if she was a witness in the Volcker inquiry?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Well, the inquiry has had difficulty with overseas witnesses. There is no power to compel them to give evidence. It can ask for a statement.

As I mentioned, in her case the United Nations had to give approval for her to be able to be allowed to give evidence.

But in some cases we've had overseas witnesses who've deliberately refused to give evidence.

MARK COLVIN: All right. Well Mr Vaile, who was only questioned essentially by his own lawyers and by the counsel for the commission, but what about Mr Downer tomorrow? Will he be cross-examined by people representing AWB for example?

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Well, there is one remaining application to interview the Foreign Minister on behalf of other witnesses. And the Commissioner has still to indicate whether they will actually be able to cross-examine the minister.

The Commissioner wants them to only be allowed to cross-examine the minister if the evidence the minister has referred to in his sworn statement is at odds with what's been put before the inquiry already. He doesn't want this to be some sort of big fishing expedition, where a minister of the crown can be asked endless questions about Australia's wheat trade or other business.

MARK COLVIN: All right.

Well, it's clearly another big day to come in the commission tomorrow with Mr Downer there.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2006/s1613034.htm

[styky]

Canada blew whistle on Oz's 'wheat-for-weapons' scandal
$300 million in kickbacks to Saddam likely financed Iraq's war, critics charge

Randy Boswell, CanWest News Service
Published: Saturday, May 20, 2006
As Australian Prime Minister John Howard wraps up his three-day visit to Canada today, new revelations are emerging in a "wheat-for-weapons" scandal rocking his government back home, which could have been prevented if a Canadian official's warnings about illegal Australian payments to Saddam Hussein had been heeded in January 2000.

Australian politics have been dominated for months by the controversy sparked when a 2005 United Nations probe into abuses of its oil-for-food program in Iraq found the Australian Wheat Board had paid $300 million in kickbacks to Saddam Hussein's regime before he was ousted from power in 2003.

Australian opposition critics have charged the money likely financed Iraqi weapons used against U.S., British and Australian troops during the coalition invasion that toppled the former dictator.

The issue also dogged Howard on the U.S. leg of his current overseas trip. American wheat farmers, angry over export deals lost to Australia under the former UN program, have urged a U.S. congressional inquiry in the matter.

Now, in a newly released document making headlines in Australia, the former head of the Australian Wheat Board has acknowledged the monopoly wheat exporter "paid money to the Iraq government in contravention of UN sanctions" and that "even though there were warning signs to some employees that this may have been occurring, AWB did not challenge these payments and was not alert to the potential consequences of making these payments."

Andrew Lindberg, who resigned as the wheat board's director in February in the midst of an Australian government inquiry into the scandal, also said "we are truly sorry and deeply regret any damage this may have caused to Australia's trading reputation, the Australian government or the United Nations."

Howard's government announced the inquiry last fall, and the prime minister testified in April that he was unaware of any illegal payments or even allegations about kickbacks from Australia to the Iraqi government during the UN oil-for-food program.

Similar denials have been issued by other ministers and government officials despite evidence that the alleged payments were discussed in scores of e-mails and telephone conversations between 2000 and 2003.

The inquiry has made clear that the wheat board, a former government agency that was privatized in the 1990s, funnelled hundreds of millions of dollars to Hussein through a Jordanian trucking company ostensibly hired to deliver Australian wheat to Iraq.

And as the inquiry concluded its hearings last week, a former UN official described in detail how Canada's attempt to blow the whistle on the kickback scheme in January 2000 was silenced by the steadfast denials of the wheat board and Australian government officials.

The "warning signs" that Lindberg has admitted were ignored by Australia came from Lt.-Col. Bernard Saunders, who at the time was a military attache to Canada's permanent mission to the UN in New York.

In a series of complaints handled by Felicity Johnston, a UN official administering the oil-for-food program, Saunders informed her that Canada had been asked -- and had refused -- to make unauthorized payments to Iraq in order to win export contracts.

In her much-anticipated testimony last week at the Australian inquiry, Johnston explained how Saunders informed her that Canada had learned Australia was already making payments to Iraq outside of UN regulations, and that the recipient of the payments was a trucking company linked to one of Hussein's sons.

"Mr. Saunders stated that the grain board of Iraq has indicated that similar arrangements were made with the Australian wheat board," said a memo written by Johnston on Jan. 13, 2000, and entered into evidence at the inquiry.

Johnston also testified she relayed Canada's concerns to an Australian diplomat, Bronte Moules, but halted her investigation when Australia emphatically denied any illegal payments were occurring.

"At that stage, I had received a categorical denial and a plausible explanation" from Australia, Johnston testified, "and I felt that any further questions in that vein would be somewhat vindictive in nature since they had originated from a competitor of AWB."

In an interview with the Australian public broadcaster ABC, Johnston added that: "We were hamstrung between having to enforce the sanctions but equally to wear this diplomatic hat, and it would have been very difficult to upset the Australian government by making accusations when we'd already asked the questions and received the categorical denials unless some very new and very real evidence had come to light at that point in time."

Australia's handling of the Canadian complaint has been a key focus of the controversy because it's widely believed that if the wheat board or government officials had carefully checked into the allegation, the illegal payments would have been exposed and stopped

<a href=http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics/story.html?id=604e7e08-41d1-4ff0-9991-9419056c8442&k=33414>source</a>

[styky]

Oil for food scandal reaches American Senate
By Judi McLeod
Tuesday, May 23, 2006

A U.S. senate probe into the alleged ties of former U.S. Senator Robert Torricelli to the scandal-ridden United Nations oil-for-food program seems to have legs. Legs that go all the way back to the disgraced Tongsun Park.

Park, a key figure in the 1970s Koreagate scandal, was indicted last April and charged with making as much as $2-million as a liaison between Iraq and the UN in the oil-for-food program. Park is accused of being the catalyst that encouraged the UN to create the oil-for-food program on behalf of Saddam Hussein’s regime.

For Torricelli it could be a matter of the company that he keeps.

Nicknamed "the Torch" for his incendiary political style, Torricelli was forced to pull out of the 2002 election after being "severely admonished" by the Senate ethics committee for accepting expensive gifts from David Chang, a Korean-American businessman, found guilty in 2002 of conspiring to violate federal campaign laws and jailed for 15 months (Churchmilitant blog).

Now in the private sector, Torricelli runs his own business consulting firm, remains a powerful figure in New Jersey politics and is a prominent Democratic Party fundraiser.

The probe of Torricelli makes it the first time that a leading U.S. lawmaker has been linked to the controversial UN program that has plagued the world’s largest bureaucracy for the past two years.

Torricelli donor, businessman Grover Connell was indicted in 1978 as part of the political corruption scandal that became known as `Koreagate’. Prosecutors accused him of concealing his ties to the central figure in the scandal, Tongsun Park, a rice dealer and Korean government-marketing agent who admitted distributing $850,000 in gifts and cash to 31 lawmakers from 1967 to 1997.

The government ultimately dropped all charges against Connell, who denounced the indictment as an "outrageous miscarriage of justice".

"Although not a public figure, Grover Connell is a wealthy businessman with good political connections. On Capitol Hill, he is well known for an unusual $84,000-a-year seminar program, under which members of Congress have been receiving honoraria for visiting Connell headquarters in Westfield, New Jersey. (Africa News, Jan. 29, 1990). "According to data compiled by Common Cause, Connell Rice disbursed $2,000 each, the legal limit, to 39 House members and three senators in 1988, the last year for which figures are available.

"The program makes Connell the largest corporate donor of Congressional honoraria, a controversial channel for political contributions. (Under the pay-raise legislation adopted by the House of Representatives in December, members are now barred from accepting honoraria, but the Senate still permits the practice).

"Only four large trade associations, led by the Tobacco Institute, gave more to members of Congress than Connell did in 1988, the last year for which figures are available."

"According to Africa News…"earlier this month, four House members who have received Connell honoraria traveled with Grover to Zaire, where his company handles the largest U.S, government food aid contracts under the Food for Peace program.

It seems that Park played starring roles in both the oil-for-food and food-for-peace programs.

Torricelli received $32,000 in campaign donations since 1983 from Connell and his family. Connell also donated $10,000 to Torricelli’s current legal defense fund, $5,000 to a prior legal fund and $55,000 to a state political action committee Torricelli once ran.

Democrat Torricelli has been one of Connell’s "regular" visitors since the 1980s,

About 40 copies of Torricelli’s latest book, Quotations for Public Speakers was on display in Connell’s office.

"The oil-for-food allegations against Torricelli are based on Iraqi documents, including diplomatic cables, retrieved after the fall of Saddam Hussein, Iraq’s former president, The Financial Times and 11 Sole 24 Ore, the Italian business daily, have obtained copies of some of the Iraqi diplomatic cables. A source also described the contents of some of the other Iraqi documents." (FT.com, May 19, 2006).

The Iraqi documents also involve a former Republican congressman, James Courter, who allegedly met with Iraqi officials on behalf of Bright and Bright, Chang’s trading and lobbying company.

Meanwhile, Senator Norm Coleman, the Republican chairman of the U.S. Senate permanent sub-committee on investigations, will leave no stone unturned in probing Torricelli.

"We take these allegations seriously and will continue to investigate in a bipartisan manner allegations of wrongdoing under the oil-for-food program.

"We have investigated the illicit conduct of politicians in Russia, France and the UK. We have a similar interest in preserving the institutional integrity of the U.S. senate, so we take these allegations regarding former Senator Torricelli seriously and will continue our investigation into them and will refer our findings to the appropriate agencies."

When it comes to the UN’s oil-for-food scandal, it seems you need a program just to keep up with all the players.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/cover052306.htm

[CdnRepublican]

Styky:

Hanging out in China, Maurice Strong can deploy hackers who, since 2003, have been conducting wide-ranging assaults on U.S. government targets as part of a massive cyberespionage ring codenamed 'Titan Rain'.

Canada is not superior ?
Cry shall I.
Strong a socialist idiot?
Surprised am I.

Abetted by Cdn subsidies and political faveur.
Strong from Gimli Manitoba.
Hmm.
Mental weight the size of a hobbit i would say.
Hey Maurice, 'have a nice day' [while i hang you].