Article

2005-02-04 International-UN-NGOs

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2005-02-04 00:00:00|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 This bag-o-shit is shocked? I think he ought to be shocked with a fu__king cattle prod , enough of these third world two bit di_kheads, cut them off and lets cut and run from this money draining America hating nightmare!

Posted by wills 2005-02-04 1:14:41 AM|| 2005-02-04 1:14:41 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Lol! A fine Arafish parody, heh.

I noticed how Kofi the Brave left his buddy of 3 decades, Benon Sevan, slowly twisting in the wind, yesterday... He's now solely interested in saving his own ass - and that's odd considering he only has 2 yrs to go. Ideas?

Posted by .com 2005-02-04 1:26:09 AM|| 2005-02-04 1:26:09 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 figger out how to get Kofi how to take a early retirement.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2005-02-04 2:01:29 AM|| [http://www.slhess.com] 2005-02-04 2:01:29 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has said he is shocked by findings of the independent enquiry into the oil-for-food programme run by the world body.

Oh puuuuuhlease.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-02-04 2:08:44 AM|| 2005-02-04 2:08:44 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 .com, I wonder what he would be willing to do to save his son as well as himself. I think in the end Mike Sylwester is going to find his heroes are clay far above their feet.

Posted by trailing wife 2005-02-04 7:33:19 AM|| 2005-02-04 7:33:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 They were shocked by Volker's report? I thought Volker was telegraphing a whitewash with a fall guy offered up for public satsifaction.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-02-04 7:56:55 AM|| 2005-02-04 7:56:55 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 I'm shocked, shocked to find the extent of peculation --- my cut should've been a lot bigger.

Posted by gromgorru 2005-02-04 8:08:00 AM|| 2005-02-04 8:08:00 AM|| Front Page Top

#8
Re #5 (trailing wife): I wonder what he would be willing to do to save his son

Save his son from what? I don't think he's accused of any indictable offense. So far, he's accused of somehow arranging for Contecna to get a UN contract. There's still no public evidence for that, other than that he had a Cotecna expense account and met with some UN officials. Even if that accusation turns out to be true, then what's the legal consequence? Probably zilch.
.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2005-02-04 9:01:11 AM|| 2005-02-04 9:01:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Oh, Mikey, how soon you forget! Remember:
"Kojo Annon Coughs Up Truth About Dirty Oil Dealings"
http://rantburg.com/poparticle.asp?HC=&D=1/30/2005&ID=55052
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1462576,00.html

Posted by Tom 2005-02-04 9:08:32 AM|| 2005-02-04 9:08:32 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 To paraphrase Claude Rains' immortal line from Casablanca, Kofi was "shocked, shocked to find bribery, theft, graft, and corruption going on in the Oil for Food Program" as he and his son pocketed their cut.

Posted by RWV 2005-02-04 9:11:48 AM|| 2005-02-04 9:11:48 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Even if that accusation turns out to be true, then what's the legal consequence? Probably zilch. .

-does that make the action any less wrong?

Posted by Jarhead 2005-02-04 9:20:38 AM|| 2005-02-04 9:20:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 What Kojo did was illegal if he worked for Uncle Sam. Whether it was illegal if he worked for the UN is another story. A**holes involved in this should be prosecuted to the extent possible (may not be much unfortunately) by the US.

Posted by Spot 2005-02-04 11:05:03 AM|| 2005-02-04 11:05:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 This opera ain't even in Act II yet. After intermission, Kofi cuts off Benon's UN pension and pulls his "get out of Jail" UN immunity card to show his "legitamacy" (snicker). Then when Benon starts getting indited in multiple jurisdictions, and his legal bills start piling up, he starts "turning states evidence". (Note to Benon: taqke really good notes. You will need them for the book deal)
That is when it will be time to tell the Fat lady to get to the bullpen and start getting ready to sing.

Posted by Capsu78 2005-02-04 11:32:29 AM|| 2005-02-04 11:32:29 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 "The secretary-general is shocked by what the report has to say," Annanâs chief of staff Mark Malloch Brown said...

Maybe he should use his "shock" constructively and in addition to leading the charge to FIX problems, reflect on how contaminated the UN is becoming and thank America for pointing out that the UN's ship wasn't tip top stern to bow, and censure any and all guilty parties in a public session of the UN for corruption under OFF. That would be a great start to healing between the US and the "international community".

But oh yeah, I forgot, the international community still thinks corruption's no big deal-just hand over the US wallet again and watch it misspent again. Those Americans-so fussy about theft!

Scrap the UN and start from scratch, eliminating the apologists for the Arabic fascist empire and ill-bred allies with no morals or principles.

Posted by Jules 187 2005-02-04 12:06:33 PM|| 2005-02-04 12:06:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Even though I'm dead, please do not associate me with this malignant little pygmy.
Merci beaucoup.

Posted by Inspector Louis Reynaud 2005-02-04 12:21:13 PM|| 2005-02-04 12:21:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Indictable under RICO.

Posted by Mark E. 2005-02-04 1:02:40 PM|| 2005-02-04 1:02:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Sorry....the above is for Mike. We do have stautes that take care of the thieves in the back offices of corrupt organizations. Semi-plausible denyability is not enough to insulate you in the US. In fact, the entire staff of the UN (and probably anyone involved with decision making of oil for food at all) is probably indictable under RICO. Not my field of specialty, you understand, but I believe that the law is pretty broad.

Now if you are contending that they haven't committed an indictable offense because they are shielded by diplomadic immunity, you are correct. Slimy, but correct.

Posted by Mark E. 2005-02-04 1:08:49 PM|| 2005-02-04 1:08:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 That's "statutes" not "stautes"

Posted by Mark E. 2005-02-04 1:28:35 PM|| 2005-02-04 1:28:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#19
Re #17 (Mark E): We do have statutes that take care of the thieves in the back offices of corrupt organizations.

Why would the USA have any jurisdiction in a case where Kojo Annan, a citizen of Ghana, working as a consultant for Cotecna, a Swiss corporation, helped that corporate client to obtain a UN contract to inspect imports of food and medicines into Iraq?

Is there even a crime? What was stolen?
.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2005-02-04 4:11:29 PM|| 2005-02-04 4:11:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 Nothing was stolen. It was all just contracts and credit/debits. No blood, no foul. Keep moving and ignore the smell.

Posted by Shipman 2005-02-04 4:33:11 PM|| 2005-02-04 4:33:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations act. The nexus with the US is the theft of our money, as well as the location of the corrupt organization/scheme in New York. Just because you are a citizen of a foreign country doesn't mean that you cannot be tried for crimes you committed on foreign soil.

To be the member of a conspiracy, you do not need to know the full extent of the conspiracy. Nor do you need to individually profit from it. All you need is to have taken action in the furtherance of the conspiracy; both people are still memebers of the same corrupt enterprise.

http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/nutshell.asp

A few relevant quotes:

"Although the RICO Act can be used in many contexts, the statute is most easily understood in its intended context: the Mafia. In the context of the Maifa, the defendant person (i.e., the target of the RICO Act) is the Godfather. The "racketeering activity" is the criminal activities in which the Mafia engages, e.g., extortion, bribery, loan sharking, murder, illegal drug sales, prostitution, etc. Because the Mafia family has engaged in these criminal actions for generations, the criminal actions constitute a pattern of racketeering activity. The government can criminally prosecute the Godfather under RICO and send him to jail even if the Godfather has never personally killed, extorted, bribed or engaged in any criminal behavior. The Godfather can be imprisoned because he operated and managed a criminal enterprise that engaged in such acts. Moreover, under section 1964(c) of the RICO Act, the victims of the Mafia family (i.e., the extorted businessman, the employers whose employees were bribed, debtors of the loan shark, the family of a murder victim) can sue the Godfather civilly and recover the economic losses they sustained by reason of the Mafia family's pattern of racketeering.

As a practical matter, the closer a plaintiff's case is to the Mafia scenario described above, the better chance the plaintiff has in succeeding under the RICO Act. Given the diverse factual scenarios that may confront attorneys and parties under RICO, it is always helpful to analogize non-Mafia factual scenarios to the prototypical RICO claim against the Mafia. It is always helpful to ask: who stands in the position of the Godfather, i.e., the defendant person? What is the equivalent of the Mafia family, i.e., the enterprise? This will give you a good start in evaluating the merits of any RICO claim you confront. If the facts are well-suited to the Mafia analogy, you likely have a stronger claim."....

"By far the most useful and common civil RICO claim is found under section 1962(c), which makes it unlawful for a person to manipulate an enterprise for purposes of engaging in, concealing, or benefiting from a pattern of racketeering activity. Given its broad utility, the general elements of a RICO claim will be discussed in the context of a section 1962(c) claim. Distinctions will then be made between section 1962(c) claims and claims under 1962(a), (b) and (d)."....

"The elements of a section 1962(c) civil claim can be described in many ways. Generally, to establish a claim under section 1962(c), the plaintiff must prove that (1) a defendant person (2) was employed by or associated with an enterprise (3) that engaged in or affected interstate commerce and that (4) the defendant person operated or managed the enterprise (5) through a pattern (6) of racketeering activity, and (7) the plaintiff was injured in its business or property by reason of the pattern of racketeering activity."....

Again, not my field. But the law seems broad enough that if the US were to "obtain jurisdiction over the defendant" i.e. arrest him or have him extradited, then this might be applied.

Posted by Mark E. 2005-02-04 4:34:10 PM|| 2005-02-04 4:34:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#22
There's no evidence that Cotecna didn't fulfill its contract properly. Who suffered harm or damages?

Where's the racketeering? Kojo Annan was a consultant for Cotecna. He had a Cotecna expense account and he met with some UN officials. He's the son of the UN General Secretary. Cotecna won a UN contract.

That's all the evidence there is, so far. That's ALL the evidence. That's pretty meagre for a RICO indictment.
.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2005-02-04 8:32:02 PM|| 2005-02-04 8:32:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Kojo, 31, has a Â£500,000 flat on Londonâs King Road. I'd certainly be looking into that.

Posted by Tom 2005-02-04 8:46:03 PM|| 2005-02-04 8:46:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 It smells bad for a lot of reasons, Mikey!
12/2/2004 --
"On Monday, Annan said he was "very disappointed and surprised" that his son KOJO received payments until February 2004 from a firm that had a contract with the oil-for-food program. The Swiss-based firm Cotecna Inspection S.A., said Kojo Annan was paid $2,500 a month to prevent him from working for competitors after he left the company in 1998."
http://rantburg.com/poparticle.asp?HC=&D=12/2/2004&ID=50268

Posted by Tom 2005-02-04 8:58:10 PM|| 2005-02-04 8:58:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 He was what we in Chicago call a ghost payroller. How it works is this: the big guy comes in and shakes you down for spots on your payroll. He benefitted to the extent that he had a job that he didn't do. He knew he wasn't doing anything for his check, because he didn't. Undenyable. The corrupt organization consists of elements of the UN who cooperated in the conspiracy and various corporations and individuals in collusion (Sevan, Cotnecna, various recipients of oil vouchers, et al.) The underlying crime(s) being threefold; the theft of oil for food money, the supply of weapons in violation of the law (and liability steming therefrom), and the warcrimes and murders committed under Saddam enabled by the supply of those weapons. Criminal and civil liability. Kojo certainly isn't a big player, but when the whorehouse gets raided, even the coatcheck girl and the piano player go to jail. It paints a vivid picture.

If you don't think I could get an indictment based on that...

Posted by Mark E. 2005-02-04 9:18:27 PM|| 2005-02-04 9:18:27 PM|| Front Page Top

00:34 Joque Hupique9312
00:34 Joque Hupique9312
00:31 Uneatle Throtle4696
00:31 Uneatle Throtle4696
00:01 trailing wife
00:01 .com
23:49 DMFD
23:47 .com
23:46 Bomb-a-rama
23:44 trailing wife
23:44 Anonymoose
23:42 DMFD
23:39 Mike Sylwester
23:33 Alaska Paul
23:31 3dc
23:27 Alaska Paul
23:25 Alaska Paul
23:18 Alaska Paul
23:09 phil_b
22:54 jackal
22:36 CrazyFool
22:29 Jeamp Ebbereting9472 aka Jarhead
22:22 Jeamp Ebbereting9472 aka Jarhead
22:19 Jeamp Ebbereting9472 aka Jarhead