![]() |
France- Germany (Shocking Article)
The Iraqi files
National Post (Canada.com) Tuesday, April 29, 2003 Not that it should come as a surprise to anyone, but it turns out some of the staunchest international opponents of invading Iraq -- on principle, you understand -- were up to their eyeballs in secret deals with the now deposed regime of Saddam Hussein. Since the fall of Baghdad earlier this month, documents found at the Iraqi Foreign Ministry, at the headquarters of the Iraqi intelligence service, Mukhabarat, and elsewhere around the capital have revealed just how deeply involved were those who sided against the war at the United Nations -- France, Germany, Russia, China and the UN itself -- in propping up Saddam's murderous government. Others suggest at least one prominent critic of the Anglo-American coalition may have taken millions in bribes to parrot Baghdad's virtues in the West. And all this inside of three weeks. Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. France pressured the group, Indict, to accept delegates who turned out to be Saddam's agents. It also encouraged pro-Saddam demonstrations outside the meeting hall, discouraged French media from reporting on the atrocities uncovered by Indict and may even have staged a bomb scare to disrupt proceedings. The French also routinely informed Baghdad of secrets Jacques Chirac learned in talks with Tony Blair or George W. Bush. Other documents have shown how, last spring, German spies approached Saddam's regime with a plan whereby the German government would oppose any and all military action proposed at the UN in return for "lucrative contracts" for German companies in Iraq's oilfields. The Russians spied on Mr. Blair during an EU summit on a possible war in February and passed their intelligence on to Saddam. They also gave the Iraqi Information Ministry advice on how to make it appear the regime was co-operating with UN weapons inspectors, when it was not. While this was going on, George Galloway, a British Labour MP, is alleged to have championed Iraq's cause in the British and European press, in Parliament and in the Labour caucus in return for US$3- to US$4-million in clandestine payments from the Iraqi Foreign Ministry. Mr. Galloway, who was an enormous thorn in Mr. Blair's side during the run-up to the invasion, denies the charges. But still more documents indicate payments may have stopped recently only because Mr. Galloway upped his demands beyond what even the corrupt Iraqi regime was willing to pay. Then there is the UN's oil-for-food program. Since 1996, it has helped sell US$55-billion in Iraqi oil, but authorized just US$34-billion in aid shipments back into Iraq. The US$21-billion surplus is thought to be sitting in UN accounts, mostly in French banks. In 2002 alone, the UN is believed to have sold US$16-billion in oil, turned a blind eye to a further US$5.3-billion in illegal sales (the proceeds of which likely went into Saddam's pockets and those of his Russian and French oil brokers) and pocketed US$483-million in commissions in the process. With more than 1,000 UN employees and 3,000 Iraqi workers -- mostly chosen by the regime -- oil-for-food is the UN's biggest and most profitable single project. Still, details are sketchy because Secretary-General Kofi Annan's office is not required to (and doesn't) disclose the details of the contracts it signs. Nor are the French overseers of the surplus accounts required to provide external audits. But we know where Saddam's share of the take went. China and France are believed to have sold "precursors" for chemical weapons to Iraq in the weeks just before the invasion began, and shipped them through Syria. Russia sold night-vision goggles to the Republican Guard. New revelations turn up every day. It is more than likely the secret documents discovered to date are just the tip of an enormous, scheming iceberg. In the coming months, still more direct connections are likely to be discovered between the anti-war governments on the Security Council and Iraq's economic and intelligence agencies. But what has been revealed to date is staggering. If anyone's position on this war was "all about oil," it was France and Russia's, not that of the United States. While affecting such public concern for peace and international law, the anti-war powers have been exposed as having acted out of self-interest of the most venal kind. To call this performance hypocritical would not begin to do it justice. -- Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com http://web2news.com/?rec.travel.europe |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
In article , Mikey
writes >Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how >France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the >Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. -- Marie Lewis |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
In article , [email protected]
(Marie Lewis) wrote: > In article , Mikey > writes > >Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how > >France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the > >Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. > > > Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. I know of no evidence that the DT routinely, or indeed ever, makes stuff up (apart from spurious excuses to run yet another pic of Liz Hurley). Whether it has been gullibly eager to accept possibly-fabricated documents that suit its editorial position is, of course, a different matter. |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
On Thu, 1 May 2003 17:10:57 +0100, Marie Lewis
wrote: >In article , Mikey > writes >>Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how >>France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the >>Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. >Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. Lewis: Left wing good, right wing bad. Me Tarzan, you Jane. |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
In article , [email protected]
writes >In article , [email protected] >(Marie Lewis) wrote: >> In article , Mikey >> writes >> >Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how >> >France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the >> >Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. >> Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. >I know of no evidence that the DT routinely, or indeed ever, makes stuff >up (apart from spurious excuses to run yet another pic of Liz Hurley). >Whether it has been gullibly eager to accept possibly-fabricated documents >that suit its editorial position is, of course, a different matter. Exactly. It is very right wing anyway. -- Marie Lewis |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
On Thu, 1 May 2003 22:13:46 +0100, Marie Lewis
wrote: >In article , [email protected] >writes >>In article , [email protected] >>(Marie Lewis) wrote: >>> In article , Mikey >>> writes >>> >Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how >>> >France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the >>> >Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. >>> Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. >>I know of no evidence that the DT routinely, or indeed ever, makes stuff >>up (apart from spurious excuses to run yet another pic of Liz Hurley). >>Whether it has been gullibly eager to accept possibly-fabricated documents >>that suit its editorial position is, of course, a different matter. >Exactly. It is very right wing anyway. And aptly described by the satirical magazine "Private Eye" as the "Daily Torygraph". |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
On Thu, 1 May 2003 17:10:57 +0100, Marie Lewis
wrote: >In article , Mikey > writes >>Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how >>France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the >>Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. >Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. and *you* are a great source of information? ha |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
On Thu, 1 May 2003 17:10:57 +0100, Marie Lewis wrote:
>In article , Mikey > writes >>Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how >>France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the >>Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. >Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. The passing of sensitive information to Iraq by the French government is well-documented. Sorry that reality does not comport with your wishes. -- "If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me some coffee." - Abraham Lincoln |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
Mason Barge wrote in
news:[email protected]: > On Thu, 1 May 2003 17:10:57 +0100, Marie Lewis > wrote: > >>In article , Mikey >> writes >>>Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how >>>France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt >>>the Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in >>>1998. >>Anyone who believe what the DT publishes needs to see a psychiatrist. > > The passing of sensitive information to Iraq by the French government > is well-documented. Sorry that reality does not comport with your > wishes. Whatever. Interesting though, how different media emphasize different aspects. German television stations have shown various reports about how the Americans helped Sadam in the Iran/Iraq war by giving him satellite information about Iranian troops, which enabled him to use gas on them. I assume that is also true. But mentioning only that kind of information about "the other" country is a tad propagandistic. Guess that both propaganda attempts cancel each other out when you know about both. Regards -- Puisqu'il faut choisir, àmots doux je peux le dire |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
On Fri, 2 May 2003 03:01:46 +0200, Wolfgang Schwanke
wrote: >Whatever. Interesting though, how different media emphasize different >aspects. German television stations have shown various reports about how >the Americans helped Sadam in the Iran/Iraq war by giving him satellite >information about Iranian troops, which enabled him to use gas on them. >I assume that is also true. But mentioning only that kind of information >about "the other" country is a tad propagandistic. Guess that both >propaganda attempts cancel each other out when you know about both. the difference between the 2 incidents is that one was then and only undermined the Iranians, what the french did was now and it was underhanded stab in the back to the US. allies aren't supposed to undermine each other |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
> The passing of sensitive information to Iraq by the French government is
> well-documented. Sorry that reality does not comport with your wishes. France, Germany, and Russia should not be looked at as Friends of the US. Publicly and covertly supporting a leader of a country responsible for millions of deaths is reprehensible enough, but supporting this regime while it was a possible threat to the USA is shocking. The Leaders of these 3 countries should be brought up on criminal charges. |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
JohnDoe wrote:
> > > > the difference between the 2 incidents is that one was then and only > undermined the Iranians, what the french did was now and it was > underhanded stab in the back to the US. allies aren't supposed to > undermine each other Could you explain the logic in that statement? Other than your assumption that what WE do is okay, but for another nation to do something similar is reprehensible? |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
Mikey wrote in message
news:[email protected]... > The Iraqi files > National Post (Canada.com) > Tuesday, April 29, 2003 > Not that it should come as a surprise to anyone, but it turns out some > of the staunchest international opponents of invading Iraq -- on > principle, you understand -- were up to their eyeballs in secret deals > with the now deposed regime of Saddam Hussein. Since the fall of Baghdad > earlier this month, documents found at the Iraqi Foreign Ministry, at > the headquarters of the Iraqi intelligence service, Mukhabarat, and > elsewhere around the capital have revealed just how deeply involved were > those who sided against the war at the United Nations -- France, > Germany, Russia, China and the UN itself -- in propping up Saddam's > murderous government. Others suggest at least one prominent critic of > the Anglo-American coalition may have taken millions in bribes to parrot > Baghdad's virtues in the West. And all this inside of three weeks. > Yesterday, London's Daily Telegraph published documents showing how > France's Foreign Ministry conspired with the Mukhabarat to disrupt the > Paris meetings of a prominent anti-Saddam human rights group in 1998. > France pressured the group, Indict, to accept delegates who turned out > to be Saddam's agents. It also encouraged pro-Saddam demonstrations > outside the meeting hall, discouraged French media from reporting on the > atrocities uncovered by Indict and may even have staged a bomb scare to > disrupt proceedings. The French also routinely informed Baghdad of > secrets Jacques Chirac learned in talks with Tony Blair or George W. > Bush. > Other documents have shown how, last spring, German spies approached > Saddam's regime with a plan whereby the German government would oppose > any and all military action proposed at the UN in return for "lucrative > contracts" for German companies in Iraq's oilfields. The Russians spied > on Mr. Blair during an EU summit on a possible war in February and > passed their intelligence on to Saddam. They also gave the Iraqi > Information Ministry advice on how to make it appear the regime was > co-operating with UN weapons inspectors, when it was not. > While this was going on, George Galloway, a British Labour MP, is > alleged to have championed Iraq's cause in the British and European > press, in Parliament and in the Labour caucus in return for US$3- to > US$4-million in clandestine payments from the Iraqi Foreign Ministry. > Mr. Galloway, who was an enormous thorn in Mr. Blair's side during the > run-up to the invasion, denies the charges. But still more documents > indicate payments may have stopped recently only because Mr. Galloway > upped his demands beyond what even the corrupt Iraqi regime was willing > to pay. > Then there is the UN's oil-for-food program. Since 1996, it has helped > sell US$55-billion in Iraqi oil, but authorized just US$34-billion in > aid shipments back into Iraq. The US$21-billion surplus is thought to be > sitting in UN accounts, mostly in French banks. In 2002 alone, the UN is > believed to have sold US$16-billion in oil, turned a blind eye to a > further US$5.3-billion in illegal sales (the proceeds of which likely > went into Saddam's pockets and those of his Russian and French oil > brokers) and pocketed US$483-million in commissions in the process. > With more than 1,000 UN employees and 3,000 Iraqi workers -- mostly > chosen by the regime -- oil-for-food is the UN's biggest and most > profitable single project. Still, details are sketchy because > Secretary-General Kofi Annan's office is not required to (and doesn't) > disclose the details of the contracts it signs. Nor are the French > overseers of the surplus accounts required to provide external audits. > But we know where Saddam's share of the take went. China and France are > believed to have sold "precursors" for chemical weapons to Iraq in the > weeks just before the invasion began, and shipped them through Syria. > Russia sold night-vision goggles to the Republican Guard. New > revelations turn up every day. > It is more than likely the secret documents discovered to date are just > the tip of an enormous, scheming iceberg. In the coming months, still > more direct connections are likely to be discovered between the anti-war > governments on the Security Council and Iraq's economic and intelligence > agencies. But what has been revealed to date is staggering. If anyone's > position on this war was "all about oil," it was France and Russia's, > not that of the United States. While affecting such public concern for > peace and international law, the anti-war powers have been exposed as > having acted out of self-interest of the most venal kind. To call this > performance hypocritical would not begin to do it justice. > -- > Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com > http://web2news.com/?rec.travel.europe You mean a government acted in an underhand way to further its own ends? Wow I really am shocked. We're fortunate to have countries like the US and UK which will lead by example. |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
Jim Morris wrote in message
news:[email protected]... > > The passing of sensitive information to Iraq by the French government is > > well-documented. Sorry that reality does not comport with your wishes. > France, Germany, and Russia should not be looked at as Friends of the US. > Publicly and covertly supporting a leader of a country responsible for > millions > of deaths is reprehensible enough, but supporting this regime while it was a > possible threat to the USA is shocking. > The Leaders of these 3 countries should be brought up on criminal charges. Advice: When trolling, try making it sound vaguely reasonable and you'll get a better response. --- DFM |
Re: France- Germany (Shocking Article)
JohnDoe wrote in
news:[email protected]: > On Fri, 2 May 2003 03:01:46 +0200, Wolfgang Schwanke > wrote: > >>Whatever. Interesting though, how different media emphasize different >>aspects. German television stations have shown various reports about how >>the Americans helped Sadam in the Iran/Iraq war by giving him satellite >>information about Iranian troops, which enabled him to use gas on them. >>I assume that is also true. But mentioning only that kind of information >>about "the other" country is a tad propagandistic. Guess that both >>propaganda attempts cancel each other out when you know about both. > the difference between the 2 incidents is that one was then and only > undermined the Iranians, what the french did was now and it was > underhanded stab in the back to the US. OK, so from your point of view - 1. What matters is how long ago something evil was done. If long enough, don't ever mention it! - 2. What matters is "whose side are you on". Killing people is OK if it's for the "good guys", where good and bad guys switch sides occasionally, and everyone needs to keep track in order not to upset you > allies aren't supposed to undermine each other OK, can you all then stop the boycott rubbish please? Thank you -- Ideology is the science of idiocy. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 10:19 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.