It really WAS about the OIL!!
vic_ticious @ Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:44 pm
No wonder the UN wouldn't support the US invasion of Iraq. It ended Kofi's gravy train. 
$1:
Oil-for-Food Official May Have Blocked Inquiries
Head of U.N. Program in Iraq Accused of Improperly Accepting Purchasing Rights
By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 14, 2004; Page A26
UNITED NATIONS -- Benon Sevan, the official accused of improperly receiving lucrative rights to purchase oil from Saddam Hussein's government while he was running the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq, discouraged his staff from probing allegations of corruption and helped block efforts by the U.N. anti-corruption unit to assess where the program was vulnerable to abuse, according to senior U.N. officials.
Sevan said that such an assessment would prove too costly and that U.N. member governments bore primary responsibility for policing the program, according to senior U.N. officials and other former program members. He did initiate reviews of possible overcharging on some program contracts, reviews on which the U.N. Security Council took no action.
The disclosures, drawn from interviews with more than two dozen current and former U.N. officials and diplomats, follow a report last month by the top U.S. weapons inspector, Charles A. Duelfer, that Hussein personally approved the allocation of vouchers to Sevan, among about 270 other officials and businessmen, to sell millions of barrels of Iraqi crude at a profit of 10 cents to 35 cents a barrel.
Evidence that Hussein used the program to raise illicit billions and erode economic sanctions emerged over years, drawing strong criticism of the United Nations from U.S. legislators and conservative groups. The new disclosures provide a view into how the United Nations limited scrutiny of the program from within.
China, France, Russia, Syria and other governments, which represented companies competing for billions of dollars' worth of business, stalled measures aimed at ending corruption, U.S. Ambassador Patrick F. Kennedy, who tracked the program for more than three years, told a House subcommittee last month.
The U.N. Security Council established the oil-for-food program to address the humanitarian impact of economic sanctions against Iraq by allowing the country to sell oil so it could purchase food, medications and other essentials. It oversaw the export of $64 billion worth of Iraqi oil between December 1996 and November 2003. Sevan's policy took shape in late 2000, just as Hussein's government stepped up its efforts to siphon money from the program by requiring companies to pay kickbacks for the privilege of purchasing Iraqi oil or selling goods to the government.
Sevan declined to be interviewed for this article. In an e-mail to friends, he said he was the target of an "intense smear campaign" by groups seeking to discredit the United Nations and prevent it from returning to Iraq. He defended the program as making "a real difference in the daily lives of the average Iraqi people."
After Hussein's government fell in April 2003, evidence of corruption in the program spurred investigations in Baghdad, Washington and New York. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker to investigate allegations that U.N. officials, including Sevan, and foreign companies received illegal payoffs. That investigation continues.
During his tenure, which ran from October 1997 to November 2003, Sevan, a Cypriot, opposed some internal efforts to review the program and issued written instructions to employees who had received tips about illegal payoffs to tell whistleblowers to make formal complaints to their governments. The gist of Sevan's orders was, "We can't act on telephone conversations. They should put it in writing and go to their government," according to a U.N. official who served under Sevan and spoke on the condition of anonymity because he had not been authorized to speak publicly on the matter.
The whistleblowers demurred, noting that Iraq could retaliate by barring their companies from future business.
Sevan also disagreed with an effort in late 2000 by the U.N. corruption watchdog, Dileep Nair, to submit the program to a major vulnerability assessment, saying that at a cost of nearly $50 million it would be too expensive, according to two U.N. officials and a senior diplomat.
Sevan was backed by the U.N. deputy secretary general, Louise Frechette. Both Nair and Frechette declined to comment for this article, citing concern that their public remarks might interfere with Volcker's investigation. A U.N. source familiar with Frechette's position said she believed it would be overstepping his role for Nair to oversee a management assessment while he was probing the program for signs of abuse.
Edward Mortimer, U.N. communication chief, said the world body may have deferred too much to the concerns of powerful member states. "Maybe we should have treated it more as a straightforward managerial problem, but we treated it as a very sensitive political matter where we were anxious not to offend the sensibilities of any important member of the Security Council," he said.
Toward the end of July 2000, U.N. officials began receiving tips from Iraq's commercial partners that the Hussein government was demanding kickbacks, according to three U.N. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. In December 2000, one company told U.N. oil experts that Iraq had demanded an illegal surcharge of 50 cents on each barrel of oil, according to the U.N. official who served under Sevan. Shortly thereafter, the tips became the subject of Security Council meetings.
Representatives from about half a dozen other companies that traded with Iraq informed U.N. officials that Iraq was forcing them to pay illegal commissions into a secret bank account for the purchase of food, medicine and humanitarian goods, according to two U.N. officials who worked for Sevan. "The chatter was that the regime was asking suppliers to agree to sign contracts with a percentage going to another account," one of the officials said.
Sevan was reluctant to embark on an anti-corruption effort because it would complicate his relations with Iraq, whose cooperation was essential to the program's success, several U.N. officials believed. He was also loath to antagonize key Security Council members, particularly Russia, which routinely opposed efforts to reform a multibillion-dollar program that served its political and economic interests.
"He used to say, 'I have to sail between Scylla and Charybdis,' " a senior U.N. official said, referring to the two sea monsters in Greek mythology who tormented Odysseus and his crew.
Several U.N. officials, echoing Sevan's view, said they could not investigate crimes committed in their programs without far more resources and a specific mandate from the Security Council. Only in rare cases in which irrefutable evidence of abuses existed would they formally present the council with an allegation of corruption.
In one case frequently cited by U.N. officials as evidence of their commitment to fighting corruption, Sevan told the council's sanctions committee in October 2001 that the Greek captain of the oil tanker Essex admitted conspiring with Iraq to smuggle $10 million worth of crude oil. Sevan's briefing was arranged after Capt. Chiladakis Theofanis provided a written account of the scheme to both the United States and the United Nations. "If we got something which was so clear as the Essex case, we had no choice" but to bring it to the sanctions committee's attention, said Michel Tellings, one of three U.N. officials who oversaw Iraqi oil sales. But "we did not feel we had a mandate to go and investigate."
Although Sevan declined to pursue allegations of corruption, he took some action to address the problem, ordering a study of Iraqi imports to determine whether the costs were inflated. The report, which has not been released, was "inconclusive," according to the official who served under Sevan. In September 2003, a Pentagon study of 759 contracts valued at $6.9 billion showed "potential overpricing" by as much as $656 million.
Sevan also instructed U.N. customs experts to review individual contracts to determine whether the prices were "abnormally high" -- a move that was aimed at flagging possible wrongdoing to the council, several U.N. officials said.
Over the next 18 months, U.N. officials presented the sanctions committee with 70 contracts that were potentially overpriced, Mortimer said. But "nobody placed a single contract on hold," he said -- including the United States and Britain, Baghdad's toughest critics on the Security Council. He said Sevan's office "did its job by doing some investigation and informing the committee of its doubts."
U.S. and U.N. officials acknowledge that by allowing Hussein's government to negotiate contracts directly with thousands of foreign companies, the Security Council provided wide scope for abuses in the program. The council's decision-making process, which requires consensus among all its 15 members, made it difficult to impose anti-corruption reforms, U.S. and U.N. officials said.
"Any plan that would have denied the authority of the Iraqi government to select its own purchasers of Iraqi oil and suppliers of humanitarian products would have been rejected by a number of key Security Council member states," Kennedy told Congress.
Head of U.N. Program in Iraq Accused of Improperly Accepting Purchasing Rights
By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 14, 2004; Page A26
UNITED NATIONS -- Benon Sevan, the official accused of improperly receiving lucrative rights to purchase oil from Saddam Hussein's government while he was running the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq, discouraged his staff from probing allegations of corruption and helped block efforts by the U.N. anti-corruption unit to assess where the program was vulnerable to abuse, according to senior U.N. officials.
Sevan said that such an assessment would prove too costly and that U.N. member governments bore primary responsibility for policing the program, according to senior U.N. officials and other former program members. He did initiate reviews of possible overcharging on some program contracts, reviews on which the U.N. Security Council took no action.
The disclosures, drawn from interviews with more than two dozen current and former U.N. officials and diplomats, follow a report last month by the top U.S. weapons inspector, Charles A. Duelfer, that Hussein personally approved the allocation of vouchers to Sevan, among about 270 other officials and businessmen, to sell millions of barrels of Iraqi crude at a profit of 10 cents to 35 cents a barrel.
Evidence that Hussein used the program to raise illicit billions and erode economic sanctions emerged over years, drawing strong criticism of the United Nations from U.S. legislators and conservative groups. The new disclosures provide a view into how the United Nations limited scrutiny of the program from within.
China, France, Russia, Syria and other governments, which represented companies competing for billions of dollars' worth of business, stalled measures aimed at ending corruption, U.S. Ambassador Patrick F. Kennedy, who tracked the program for more than three years, told a House subcommittee last month.
The U.N. Security Council established the oil-for-food program to address the humanitarian impact of economic sanctions against Iraq by allowing the country to sell oil so it could purchase food, medications and other essentials. It oversaw the export of $64 billion worth of Iraqi oil between December 1996 and November 2003. Sevan's policy took shape in late 2000, just as Hussein's government stepped up its efforts to siphon money from the program by requiring companies to pay kickbacks for the privilege of purchasing Iraqi oil or selling goods to the government.
Sevan declined to be interviewed for this article. In an e-mail to friends, he said he was the target of an "intense smear campaign" by groups seeking to discredit the United Nations and prevent it from returning to Iraq. He defended the program as making "a real difference in the daily lives of the average Iraqi people."
After Hussein's government fell in April 2003, evidence of corruption in the program spurred investigations in Baghdad, Washington and New York. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker to investigate allegations that U.N. officials, including Sevan, and foreign companies received illegal payoffs. That investigation continues.
During his tenure, which ran from October 1997 to November 2003, Sevan, a Cypriot, opposed some internal efforts to review the program and issued written instructions to employees who had received tips about illegal payoffs to tell whistleblowers to make formal complaints to their governments. The gist of Sevan's orders was, "We can't act on telephone conversations. They should put it in writing and go to their government," according to a U.N. official who served under Sevan and spoke on the condition of anonymity because he had not been authorized to speak publicly on the matter.
The whistleblowers demurred, noting that Iraq could retaliate by barring their companies from future business.
Sevan also disagreed with an effort in late 2000 by the U.N. corruption watchdog, Dileep Nair, to submit the program to a major vulnerability assessment, saying that at a cost of nearly $50 million it would be too expensive, according to two U.N. officials and a senior diplomat.
Sevan was backed by the U.N. deputy secretary general, Louise Frechette. Both Nair and Frechette declined to comment for this article, citing concern that their public remarks might interfere with Volcker's investigation. A U.N. source familiar with Frechette's position said she believed it would be overstepping his role for Nair to oversee a management assessment while he was probing the program for signs of abuse.
Edward Mortimer, U.N. communication chief, said the world body may have deferred too much to the concerns of powerful member states. "Maybe we should have treated it more as a straightforward managerial problem, but we treated it as a very sensitive political matter where we were anxious not to offend the sensibilities of any important member of the Security Council," he said.
Toward the end of July 2000, U.N. officials began receiving tips from Iraq's commercial partners that the Hussein government was demanding kickbacks, according to three U.N. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. In December 2000, one company told U.N. oil experts that Iraq had demanded an illegal surcharge of 50 cents on each barrel of oil, according to the U.N. official who served under Sevan. Shortly thereafter, the tips became the subject of Security Council meetings.
Representatives from about half a dozen other companies that traded with Iraq informed U.N. officials that Iraq was forcing them to pay illegal commissions into a secret bank account for the purchase of food, medicine and humanitarian goods, according to two U.N. officials who worked for Sevan. "The chatter was that the regime was asking suppliers to agree to sign contracts with a percentage going to another account," one of the officials said.
Sevan was reluctant to embark on an anti-corruption effort because it would complicate his relations with Iraq, whose cooperation was essential to the program's success, several U.N. officials believed. He was also loath to antagonize key Security Council members, particularly Russia, which routinely opposed efforts to reform a multibillion-dollar program that served its political and economic interests.
"He used to say, 'I have to sail between Scylla and Charybdis,' " a senior U.N. official said, referring to the two sea monsters in Greek mythology who tormented Odysseus and his crew.
Several U.N. officials, echoing Sevan's view, said they could not investigate crimes committed in their programs without far more resources and a specific mandate from the Security Council. Only in rare cases in which irrefutable evidence of abuses existed would they formally present the council with an allegation of corruption.
In one case frequently cited by U.N. officials as evidence of their commitment to fighting corruption, Sevan told the council's sanctions committee in October 2001 that the Greek captain of the oil tanker Essex admitted conspiring with Iraq to smuggle $10 million worth of crude oil. Sevan's briefing was arranged after Capt. Chiladakis Theofanis provided a written account of the scheme to both the United States and the United Nations. "If we got something which was so clear as the Essex case, we had no choice" but to bring it to the sanctions committee's attention, said Michel Tellings, one of three U.N. officials who oversaw Iraqi oil sales. But "we did not feel we had a mandate to go and investigate."
Although Sevan declined to pursue allegations of corruption, he took some action to address the problem, ordering a study of Iraqi imports to determine whether the costs were inflated. The report, which has not been released, was "inconclusive," according to the official who served under Sevan. In September 2003, a Pentagon study of 759 contracts valued at $6.9 billion showed "potential overpricing" by as much as $656 million.
Sevan also instructed U.N. customs experts to review individual contracts to determine whether the prices were "abnormally high" -- a move that was aimed at flagging possible wrongdoing to the council, several U.N. officials said.
Over the next 18 months, U.N. officials presented the sanctions committee with 70 contracts that were potentially overpriced, Mortimer said. But "nobody placed a single contract on hold," he said -- including the United States and Britain, Baghdad's toughest critics on the Security Council. He said Sevan's office "did its job by doing some investigation and informing the committee of its doubts."
U.S. and U.N. officials acknowledge that by allowing Hussein's government to negotiate contracts directly with thousands of foreign companies, the Security Council provided wide scope for abuses in the program. The council's decision-making process, which requires consensus among all its 15 members, made it difficult to impose anti-corruption reforms, U.S. and U.N. officials said.
"Any plan that would have denied the authority of the Iraqi government to select its own purchasers of Iraqi oil and suppliers of humanitarian products would have been rejected by a number of key Security Council member states," Kennedy told Congress.
$1:
Officials Double Saddam's Oil-for-Food Theft
Monday, November 15, 2004
NEW YORK — Saddam Hussein's (search) regime made more than $21.3 billion in illegal revenue by subverting the U.N. Oil-for-Food program and other sanctions — more than double previous estimates, according to congressional investigators.
"This is like an onion — we just keep uncovering more layers and more layers," said Sen. Norm Coleman (search), R-Minn., whose Senate Committee on Government Affairs received the new information at a hearing on Monday.
New figures on Iraq's alleged surcharges, kickbacks — and oil-smuggling dating back to 1991 — are based on troves of new documents obtained by the committee's investigative panel, Coleman told reporters before the hearing. The documents illustrate how Iraqi officials, foreign companies and sometimes politicians allegedly contrived to allow the Iraqi government vast illicit gains.
The findings also reflect a growing understanding by investigators of the intricate schemes Saddam used to buy support abroad for a move to lift U.N. sanctions.
Coleman said the probe is just beginning and that officials aim to discover "how this massive fraud was able to thrive for so long." He said he is angry that the United Nations has not provided documents and access to officials that investigators need to move ahead.
Officials must get to the bottom of the allegations because, among other things, it will help the international community to better design future sanctions programs, some senators said.
"That humanitarian program was corrupted and exploited ... for the most horrible and aggressive purpose" of raising money for Saddam's military, said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.
But the committee's ranking Democrat, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, said "for the most part the U.N. sanctions achieved their intended objective of preventing Saddam from rearming and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Saddam's military spending plummeted after sanctions were imposed in 1991 to a fraction of what it had been before, he said, adding that the vast majority of illicit income was from publicly disclosed trade agreements that the world well knew about "but winked at."
"Saddam Hussein attempted to manipulate the typical oil allocation process in order to gain influence throughout the world," Mark L. Greenblatt, a counsel for the Senate panel's permanent subcommittee on investigations, said in prepared testimony obtained by The Associated Press.
"Rather than giving allocations to traditional oil purchasers, Hussein gave oil allocations to foreign officials, journalists, and even terrorist entities, who then sold their allocations to the traditional oil companies in return for a sizable commission."
The reference to terrorist groups referred to evidence that the regime had allocated oil to such organizations as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Mujahadeen Khalq, a group seeking to overturn the government of Iran, Greenblatt said.
Previous estimates — one from the General Accountability Office and the other by the top U.S. arms inspector Charles Duelfer — concluded that Saddam's government brought in $10 billion illicitly from 1990 to 2003, when sanctions were in place.
But congressional investigators found that vastly more oil — totaling $13.7 billion — was smuggled out of Iraq than previously thought. Investigators also raised the GAO's estimate of $4.4 billion in oil-for-food kickbacks by $200 million, and said the regime made $2.1 billion more through a scheme where foreign companies imported flawed goods at inflated prices.
According to the documents, the Iraqi government signed deals to import rotting food and other damaged goods with the full understanding of the exporting companies, who accepted payments for top quality products while kicking back much of the price difference to the Iraqi regime.
The panel estimated that such substandard goods accounted for 5 percent of all goods imported under the oil-for-food program, which was put in place in 1996 amid concerns that the Iraqi population was suffering from lack of food and medicines under the sanctions. The rough estimate "is drawn from anecdotal information provide by officials of the former Iraq regime, the United Nations, and U.S. government officials," the panel said.
The total estimate of illegal revenue also includes $400 million from interest earned from hiding illicit funds in secret bank accounts. Another $400 million in illicit revenue grew out of pricing irregularities and kickbacks in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq.
The Senate panel is conducting one of several congressional probes into alleged illegal profiteering in the oil-for-food program after allegations of corruption came to light earlier this year when Saddam was driven from power during the U.S.-led invasion. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker heads a panel that's conducting an independent investigation.
Monday, November 15, 2004
NEW YORK — Saddam Hussein's (search) regime made more than $21.3 billion in illegal revenue by subverting the U.N. Oil-for-Food program and other sanctions — more than double previous estimates, according to congressional investigators.
"This is like an onion — we just keep uncovering more layers and more layers," said Sen. Norm Coleman (search), R-Minn., whose Senate Committee on Government Affairs received the new information at a hearing on Monday.
New figures on Iraq's alleged surcharges, kickbacks — and oil-smuggling dating back to 1991 — are based on troves of new documents obtained by the committee's investigative panel, Coleman told reporters before the hearing. The documents illustrate how Iraqi officials, foreign companies and sometimes politicians allegedly contrived to allow the Iraqi government vast illicit gains.
The findings also reflect a growing understanding by investigators of the intricate schemes Saddam used to buy support abroad for a move to lift U.N. sanctions.
Coleman said the probe is just beginning and that officials aim to discover "how this massive fraud was able to thrive for so long." He said he is angry that the United Nations has not provided documents and access to officials that investigators need to move ahead.
Officials must get to the bottom of the allegations because, among other things, it will help the international community to better design future sanctions programs, some senators said.
"That humanitarian program was corrupted and exploited ... for the most horrible and aggressive purpose" of raising money for Saddam's military, said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.
But the committee's ranking Democrat, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, said "for the most part the U.N. sanctions achieved their intended objective of preventing Saddam from rearming and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Saddam's military spending plummeted after sanctions were imposed in 1991 to a fraction of what it had been before, he said, adding that the vast majority of illicit income was from publicly disclosed trade agreements that the world well knew about "but winked at."
"Saddam Hussein attempted to manipulate the typical oil allocation process in order to gain influence throughout the world," Mark L. Greenblatt, a counsel for the Senate panel's permanent subcommittee on investigations, said in prepared testimony obtained by The Associated Press.
"Rather than giving allocations to traditional oil purchasers, Hussein gave oil allocations to foreign officials, journalists, and even terrorist entities, who then sold their allocations to the traditional oil companies in return for a sizable commission."
The reference to terrorist groups referred to evidence that the regime had allocated oil to such organizations as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Mujahadeen Khalq, a group seeking to overturn the government of Iran, Greenblatt said.
Previous estimates — one from the General Accountability Office and the other by the top U.S. arms inspector Charles Duelfer — concluded that Saddam's government brought in $10 billion illicitly from 1990 to 2003, when sanctions were in place.
But congressional investigators found that vastly more oil — totaling $13.7 billion — was smuggled out of Iraq than previously thought. Investigators also raised the GAO's estimate of $4.4 billion in oil-for-food kickbacks by $200 million, and said the regime made $2.1 billion more through a scheme where foreign companies imported flawed goods at inflated prices.
According to the documents, the Iraqi government signed deals to import rotting food and other damaged goods with the full understanding of the exporting companies, who accepted payments for top quality products while kicking back much of the price difference to the Iraqi regime.
The panel estimated that such substandard goods accounted for 5 percent of all goods imported under the oil-for-food program, which was put in place in 1996 amid concerns that the Iraqi population was suffering from lack of food and medicines under the sanctions. The rough estimate "is drawn from anecdotal information provide by officials of the former Iraq regime, the United Nations, and U.S. government officials," the panel said.
The total estimate of illegal revenue also includes $400 million from interest earned from hiding illicit funds in secret bank accounts. Another $400 million in illicit revenue grew out of pricing irregularities and kickbacks in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq.
The Senate panel is conducting one of several congressional probes into alleged illegal profiteering in the oil-for-food program after allegations of corruption came to light earlier this year when Saddam was driven from power during the U.S.-led invasion. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker heads a panel that's conducting an independent investigation.
Popo @ Sun Nov 28, 2004 12:58 pm
I don't know what the hell you're talking about! Please reply with a somewhat smaller version of what you said before.
sk1d @ Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:20 pm
that post is way too long, i'm not going to read that
gimmie an abstract, then a link to where you got it from
Rev_Blair @ Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:51 am
That's an over-simplification, Godz...the kind of thing that people who hate the UN and get all their news from right-wing opinion columns come up with.
Roc @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:47 pm
It was always about the oil. French oil.
An American invasion would mean the end to millions of $'s in oil vouchers for France. Not to mention the millions of $'s in arms France sells Iraq on an annual basis. Same for Russia and China.
Rev_Blair @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:08 pm
Actually that has a lot to do with it, kind of. Saddam had signed contracts with several non-American oil interests that were to take effect when the sanctions were lifted. The US was losing the ability to keep the sanctions in place.
Saddam had also switched to Euro and, when the sanctions ended, would likely have been able to influence the rest of OPEC to do the same. That would effectively end the greenback's dominance as a petro-currency.
Georgie illegally invaded Iraq because of the oil. That's the way it goes when you are a failing super-power trying desperately to enforce your will on an increasingly incredulous world. Giants tend to thrash about as they die.
Robair @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:15 pm
Roc Roc:
It was always about the oil. French oil.
An American invasion would mean the end to millions of $'s in oil vouchers for France. Not to mention the millions of $'s in arms France sells Iraq on an annual basis. Same for Russia and China.
An American invasion would mean the end to millions of $'s in oil vouchers for France. Not to mention the millions of $'s in arms France sells Iraq on an annual basis. Same for Russia and China.
Exactly. America sold all kinds of arms to Iraq during the Iraq/Iran war.
Dubyas dady turned Americas number one allie in the mid-east to a fellow who no longer wanted to do business with America. That means, America could no longer get their hands on Iraqi oil. So yes, it WAS for oil. Now you're getting it.
Wait... are you under the impression those arms sales were illegal? Saddam was still allowed to aquire conventional weapons to protect himself from his neighbors. Ugly neighborhood down there y'know.
Pathos @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:49 pm
meh..seems comprehension is the common missing link between you two...doesnt matter much why or how they got there..they are there and theres fuck all you blathering loser kerry supporters can do about it....except cry your constant blues...holy fuck, what a pair of goofs
Rev_Blair @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:57 pm
Hi Pathos. Get bored waiting for goats to cross over your bridge?
Pathos @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:09 pm
Blare said...well nothing really and certainly nothing of consequence as is his way....he just thought he should take the opportunity to spew his hatred for Canada once again. He's got a tiny dick and an even smaller brain.
wassup boy...nothing original to say....just the same old crap day in and day out..shouldn't you be working on your next plagiariesed tome or book(let) or book(blares very condensed version of 'i hate america'..you have become a caricature and the poster boy for the ugly canadian
Robair @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:21 pm
Pathos Pathos:
meh..seems comprehension is the common missing link between you two...doesnt matter much why or how they got there..they are there and theres fuck all you blathering loser kerry supporters can do about it....except cry your constant blues...holy fuck, what a pair of goofs
The point, pathos, is not to try and change what has already happened but to point out what is wrong with it. That way, maybe it won't happen again. And if it does happen again, perhaps we can try to keep Canada out of it. There were many Canadians willing to follow blindly into a sensless war, maybe next time the US won't automatically have credibility from the get go with these Canucks.
It is also about seeing something wrong, then standing up and saying "that's wrong". I wouldn't expect you to understand this pathos, the man of little chest that you are.
Rev_Blair @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:29 pm
Forget it Robair...this troll doesn't have a point. Just a tendency towards stalking and a slew of aliases to hide behind.
True-North @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:54 pm
Rev_Blair Rev_Blair:
Forget it Robair...this troll doesn't have a point. Just a tendency towards stalking and a slew of aliases to hide behind.
mmmm troll I think Blair loves yor Robair
Rev_Blair @ Tue Nov 30, 2004 9:05 pm
here's another one