Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Norm Coleman: Still The Consummate Asshole

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
wellst0nev0ter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-04-05 06:09 AM
Original message
Norm Coleman: Still The Consummate Asshole
Norm Coleman: Why I'm standing by my call for Annan to resign
Norm Coleman
April 4, 2005

After reading Wednesday's error-ridden and specious editorial, I feel compelled to review the facts behind my call for the resignation of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

For six months, I have insisted that Annan be held accountable for the U.N.'s gross mismanagement of the Oil-for-Food Program. Last week, the U.N.'s own investigators issued a report criticizing Annan's own conduct -- including his failure to resolve a serious conflict of interest concerning his son -- and the conduct of his chief of staff.

The Volcker report did not "exonerate" Annan, as many have claimed; to the contrary, it pointed the finger directly at him. Indeed, one member of Volcker's committee, Mark Pieth, made that point loud and clear: "We did not exonerate Kofi Annan."

With that in mind, I reiterate my call for Annan's resignation.

Let's review the facts: Nearly one year ago, as chairman of the Senate permanent subcommittee on Investigations, I initiated a bipartisan, comprehensive investigation into the Oil-for-Food scandal. Our investigation showed that the U.N. terribly mismanaged the program.

Annan, as the U.N.'s CEO, is ultimately responsible for the organization's performance. My call for Annan's resignation was not, and is not, based on the misconduct of his son; instead, Annan must be held accountable for his failures and his organization's widespread ineptitude. In short, the buck stops with Annan.

Since I called for his resignation, an avalanche of evidence concerning the U.N.'s mismanagement of the program emerged:

• Volcker's investigators exposed the corrupt activities of Benon Sevan, Annan's hand-picked chief of the program. Our subcommittee released evidence showing that Sevan received lucrative oil allocations from Saddam Hussein, including documents from the Iraqi Oil Ministry estimating Sevan's profits at $1.2 million.

• The U.N. investigators also released 58 internal audits that revealed numerous instances of rampant mismanagement by the U.N., exposing a program rife with sloppy stewardship and riddled with "overcharges,"double charge" and other "unjustified" waste of more than $100 million.

• Our subcommittee disclosed overwhelming evidence that a U.N. agent took a bribe of $105,000 to help Saddam cheat the Program.

• The Volcker committee determined that the U.N.'s process for awarding three multi-million-dollar contracts in the program was "tainted."

Last week, the avalanche continued. Specifically, the Volcker report found that the secretary-general failed to adequately investigate or remedy a serious conflict of interest -- namely, that the U.N. had awarded a massive contract to the company that employed Annan's son.

Most disturbing was the Volcker panel's finding concerning Annan's chief of staff, who -- on the day after the Volcker committee was created -- authorized the destruction of three years' worth of documents. This report did not "exonerate" Annan -- rather, it chastises him for yet another serious lapse of management, and identifies more serious misconduct by Annan's hand-picked advisers.

This newspaper, like Volcker's committee, was mistaken when it wrote that "the secretary general is not involved in procurement decisions."

The program's rules clearly obligate the secretary-general to appoint the U.N.'s inspection agents. The agreement between the Secretariat and Iraq states: "The arrival of goods in Iraq purchased under the plan will be confirmed by independent inspection agents to be appointed by the Secretary-General." The rules of the Security Council committee similarly obligate Annan to appoint the inspection agents.

The secretary-general's failings, however, are not limited to past mismanagement. For instance, he has failed to strip Sevan's diplomatic immunity, despite the wealth of evidence establishing Sevan's misconduct. Worse, the U.N. also agreed to reimburse Sevan out of oil revenues from the program for his hefty legal fees resulting from its investigation. That the U.N. would pay for Sevan's defense, when it has found him responsible for unethical misconduct, is beyond comprehension.

Only after an international uproar did the U.N. reverse its decision.

Despite this evidence, this newspaper alleged that my call for Annan's resignation was motivated by some connection with the White House. That claim is patently false. The administration disagrees with my call for Annan's resignation, and offered its support: "We continue to support Secretary-General Annan in his work at the United Nations." While we agree that the U.N. desperately needs reform, we simply disagree on whether Annan is the right person to effect those reforms.

The U.N. is a vital institution for the United States and the world, with the unique ability to lead an international response to global problems like nuclear proliferation, the horrifying spread of HIV-AIDS, economic and political rebuilding in war-torn regions, and worldwide poverty.

Because of its rarefied position, the U.N. must regain its credibility and fulfill its obligations with impeccable integrity.

These are the facts. And those facts point to an inescapable conclusion: For the good of the U.N., Kofi Annan must step aside and a true reformer be appointed. The time for half-measures passed long ago.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5325741.html

Yes, Norm, you were right all along. UNLIKE our president, Kofi Annan was supposed to be responsible for the Oil For Foods program that the United States administered. Kofi Annan should not have had his son be associated with a company doing business in Iraq, UNLIKE our administration who has NEVER had any conflict of interests named Halliburton in reconstructing Eye-rack. The buck ALWAYS stop with those in charge, unlike OUR president who has never saw a bad publicity he never deferred to the lower rank.

Sorry, the Volker investigation was a witchhunt and the Puritans were trying to save face, and you are still covering the ass of your rent-daddy Bush. Human scum like you we can do without.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-04-05 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. You need an "[/s]" tag.
Edited on Mon Apr-04-05 06:43 AM by TahitiNut
:shrug: I'm guessing the article contained a bracketed "s" in "double charge" ... which you could/should change to "double charge(s)". Good morning! :hi:

On edit: Yep. I see it in the article. Square brackets need to be changed to #-form or "()".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemonFighterLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-04-05 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. I wish nomie would worry about himself
When he sold his soul to the devil and watched w steal elections and take us into an immoral war, he was real comfortable.
Poor hollow man-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC