Now that the Independent Inquiry Committee has released its final document, a 483 page report describing the UN Oil-For Food scandal, I don�t suppose we�ll be hearing many Liberals and their Democratic allies express a deep sense of shame about their dogmatic support for the �international community.� Why not? Well, they may feel shame only when they disagree with an American policy such as the �illegal� war America launched against the �Minutemen� and �freedom fighters� in Iraq. Then, again, they may expediently hide their shame to avoid reminding the American people that the �international community� into whose hands they would put the lives of America�s children is the same one that facilitated the stealing of money earmarked to purchase food and medicine for Iraqi children.

Perhaps, however, there is nothing at all for Liberals and other Democrats to be ashamed about. After all, every nation, corporation, or person implicated in the report denies paying kickbacks to a murderous dictator, denies that their profits flowed from an illegal enterprise, or denies knowing that monies they were paid or �charitable contributions� they received even came from an oil sale.

So, should a shame-saddened John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, et al. issue an apology for telling us that it�s not all that difficult to protect our children, ourselves, and our culture if only we would �work with� and �trust� the �international community�? Or should they utter a smug �I was right!� Let�s look at what Mr. Volcker�s report has to say and then decide for ourselves whether to regard the real international community as thieving, cowardly, selfish, hypocritical wolves or innocent lambs who love justice and peace.

First, a summary: The report reminds us that beginning in 1996, the UN authorized Iraq to sell oil under an �Oil-for-Food� program. It then states that over the next six years Iraq sold $64.2 billion of oil, paid $34.5 billion to 3,614 companies for humanitarian goods, and received a total of $1.8 billion of illicit income from surcharges placed on the oil sales and kickbacks demanded from sellers of the humanitarian goods. Following are the most important allegations it makes about the oil sales.

All of us recall that the Russian government, apparently feeling that twelve years is far too little time to �give diplomacy a chance,� opposed using force against a murderous thug who had flouted a dozen UN resolutions. The report leads us to believe, however, that Russian motives had nothing to do with diplomacy and peaceful resolutions of conflicts and everything to do with oil  --  sick Iraqi children, tortured and murdered Iraqis, and gassed Kurds be damned.

According to the report, Russian companies did the most business with Saddam, purchasing $19.3 billion of oil under the program or 30% of the total oil purchased. With regard to the deceit necessary to engage in this illicit business, the report alleges that the Russian government played an �active role in coordinating actions of those companies.� Moreover, it claims that Russian organizations benefited as well, with the following groups receiving oil allocations from the Iraqi government: The Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, and the Party of Peace and Unity, an entity whose name causes us to wonder whether Irony ever takes even a moment�s rest.

Now, on to the report�s French Section. How the French people and their friends abroad loved it when the French government sent its foreign minister to visit African members of the UN Security Council to inform them that France would veto any Council resolution calling for the use of force against Saddam, thereby making it politically impossible for those African nations to support the U.S./British position. And how that same crowd loves to extol the French commitment to peace and justice in a world in which France serves as the counterbalance to American �imperialism.� However, in contrast to the lofty place the French assign themselves in world affairs, we read the following ugly allegations about French companies and individuals.

The report takes pains to point out that the Iraqi regime so regarded France as a friend for its support of lifting sanctions against Iraq that it maintained an �explicit policy of favoring companies and individuals based in France� to the extent that a number of �hoax� companies contrived to disguise themselves as French.

Most of the French Section, however, scrupulously details allegations made against highly placed French individuals. Jean-Bernard Merimee, former Special Advisor to the Secretary General of the UN is alleged to have received and sold oil allocations for 6 million barrels, earning $165,725 in commissions. (O! the affairs that go on in �sophisticated� France. How right it was, then, in 1999 for Kofi Annan to appoint Mr. Merimee Special Advisor on European Affairs so that French sophistication could be brought to the entire European continent!)

The report alleges that Charles Pasqua, former French Minister of the Interior, received allocations for 11 million barrels whose sale was carried out by Bernard Guillet, his diplomatic advisor who received $234,000 in cash payments and is alleged to have exercised oil allocations of his own.

Americans are not likely to recognize the name of Claude Kaspereit, a French businessman who is alleged to have received allocations for over 9.5 million barrels of oil by the Iraq government. But Americans will recognize "Marc Rich & Company," alleged to have financed 4 million barrels for Mr. Kaspereit�s �France-based shell company.� Of this subterfuge, the report goes on to say that Marc Rich and Company �directed BNP Paris not to disclose its identity to BNP New York in connection with its financing of the UN contract.�

Those who may be confused about Mr. Rich�s identity should know that he is indeed the same Marc Rich who was one of the Justice Department�s most wanted fugitives, indicted for tax evasion and illegal oil deals with Iran, when Clinton pardoned this estimable member of the �international community� in 2001. And, yes, his ex-wife Denise is the same person who may have �facilitated� the pardon by donating nearly $1 million to Democratic causes, including $70,000 to Hillary Clinton�s Senate campaign and $450,000 to the Clinton Presidential library fund. (Marc, Denise, Bill, and Hillary: How those Multilateralists love one another!)

The report�s French Section concludes by detailing allegations against Serge Boidevoix, a former French diplomat who received allocations for over 32 million barrels of oil and Gilles Munier, the pompously titled �Secretary-General� of the French-Iraqi Friendship Association, who received allocations for 11.8 million barrels. Regarding Mr. Munier, the report exposes the falseness of pretentious French morality when it tells us that he commented that if surcharges were imposed on the contracts, �that wasn�t my problem.�

Leftist �anti-war� activists make their way into the report in the person of George Galloway, the British MP who was booted out of the Labor Party for a number of reasons, one of which is that Labor found that he incited Arabs to fight against British troops. What are the allegations against this vitriolic grandstander who prefers the USSR, Iraq, and Syria to �rogue states� such as the U.S and Great Britain?

They are these: (1) Some of the proceeds from allocations of 18 million barrels of oil given �either directly in the name of George Galloway . . . or in the name of one of his associates, Fawaz Zureikat� were deposited into the account of the Mariam Appeal, an organization dedicated to providing health care for Iraqis and to work �against sanctions in Iraq� and with which Mr. Galloway was associated as an officer. (2) Deposits of illicit oil money were made to �the bank account of Amineh Naji Daoud Zayyad, Mr. Galloway�s wife� and �officer for the Mariam Appeal.�

It should be noted also that this hero of the American Left may face perjury charges as a result of his testimony regarding his involvement in the Oil-for-Food scandal before the U.S. Senate. However, if he is charged, he may, like Marc Rich, choose never to �visit� America again, unless, of course, another Clinton grants him a well deserved Presidential pardon.

To its credit, the report does not limit itself to unscrupulous businessmen and hypocritical, �anti-war� politicians. Consider the allegations it makes against Father Jean-Marie Benjamin, an assistant to the Vatican�s State Secretary (�91-�94) and founder (�97) of the Benjamin Committee for Iraq, praised by Tariq Aziz for its �prodigious efforts to establish principles of justice and right.�

The report alleges that Father Benjamin teamed up with Swiss oil trader Alain Bionda (apparently while Father was pursuing �justice and right� for Iraq) so that monies from illicit oil sales could find their way into the coffers of the Benjamin Committee. Honesty requires the admission that Father denies knowing the source of the funds. Honesty also requires stating that the report tells us that Father explains his withdrawing more than half of a $90,000 deposit in banknotes with the reason that �he needed banknotes for his activities in Iraq because the economy was cash driven.�

Thus ends this account of some of the report�s most interesting allegations. In response to it, there are those who will express bewilderment about the vile corruption existing within the highest reaches of the �international community� and its selfish, cowardly reaction to that corruption. To these people, who most likely suffer from the illness of regarding the �international community� as a long established champion of the oppressed and brave defender of justice and freedom, I suggest a simple medicine: immerse yourselves in conversations with people of Cambodia, Rwanda, the Balkans, and Sudan  --  human beings who upon learning of every vile aspect of the Oil-for-Food scandal will express not an iota of surprise.

Copyright by A.J. DiCintio

Email Comments