Wikileaks Breaks $3 Billion Corruption Story 206
James Hardine writes Wikileaks, the website for whistleblowers, has broken one of the world's biggest corruption stories in the international press (Guardian, BBC, Forbes, Sydney Morning Herald). The site has leaked a secret report on looting by ex-president Moi of Kenya — and possibly altered the outcome of an impending national election. Moi has become a key player in political life in Kenya, and is now an essential pillar in President Kibaki's campaign for re-election in December 2007. From the Wikileaks page: 'The suppressed auditor's report reveals that currency worth billions of US dollars was looted from Kenya by President Moi and his associates. The money was laundered across the world and includes properties and shell companies in London, New York and South Africa and even a 10,000 hectare ranch in Australia.'"
Phew! (Score:5, Funny)
See, this is why I stay away from Kenya and only deal with my legitimate business partners from Nigeria.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
this is the result of socialism (Score:2, Insightful)
Show me where socialism and government control over business activity has brought about prosperity and lifted a country out of poverty? I can show examples for capitalism: China, Singapore, South Kor
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now lets look at countries that are following socialism. I'm betting heavilly that we are
Re:this is the result of socialism (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And how is this different from beacon-of-capitalism and friend-of-America, Saudi Arabia? Except that Chavez is elected and the House of Saud isn't?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Same problems, different labels. The neocons still suffer from knee-jerk reactions against anything labeled 'Socialist' due to our experiences during the Cold War.
One other factor to consider is whether US interests are given a cut of the profits. The Saudis throw some business to American contractors, so they must be benign.
Re:this is the result of socialism (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:this is the result of socialism (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:this is the result of socialism (Score:5, Interesting)
The USSR of-course has defeated the Fascist Germany, the first man in space was Yuri Gagarin and Lev Landau was at least as smart as Einstein. However you are contributing these obvious achievements to the socialist/communist regime set in place, which is a logical fallacy.
You see, after the October Revolution took place there were people (Stolypin) in the country who proposed reforms that could have turned the country around and brought it into a soft form of capitalism (small size landownership actually.) After all, the country itself was mostly agrarian.
What has actually happened was very different. My great-grandfather's 7 out of 12 children have died in Ukraine in the beginning of 1930th from hunger along with 30 million other people. So my great-grandfather was moved off his land, because he had to hire help to work in the field, this was against the communist law of the time. His remaining family and himself together with millions others were put on trains and moved to Siberia, away from their lands. His wife and one more kid died in the train during the move from diphteria. Now to some this may not mean much, but they may not understand what Ukraine actually was at the time (and still is today.) It was called the Bread Basket of the Soviet Union. For 30 million farmers to die from hunger is not something that can be explained easily, but the basics of it are these: the new communist government needed money, which it did not have, to jump start a non-existing industrial complex. The only way to do this was to take away what could be taken away from the farmers of the land and to sell it abroad, namely food. Food was taken away completely for at least 3 years in a row, which resulted in approximately 30 million deaths.
That is just one small bookmark in the novel written by the new communist regime.
Many probably do not realize this, but when Hitler attacked USSR, he hit Ukraine first. The initial reaction of the people was mixed, most were fed up with the Soviet form of government and they would have stayed away from the war completely and let the Nazi forces through, however Hitler made one of his many many blunders, he killed the civilians and he killed them in numbers and with ferocity that somehow outmatched the late doings of the Communist Party in the republic. At the end of it all Ukrainians had little choice, they had to fight the immediate danger of being exterminated.
You have cited some examples of ingenuity shown by the people of the former Soviet Union, what you have not seen though outmatches everything that you have heard off. The fate of the people of that land between 1912 and up to about the end of 1960th was terrible. From about 1970th and to the imminent collapse of the Soviet Union the life became much easier, but it was never free.
You see, the socialists do not want to free people from anything really, they want to tell the people how to live their lives too. If you weren't with 'it' in the former USSR, you were against the law, and the Communist Party set the law. There was no other party.
Personally I would rather live in a capitalist country during depression, then in a communist country in the best of times though.
Re: (Score:3)
Why do you have to make up stuff like this? The population of Ukraine was in 1927 32 million, so it is completely unimaginable that 30 million of them died. Historians place the death toll to anywhere between 2 to 7 million, not 30. Also note that while Stalin's collectivization program undoubtedly catalyzed the famine, f
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:this is the result of socialism (Score:4, Insightful)
However I must take exception to attributing the horrors and abuses of the Soviet government to socialism or communism. The USSR was about as true an example of "socialism" as the US is of "democracy".
Socialism didn't cause the problems, just as democracy didn't cause the oil war. The bastards who succeed at politics always promote an ideology, but they do not follow it. Whether it's socialism or capitalism, it's always the same kind of crooks doing the exact same things.
Some of the Scandinavian countries are doing very well blending socialism and capitalism, BTW. Something we are sadly still too brainwashed to do here in the US.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Gee, by far the largest country in the world managed to defeat the tiny nation of Germany, and merely by throwing wave after wave of it's own men to be slaughtered in the millions.
And even with that, I still seriously doubt the USSR would have won the war on it's own. You're completely dismissing the aid the USSR received, and amount of effort the Axis put into fighting the other Allies. England and the US weren't on the ground in Europe a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
right, the nazis gaining power in germany had nothing to do with the great depression. it must have been their fashion sense and good manners...
-esme
Re: (Score:2)
I am not convinced. In 1943 the US armament production was almost half of the world total and about 3 times higher then that of the USSR without shifting as far as other nations toward a war economy. The aid going to the Soviets both directly and indirectly was significant.
I would actually assign more significance to Hitler's poor management of the war turning
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a westerner that spent many years in the former communist countries. Much of what you read in the west of the hardships in these countries was western propaganda. It really wasn't as bad as you were told it was in many cases, there were some very good things about the systems they had. Sure, yes, there
Re: (Score:2)
Before spitting anti-socialist propoganda, check out "The Revolution Will not be Televised" for the kinds of problems South American countries (and close U.S. trade partners actually face). Russia's economy totally collapsed overnight and it got worse when they switc
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In any case there are *many* examples of successful socialism, almost every major European nation exhibits varying degrees of socialism.
Re: (Score:2)
The question is then raised, "Does extreme socialism lend itself more easily to government corruption then extreme capitalism?"
Another question would be, "Does socialism tend towards a totalitarian state more then capitalism, if so, why?"
My take on it is that the more power is concentrated in a smaller group of people the more corruption, and the faster the move to totalitarianism. This may be because the smaller the group holding power, the more power each member of that group has, and to quote an old
no, it's not. (Score:5, Interesting)
Show me where socialism and government control over business activity has brought about prosperity and lifted a country out of poverty?
Interestingly enough, when deregulation in Ohio led to the great blackout of 2003, the Quebec grid was mostly unaffected because Hydro-Quebec keeps its grid out of sync with its neighbors because they expected something like that to happen, since the states around it are dangerously under-regulated.
And the CBC is a much more reliable source of news than any of the conglomerate-operated sources in the USA, FOX news they ain't.
It was not clear of the counterfeit powder included any toxic ingredients, but some children were reported to have died within three days of being fed the fake milk.
Others were hospitalised when their parents realised they were ill. Fuyang's People's Hospital alone received more than 60 babies who had been fed fake milk formula, according to the Beijing News.
makes me worry about more than socialism! milk?? (Score:2)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3641 [bbc.co.uk] 475.stm
It was not clear of the counterfeit powder included any toxic ingredients, but some children were reported to have died within three days of being fed the fake milk.
Others were hospitalised when their parents realised they were ill. Fuyang's People's Hospital alone received more than 60 babies who had been fed fake milk formula, according to the Beijing News.
Makes me REALLY wonder about the quality of the stuff we eat, use and abuse; since when I was young the news has been telling many things that products need to be troughoutly tested before they can be used as medicine or healthcare products.
Feeding a baby who has just been put on the world is considered health care. These kids cannot care of themselves or tell us they are missing something; the language is just not there yet for that to happen. The responsibility does not only lie in the hands of its pare
Re:makes me worry about more than socialism! milk? (Score:2)
I never really saw the use of using artificial products over the real thing and why giving them to babies while they should get most of the real nature to grow up?
Simply put, it's the result of for-profit corporate disinformation and propaganda [wikipedia.org]:
Advocacy groups and charities have accused Nestlé of unethical methods of promoting infant formula over breast-milk to poor mothers in third world countries.[15][16] For example, IBFAN claim that Nestlé supports the distribution of free powdered formula samples to hospitals and maternity wards; after leaving the hospital, the formula is no longer free, but because the supplementation has interfered with lactation th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So thanks for wrongly knocking socialism, and thanks to the moderators who modded you up. It reminds me just how much bollocks is flying around when it comes to politics.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why whenever you see a governme
Re: (Score:2)
Except that, perhaps, western media aren't really doing enough to get the important issues exposed, and people are to complacent. That's my view, anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
The US after the Great Depression? You know, the one that came about because of ineffective government regulation of the financial sector?
I don't buy the argument that services for which the delivery infrastructure is a classic natural monopoly and the demand is inelastic - like electricity - should be put in the hands of a private entity with a profit motive.
Nice troll, tho
Re: (Score:2)
The causes of the Great Depression are still being debated:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Great_D epression [wikipedia.org]
The opening paragraph:
Causes of the Great Depression are still a matter of active debate among economists. The specific economic events that took place during the Great Depression have been agreed upon since it was first studied: a deflationary s
Re:this is the result of socialism (Score:5, Insightful)
For example: welfare. In a perfect world there would be no such thing and everyone would make their own way or pay the price. So we abolish welfare. Problem is, there will always be a percentage of people who don't make it and who cause those who do to pay the price through theft and violence and being a general nuisance. So it is better for the people who make it to set aside some amount of their income to keep these people living at least at a level where crime upon others is minimized but so is freeloading. Make living at the bottom of the barrel nice enough to prevent crime yet uncomfortable enough that only the most serious hard cases would put up with it. There's no perfect solution, but there is an optimal balance point.
Call it extortion by the poor, but in a pragmatic sense your money that goes towards welfare stabilizes things in a way that benefits you more than just holding on to that money would. There are countries that go too far in that direction, redistributing wealth, and have serious problems. There are countries that don't do any wealth redistribution, and they have different serious problems. Finding that balance... which few talk about... is really the puzzle. But we just get caught up in arguing about which extreme is correct, holding on to impractical ideals.
The same balancing act applies to many areas; health care, government mitigating the tragedy of the commons, copyright. How much should the governement get involved in things? For a healthy society the answer is close to "none", but it's not "none".
Cheers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cheers.
Re: (Score:2)
Oxdung. Poverty and ignorance (citizens who don't know the law, their rights and who can then be bullied by local bullies) are what cause corruption.
In Canada and France, for example, the governm
Re: (Score:2)
Because capitalist politicians are never corrupt.. (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is Kenya unique? in a word no...
Get your facts right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know more about him and his policies than your comment indicated? From the lack of specific mention of Kenya in your post, I wonder if you were basing your comments on some prejudices about generic "African" politics?
Re: (Score:2)
Show me where socialism and government control over business activity has brought about prosperity and lifted a country out of poverty? I can show examples for capitalism: China, Singapore, South Kor
Re: (Score:2)
Show me where socialism and government control over business activity has brought about prosperity and lifted a country out of poverty? I can show examples for capitalism: China, Singapore, South Kor
Re:this is the result of socialism (Score:5, Insightful)
The only way I can describe that is Bollocks.
I'm not supporting grandparent's idea that socialism is the cause of corruption in Kenya, but to see socialism in Britain as an economic success story is just plain wrong.
What was the economic legacy of socialist governments in Britain? Rampant unions, unemployment, loss making state-owned manufacturing industries that were decades out of date.
caricaturisationRe: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But I was more thinking of the nationalised coal mines and steel works - things that really in no shape or form should be under government ownership. Control by the workers of the means of production is the ideology that IMO should be dead and buried; it means control by the state in effect. And the idea th
Re: (Score:2)
We do seem to have gotten over most of those cyclical problems now, and I would put that down to the quasi socialist policies of the quasi-socialist government that has been in power for the last 10 years. As someone previous in this thread mentioned, its not sociali
Re: (Score:2)
I'd put it down to the government of the last ten years not being socialist and the independence given to the bank of England.
Re: (Score:2)
However these have been coupled with quite a few successful (and traditionally non-Socialist policies) like giving independence to the Bank of England (there must be a few more but I cant think of any...).
Then there have been the badly received and seemingly badly executed non-Socialist policies li
Re: (Score:2)
The Socialist Party in Holland is currently headed by a man who, apparently, at one time considered Mao Zedong, responsible for tens of millions o
Depends on the selection (Score:2)
If you have a democratic-style government, and your choices are Adolph Hitler, Beezelbub, and OJ Simpson, chances are that no matter whom you choose it isn't going to work out very well. In contrast, if you have a dictatorship, monarchy, or whatever, and you happen to have a *good* government (I've heard the King of Thailand is well looked upon), then your country will prosper.
Given
Re: (Score:2)
Canada is in generally good shape. Some of our cities often rate among the most desirable places to live in the world. For now, we have a decent comprehensive health care system which, among other things, means that you don't
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Kenya... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Best dept. EVAR (Score:2)
There's corruption in Africa? (Score:4, Funny)
Fortunately, China is raping that continent now instead of Europe, and we know how the Chinese deal with corruption. When it's really obvious. And someone notices. And someone dares to write about it.
Related stories, huh? (Score:5, Interesting)
Congratulations (Score:3)
So let me be the first to welcome our new, leaking overlords!
Congratulations, Wikileaks!! Keep up the good work!
It's the corruption, not the ideology (Score:4, Insightful)
Not that the isms make no difference. But the difference is of style, not virtue. It's like the difference between rock-n-roll-ism and jazz-ism. Most rock-n-roll, and most jazz, is a faint and corrupted echo of the truly great exemplars. Virtue in a musician isn't a matter of which ism they've pursued, but of how they've pursued it. There are great jazz bands, and lousy ones; great rock bands, and lousy ones; great socialist countries (e.g. Sweden), and lousy ones (e.g. Burma); great capitalist countries (e.g. Taiwan), and lousy oness (e.g. Nigeria). Your taste in examples my differ; the point remains that its not what you do (socialist, capitalist, whatever), it's how you do it.
Confidential business transaction requested (Score:2, Funny)
I am writing to you with an offer to execute a TRANSACTION with a value
of $3.000.000.000 USD (THREE THOUSAND MILLIONS) of American Dollars.
This transaction requires strict and secure confidences, of which I
trust we can be including in the matter at hand.
I was in the employ as Senior Executive Treasurer General Officer of
the President of an African NATION for which I cannot disclose at this time,
and I have managed a worldwide network of shell companies, secret trusts,
and front-men to
Only in Kenya (Score:2)
10,000 hectare ranch in Australia? (Score:2, Informative)
Donor money is fair game. (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem it's that in many cases when you deal with "donor" money, they don't consider it necessarily stealing from their people, but just getting "free" money from the donors.
I've seen it first hand on the national scale:
In Tanzania, during the midst of a severe power crisis I sat down in a cafe in Dar and had chai with the president of the Richmond Development Corperation "based" in Houston TX. They were under contract to import and install emergency power generators to the country. This was a deal worth 10s of millions of USD (This money was of course aid money, Tanzania doesn't have 10 Million in hard currency to toss about). We talked about the power situation and how nice it would be to have it fixed, about foreign aid, and about the USA and Tanzania in general. He was a very pleasant man overall, he gave me his business card and even paid my tab.
Several weeks later it came to light that RDC was basically a shell company with no real corporate presence anywhere, or capability to buy and ship generators (Google it if you want). It was purely an attempt to swindle millions of dollars (the attitude being that since it was donor money, it wasn't really taking money from Tanzania) How the heck did they win the contract in the first place? I'm sure they greased a few palms along the way.
Even on the village level, if you write a grant for a building and budget X TSH money for concrete, you can damn well be sure that someone will try their hardest to short a bag or two and pocket the money (concrete is very expensive FWIW). Receipt tracking for grants would be hell if you were not solely in charge of buying and paying for things.
Considering the harshness of life there, I can't be to angry at people for trying for a few bucks, but with that in mind, the people stealing millions are even more reprehensible.
RPCV Tanzania 2005-2007
Still have the business card and newspaper clippings
Google knows all (Score:2)
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=h ttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Finfocus%2Fafrica% 2Fafrica_accomplishments.pdf&ei=NMTZRqrcF6WqxAGf5M 2OAw&usg=AFQjCNGsylMvKy5w5W7fvYJ9XGJdSbcpQw&sig2=T 3B32gMv7qDOnRQkSthpoQ [google.co.uk]
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20 021205-2.html [whitehouse.gov]
So, not exactly his fault, but perhaps unwise to be supporting someone who the EU, Denmark and UK had warned
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Also, it is unwise to have any other sort of friendly diplomacy with persons/nations for the same reason.
(Bombing them is ok though... worst case scenario, we'll apologize and move on.)
Re: (Score:2)
*listens to whispering voice*
Ah, Kenya. Of course, I meant Kenya.
Re: (Score:2)
Even though Bush doesn't appear anywhere in the article, they have to some how connect the two? I can hear the article submitters not "Don't we have a pic of both of them in front of a Haliburton sign?" Seriously, you don't have to be a GW fan to realize that this kind of goofy crap hinders the cred.
What do I win? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are marked as off-topic, but I think the CIA and GWB know very well most details of the corrupt nature of America's political guests. Lavish welcomes for a guy who robs his country of billions are not a Good Thing(TM).
Lavish wellcome to a guy who, like yourself, is robbing his country of billions [google.com], however vile, is par for the course.
I've been getting a lot of unwarranted downmods lately, I guess someone's got an ax to grind.
Possibly someone who'll mod up the trite I replied to. Someone who doesn't know the difference between jingoism and patriotism.
Re: (Score:2)
Disallow all ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. It's amazing that a president can do a few things you agree with and you can gloss over what is probably the least ethical presidency since the Nixon administration (possibly worse). How can you look at no-bid contracts given to Haliburton and not at the very least think "appearance of impropriety." You've got one messed up definition of ethics there. How about putting a businessman with no real political e
Re:What about legal looting? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been following the Wikileaks idea for a bit, every since Cryptome [cryptome.org] published a bunch of info about it.
I'm in two minds about Wikileaks. On the one hand, the idea is kind of cool - I'm all for whistle-blowers, and think they perform a vital function. It's sometimes important for the public to see information that could be blocked [guardian.co.uk] from public release due to legal pressures.
But on the other hand, maybe that information should not be in the public domain, as it could put lives at risk (as was argued in the previous link).
Also, it's ultimately flawed in the same way that business Web 2.0 review-type sites are flawed: you can't trust the information worth a damn. People have a terrible habit of trying to set up someone they feel disgruntled about, or wish to slander a company that they feel treated them unfairly. Or, of course, they could just be out to rubbish a competitor.
Wikileaks is likely to become a stomping ground of disinformation, misinformation, and vendettas, and if they think the wisdom of the crowds is going to be able to judge that a piece of information is, in fact, a forgery, they're fools.
Also, who exactly will be held accountable when it's used, say, to swing an election, only for us to discover that the information in question was bogus? Wikileaks? Will they hand over the leaker?
I can't help but feel that Wikileaks may, in fact, do more harm than good. A few bad incidents at Wikileaks, and it's highly likely that the law (and government, business etc.) is going to come down hard to silence legitimate whistle-blowers under the pretext of protecting themselves from slander and libel.
What's really needed is a system of legal mechanisms to encourage and protect leakers in the real world, as well as allow a system of accountability. The incidents described [msn.com] by leakers who stepped forward regarding corruption in Iraq indicates that there are simply not enough legal avenues open to help and protect whistle-blowers.
Re: (Score:2)
Since private presses have largely died out, this is the only way to be able to provide relevant details etc before getting hauled into court and fired.
The phone works for 30 second explanations but the kind of stuff going on now requires longer explanations, and this is a good medium.
If I worked in
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
As for safety, all whistleblowing is dangerous, but who was ignorant on this point? Ce
Re: (Score:2)
If you and I run for an election, I can sway public opinion by running a poll asking questions like "Would you (poll answerer) still vote for [[you]] if you were to suddenly find out he is a child molester?"
I haven't actually accused you of molesting children by running that poll, there may not have been any child-molesting story to speak of, but simply by suggesting the possibility of such a hypothetical scenar
Free speech (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, who exactly will be held accountable when it's used, say, to swing an election, only for us to discover that the information in question was bogus? Wikileaks? Will they hand over the leaker?
Who is called accountable as it is? Say a presidential candidate lied/carefully misinformed using half-truths for his own ends. N
Re: (Score:3, Funny)