Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Email 1: Chichakli - Schmidle Files - SkyPotrol.net

Email 1: Chichakli - Schmidle Files - SkyPotrol.net

Ratings: (0)|Views: 117|Likes:
Published by George Mapp

More info:

Published by: George Mapp on Mar 07, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/07/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Re: Query from The New Yorker 
Chichakli R 4
 янв
.
в
07:42
Кому
Nicholas Schmidle
Response_NYT.doc
44
КБ
Good dayFarah is one on the two key witnesses; the other is unknown to the media or inten
onally overlooked. However, placing Peleman on the stand is not a bad idea, also ques
oninga couple of key government employee including Adam Szubin, ad Whitney Schneider would not be bad either, and here is how:1-
 
Douglas Farah as you know is making living out of the Bout story, he is “the key expert used by the US government agencies; and par
cularly the DOJ in 2005, andthe DEA in 2007. Farah – with the help of a par
cular congressman from California was also used – as an expert to provided two tes
monies before certain Congressionalcommi
ees and in both tes
monies he commi
ed perjury. He lied under oath to serve his contract and certainly to serve his employer. Ques
oning Farah about thesetes
monies is key to show “doubt” and doubt is all needed for acqui
al under the law.The
rst tes
mony Farah did in Feb/2005 and the second in Jul/2008. In the second tes
mony (available hereh
p://victorbout.com/Documents/Farah_Test_onVB_073108.pdf ) he stated that Victor Bout have sold arms to FARC before – he need to be quizzed about this tes
mony in court and the prosecutorcannot excluded due to its relevancy. Farah lied before congress, and he cannot a
rm or substan
ate his tes
mony before congress. As such his credibility is doub
 
ul,so is the informa
on he provided to the DOJ and later the DEA. The ques
on for the jury is “BEYOUND DOUBT” and when you read the indictment in his case, you cannotavoid the fact that the indictment was based upon the allega
on of what he supposedly did. The defense should have asked “How much of what in the indictment istrue, how much of what in the media is true?Farah is the key for the US government case and 99.9% of what they operates with came from him or through him. His rela
on t Johan Peleman was never ques
oned,and there are few witnesses whom are willing to tes
fy to how he conspired with Peleman to create the story since the late 1990. I am talking about live witnesses, whoworked with Bout’s case and whom are armed with copies of email exchanges, and records of how Peleman and Farah used to create the stories and how to get theintelligence and law enforcement involved, and certainly how to ramp it up through an organized media network in press and internet. Copies of email between Farahand Peleman and which were made available through a US na
onal who worked as an assistant to Peleman at IPIS will leave no ques
on concerning the nature,
ming,and extent of conspiracy between Farah and Peleman leading to the INVENTION of the Victor Bout you happened to hear about.Bout is no saint, but he is nothing at all of what he is portrayed to be in the media. You try to trace what you know about this case. If you do so honestly you will realizethat all you know came from sources beyond your own personal experience, all is hearsay because you never worked with Victor nor ever witnessed any of the allegedarms trading. Then try to explore the routs of what you know and perhaps believe to be a fact, you should not be surprised when you see it all coming from the samesource – no excep
on. If you want to see example of that, just look at the 4 main documents that was used to create Victor Bout for the law enforcement apparatus andcompare them, they all look exactly as a copy of Peleman’s UN report S/2000/1225 a full copy is here:h
p://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=S/2000/1225Star
ng in the United States, the
rst report about Victor Bout was issued by the ATF, the classi
ed report found here:h
p://chichakli.com/Documents/Bout%20Report%201_ATF.pdf compare it with another con
den
al report by the South African intelligence located here:h
p://chichakli.com/Documents/Bout%20Report%202_RSA.pdf and then compare it again with the Interpol report:h
p://chichakli.com/Documents/Bout%20Report%203_Interpol.pdf Amazingly, theyare all copies of the S/2000/1225 with di
ff 
erent na
onali
es. The same goes to the UK, Belgium, France, etc., etc. As to Farah’s book, perhaps YOU can ask him to giveyou a contact to verify any of the stories he included there? Why don’t you? You are asking me, so do the same – then listen to his answer “it is all in the book” … thatwhat you will hear!2-
 
Now thinking about quizzing Peleman, it is simple, his integrity and the validity of everything he said in the his crea
on of Victor Bout and my alleged working forcan all be shown as a fabrica
on by ques
oning him about the UN report in which he invented Victor Bout – That is S/2000/1225.In his report Peleman stated in Sec
on 6 “all those named in the report were ques
oned and given the opportunity to respond”, I was men
oned there – big
me and Iwas not contacted nor given the opportunity to respond. Why would Peleman lie? The defense can ask Peleman “Did you or did you not contact Richard Chichakli? It isthat simple, and the answer will be “NO” and that is the end of the report because the follow up is “how much more did you lie about?” That is all the doubt needed; thecrea
on of Victor Bout was a made-up story, a crea
on used to cover up the real sanc
on busters in Angola; that is the 82 convicted in “Angola Gate” in France, the $867,000,000 in illegal arms sale and the more than 2,000
ights Peleman did not see as he was “detec
ng” the alleged 10 million in sales and 23
ight by VictorBout?????Be
er more, quiz Peleman “Why the name of Richard Chichakli disappeared from his follow-up report on Bout Organiza
on S/2001/ in 2001? Very Strange andunexplained disappearance.3-
 
Adam Szubin, the head of OFAC can be quizzed about the validity of his Six Billion Dollar claim regarding Victor Bout as he stated here:h
p://youtu.be/yDXkkIavCD4The defense can ask Adam Szubin whether six billion dollar worth of surplus weapon available or whether it is possible to buy-sell-move or transport sixbillion dollar of weapon, who can buy such sum. Perhaps the ques
on to Szubin “How much OFAC exaggerated the story of Victor Bout”Be
er, quiz Szubin “How come Richard Chichakli is not listed as being sanc
oned in the United States against Liberia sanc
ons? See table-4 on Page 29 of the UN reportS/2007/340 found here:h
p://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=S/2007/340. Certainly Richard Chichakli, a US ci
zen who was sanc
on on April 2005 and hisassets in the US were seized, and who clearly appears on OFAC list, he is not reported to be sanc
oned by the US government to the UN, and surely his assets are neitherlisted nor reported? Is that strange or what, or is that opens the gate on the government conspiracy and the countless viola
ons of the laws? I would love to hear whathe says!4-
 
Whitney Schneidman of the US State Dept. can also be quizzed about how much of what he tes
ed about it is true and how much of what the informa
ondelivered to him by Farah and alike is true, plausible, veri
able, or at least not enormously exaggerated. In his statement made to the BBC here he seems unsure:
почта
Письмо
«Re: Query from The New Yorker» — Chichakli R — 
 Яндек
...https://mail.yandex.ru/neo2/1 of 304-Mar-12 11:20 AM
 
 h
p://youtu.be/rP6oiJdAEI8- There are tons of doubt and lack of certainty because the informa
on received were fake and made to serve the bene
ts of those whomade it.There are dozens, if not hundreds of the US government o
cials who all will tes
fy that they were briefed by Farah, and they were made to believe by those whobrought Farah to tes
fy that “Farah is THE expert with most knowledge on Victor Bout, his ac
vi
es, his people and organiza
ons, and his methods to circumven
ngSanc
ons” this is the exact wording used by the DOJ and DEA o
cials in the introduc
on of Farah. They all know that Farah never saw Victor Bout, never worked with ornear Victor Bout, and never spoke to anyone who knew or worked with Victor Bout. As well as they know that Farah neither possesses any academic knowledge,
eldquali
ca
on, nor experience in the business of avia
on, transporta
on, aircra
opera
ons,
nance, terrorism, or even speak the language of those presumably involvedin these ac
vi
es. What a scam, just like asking a carpenter to explain a brain surgery, and I wonder how the jury will see that other than a conspiracy to manufacture acase.Your next ques
on, the hotel and the bill, naming any of those will expose informa
on, acts, and people. I will keep that closed for the
me being.Concerning “lie in what sense” in all senses:
·

Victor never worked for the US government, directly or indirectly
·

Victor never had, held, or owned any interest in Airbas, nor he ever controlled – directly or indirectly any of its opera
ons or ac
vi
es
·

Victor never received a penny or bene
ted
nancially from Airbas or its opera
on or contract with any US contractor or subcontractor
·

Dayan conspired with another person to create the story thinking “that will be a manifesta
on of a poli
cal case”For Victor
nance, since 1999 the opera
on of Metavia Airlines – the airline the US government and OFAC, etc. never men
ons because it will cause the collapse of the tale theyinvented about, the story of CFO,etc. which you personally is likely to have heard and
rmly believes without a doubt.Metavia was a scam played on Victor in 1998 by D. Ward, her daughter Mandy, and her Ex-husband. The airline was ir – was causing sever zero assets for which Victor paid $1.2million and it was hemorrhaging about 100K per month in losses – or apparent losses. On top of that add the 20% Deidre was taking from the revenue of AIRPASS and the out-of-control expense resul
ng from the opera
ons of Aircess Swaziland, Central Africa Airlines, Aircess Holdings – Gibraltar, TAN group, and of Course the massive payments toVictor’s partners such as Michael Herredine $20,000/month, Deidre Ward $25,000/m, Ronald De Smet $15,000/m, among the rest of them.Victor was never in control of any of his opera
on as you see in my report to him in 1998, and which was mirrored by his auditors and lawyers in South Africa. In 1998 I told Victora
er I reviewed his business for the possibility of going public that his opera
on will go bankrupt in a year if he does not control it and weed out his “worthless partners”. He didnot listen, and he became insolvent late 1999 as you can see in this internal memo:h
p://chichakli.net/bout's_
nancial.htmVictor hope of recovery or ge
ng back to business was evaporated by a
er the publishing of Peleman’s report in January of 2001 causing him to return to Russia, no money, noaircra
, and worse of all no friends as all of the old friends evaporated for one reason or the other. I called Victor and I promised to help him
nancially. I gave him money tofeed his family as you can see from the credit cards bills, to buy grocery and get medical care un
l he get back on his feet. As the 2002 started, Victor remodeling and renova
onbusiness started and with it he starts to make good money as the demand in Moscow for such service during that
me was unlimited.. In 2003 Victor also partnered with anotherRussian person and created a small factory for building facade – a type of decora
ve concrete
les or shingles, and by about mid 2003 my credit card was returned to me by Victorsta
ng “thank you for being the only one to stand by me, but I will not need this anymore.”Concerning the
ming and the experts, please consider the following:a-
 
I do have an open case with the US government and as such certain informa
on is required to be kept for the proper
meb-
 
The experts you men
oned are, in fact, experts and I certainly have had contact with them on numerous occasions concerning ma
ers related to Victor Bout;however, there are many other experts who are currently, and for the
rst
me ever, objec
vely examining what was established about him the Western media. Look wayfar East, that is where the truth shall come from. Most people in US and Western Europe are nothing but slaves busy in blindly pushing the wagon of the US governmentwherever their master dictates. It is corrup
on on top of corrup
on, in poli
cs, media, social life, and all are enslaved to
nancial powers.c-
 
Last, but not least, I really do not know you nor I am con
dent that you will be fair or objec
ve. Nothing against you, but I have been through the promise of “really honest wri
ng, and objec
ve repor
ng” way too many
mes before. It take special people to swim against the current, it takes courage and honor, it take resolveand perseverance, and most of all it takes the thinking of “quick buck” away. Perhaps you have all what it takes, and perhaps you are no be
er than Douglass Farah,Peter Landsman, or the others.Best regardsRichard Chichakli
03.01.2012, 21:05, "Nicholas Schmidle" <nickschmidle@gmail.com>:Thanks Richard,This is super helpful. A couple of further questions in response to your own replies.
The documents included official testimonies of experts/witnesses used by the US government to build its case against Victor Bout, documents related to the order initiating the government action against Victor Bout in 2002, documents exposing the falsity of certain details listed in the indictment of Victor Bout, and a document contains the name and address of rebutting witnesses capable of clarify the extent of the government/media conspiracy in the Bout matter. All were delivered to Dayan in the hotel - which bill he did not pay – along with a letter from me stating at the end of 4 pages of information “IF YOU DO NOT QUESTION THE TWO WITNESSES I MENTIONED HERE YOU WILL NEVER WIN THIS CASE” 
  And these two witnesses are Peleman and Farah? How would calling them have won the case? Just to play devil’s advocate,let’s assume (and I full agree with you that some/much of the reporting in “Merchant of Death” is suspect) they testified, whatdoes that show except sloppy research? Does it prove a conspiracy? And which hotel was Dayan staying in where he didn’t pay the bill? Who was left to pick up the tab?
Письмо
«Re: Query from The New Yorker» — Chichakli R — 
 Яндек
...https://mail.yandex.ru/neo2/2 of 304-Mar-12 11:20 AM

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->