Re: Query from The New Yorker Chichakli R ...

https://mail.yandex.ru/neo2/

Re: Query from The New Yorker

Chichakli R 4 . 07:42 Nicholas Schmidle

Response_NYT.doc 44
Good day Farah 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 oning a couple of key government employee including Adam Szubin, ad Whitney Schneider would not be bad either, and here is how: 1Douglas 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, and

the 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 Congressional commi 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 these tes 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 here h 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 prosecutor cannot excluded due to its relevancy. Farah lied before congress, and he cannot arm 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 cannot avoid 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 is true, 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, who worked with Bouts 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 the intelligence and law enforcement involved, and certainly how to ramp it up through an organized media network in press and internet. Copies of email between Farah and 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 realize that 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 alleged arms 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 same source 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 and compare them, they all look exactly as a copy of Pelemans UN report S/2000/1225 a full copy is here: h p://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=S/2000/1225 Star ng in the United States, the rst report about Victor Bout was issued by the ATF, the classied report found here: h p://chichakli.com/Documents /Bout%20Report%201_ATF.pdf compare it with another conden 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, they are all copies of the S/2000/1225 with dierent na onali es. The same goes to the UK, Belgium, France, etc., etc. As to Farahs book, perhaps YOU can ask him to give you a contact to verify any of the stories he included there? Why dont you? You are asking me, so do the same then listen to his answer it is all in the book that what you will hear! 2Now 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 for

can 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 I was 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 is that 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; the crea 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 Victor Bout????? 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 and unexplained disappearance. 3Adam 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

/yDXkkIavCD4 The 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 six billion 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 report S/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 his assets 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 neither listed 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 what he says! 4Whitney 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 on

delivered to him by Farah and alike is true, plausible, veriable, or at least not enormously exaggerated. In his statement made to the BBC here he seems unsure:

1 of 3

04-Mar-12 11:20 AM

 Re: Query from The New Yorker Chichakli R ...

https://mail.yandex.ru/neo2/

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 benets of those who made it. There are dozens, if not hundreds of the US government ocials who all will tes fy that they were briefed by Farah, and they were made to believe by those who brought 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 ng Sanc ons this is the exact wording used by the DOJ and DEA ocials in the introduc on of Farah. They all know that Farah never saw Victor Bout, never worked with or near 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, eld qualica on, nor experience in the business of avia on, transporta on, aircra opera ons, nance, terrorism, or even speak the language of those presumably involved in 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 a case. 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 beneted 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 they invented 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 $1.2 million 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-ofcontrol expense resul ng from the opera ons of Aircess Swaziland, Central Africa Airlines, Aircess Holdings Gibraltar, TAN group, and of Course the massive payments to Victors 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 Victor a 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 did not listen, and he became insolvent late 1999 as you can see in this internal memo: h p://chichakli.net/bout's_nancial.htm Victor hope of recovery or ge ng back to business was evaporated by a er the publishing of Pelemans report in January of 2001 causing him to return to Russia, no money, no aircra , 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 to feed 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 on business 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 another Russian 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 Victor sta 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: abI do have an open case with the US government and as such certain informa on is required to be kept for the proper me 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 way far 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 government wherever 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. cLast, but not least, I really do not know you nor I am condent 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 resolve and 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 regards Richard 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 devils advocate, lets assume (and I full agree with you that some/much of the reporting in Merchant of Death is suspect) they testified, what does that show except sloppy research? Does it prove a conspiracy? And which hotel was Dayan staying in where he didnt pay the bill? Who was left to pick up the tab?

2 of 3

04-Mar-12 11:20 AM

 Re: Query from The New Yorker Chichakli R ...

https://mail.yandex.ru/neo2/

Other nice witnesses, how about the head of OFAC Adam Szubin he claimed to have caused Victor a loss of 6 Billion dollars in arm sales; perhaps he can explain that there are way too many zeros in the number he is talking about as you can see him say it on youtube. Just look at the number 6,000,000,000.00 then try to tell the jury from where can a person buy or to whom can sell that amount, tell the jury that Russia sold 3.7 billion, the US 5.9 billion, and Victor Bout was denied 6 billion How much Victor Bout was selling in total if 6 billion were busted??? I wonder if there is a doubt about what the Government says to be true or claims to have done. I wonder if there is any credibility to what the US government say when you ask OFAC why Richard Chichakli is not listed as a Frozen person in the United States under Liberia Sanctions. Read my OFAC sanctions, and then read the UN list of persons sanctioned. I am not sanctioned in the US according to the UN list and I do not have any assets frozen in the US. Would you think any of that may create a doubt concerning what the US government is doing or saying, perhaps a credibility issue! No doubt that 6 billion figure seems a little, well, inflated. Can you point me to the Szubin youtube video where he says about the 6 billion? The only reference to 6 billion that Ive seen is in an email that Smulian sent. Dayan filed with court a motion stating Victor Bout worked for the US government in IRAQ delivering cargo. This is a lie, he knows it was a lie, and he conspired with certain person prior to filing the motion and with the prosecutor after he filed it. It was a lie in the sense that it wasnt Viktors company, but rather your and Sergeis company? Victor was broke in 2000, got back on his feet about 2003, and yes he does not have nor can he afford paying $750,000 in defense cost. OFAC did nothing to Victor Bout, nor it has any sanctions that affected any of his business, nor had it ever seized or frozen a single dollar that belongs to him, period. What is frozen by OFAC is the house I bought when Victor was in dipper, the accounting practice I built on the business of 500 American clients in the US, and the real estate I bought from VA, HUD, and foreclosure auctions. OFAC counting on you and those like you not to question anything they say and certainly they are safe in concealing the truth and stifling the issues as such. I say that because I have not seen anyone yet to question OFACs six Billion Dollar story despite the obvious. What led Viktor to going broke in 2000? And what led to him getting back on his feet in 2003?

Furthermore, I said all I know about Victor Finances on my website and in several article, please try to read all the answers to your questions there. Thanks, your website is a fantastic resource. That said, theres so much information on there that if you could point me to the relevant sections/documents, Id be most grateful.

Well, that is to be told in the right time. This is not the right time to speak, but I assure you to be among the first to know when I decide to blow the lid. As you are fully aware this may change everything, including possible retrial for Victor and disbarment of Dayan - at least. I would make the pitch that this would be the right time to speak, seeing as how the piece Im writing about Viktor will dwarf anything else written about him in terms of exposure. If there is information you want to reach a wide audience, then I think this would be a great opportunity. All what you asking for is available; however, at this point of time there is a group of experts whom are examining this matter with true independence, impartiality, and objectivity that is true experts rather than the governments proclaimed ones, and real objective examination rather than the politically-motivated subjective one. Therefore, I would not be able to support your request at this point because I am delivering what I have to them only exclusively because they happened to be the only group who are willing to put the efforts and resources to dig truth and explore beyond what the media been regurgitating since the story of Victor Bout became the source of income and fame to those who know how to manipulate the media. I am sorry that I have to decline, but I hope that you understand the situation. Thanks, similar to my previous answer, I both do and dont understand. I assume the experts youre referring to are Peter Danssaert and Brian Thomas? Ive spoke to both of them and they are certainly experts in the field and doing great work. I found my conversations with them super helpful and will be using much of what theyve shared in the piece. But, as mentioned above, any further documents that youre willing to share will get far, far wider exposure in a piece in The New Yorker than in a more specialized report. Would you potentially re-consider? Thanks again! Best, Nicholas

3 of 3

04-Mar-12 11:20 AM