In 2002, the involvement of an Irish registered company with an international arms smuggling operation was revealed. The company, Balcombe Investments Limited, owned the aircraft operated by Renan Airways of Moldova to fly several shipments of illegal arms to Africa.

In December 2000, a United Nations report briefly mentioned suspicious dealings involving Renan Airways. A subsequent UN report on the arms embargo on neighbouring Liberia, confirmed those suspicions, identifying Renan Airways as having flown unauthorised cargos of arms from Moldova to Liberia. The report also detailed how Renan Airways had worked with another company, Central African Airlines - owned by former KGB officer Viktor Bout - to ship illegal arms to Sierra Leone.

Balcombe Investments was registered in Ireland in 1992 by a Dublin-based company formation agent on behalf of an Isle of Man company, Portman Consultants Ltd. Company formation agents are not generally aware of the activities of their client companies and would have had no knowledge of Balcombe’s arms trade link. The day after Balcombe Investments was formed it got a new set of directors based in the Channel Islands and employed by Portman Consultants. From then on Balcombe Investments was essentially a company of convenience which was used to register aircraft in Moldova.

When contacted by the Irish Examiner and asked about illegal arms sales to Africa, a Renan spokesman said: “Balcombe Investment have some aircraft. We transport cargo world-wide, they are the owners and we are the operators. It is an offshore company, so they acquire some aircraft and register it in the Republic of Moldova.”

I also read that until 1996, all papers and accounts for Balcombe Investments were presented to the company’s office by Portman Consultants in the Isle of Man. In 1996, Portman closed and its companies were transferred to a new company Portman Consultants International operating from Malta.

Who owned Portman Consultants and Portman Consultants International? What other companies does Portman own? And also what other companies does/did Donnelly, one of the Channel Island directors, have connections with?

Almost everyone is asking “why did Victor Bout go to Thailand?” and so far, all we have is a US-trumpeted answer alleging that he went to negotiate an Arms deal with the FARC. This story line came immediately after the neither unexpected nor planned intervention of Thai police into the 100% American plan to apprehend Victor and fly him out in an “Extraordinary rendition” type of operation. Victor Bout did not make it to the unmarked US government private jet waiting to “bag” him toward an unknown destination because of his name recognition, and because of one Captain in the Thai Tourist police. Andrew Smulian made that flight and ended-up in New York; however, instead of entering the Witness Protection Program, he was determined to know too much about the operation to be set free. Smulian agreement with the Bush administration was withdrawn and he ended up in the same ranks with Victor Bout. Recently, agents of the UK government interviewed Smulian, and there are plenty of whispers regarding his situation.

What we have on hand – for facts, is what the US alleged upon the news broke out on March 6, 2008 and these are the following:

Victor Bout was in Thailand to sell arms to FARC – according to the US indictment
The deal went through several countries, and several government participated in the operation – according to US indictment and the DEA’s agent in charge testimony on BBC public television
Victor made several trips to Thailand prior to this one – according to the testimony of the DEA’s agent in charge also in the same BBC interview

The analysis of these facts in view of what is being transpiring in Thailand as far as the court action concerns on the two cases involving Victor Bout provide an extraordinary contradictions between the alleged crime, the court action, and the defendant reaction. However, by placing the facts altogether, a plausible explanation supported by evidence can easily emerge.

Why Thailand?

The FARC is called a terrorist organization only by the United States and a handful of its allies, FARC is not considered a terrorist organization in Thailand according to the testimony of the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Thus a person who is supporting the FARC or dealing with FARC would not be committing a crime in Thailand. Victor Bout is not under any charges or indictment in Thailand and he is solely held for more than a year now because of a US indictment. That US indictment was issued after Victors arrest and the Thai government did not have any knowledge about it according to the Thai officials’ testimony given in the hearing.

Furthermore, it is an established fact now that Victor Bout was not arrested by the Thai police, nor was he under any indictment or outstanding warrant at the time of his arrest. That “False arrest” gave rise to Victor’s legal action against the Thai government and his imprisonment under Article 90 of the Thai law. The lawyers of the United States government lobbied very heavily to cause the dismissal or to stall the case filed by Victor under Article-90, the attempt for dismissal failed. Then the unsuccessfully attempted maneuvers to separate the US extradition case from the false arrest case, prior to finally trying to have a so-called “priority” assigned to the extradition case under a particular cooperation agreement between the US and Thailand, and that also did not materialize into any positive news for the US team. All of these political lobbying and legal maneuvering caused the unbelievable delay this case experienced. The Thai law allows the detention of persons not charged with a crime in Thailand for a maximum of 82 days. Thus, Victor Bout is being illegally detailed for more than one year.

The question of why Thailand, and why then in March of 2008 may have been answered in a written testimony provided to the Thai court by a person who seem to be impossible to dismiss, Richard Chichakli was the name of that person, a name that became synonymous with the Bout case.

Richard Chichakli is not an ordinary person, not by any account or available facts. Richard is the uncontested “most qualified account in the United States” according to the opinion of almost every Certified Public Accountant I interviewed. No other accountant in the United States, and probably the world holds the same qualifications and professional titles as Chichakli does. Chichakli is a state-licensed Certified Public Accountant in two US states and he managed three public accounting practices in Texas in Plano, Richardson, and Grand Prairie, in addition to one in Missouri. He also taught in US colleges in Collin County and Dallas County, Texas. Chichakli’s public military records are “made-up” without a question, evident by the record itself and here is why:

Richard’s VA and military records showing that he is a “disabled Veteran” receiving (20%) disability pay for service-connected injury received overseas “the desert syndrome”, it also indicate that he received the “Good Conduct” medal, a “Driver Badge”, “two campaign stars” and the “Southwest Asia” medal. The records also shows that he attended schools for two NCO leadership training, Air assault and Airborne Training, DLI Language School training, and the FAA school for Air Traffic Control training, in addition to his basic, AIT, and specialized Linguist identifier and MOS trainings, and several other schools and training in many different states around the US.

What does all of that mean? The answer is simple:

The records indicates that Richard total service is 30 month, that is two years and half which does not add-up even to the number of days he should have spent in military schools and training without serving a day of active duty!

Thus, no one out of Richard’s old colleagues seemed to forget the “older than usual” soldier who served on the US-elite “Rapid Deployment Forces” and who was serving with them in many places including Ft. Rucker, Ft. Huachuca, Ft. Bragg, and Ft. Campbell among many other military installations. Every person knew Richard Chichakli is still remembering him very clearly, here is some of what you may hear about Richard, “he spoke funny and looked like a spy”, he “smoked the younger kids on runs and PT, he was a hard-core Huwaa”, “he was a strange person - he use to give himself a hair cut every third day and never went to a barber”, “we use to call him DOC, he was a doctor of something”, “he had a hot temper but you would love to see him running the tower in high traffic, all pilots knew him - he sounded funny”, and “People hated him, he was smarter than all of them and made’em look bad, specially Mundt and Pritchet – but Masselli; the first sergeant loved him, I think he protected him a lot from getting hurt.”

There are hundreds of stories, and whatever they say, they all say one thing – Richard Chichakli was on active duty for several years, so why his military records were manipulated? The Good Conduct medal require a minimum of 36-month of service, the driver badge is given for 10,000 miles of accident-free driving, the SWA middle require service in SW Asia, the campaign stars require participating in military campaigns, the language schools and the Military Occupation Specialty schools require about 4-month each – multiply that by the number of MOSs held by Richard and the number of language certifications he received according to his official military records. Thus, and strikingly Richard Chichakli’s records shows less than 30 month of service, no overseas service, no military campaign service, nothing consistent with the records itself?

Out of the previous it is easy to conclude:

the information we were present with concerning Richard’s relation to Victor by the UN report S/2000/1225 is false and groundless. Chichakli’s site alleges that the report was “intentionally falsified by the preparer Johan Peleman, a Belgian UN contractor”, and that contractor did not contact Richard as he claims in the said UN report. Peleman refused to comment about the implausible presentation he made in the UN report regarding the alleged Richard 10-years employment of Richard with Bout, and he refuse to answer why he did not contact Richard as he alleged to have done.

OFAC’s allegation against Richard; which is based upon the aforementioned UN report as seen in the UN sanction resolutions is also false. Therefore, what was published by the US government directly or via the “approved media channels” regarding the cause of action against Chichakli is mere propaganda aimed to conceal the real cause of action. It is fact that Richard Chichakli is currently not, and never was charged, indicted, or convicted in connection with the bout case or other and he is not, nor ever was a fugitive as we see in “certain media” from time to time. The most important of all, Richard is very-likely know or aware of certain sensitive information related to Victor Bout and his operation; however, such information is highly damning to the US government to the point where the mighty US government can’t neither go after him, nor relief him, and the most important.

Richard could have divulged some of that information he possess regarding Victor case to the Thai court, causing the court to admit his statement into the record while dismissing all other statements submitted by the US lawyers and Victor lawyers.

What could be the real reason for Victor’s visit to Thailand?

According to the statements given in court by the US authorities including the DEA and DOJ, Victor have visited Thailand several times prior to his arrest. The automatic questions here, for what reason and why was not he arrested then?

We all know that Victor Bout was allegedly working for the US government as it was acknowledged by our esteemed colleague “Douglas Farah” and who is the “defacto” US government recognized authority on Victor Bout evidenced by being called to testify on many occasion before the FBI and before congress about Victor and his operations, and also as being acknowledged by hundreds of politicians, scholars, and reporters.

If Victor was working for the US government for a fact, why don’t we consider the possibility that he was visiting Thailand on orders by his American bosses to receive instructions, getting paid for services, or do whatever he does for the US government, and as he did several time before “in Thailand” according to the US official statement.

It might be the very fact that Victor Bout was in Thailand to do service to the US government as they acknowledged he did, but at this point George Bush who is leaving office wanted to cover his tracks by eliminating Victor. This is very plausible considering:

The Thai authorities were not notified or informed about the US government plan, thus, giving rise later to the false arrest case.

Victor have travelled to Thailand on several occasions before, fully knowing that Thailand is more or less, controlled by the US and that the US agents roam freely in Thailand

The US government who alleged to have had Victor red-handed and possessed all the needed evidence have failed to gain extradition after 14 months of courts’ hearings

The US government failed to show any evidence in connection with the alleged charges against Bout; however, trumpeting the same in the media and through propaganda vectors

Then, the statement of Chichakli which is said to consist of 8 pages and more than 250 pages of supporting document. The statement said to have provided critical information related to a 2004 dated problem of “political nature” between Victor and the Bush administration and possibly evidence proving that Victor Bout is an agent acting on behalf of the US government on official duty in Thailand.

http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=13875176&PageNum=0

Are there any details about the content of that affidavit?