Monday, December 12, 2005

Firedump: 3C-QRF

In past posts on TYR, we've often mentioned a BAC-111 aircraft registered 3C-QRF, serial number 61. This plane belongs to the curious Jetline International of Sharjah, who we've discussed quite a bit. lists 3C-QRF as operated by Jetline for San Air General Trading, Richard Chichakli's firm, which is now on the UN sanctions blacklist regarding Liberia. Now, unusually, we also know where 3C-QRF is: it's in storage at Baneasa airfield on the edge of Bucharest.

This would seem to make it a priority target. If we can't ground an aircraft that's in Europe and not flying much, we might as well give up. The question is supporting the link with San Air and illegal activities. The operator of says that there was a single report placing it with San Air; I'm trying to clarify the nature of the report. But it's well worth remembering that 3C-QRF has indeed been used to smuggle arms: check out the July, 2004 UN Security Council report on arms sanctions in the DR Congo, here (pdf). Not just that, it was the venue for a mysterious council-of-war between the Congolese vice-president Jean-Pierre Bemba, who is related by marriage to Sanjivan Ruprah, and supposedly Libyan emissaries (press reporting here, Romanian press cached here)

So much for the bullshit. Now for the brief. Here is the list of contacts for the Romanian embassy in the UK. The Political Section sounds like the right one, or perhaps Home Affairs? Don't copy-paste posts, and do not commit spam, but do make the case for 3C-QRF's investigation. US readers could try here and use the "reach us" tab - the website is terribly designed. French readers will be pleased to know that the defence attache's phone number is The Romanian government website is, strangely enough.


Alex said...

Hannah, do you have an email address so I can contact you off-blog?

Anonymous said...

Try me at

I look forward to hearing from you.
(Note spelling carefully!)

Alex said...

Richard, can you explain why so many people before that were apparently able to use you as a gatekeeper for Viktor?

Anonymous said...

It is very likely that I was viewed to be connected to Victor Bout for three reasons:
1-I was portrayed to be the man in charge of Bout's organization and the "specialist" providing the know-how in accordance with the invention of Johan Peleman in the UN report S/2000/1225 and which was proven wrong later in 2001 in accordance to UN report S/2001/1015;

2-The second reason would be the fact that I was the only person talking to the press about what I know regarding Victor Bout and his operation;

3-The third reason would be the knowledge I have about Bout's organization operation, and which I was exposed to by the virtue of running the Sharjah Free Zone in 1995 and 1996, and where Bout had to provide me with feasibility study and all the financial reports in order to be considered for Free Zone operation; and in 1998 during my short visit to South Africa to examine his company's ability to become publicly listed.

In my opinion these are the major reasons that caused some people to view me as an employee or associate of Victor Bout; however, and as I stated in 2003, Victor Bout to me was nothing more than a friend and brother, and whether he is guilty of any wrong-doing or innocent of what he is accused of, in my opinion is a matter to be determined in a court of law, where evidence can be seen.

I beg of you and of all those wanting to evaluate Victor Bout, to do so on basis other than what was reported by Johan Peleman. I say that because I am 200% sure that Johan Peleman lied in my case, and violated the rules of UN reporting which can be seen in Paragraph 6 of the same report where I was accused of being the manager of the day-to-day activities. Please read the UN report S/2000/1225, particularly paragraphs 6, 138, 139, and 140. And then question the integrity of the report and of those who wrote it given the fact that I was not asked, approached, contacted or given a chance to reply or provide evidence to the contrary.

Anonymous said...

On May 29th 2007 the Belgian Court had dropped all charges against Victor Bout and closed the case investigation for which stretched for about 10 years. Victor Bout no longer has any charges anywhere in the world by any government or authority. The court decision is posted at the web site of Richard Chichakli who has also been hurt by the hostile and undemocratic American Government for no legal causes. See the court decision for yourself here:

Now, considering that Victor Bout is not wanted by any authority on any charges, and considering that he has been acquitted, what is the turn that the case of Richard Chichakli will turn? Richard Chichakli is now being accused to have had relations with a …hmmm… innocent man Victor Bout?!

Alex said...

It is probably worth pointing out that the decision quoted states that the court closed the case "wegen verjaring" - because it ran out of time, rather than because they considered he was innocent.

kostenloser Counter