BAGHDAD, Iraq — U.S. officials believe they have "rock solid" evidence that Iraqi Governing Council member Ahmad Chalabi (search), once a darling of the American government, passed secrets to Iran, Fox News has learned."There is no need for an investigation because we're quite certain he did it," one senior Bush administration official said.
The official first described the evidence against Chalabi as "pretty solid" and then characterized it as "rock solid."
U.S. officials won't describe the information Chalabi's alleged to have passed to Iran or how he's supposed to have obtained it, but they said he does not have the clearance to possess American classified information.
According to Reuters, however, this is not what yesterday's raid was all about.
An Iraqi judge, Hassan Muathin, said the raid was carried out under an arrest warrant for several men wanted for stealing state-owned vehicles, but Chalabi accused U.S.-led authorities running Iraq of a "targeted attack" against him.Squads of soldiers and police sealed off the neighborhood around the headquarters of the Iraqi National Congress (INC) and a nearby house used by Chalabi, removing computers, files, a copy of the Koran and other personal items, Chalabi said.
UPDATE: Michael Rubin of the American Enterpise Institute sees it this way:
On May 20, U.S. forces raided the home and office of Iraqi National Congress leader Ahmad Chalabi. At a press conference following the operation, Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) spokesman Dan Senor told assembled journalists that U.S. forces did not participate. To be kind, Senor appeared to misspeak. There was a non-Iraqi American citizen in Chalabi's house at the time of the raid. As armed men pointed guns at Chalabi's head, the U.S. citizen demanded to know who was in charge. A number of heavily armed Americans (judging by language and accent) in civilian clothes, upon learning of the presence of a non-Iraqi witness, scurried outside and waited in U.S. military humvees while Iraqis searched Chalabi's house.Those conducting the raid stole a Chalabi family Koran, smashed a portrait of Chalabi's father, and destroyed computers and family heirlooms. Chalabi's name did not appear on the warrant they presented. Iraqi police conducting the raid under American supervision sheepishly apologized in Arabic; they did not know they were to target Chalabi.
Iraqis--fans and foes of Chalabi alike--saw the raid as another sign of the contempt the CPA shows for ordinary Iraqis. By sending forces to break into Chalabi's house and then by holding a Governing Council member at gunpoint, Bremer sought to humiliate Chalabi. Bremer has not learned from the Abu Ghraib scandal. Humiliation backfires.
Simultaneously, the inside-the-beltway rumor mongering made clear both the irrational contempt and ignorance that many professional pundits feel for any proponent of Arab democracy. Those academics, pundits, and commentators who have never met Chalabi reserve for him the greatest vitriol.
And, via LGF, Michael Ledeen, also of the American Enterprise Institute, spells it out further:
Yet the State Department's and the CIA's Middle East gangs have hated him and fought him for more than a decade, because he is independent and while he is happy to work with them, he will not work for them.
Sounds to like CIA may have had some very good reasons to be leery of working with Chalabi, even though he was the Pentagon's boy.
This ought to turn out to be very interesting.
Roger that, Hank. I suspect that he may have been the source of some bad intel before the war, too.
I Quite agree there. One has to wonder if the info they find will give the more-moderate movements in Iran fuel to push for reforms. Once can hope it is Very embarrasing to the government of Iran....
But just Wait for the Democrats spin on this. 'What did Bush know, and when did he know it, and why didn't he Do something about it?'
Dr. Ahmad Chalabi is a Shi'a Muslim. He is the son of a wealthy banking family whose grandfather, father and brother held prominent posts in Iraqi governments until Saddam Hussein's Baath Party seized power in 1968. He has not lived in Iraq since 1956, apart from a period organizing resistance in the Kurdish north in the mid-1990s. Chalabi was a math professor at the American University in Beirut until 1977. His main political support came from the US Congress, the Pentagon and parts of the CIA. The US State Department does not trust him and has raised questions about Iraqi National Congress's accounting practices. In 1995 he organized an uprising in the Northern Iraq, which was called off by the CIA at the crucial moment, and which subsequently led to the deaths of thousands of INC members. A highly controversial figure, he is charismatic and determined, though many also regard him as domineering. Since he left Jordan, Chalabi has resided in London and he is now a British citizen.
http://www.iraqinews.com/people_chalabi.shtml
Tests Confirm Sarin in Iraqi Artillery Shell
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
By Liza Porteus
NEW YORK — Tests on an artillery shell that blew up in Iraq on Saturday confirm that it did contain an estimated three or four liters of the deadly nerve agent sarin (search), Defense Department officials told Fox News Tuesday.
The artillery shell was being used as an improvised roadside bomb, the U.S. military said Monday. The 155-mm shell exploded before it could be rendered inoperable, and two U.S. soldiers were treated for minor exposure to the nerve agent.
Three liters is about three-quarters of a gallon; four liters is a little more than a gallon.
There are dots Just think out of the box.
Part of the American Trib
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and All who fight with her give them Strength and Courage to stay the Course to Victory Amen
"Chalabi, however, is hardly baggage-free. In 1992, the Jordanian government convicted him in absentia for embezzlement and fraud and sentenced him to 22 years of hard labor. The charges stem from the demise of the Petra Bank, which Chalabi founded in 1977 and ran until it collapsed in 1989. At its peak, the bank was Jordan's third largest. "
he's a snake who wants to be ruler of iraq
Are you suggest we push him over the border? Sounds fair. He does his time as a convicted criminal, and we have one less Iranian sympathizer in Iraq. Peachy.
The liberal press can't decide which way to spin.
The BBC is not carrying this story other than his home invasion. Of course the BBC never did carry even one hint of an article regardibng the nerve gas in the improvised explosive, and still havent.
Fox news ran the article with a framed picture of Chalabi laying on the floor. Then CNN smashed the glass on the picture frame (to show victimization and to stage news instead of report it) and ran with that picture.
Reuters is down playing this.
But then check out the other Reuters article "Spain Removes final troops to snub Bush". I though Spain was removing troops because they did not support the was? The reporters in this article, obviously, reveal their personal beliefs and agenda in the first sentance but no where in the article does it say anything from the Spainards about a snub of Bush. The reporters are obviously uninformed that the Spainards have increased their presence in Afgan.
This liberal press is really needing to be put in the spotlight.
If there are no ethics in reporting, then why have media.
These morons need to report fact not opinion.
The press makes me want to throw up....They are hellbent on defeating "W". They take us all for a bunch of dopes. Chalibi looks like a snake. I never trusted him and am not surprized by this latest development. Send him to Jordan where they already have the goods on him.
I gotta quit watching the news as it makes me sooooooo upset at the reporting of the "prison abuse scandal" while playing the photos of said "scandal" while ignoring the be-heading of Berg. They should be playing the video of his be-heading too.
what needs to happen to chalabi is we need to allow the jordanians to snatch him and take him back to jordan to serve his sentence in jail.
Joseph...is that really you?.....I just checked and I'm not running a fever, yet you and I agree on this Chalabi issue.....Miracles never cease.....
About taqiyya, the act of lying for and about Islam, read here:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=178
I just saw the prisoner abuse video clip. I'm still reeling from the way that American gave the prisoner a light cuff on the cheek.
hmmm...
Tom and Alaska and the rest -
While I definately agree with you guys that the media has not given enough coverage to the sarin being found (they should certainly be covering it a lot more than they should be covering Paris Hilton), I think you need to put it in perspective - what's the bigger story here? 4 liters of sarin does not alone vindicate the 800 lives and 87 billion dollar investment America has put in this war (sure there might be more, but it can't be the huge stockpiles we were talking about prewar), not to mention that now powell and other administration officials have been hinting themselves that we will leave if the new iraqi government asks us to (so much for establishing a democracy)...
compare that with the chalabi story - don't you think it's pretty significant that our #1 man to bring democracy to iraq, a huge reason we went to war in the first place (based on his "intel"), a man that has been the darling of Cheney and a variety of other Bush administration officials, a man that sat behind Laura Bush at the state of the union, is a complete fraud? Doesn't it piss you guys off a bit that our leaders were completely duped.. doesn't it make you think that maybe Chalabi was just telling them what they wanted to hear prewar? We knew he was a sketchy character based on his dealings with Jordan -- why are you directing anger just at him and not at our officials that were fooled? And isn't that probably a bigger story than 4 liters of sarin?
And as for the Berg video - what more can really be covered? Short of playing the video (which would never happen), how much more is there to cover about him? He was an idealist, a hero, someone who put his money where his mouth is, and he was murdered by fundamentalists. Are we going to get the bastards - hopefully... what more needs saying?
The reason the prisoner abuse story is getting so much play here is that the government is being extremely stupid by not releasing everything at once, allowing instead for this trickling down of pics to occur -- they should have treated like a bandaid - one swipe and that's it - instead of this continuous damage.
As for the media being liberal (I never thought I'd see foxnews and liberal in the same sentence) - you guys have heard about Sinclair Broadcasting Group, right? And what about Disney and the Michael Moore movie (remember when we assumed the right to freespeech just because we're American... those were the days) -- these are issues you should be concerned with regardless of your political views.
Anyway, I personally feel that the truth lies somewhere between Al Franken and Bill O'Reily -- but honestly, I feel like some of you need to open your eyes to what's really going on... it's the same media that sold this war to the nation over a year ago - it hasn't changed. The situation has.
And Crest - regarding your "cuff on the cheek" comment -- maybe you did miss the human pyramid picture, the video of a man getting a dog sicced on him, and the soldiers posing next to a corpse with a thumbs-up sign... maybe that's what should make you reel -- yes, it's true, maybe those prisoners had it coming to them (geneva conventions be damned), and yes our military in general is highly professional and should make us all proud to be Americans, but if you can't see the fact that what those soldiers did in those prisons is directly going to one day cost the lives of innocent American civillians in the future... well, you're just dense I suppose. Turn down the Rush Limbaugh and try doing some thinking on your own for a change.
Sorry for the book, just my two cents...
hmmm...
Tom and Alaska and the rest -
While I definately agree with you guys that the media has not given enough coverage to the sarin being found (they should certainly be covering it a lot more than they should be covering Paris Hilton), I think you need to put it in perspective - what's the bigger story here? 4 liters of sarin does not alone vindicate the 800 lives and 87 billion dollar investment America has put in this war (sure there might be more, but it can't be the huge stockpiles we were talking about prewar), not to mention that now powell and other administration officials have been hinting themselves that we will leave if the new iraqi government asks us to (so much for establishing a democracy)...
compare that with the chalabi story - don't you think it's pretty significant that our #1 man to bring democracy to iraq, a huge reason we went to war in the first place (based on his "intel"), a man that has been the darling of Cheney and a variety of other Bush administration officials, a man that sat behind Laura Bush at the state of the union, is a complete fraud? Doesn't it piss you guys off a bit that our leaders were completely duped.. doesn't it make you think that maybe Chalabi was just telling them what they wanted to hear prewar? We knew he was a sketchy character based on his dealings with Jordan -- why are you directing anger just at him and not at our officials that were fooled? And isn't that probably a bigger story than 4 liters of sarin?
And as for the Berg video - what more can really be covered? Short of playing the video (which would never happen), how much more is there to cover about him? He was an idealist, a hero, someone who put his money where his mouth is, and he was murdered by fundamentalists. Are we going to get the bastards - hopefully... what more needs saying?
The reason the prisoner abuse story is getting so much play here is that the government is being extremely stupid by not releasing everything at once, allowing instead for this trickling down of pics to occur -- they should have treated like a bandaid - one swipe and that's it - instead of this continuous damage.
As for the media being liberal (I never thought I'd see foxnews and liberal in the same sentence) - you guys have heard about Sinclair Broadcasting Group, right? And what about Disney and the Michael Moore movie (remember when we assumed the right to freespeech just because we're American... those were the days) -- these are issues you should be concerned with regardless of your political views.
Anyway, I personally feel that the truth lies somewhere between Al Franken and Bill O'Reily -- but honestly, I feel like some of you need to open your eyes to what's really going on... it's the same media that sold this war to the nation over a year ago - it hasn't changed. The situation has.
And Crest - regarding your "cuff on the cheek" comment -- maybe you did miss the human pyramid picture, the video of a man getting a dog sicced on him, and the soldiers posing next to a corpse with a thumbs-up sign... maybe that's what should make you reel -- yes, it's true, maybe those prisoners had it coming to them (geneva conventions be damned), and yes our military in general is highly professional and should make us all proud to be Americans, but if you can't see the fact that what those soldiers did in those prisons is directly going to one day cost the lives of innocent American civillians in the future... well, you're just dense I suppose. Turn down the Rush Limbaugh and try doing some thinking on your own for a change.
Sorry for the book, just my two cents...
Manny~ I shall let the more eloquent speak on what you relate above... all I will say about Chalabi, it wasn't the first time in history, it won't be the last time in history, and it has been going on since history has been a matter of record.
In the end, I think we shall Still be proved right on all counts.
And Rush is only right 80% of the time in my book. :P
Chalabi's insiders gave us a lot of the intel used in powell's UN speech including the mobile weapons labs. I read Chalabi backtracking somewhere yesterday saying that no one mentioned weapons labs merely, mobile biological labs.
I am surprised that the loony left isn't going more nuts over this. If they want to get bush out I think this might be their running item. The american people at large couldn't care less about prisoner abuse. Most people will spout the rhetoric about it but they don't have any -emotion- behind it. On the other hand, the Pentagon's boy being a liar, an Iranian double-agent, and a turncoat could have serious implications for the electability of the current admin.
The Decadent West made an interesting connection between Chalabi's arrest and the UN oil for food scandal.
We're skeptical about the Iran thing. Everything this administration says must be filtered at least three times before you can believe it. It's the cheating husband syndrome.
During the European dark ages, Roman and Greek learning was lost. The Islamic empire, which reached as far west as Spain, recovered this knowledge and preserved it but also expanded on it. Muslims made contributions to all the sciences - try doing complex sums with Roman numerals rather than the Arabic numerals we're all used to.
Jews and Christians, although allowed to live in Spain under their Moorish rulers, had to pay the Jizya tax ("they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection").
Around the 11th century, divisions in the Islamic empire brought on repression; the closure of freethinking schools, and dissent was outlawed.
After the Christians re-took Spain, Muslims were forced to convert to Christianity, and were treated miserably.
The scientific and philosophical texts in Spain were translated and absorbed by the rest of Europe. In particular, Aristotle's ideas of rational thought proved decisive in breaking the Church/State link and bringing about the Renaissance. This crucial break was never made in Muslim societies. They sank into their Dark Age of the Jihad-bots.
MUSLIMS, while you've been cringing in your mosques, the West has built a glittering civilisation, which proudly rings out its protection of human liberties. You curse it but swarm in your millions to supp its golden honey.
MUSLIMS, this is what you've lost, as your prophet said:
"the ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr."
We in the West tend to forget the Inquisition, the pogroms, and the witch burning of our past. Muslims, you should not forget them either. Such an anti-Gog, with technology at its command, can easily knock down your barren, sand societies and stamp them out of history forever.
But let's put the beast and the darkness away and live in learning's light!!!
Bill Blake
Bill Blake,
You can start the learning by saying Hindu numerals instead of Arab numerals. The Hindus were there first. Arab loving doesn't get better that this - attributing everything the Hindus did
to the 'glorious ' Islamic civilisation.
Chalabi is yet another example of the willingness of Muslims to put their differences with other Muslims aside in an effort to cheat, sneak, lie, and steal. This S.O.B. owes the American taxpayers millions, so I'll merely settle for his death, as long as it's slow.
E.D. Hill from Fox News said that she had asked Chalabi or someone affiliated with him where the 340K a month was going and was told it was none of her business.
Since it's our tax dollars paying for this skunk, it is our business, down to the last penny, and his cocky attitude is typical of Islamic arrogance.
Trust is not in their vocabulary, they only understand dominance. The sooner this is learned, the sooner we can finish our job, and get out of that hellhole. Enough with the tap dancing around shrines and mosks.
Destroy what's in the path and let's move on. Syria and Iran obviously want to push our buttons, and guided missles should be our unconditional response.
I have given you three sides of the box! Come on I know you are smart?
the DOD paid chilabi but he was a State man cause the state can not fund a military unit.
Look at the sarin and the threats that chailabi made during his press confrence. Then look at his histroy and you will find the answer? He was a bad man but we pay his group which had given alot of info that stopped the min. he touched down in Iraq and was run out of the south ran to Iran. Why did Bremmer not run him out of Iraq when he said that we would not put up with any funny business? Is bremmer tied to the oil for food remember he is State Look at the CIA and Billy boy? China? Russa? the libs are not going to like what is coming?
Now think out of the box?
Part of the American Tribe
God Bless the USA and her fighting Forces and All who Fight with her give them Strength and Courage to stay the course to Victory Amen
PS Manny study history there have always been spys [bad people] people that play both sides. Nothing to be happy about. Guess you had no balls to look at the Berg video where they cut the mans head off then showed their prize to the world I guess you think someone will die to protect your ass well think again we will turn you over to the monsters don't have pat. for your kind any more!!!!! We remember 9/11 this is war.
Catherine -
sweetheart... I really came onto this board because I thought I could have an intelligent, fact-based conversation with people who might have different view-points than me -- and have my horizons broadened (and who knows, maybe even broaden somebody elses horizons) in the process.
I can see, however, that you are not interested in pursuing an exchange of ideas -- that is because you are a hate-mongering twit, and not capable of contributing anything to a conversation other than Limbaugh-approved catchphrases and dick-jokes.
in terms of not having patience "for my kind" - by which you can only mean rational people wanting to engage in rational conversation - I don't think it's patience you lack, but rather intelligence and decency.
As far as the Berg video which I didn't have "the balls" to watch (you must have been a poet in a former life), and how I am not "remembering 9/11" because I am critical of this ill-conceived war - let me just say that the iraq war has done nothing to further the cause of the American people - by the looks of it, no democracy will be established in Iraq (this is according to what powell just said), we have not won over any hearts and minds, and we have helped our enemies gain new allies. The United States is not any safer for these efforts. Worst of all, we have significantly hurt the war on terror, which can ultimately only be won on a law-enforcement level. This has nothing to do with my "balls" or patriotism. I'm willing to look at the facts and make up my own mind. I won't ever forget 9/11, but I realise that those bastards didn't crash planes into the WTC because they were "jealous of our freedom" or whatever catch phrase GeorgeBush/SeanHannity would have you believe. Osama crashed these planes into the WTC because America had bases in Saudi Arabia from the first gulf war, and the presence of us "infidels" enraged him. Am I saying we pull out of everywhere and play dead? Of course not - but I am saying that regardless of how many of our soldiers die and how much money we spend in iraq, we will be no closer to bringing those responsible for 9/11 to justice, and no closer to building a safer United States for all of us to live in. Even if you don't agree with me, I wish you had "the balls" to try to debate with actual facts. if it's endless war with no benefit to the United States you want, I'll be more than happy to have you let your children fight it and your tax-dollars pay for it.
I'm a second generation American - my father came here with $100 in his pocket as an immigrant, and now I am in medical school studying to be a doctor -- and I will be doing more good for people in one single day than you will ever do in your entire lifetime of ignorance. There aren't any other countries in the world where what my father did would be possible, and as a result I love this country more than you could possibly ever understand. Don't you dare question my patriotism just because I ask questions -- the way I see it, you should leave MY country (that's right, and I'm only second generation and I'm brown - how do you like that for balls!), because frankly, I think we'd be a lot better off without you.
Sorry for the rant - but lady, you royally piss me off.
Proud to be an American,
Manny
Sounds to me like Chalabi was playing both ends against the middle. If Saddam had won or at least stayed in power he would have been in favor for passing intel. In post war Iraq he was seen as an American supporter. The Jihadis see him as giving false info which embarassed and discredited the American administration. Any way you play it, he was going to win.
Muslims,
Allan is satan. Muslims are evil or whores of allah. Isalm is evil. Mohamamed is a vile sick pig burning in hell. Mecca, Medina, and the dome of the rock will be crushed. Jesus will rule, reza. muslims will all burn in hell now and forever. e.g. i use the koran as tiolet paper. Why not? I want to live free. May God Bless and Keep US always. Urban II
Manny~ Stick with us though, hey?
3rd Gen here :)
After thinking about this more, there's more to this than has been let on about. If Chalabi is an Iranian agent, why would they swoop down on him now? Wouldn't it be better to flip him (doesn't look too difficult) and use him for disinformation/intelligence vis a vis Iran?
I don't know, this was done very publicly for a reason, and I'm just really having a hard time figuring out what that reason is.
Hank~ that may be Exactly why they worked with him all this time. Or not. Only time will tell.
U.S.-arrest rebel cleric's supports in N.Iraq Reuters
Part of the American Tribe
God Bless the USA and her Fight Forces and All who Fight with her give them Strength and Courage to stay the course to Victory Amen
Manny:
Ease up on Catherine. She is an affectionately valued "regular" here, and even though she and others of a different political persuasion than you may "royally piss you off", you are falling into the same trap that most newbies and many regulars fall into frequently - focusing on and squabbling over diverse political ideologies instead of focusing on the real threat - Islam. We are here because we are anti-Jihad, and anti-Islamist (except, of course, for the occasional stray Muslim who wants to convert us - some with words, some by force if words won't work). You may not agree with Catherine's ideas, but I'll wager that she would put her own life on the line to save the likes of you; (sorry to speak for you, Catherine) she would kill and die to preserve freedom and democracy - to her, you are "part of the American tribe".
Also, it's inappropriate to denigrate people for their perceived level of education, etc. Many who post here are not native English speakers, and many may not be as educated or articluate as you. Many just make a lot of typos! That does not mean that they are less intelligent than you or any less entitled than you to express their opinion on this forum and everywhere else in this great country.
Ad hominem attacks really contribute nothing to this forum; a reasoned and rational exchange of ideas does. And yes, that is what we are constantly striving for here, despite getting bogged down in less-important (when you consider the Greater Threat that we all face) political in-fighting. Try not to "take the bait", and when you do, try not to respond in kind.
We are proud to have you as a fellow American - being "brown" is so completely immaterial that I was surprised when you mentioned it. We here are concerned with preserving the greatest civilization on the face of the Earth, freedom, democracy, and all that they entail; our very way of life. Please join us in that fight. Expect some basic negative traits of human nature along the way - you'll see those exhibited here more than most of us would like. But we're still trying, every day, and we won't give up - ever.
I think it is folly to go back to treating Islamic Terrorism as a mere law enforcement issue. I think it calls for both moral and, if need be, the appropriate militaristic ‘clarity’.
Militaristic jihad needs to be named for what it is, unadulterated evil. And ultimately, we will know it has been defeated when the global Muslim community names it as such, with one loud and clear voice.
In the mean time, nothing, including pre-empting murderous thugs of dictators in the jihadist’s neighborhood…is off the table. Because, we now know, after 9/11, nothing is off the table for them. We are engaged in a religious war, whether it is contrary to PC ethics to call it that, or not.
I have to strongly disagree with those who assert that the War in Iraq has nothing to do with Islamic Terrorism. Even if it is granted that there was some hidden neocon agenda at work prior to the war [there seems to be a diversity of opinion on what, precisely, that agenda is/was], the fact remains that Iraq…now…has everything to do with Islamic Terrorism.
One thing everyone agrees on is that the War on Islamic Jihad is a battle for hearts and minds.
Which begs the question of why the media is fixated on Abu Gharib…rather than Nick Berg or Daniel Pearl.
Brian.
Dear Manny,
You are more than welcome here...Post as you wish. I have a question about your first post. You comment about Chalabi telling the Bushs' what they want to hear...Is it possible Chalabi told them what He WANTS THEM TO BELIEVE?? Could Chalabi have spun the truth to appear to be in agreement and more valuable to them? If the answer is yes, then couldn't the liberal media outlets (NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN) be doing the same to you?
One gallon of sarin is a big deal Manny. Even when its discovery makes some people look like fools. I wonder if those that have been riding the NO WMD band wagon will eat their crow in public?
PS In light of the revelation that the UN is in bed with Saddam and is corrupt to the gills can we really trust the "inspections" they did in Irag anyway??
Just food for thought
Dear Alaska,
Your comment is right on...
You wrote: "Fox news ran the article with a framed picture of Chalabi laying on the floor. Then CNN smashed the glass on the picture frame (to show victimization and to stage news instead of report it) and ran with that picture."
Maybe the Tail wagging the Dog can apply to news outlets as well as administrations? A smashed picture communicates so much more than a whole unbroken one...A picture is worth 1,000 words and 10,000 emotions!
I can hardly wait until the Libs wake up and realize the way they have been manipulated!
Susan:
You comment about Chalabi telling the Bushs' what they want to hear...Is it possible Chalabi told them what He WANTS THEM TO BELIEVE??
I suspect that when we finally get to the bottom of the whole Chalabi story, we may find out that's EXACTLY what he's been doing all along.
A more important question, though, is Why?
I caught a brief mention on one of the news channels yesterday of the fact that, on closer inspection, much of the "intelligence" Chalabi gave us apparently came straight from Tehran. It seems that the documents were littered with phrases that a native speaker of Arabic wouldn't use, but are actually common figures of speech in Farsi.
Combine this with the fact that the group that's causing the most trouble in Iraq at the moment, al Sadr's "Mahdi Army," is clearly backed by Iran, and seeks to install their leader as the head of a new Shiite theocracy in Iraq, and things begin to become much clearer.
Someone tell me, in all seriousness, how do we resolve this "problem" peacefully with the Jihadists at this point. *We* can forget about the Crusades since it was 800 years ago, they're apparently still ticked. May be the longest held grudge in history.
We have bases there, we've done this, that and the next. So if we do this and such, if we build schools in every single poor Indonesian village, if we give everyone Nikes, if we swear we'll never do it again, and don't (whatever *it* is) is it going to work?
Or is the oil/killing wedding revelers/maxipad wearing innocently detained inmates all just smoke and mirrors and no matter what we do, they just want us dead?
Whistling dixie:
They just want us dead. Period. #1 reason: Envy. #2 reason: We're not Muslim.
CGW -
you, sir, speak words of wisdom... you're right, I had no right insult catherine's intelligence, and for that I apologize. I just want to make it clear that it isn't political views unaligned with mine that "royally pisses me off", but rather the willingness of people to not actually listen and not debate with facts, and just toss out slogans and stereotypes instead -- it's the shock-jocking of America and it totally sucks. I guess I'm just a bit sensitive at having my patriotism, motives, and masculinity questioned just because I'm trying to argue a different viewpoint (gee... can you tell?) In the future, Catherine, I hope you'll think twice before you accuse other people of not being as American or as courageous as you claim to be -- there's nothing more American than having a difference in opinion.
Brian - you make some interesting points:
"I think it is folly to go back to treating Islamic Terrorism as a mere law enforcement issue. I think it calls for both moral and, if need be, the appropriate militaristic ‘clarity’"
As for the law enforcement issue, I completely disagree. Jihadists aren't a single government or group or country we can bomb. The war in Iraq is doing nothing but making the jihadists multiply, and worst of all - pushing moderate muslims into supporting them. Now you may be thinking "why should we care about the so-called 'moderate muslims' - we're United States and we'll bomb them all to hell" I have to say - we neither have the ability nor the will to wage war on a billion people. For all of Israel's military strength, they are being marauded by dirt-poor people who only have will on their side... where is the moral or military "clarity" in that? this is clearly not a fight that can be won by gunships, and I don't think we should err by straying down the same path.
The war on terror will only be won by: 1. good intelligence information on our part (not our strongpoint evidently), and working to infiltrate terrorist organizations both here and abroad, 2. aggressive economic anti-terrorism to try to suck terrorists' finances dry, and 3. improved immigration control and Homeland defense. These all fall under the law enforcement jurisdiction, and any investment we make here will accomplish 10 times as much for 10 times as less than any possible military intervention. Look, sure it's great that we got Libya to gives up it's WMD programs - but Libya isn't our grave concern... there's plenty of WMD unaccounted for from the Soviet Union (presumably in terrorist hands) - and jihadist organization don't neccessarily need government support or funding to launch another big attack (or more terrifying in its own way - a series of small attacks... imagine the social/economic repercussions if jihadists start suicide-bombing shopping malls in Iowa) -- we're stretched too thin and not focusing our resources properly.
"Militaristic jihad needs to be named for what it is, unadulterated evil. And ultimately, we will know it has been defeated when the global Muslim community names it as such, with one loud and clear voice"
I think you've 100% hit the nail on the head... how do we go about doing this though? It's not to be through the types of military action that we've been taking -- clearly that's polarized the muslim against us - Muslim society needs to be reformed from the inside... and we need to encourage it anyway possible. Whether that means supporting alternative energy sources/drilling in Alaska to try to starve moderate muslims into realizing that they are far better off siding with us than jihadists, or whether we need to take a more even-stance with Israel without compromising it's security... I don't know. But it seems like the huge gamble the Bush administration took on this war (at least he took a risk I suppose...) is not going to pay off -- I hope I'm wrong and it works out (I really do), but we need to start thinking long and hard about what's next...
Bill Blake
"During the European dark ages, Roman and Greek learning was lost. The Islamic empire, which reached as far west as Spain, recovered this knowledge and preserved it but also expanded on it. Muslims made contributions to all the sciences - try doing complex sums with Roman numerals rather than the Arabic numerals we're all used to."
The knowledge was only lost to western Europe. There was plenty of classical knowledge left in the Eastern Roman Empire A.K.A. Byzantium, until it’s fall in 1453.
How much of the supposed Muslim knowledge was actually original and how much was simply lifted from pre-existing non-Islamic societies remains open to question. Which ever the case, Muslims certainly did nothing with all the advanced knowledge they claimed to have. What ever innovations came out of the ME after the Arab conquests was in spite of Islam, not because of it.
Whistling...
What are you saying? That we are holding a grudge against the muslims? Lest anyone forget the Crusades, as awful as they were, accomplished there intended purpose...They pushed the muslims, bent on waging Jihad against all non muslims ending in world domination, back to the desert!! There is no reason for any non muslim to hold a grudge...We won...
and HELLO! THERE WAS NO WEDDING PARTY!...No Decorations...No Gifts...No Large amounts of Food...Not even any leftovers! But there were plenty of fighting age men and weapons and sleeping quarters for 300 and a Medical infirmary!!
Come on! Stop listening to the mainstream media! It might break your heart but They report selectivly..They twist the stories... in short, THEY LIE...
If you can not stop listening to them please at least leave some room in your mind for the possibility that they too have a political agenda...One that in my mind looks rather UN-American at the moment...
But that is just me:)
Susanc you make some good points. We need to wake up and realize that Islam has declared war (jihad) against the non-muslim world, i.e., the civilized world, as they are commanded to do in their unholy book the Koran. Until we change our focus from "terrorists" to the real problem which is Islam itself, not much will change. Even if we capture or kill Bin Laden and his ass kissing cronies, it will only make martyrs out of them and then some other dissatisfied, third world illiterate youths will get the same message from the Koran and start the same thing all over again.
“As for the law enforcement issue, I completely disagree. Jihadists aren't a single government or group or country we can bomb. The war in Iraq is doing nothing but making the jihadists multiply, and worst of all - pushing moderate muslims into supporting them.” [Manny]
Hey Manny.
I am not convinced we are in total disagreement regarding the law enforcement issue. I am all for using law enforcement to fight Islamic Terrorism. What I am dead-set against is confining our efforts to law enforcement. Also, I think the stakes have become far too deadly to rely on intelligence or intelligence gathering techniques.
And I think our man Chalabi only lends credence that assertion.
Also, with due respect sir, I am inclined to think that you expose yourself too much to the liberal media and their Iraq-spin. Might I suggest that the Madrid bombing and the subsequent electoral appeasement by the Spaniards, did more to gain radical Muslim recruits than the War in Iraq ever will?
Because it sent them the signal that they can actually win this thing. And that signal had everything to do with Iraq. There are a couple of things at stake in Iraq. One is, the establishment of anything resembling a liberal democracy in the geographical heart of the Middle East…would have to be…a crippling blow to radical Islam. I don’t think it would be a stretch to call it their 9/11..if it should happen.
I think what a lot of people miss about that potential outcome, is the fact that it would be such a devastating blow to the Islamists, that they would be forced to focus a portion of their finite energy and resources on the ‘grand-baby-Satan' coming up in their midst.
I think would give us what is called a strategic advantage, in military lingo.
Secondly, our credibility is at stake. And I don’t mean our standing with the French and Germans. I mean our credibility with the Islamists. If anyone wants to see an exponential growth rate in radical Muslim recruitment, let us ‘cut and run’ in Iraq. I am not an expert on Arab culture, but I think we actually gained the respect of the Muslims by attacking Iraq…though they would never admit it…and certainly not on Al-Jazeera.
As of March of last year, we were no longer the paper tiger that ran from the Somalians.
IMO, if we are unable to prod and cajole the Iraqis into representative self-government, then we need to find a way to declare victory of some sort. I can’t imagine how one would go about doing that, but it is something that may have to be considered at some point. Though I think now is way too early to be talking about it.
That, is the sort of thing that helps recruit these young people into the Dark Side.
Brian.
I always thought that the wisdom of the ancients survived in the Irish monastaries, and those fonded in Europe by Irish missionaries.
Tallk about the dark ages, what about the Muslim countries where women are denied an education, and many of the people are illiterate, just like their hero, Mohammed. Or they are taught that Jews can turn into dogs, rats and monkeys. Or that the moon was once a sun, or that the sun sets in a muddy well as the Koran says. Yeah, real scientific.
I come to this site everyday, read all the stories and all of the comments. It is the best education a person can get on this war. Keep up the good work! You are all important resources.
Yes, much, if not most, of Western knowledge was kept and maintained by the Irish during the dark ages in Western Europe. Although I am not Catholic and not Christian, I gained a real respect for St. Patrick. Had it not been for him and his followers, we would all be speaking Arabic today - the Muslims would already have won. Thank G-d for St. Patrick and the Irish!
Oh, and if you want a good read about the following, Thomas Cahill's book, "How the Irish Saved Civilization" is an EXCELLENT book. :-)
Oops, that comment was in support of Fox2's earlier posting.
Manny, in response to your 'war is not the answer' comments: What would you say to non-Muslim people in the Sudan right now? IF they had arms, would you tell them to use them or just work for fundamental changes in the Muslim terrorists basic belief system?
And, since they have no bases on Arab soil, why are they being exterminated and taken into slavery.
And how is that situation the fault of the US? Because, wherever there is fighting and terrorism, it MUST be our fault?
When you grasp the basic principles of Islam, how can one reform countries from the inside so we can all live in peace.
Can we hear more on that?
Brian -
"I am not convinced we are in total disagreement regarding the law enforcement issue. I am all for using law enforcement to fight Islamic Terrorism. What I am dead-set against is confining our efforts to law enforcement. Also, I think the stakes have become far too deadly to rely on intelligence or intelligence gathering techniques."
You suggest that both effective law enforcement and the war in Iraq are not mutually exclusive - I would have to disagree. With the money and resources (and lives) we are spending in Iraq, I think there are many experts that agree that we are leaving many basic Homeland security issues completely unattended to -- may I suggest that by us not doing something as simple (although it is a huge task) as not inspecting large containers that are coming to America via shipping routes, we are doing far more damage to our security than we are helping it by finding 4 liters of sarin and by aiding jihadi recruitment efforts.
I also present to you from the Foxnews website:
"With American troops facing continuing battles in Iraq, the Bush administration on Friday did little to play down remarks by U.S. civilian administrator L. Paul Bremer (search), who said the United States would withdraw after the June 30 handover if the Iraqi Governing Council requested."
and (same article):
"In Washington, Secretary of State Colin Powell (search), meeting with the foreign ministers of the G-8 countries, half of which are coalition members, reinforced the notion of a pullout upon request."
This is from an article from last saturday, and certainly not from a "liberal media" source -- this is very different from what the Bush administration has ever said previously... do you see the implications of this? What happened to staying the course, to building a democracy (which IMHO would have been impossible - democracies develop in advanced societies only)? Wasn't that, post-WMD the reason for this war -- if for our $87 billion and 800 life investment, if we leave without even trying to build a democracy, then what exactly do we have to show for our efforts?
patricia -
I want to make clear that I'm not saying "war is not the answer" -- I'm not trying to simplify this as an "oil war" as so many liberals do -- I am simply saying "this war is not the answer" -- I think we are in a worst position for it... now that the Bush administration is dropping not so subtle hints about leaving Iraq ASAP, I simply can't see what it has accomplished -- idealogically or pragmatically. We haven't shown "A-rabs" that we can go in and "kick ass Texas style" (I'm not alleging that that's what you think, mind you... just having some fun I suppose) -- if nothing else we've shown that we came in with a horribly planned war (I'm not playing armchair general here -- I'm saying that it was irresponsible to go into Iraq without basic neccessities such as enough Arab-language translators, and a plan for how to keep the peace once the Baathists were toppled - how can we expect the 18 year olds that we send into war - who have been trained only to kill - to serve as a police force and engage in conflict negotiation? we lost any meager hope of a democracy there when we allowed the looting to continue)... and that shows nothing but American weakness, not strength.
"And how is that situation the fault of the US? Because, wherever there is fighting and terrorism, it MUST be our fault?
When you grasp the basic principles of Islam, how can one reform countries from the inside so we can all live in peace.
Can we hear more on that? "
I'm not sure where I implied that all fighting and terrorism was our fault - if I did, I certainly never meant to. And as far as steps towards encouraging reform - well, for starters I think it was a huge mistake for Bush to brand Iran as part of the hugely simplistic "axis of evil" -- we had an opportunity to try to appeal to the moderate generation of Iranian youngsters who are trying to bring change within their oppressive mullah government, and frankly we blew it just for the sake of creating some slogans that would look good in the headlines the next day (add "shock and awe", "old europe" to that pile of blunders that accomplish nothing). That's a pretty minor point though - honestly, I won't pretend to be an expert on this, but I feel that removing our reliance on middle eastern oil will do wonders for improving our standing with arab moderates (we'll be forcing them to see where there allegiances truly are) -- and so will taking a more even-handed approach w/ Palestine and Israel (which I think we have been making steps in the right-direction toward).
CGW - you said something interesting in a post to somebody else as to why muslims really have it out for us:
"They just want us dead. Period. #1 reason: Envy. #2 reason: We're not Muslim"
--I think that's oversimplifying the problem way too much: if they envied our wealth, it wouldn't make sense that Osama bin Laden and many of the 9/11 hijackers came from families wealthy beyond most of our dreams -- if they envied our freedom, why are radical muslim societies so oppressive? And as for your second reason, I fear that it may be true among the jihadis, but what about the other muslims - if that were true, why would they be willing to have close ties to the Russian government inspite of them fighting against muslims in Afganistan a generation ago, and their fight against the Chechan rebels? We cannot do anything about the jihadis except try to contain them (which is very difficult to do - our major military operation in Iraq is only making them multiply, and our major operation in Afghanistan has not eliminated the Taliban - who incidentally we gave something like $50 million just prior to 9/11 for their efforts in curbing opium production - even though we knew that they had terrorist training bases),
and try to encourage non-jihadi muslims to not support them - and we are doing a pretty terrible job on both fronts. I'm not suggesting a policy of peace, love, and smooches with jihadis - nor am I trying "to feel their pain" -- I'm simply saying that the economic and military resources we used and the political capital we have expended in this war have done nothing but made the jihadi movement stronger, and made us look weak in the process.
Anyway, I have to say I'm thoroughly enjoying this debate, and I eagerly await your responses...
manny:
What they envy is this: Their civilization is a dismal failure, producing nothing of value, while ours exemplifies the greatest human achievement on this planet thus far. Allah promised them worldwide domination and the spoils of their conquests in return for their fidelity. They can't stand the fact that we have succeeded where they have failed, never thinking to blame it on their own backward belief system. Much has been written about this phenomenon of Arab envy. Perhaps someone on this forum (you might ask Hugh) can guide you to the appropriate resources.
As for the second reason, that too is well documented everywhere from Islam's own texts to Robert Spencer's books, and proven by the slaughter and dhimmitude of non-Muslims wherever Islam holds sway.
Manny:
now that the Bush administration is dropping not so subtle hints about leaving Iraq ASAP...
We're not going to be pulling out of Iraq "ASAP," or even in the forseeable future.
While I'm not an "armchair general," what I AM is the operations sergeant involved with the deployment of one of the brigades that will be going to Iraq this fall.
Trust me when I tell you we aren't leaving.
You need to learn how to read between the lines.
If you look at both Bremer's and Powell's statements, you'll note that they both said the same thing: We will withdraw our forces following the June 30th handover
if the Iraqi Governing Council asks us to.
There's not a chance in hell that the council will make such a request, because they know it would mean the country's descent into all-out civil war.
As for your comments regarding Iran:
I think it was a huge mistake for Bush to brand Iran as part of the hugely simplistic "axis of evil" -- we had an opportunity to try to appeal to the moderate generation of Iranian youngsters who are trying to bring change within their oppressive mullah government, and frankly we blew it just for the sake of creating some slogans that would look good in the headlines the next day
You have, once again, missed the mark.
While Bush's "axis of evil" speech may have angered the mullahs in Tehran, it had quite the opposite effect on the younger generation in Iran.
The notion that we in the West are finally starting to catch on to what their leaders are doing gave them hope for the future, rather than creating a new generation of enemies.
You suggest that both effective law enforcement and the war in Iraq are not mutually exclusive - I would have to disagree. With the money and resources (and lives) we are spending in Iraq, I think there are many experts that agree that we are leaving many basic Homeland security issues completely unattended to -- may I suggest that by us not doing something as simple (although it is a huge task) as not inspecting large containers that are coming to America via shipping routes, we are doing far more damage to our security than we are helping it by finding 4 liters of sarin and by aiding jihadi recruitment efforts. [Manny]
Well Manny, I have to disagree with that. I don’t think they are mutually exclusive out of necessity. Though I will grant that there is more that can be done on the Homeland Front, let us not delude ourselves with the notion that…whatever we did in terms of striving for Fortress America…it could never be enough.
And for that reason, I think any effective campaign against global Islamic Terrorism necessitates that we allow for pre-emption.
I am OK with the June 30 hand-over deadline in Iraq. Perhaps it is a little dicey, but then who is to say that the world could end up with free Iraq, even if it only comes after a little bit of the Iraqis determining amongst themselves, which way it is they want to go.
And yes, I am aware that I just euphemized a state of civil war… right there:)
But Iraq was a dicey proposition to begin with. But what were the alternatives? What were the clear alternatives? Send every American soldier into Afghanistan until we came out with bin Laden’s head on a platter? Make an appeal to the UN? Invade Saudi Arabia?
Speaking of the latter, have you ever projected the lines, in terms of having an American unit firing a few rounds of mortars in the general direction of Mecca or Media?
The utopian notion of Fortress America?
No Manny. As a direct result of 9/11, we needed to make a palpable military stand in the Middle East.
And Saddam was begging for it.
Brian.
lobo -
as for your first assertion that the US won't pull out of Iraq anytime soon b/c the governing council would never ask us to - I hope you are right... yet it doesn't seem that the average iraqi has much faith in the governing council, particularly because of their (as we've now seen shaky) American allegiance. I'm not so sure the council wouldn't ask us to leave just to try to secure it's own position (after all, American military protection didn't prevent that assassination). also, with the leader of the governing council being blown to bits, and another main member now having been accused not of only of being an Iranian spy, but having ties to Al-Sadr... I'm not so sure of just how long this council will last. The shia (sp?) majority hates us - possibly b/c we left them high and dry after the first gulf war -- as do the sunnis... we can't expect to build an entire democracy led by the governing council based on nothing but Kurdish "good vibrations"...
As for the Iranian youth axis-of-evil comment -- I couldn't find anything to support my position that it isolated young iranis... so I take that back
Brian -
you posted:
"No Manny. As a direct result of 9/11, we needed to make a palpable military stand in the Middle East."
I would have to say - wasn't Afghanistan a stand, and shouldn't we finish that properly?
exactly who are we making a stand against now?:
a quote I found -
"In January, Princeton Survey Research Associates asked 1,200 Americans this question,
To the best of your knowledge, how many of the September 11 hijackers were Iraqi citizens?
Only 17 percent of respondents answered correctly that none of the hijackers were Iraqi"
9/11 had absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. There is absoultely no proof that the two are correlated. If this war was really about 9/11, we would have attacked Saudi Arabia for fostering a culture from which the majority of hijackers could arise. If you can find me one tangible, reputable piece of information linking the two together, I will remove my shoe, salt and pepper it, and eat it with a fork and knife (really, I will).
Let's just say this war wasn't eroding our security at home and abroad, wasn't costing American lives and huge sums of money -- would I be against it? Of course not! Don't equate disagreeing with the war with being pro-Saddam... sure, it's great he's out of the picture, but the US is not in the business of taking out cruel dictators when it doesn't serve our own purposes (nor should it be neccessarily).
"But Iraq was a dicey proposition to begin with. But what were the alternatives? What were the clear alternatives? Send every American soldier into Afghanistan until we came out with bin Laden’s head on a platter? Make an appeal to the UN? Invade Saudi Arabia?"
Umm... here's some alternatives:
1. finish the job in afghanistan -- make sure the Taliban don't come back, and successfully rebuild the country like we said we would - we don't have to come out w/ bin laden's head on a platter (although it wouldn't hurt certainly), we do have to make good on our promises
2. not have rushed into iraq -- what was so critical about timing it before the summer? We were there during the summer anyway... even if we didn't end up having a multilateral force in the end (and I believe that we could have had more countries if we had waited a bit), we could have sent our troops in with a much better plan to occupy the country than "firing the baathists, realizing we can't bring the infrastructure back up on our own, rehiring the baathists" which is exactly what's happenning.
3. spend some of the vast sums of money on homeland security - our immigration control still sucks, as do a lot of our other homeland defenses. I'm not saying I want to live in a police-state (quite the contrary), but there's basic, affordable stuff that's not getting done because we don't have our priorities in line.
Anyway, I kind of feel like we're starting to beat a dead horse here... we may just have to agree to disagree -- I really hope you guys are right: I would rather be wrong and have my country be right -- I just fear that won't be the case.
Manny:
9/11 had absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. There is absoultely no proof that the two are correlated.
Who said it did?
The last time I checked, we were engaged in something called (somewhat euphemistically in my opinion) the "Global War on Terror," not the "War to Avenge 9/11."
Iraq under Saddam was a major state sponsor of terrorism. Saddam consistently lied, cheated and obfuscated his way through 12 years of UN sanctions. He flatly refused to abide by the terms of the 1991 cease-fire, and it cost him his job and his country.
My only question with regard to Iraq is, "Why did we wait so long?"
Afghanistan and Iraq are nothing more than different fronts in the same war, a war that will probably still be going on when your kids are adults.
Personally, I'd rather we fought it in the streets of Karbala, Kufa and Kandahar than in Kansas City.
I think most Americans would agree.
"9/11 had absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. There is absoultely no proof that the two are correlated."
Uh, not necessarily true.
"U.S. District Judge Harold Baer allowed damages in the amount of $104 million for the families of two victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center. The families named Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and Saddam Husein and his regime as parties to pay damages. Although the decision is a formality, it is nevertheless important, for in the United States, the word of a court carries weight. One of the pieces of evidence supporting Saddam Hussein’s participation in the Sept. 11 attack was the information of the Czech Interior Ministry regarding Atta’s visit to Prague and his alleged meeting with Al-Ani."
Once upon a time a story ran saying directly that Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi security forces in two trips to Prague. This was quicky denounced as nothing more than a rumour by many sources, and was hardly a smoking gun.
More importantly, US Forces captured Ahmed al-Ani, the Iraqi consul to Prague, who happens to currently reside at the same airport jail as one Saddam Hussein.
All of this info was pulled from "Respekt," a Czech Republic weekly paper:
http://www.worldpress.org/Europe/1684.cfm
That howver, doesn't detract from what lobo and others have said.
This Iraqi war wasn't about 9/11. This was about the 12 years of non-compliance from his assault of Kuwait and his terms of surrender. He agreed to a list of terms, we agreed not to squish him like a bug. He tried to play us (and the rest of the world). If 9/11 had anything to do with The war in Iraq, it was that 9/11 simply made up tired of taking crap.
Manny
I voted for the 87 billion before i voted against the 87 billion is this the kind of wit you want. and like I said you did not have the balls to watch the monsters cut the mans head off and show the Prize to the world and guess again
I grew up hearing sticks and stones can break your bones but names can never hurt you.
We the Islamist are useing sticks and stones and I don't care about your names.
I bet you don't have a sign in your front yard that says " No GUNS here" well you had better think who you call names we may not want to protect your ass.
Part of the American Tribe
God bless the USA and her fighting Forces and All who Fight with her give them Strength and Courage to stay the course to Victory Amen
Paul Wolfowitz was on the BBC radio breakfast programme ("Today") today, and was asked about the raid on Chalabi. He said that the CIA was simply wrong about Chalabi and had produced no evidence that he was working for Iran.
Presumably he was speaking for the DoD. I was quite surprised that he should disagree with another arm of the US government in such a forthright way, and on a non-US station as well.