Chirac was right to oppose the war, which was directed at the wrong foe, one who had not attacked us on 9/11. It failed to confront the real causes of the 9/11 jihad attacks, which have still not been confronted.
But the really interesting aspect of this story is that it raises another question: how many other Western politicians have accepted bribes in exchange for compliant policy positions? Who, and when, and who bribed them? Could the West’s wholesale capitulation to the Islamic supremacism, the erosion of the freedom of speech, the demonization of analysts who have discussed the actual causes of jihad activity, and the refusal to confront the motivating ideology behind jihad violence be the result of large bribes like this one? Will we ever find out?
“Saddam Hussein ‘bribed Jacques Chirac’ with £5million in bid to make the former French President oppose the US-led Iraq war,” by Abul Taher and Peter Henn, The Mail On Sunday, September 28, 2019 (thanks to Henry):
Jacques Chirac was paid millions of pounds in bribes by Saddam Hussein to oppose the US-led war in Iraq, according to intelligence revealed for the first time by Britain’s former spy chief.
Sir Richard Dearlove – head of MI6 in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 – spoke out as recent obituaries for the former French President cited his principled opposition to US President George Bush’s plans for military action.
But the former spymaster, speaking exclusively to The Mail on Sunday, revealed that Chirac’s true motive for opposing the Gulf War was because he accepted ‘substantial amounts’ of cash from the Iraqi tyrant for his election campaigns.
Sir Richard, who made the sensational revelation only days after the French statesman’s death on Thursday aged 86, said: ‘There were strong indications in the US and UK [intelligence services] that Chirac received money from Saddam.
‘His recent obituaries are saying that Chirac got it right [on Iraq] and the rest of us got it wrong. But I am saying that Chirac’s motive for getting it right may not appear to be what it is.’
Chirac had led an alliance of France, Germany and Russia against plans by the US and Britain to invade Iraq over suspicions that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction, which it would pass on to terrorist groups like Al Qaeda….
At the time, MI6 and its US counterparts were gathering ‘reliable intelligence’ that Chirac had pocketed £5 million from the Iraqi dictator to fight his presidential elections in 1995 and in 2002.
The money came from Saddam’s own personal funds and was passed to Chirac through intermediaries, according to the intelligence.
Sir Richard told this newspaper that the ‘long relationship’ between Chirac and Saddam was the real reason why the French leader opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
‘He [Chirac] had this questionable relationship with Saddam Hussein,’ said Sir Richard. ‘It raises a lot of questions as to what his motives were for opposing the UN Resolution in the build-up to the invasion.’
He added: ‘It was not a matter of conscience, it was his [Chirac’s] reputation. If it came out in the wash [that he received money from Saddam], it would have been damaging to him as a politician.
‘It was a dimension which at the time was politically worrying – Chirac had a longstanding relationship with Saddam, which was not state to state, it was personal.’…