How Ahmed Chalabi conned the neocons

Salon ^ | 5/4/2004 | John Dizard

[JohnGalt]

The hawks who launched the Iraq war believed the deal-making exile when he promised to build a secular democracy with close ties to Israel. Now the Israel deal is dead, he's cozying up to Iran -- and his patrons look like they're on the way out. A Salon exclusive.

- - - - - - - - - - - - By John Dizard

May 4, 2004 | When the definitive history of the current Iraq war is finally written, wealthy exile Ahmed Chalabi will be among those judged most responsible for the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein. More than a decade ago Chalabi teamed up with American neoconservatives to sell the war as the cornerstone of an energetic new policy to bring democracy to the Middle East -- and after 9/11, as the crucial antidote to global terrorism. It was Chalabi who provided crucial intelligence on Iraqi weaponry to justify the invasion, almost all of which turned out to be false, and laid out a rosy scenario about the country's readiness for an American strike against Saddam that led the nation's leaders to predict -- and apparently even believe -- that they would be greeted as liberators. Chalabi also promised his neoconservative patrons that as leader of Iraq he would make peace with Israel, an issue of vital importance to them. A year ago, Chalabi was riding high, after Saddam Hussein fell with even less trouble than expected.

Now his power is slipping away, and some of his old neoconservative allies -- whose own political survival is looking increasingly shaky as the U.S. occupation turns nightmarish -- are beginning to turn on him. The U.S. reversed its policy of excluding former Baathists from the Iraqi army -- a policy devised by Chalabi -- and Marine commanders even empowered former Republican Guard officers to run the pacification of Fallujah. Last week United Nations envoy Lakhdar Brahimi delivered a devastating blow to Chalabi's future leadership hopes, recommending that the Iraqi Governing Council, of which he is finance chair, be accorded no governance role after the June 30 transition to sovereignty. Meanwhile, administration neoconservatives, once united behind Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress he founded, are now split, as new doubts about his long-stated commitment to a secular Iraqi democracy with ties to Israel, and fears that he is cozying up to his Shiite co-religionists in Iran, begin to emerge. At least one key Pentagon neocon is said to be on his way out, a casualty of the battle over Chalabi and the increasing chaos in Iraq, and others could follow.

[JohnGalt]

You'll need to watch a short ad in order to get the rest of the story but well worth it.

[JohnGalt]

ping...well worth the brief ad...

[GraniteStateConservative]

"neo-conned." That's pretty clever.

[Always Right]

When the definitive history of the current Iraq war is finally written, wealthy exile Ahmed Chalabi will be among those judged most responsible for the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein.

I seriously doubt it. Just because this guy might have pushed for war, doesn't mean he was that influential. Salon wants to depict 'neo-cons' (whatever those are) as mindless idiots who can't think for themselves.

[JohnGalt]

I see so many people on this site who are still siting his since discredited tinfoil hat theories be they from Laurie Mylroie or Douglas Feith leaked memo, I think perhaps you should reconsider how much influence he actually had on public opinion...oh, and see the tag line.

[ex-snook]

"I seriously doubt it. Just because this guy might have pushed for war, doesn't mean he was that influential. "

Agree with you 100%

Salon wants to depict 'neo-cons' (whatever those are) as mindless idiots who can't think for themselves.

Disagree with Salon 100%. Neo-cons [and I'm sure you plead ignorance in jest] have thought out going to war long before using Chalabi as a excuse.

[Always Right]

I think perhaps you should reconsider how much influence he actually had on public opinion

I have, and I don't thinnk he had much.

[Dales]

It's official. Neo-con has now lost any meaning that it once had, and now is a transparent attempt to attach a negative connotation to what was previously called a "hawk".

[JohnGalt]

LOL.
Umm, Salman Pak? WMDs? Nuclear bombs? Saddam behind 9/11?

Are you seriously telling me you don't see that nonsense around?

[JohnGalt]

'Leftwing hawk' anyway.

[JohnGalt]

I moved from Massachusetts to Maine over this past month. Traded a middle unit townhouse in the 495 belt for three wooded, rural acres in a town of 3000.

Long live the New England Republic.

[tkathy]

IMHO somebody is out to smear Chalabi. I like what he says most of the time.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Amen.

[GraniteStateConservative]

A hawk would have left after major combat was over. A neo-con stays.

[pawdoggie]

Yeah, and I'll bet that Chalabi may up the whole Halabja story. And then he got the Iranians (he is, I believe a Shia) to make up the story of the poison gas used on their troops. The "mass graves" of Saddam's henchmen story was really just about reburials of corpses removed from ancient burial sites to make room for Saddam's palaces. The invasion of Kuwait was all a misunderstanding provoked by Chalabist agents. And the stories by US and coalition prisoners of torture in Saddam's prison camps? Well, as Jane Fonda would say, they were all just liars.

[Always Right]

Umm, Salman Pak? WMDs? Nuclear bombs? Saddam behind 9/11? Are you seriously telling me you don't see that nonsense around?

Saddam behind 9/11??? Bush never used that. What was said was that Saddam supported terrorism, which is true. Saddam also had a WMD program, but we were apparently more successful at thrawting it than we believed. Saddam played too many games with the UN inspectors though, so we really did not know. You give this Chalabi way too much credit.

[JohnGalt]

I never said anything about Bush, I said people on this web site.


Let me clarify since you seem to be going in a different direction. Chalabi lies were used to secure political support from the Right. The Chalabi story tells of how he subverted the institutions of our Republic by making common cause with certain people. A patriot must hold his enablers accountable, see the tagline.

[JohnGalt]

See the tagline.

[adam_az]

"Last week United Nations envoy Lakhdar Brahimi delivered a devastating blow to Chalabi's future leadership hopes, recommending that the Iraqi Governing Council, of which he is finance chair, be accorded no governance role after the June 30 transition to sovereignty."

AS IF BRAHIMI HAS 1 OZ OF CREDIBILITY????

"The policy of Israel is a poison in the region, and that is the feeling of everyone in the region and beyond and I think this is a statement of fact, not an opinion," said Brahimi after a meeting with French President Jacques Chirac in Paris for talks on forming a local authority in Iraq. - http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/419424.html

Who is the author?

Russia receives values taken away by Golden ADA to US [Free ...... Golden ADA also wired money to Belgium, Liechtenstein, and Israel, as well as ... John Dizard of the New York Times has written that " Leon Fuerth, the maleducato ...
www.freerepublic.com/forum/a383d03d466fd.htm - 101k - Cached - Similar pages


John Dizard of the hard-left NY Times praises an Jew hating monster and refers to hawkish Jewish conservatives as "neo-cons," which is a codeword for "International Jewry" in the "Jews control the world" conspiracy mindset.

In that context, this article makes perfect sense - the ramblings of a madman.

[adam_az]

"Let me clarify since you seem to be going in a different direction. Chalabi lies were used to secure political support from the Right. The Chalabi story tells of how he subverted the institutions of our Republic by making common cause with certain people. A patriot must hold his enablers accountable, see the tagline."

Which certain people, John?

Isn't Treason a serious charge? Your accusations don't stand up to "treason."