Posted on 05/20/2004 3:19:26 AM PDT by Uncle Kermie
BAGHDAD, Iraq — U.S. soldiers and Iraqi police surrounded the residence of Iraqi politician Ahmad Chalabi (search) on Thursday, and an aide said the troops raided the house ostensibly to search for fugitives.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Thanks for posting. I just heard Charles McCord (Imus) report this story and wasn't sure I heard it right.
Chalabi seems to be a master at "using" whatever issue or side he allies himself with.
Looking for fugitives??? What does that mean? Fugitives from where? Or fugitives aligned with whom?
Yes and now his ties to Iran seem to have gotten him in very hot water.
He goes from receiving $400,000 a month from the US to being surrounded in a matter of a day or two. I'm confused.
Wouldn't it be something else if we were sucked into this war due to Iran + Chalabi machinations? All so Iran could split away the Shi'ite part of Iraq and it's vast oil resources. Get them under Iranian control. Meaning Iranian ayatollahs get the oil profits
Not that I mind us being in Iraq and ridding it of Saddam, but ......
"Flying high in April, shot down in May"
Quote of the Day. LOL!
The "we must keep Iraq together" school of thought is based entirely on the idea that Iraq is a counterbalance on Iran in the region. I'm not sure I buy that theory but I am sure the Iranians lust for an impotent Iraq or Iraqs.
Thanks, I missed that yesterday. The spin I had been hearing (re: the funds cutoff) was that the Administration wanted him to look independent by June 30th. Guess there is a little more to the story.
From good as gold to not worth a plug nickel?...How the mighty have fallen!
I've heard of cutting a kids allowance but this crosses the line. He must have refused to take out the rubbish.
If it wasn't for the prison "abuse" story this would be the lead on all the networks this morning. I only watch FR, Imus and C-SPAN in the AM - wonder how NBCABCCBSCNN will cover it?
This is BIG!
He is obviously going to take the fall for something.
Maybe we're in there to get some of our money back?
"This is BIG!"
Agreed. The Fox story said that boxes of material were taken out, as well as computers. I think we've got something big on this guy, beyond the bogus "intel."
bump to check back later and find out why this happened.
Now, I'm adjusting my tinfoil hat!
Wonder if he had anything to do with the death of the other council member a few days ago?
I see the liberal spin(defense of Chalbi) is already starting.
I guess it could never occur to you that this guy was a backstabber.
Lighten up, SA!
Dane, why do you say this..? I am confused by your accusation.
Lol, timely. That's life.
Interesting to see what develops.
The automatic knee jerk conjecture that Chalabi is a fall guy for the US. Govt./military.
Could be he is a scumbag and the govt. and has the evidence now.
There were some knee jerk accusations on FR yesterday beleiveing that a wedding party at 2:45 AM was bombed, when in actuality it was a terrorist safehouse.
Someone has to take the fall for all the bad information leading us into this mess. Deceived people get real p*ssed when they find out they've been used.
I shudder to think what kind of thing he is involved in...I would be relieved if he was only a crook, not spending money we gave him as intended.
Involved with Iran, the death of the Interim government leader, plotting with bad guys, plot to take over government (OIL)...that's what scares me.
Kneejerks are a problem...best to avoid them and throwing around words like liberal.
Take a look at 29, Dane. 'Taking the Fall' is not necessarily a bad thing, especially if it's justified. Your tone to me was uncalled for. I'm speculating like most everyone else is.
Just giving my opinion and refuse to let kneejerk speculation go unanswered.
I don't think we were "sucked into" this war by Chalabi or anyone else - there was plenty of indication from many other sources that Saddam was dangerous in himself, was supporting AQ, etc. But I bet Chalabi has had a lot to do with messing up the rebuilding of Iraq.
The war went well. Once Chalabi got back into Iraq and got into some sort of power, the situation began to shift. It might have done so anyway, but this arrest makes one go "hmmmm..."
"Taking a fall" implies that Chalabi is ultimately innocent, rather than implying that Chalabi is ultimately guilty.
This a thread where nothing but speculation was possible..Fox was speculating that the oil for food scam was a possible reason for the investigation....Everyone is speculating...Why be on the thread otherwise?
Yes, that would be a real comedy. The Arabs have a saying that you need a hundred devious people to equal one ordinary Iranian.
I noticed something, some years ago, when announcements were being made that the oil fields in southern Iraq, if fully developed, might be twice the size of those in Saudi Arabia. Several Iranian religious/political writers started commenting wistfully that the bounds of the Persian Empire used to be three times the size of what they are now.
I doubt it. We have had Iran in our crosshairs, along with Iraq and North Korea, since Sept. 12. They know we're coming.
It was speculated that Chalabi is a "fall guy". Implying that he does not have the guilt, but is a victim of someone else.
Why the hostility to the possibilty that Chalabi is the one who is ultimately guilty.
It sounds more like the latter than the former!
Now since he's under "house arrest", just pass the word to Chalabi that the new Iraqi government is planning to sign an extradition agreement with Jordon.
That'll get him sweating.
That's a stretch.
What you implied was that my "kneejerk" reaction was associated with a liberal point of view as opposed to your "kneejerk" reaction, where you insinuated that he was a "backstabber."
Brew another cup of coffee and this time don't urinate in it.
There you go. Fight fire with fire, I guess.
There was an article in Salon, about last week, which alleged that Chalabi actually had ties with elements of Sadaam's regime, during the oil for food deals. That would tie in with the allegations here.
In your reply #18 you stated, "He is obviously going to take the fall for something", implying that Chalabi does not have ultimate guilt and is a victim of someone else or organization.
And yes it is my opinion when someone automatically states that Chalabi is a victim it is a akin to a liberal kneejerk reaction.
Ping to you--I guess Mr. Galt left us a little too soon? He'd have LOVED this one! (What a maroon he was! This thread would have ended up in Chat really fast!) ;o)
It was speculated that McVeigh was taking a fall for a larger conspiracy, implying he was guilty but so were others unknown...You can be guilty and protect (take the fall for) another guilty person.
Perhaps taking a fall was inexact language to use. Chalabi doesn't impress me as the kind to take a fall..if he goes down he won't protect anyone!
Fox just mentioned the Oil for Food thing as a possible reason for the raid.
Not inexact, IMO, but purposeful, to make a point and plant a seed that Chalabi is somehow a victim.
I gave my opinion otherwise.
I didn't say he was obviously taking the fall for something he didn't do. "Taking the Fall" could mean for something he did do. You don't know what I was implying.
Like I said before, lighten up!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.