Conservative Allies Take Chalabi Case to the White House ("Uriah Heep" Chalabi has defenders)

NY TIMES ^ | May 29, 2004 | ELISABETH BUMILLER

[Liz]

WASHINGTON, May 28 — Influential outside advisers to the Bush administration who support the Iraqi exile leader Ahmad Chalabi are pressing the White House to stop what one has called a "smear campaign" against Mr. Chalabi, whose Baghdad home and offices were ransacked last week in an American-supported raid.

Last Saturday, several of these Chalabi supporters said, a small delegation of them marched into the West Wing office of Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, to complain about the administration's abrupt change of heart about Mr. Chalabi and to register their concerns about the course of the war in Iraq. The group included Richard N. Perle, the former chairman of a Pentagon advisory group, and R. James Woolsey, director of central intelligence under President Bill Clinton.

Members of the group, who had requested the meeting, told Ms. Rice that they were incensed at what they view as the vilification of Mr. Chalabi, a favorite of conservatives who is now central to an F.B.I. investigation into who in the American government might have given him highly classified information that he is suspected of turning over to Iran.

Mr. Chalabi has denied that he provided Iran with any classified information.

The session with Ms. Rice was one sign of the turmoil that Mr. Chalabi's travails have produced within an influential corner of Washington, where Mr. Chalabi is still seen as a potential leader of Iraq.

"There is a smear campaign under way, and it is being perpetrated by the C.I.A. and the D.I.A. and a gaggle of former intelligence officers who have succeeded in planting these stories, which are accepted with hardly any scrutiny," Mr. Perle, a leading conservative, said in an interview.

Mr. Perle, referring to both the Central Intelligence Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency, said the campaign against Mr. Chalabi was "an outrageous abuse of power" by United States government officials in Washington and Baghdad.

"I'm talking about Jerry Bremer, for one," Mr. Perle said, referring to L. Paul Bremer III, the top American administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority in charge of the occupation of Iraq. "I don't know who gave these orders, but there is no question that the C.P.A. was involved."

In Baghdad, coalition authorities vigorously denied Mr. Perle's assertion. "Jerry Bremer didn't initiate the investigation," Dan Senor, the spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority, said in a telephone interview.

Similarly, Mark Mansfield, a C.I.A. spokesman, called Mr. Perle's accusation that the agency was smearing Mr. Chalabi "absurd." A Defense Department official who asked not to be named said that Mr. Perle's accusations against the D.I.A. had no foundation.

Mr. Chalabi has been a divisive figure for years in Washington, where top Pentagon officials favored him as a future leader of Iraq and top State Department officials distrusted him as unreliable. Either way, Mr. Chalabi and his exile group, the Iraqi National Congress, fed intelligence to the Bush administration about Iraq's unconventional weapons that helped drive the administration toward war.

Intelligence officials now argue that some of the intelligence was fabricated, and that Mr. Chalabi's motives were to push the United States into toppling Saddam Hussein and pave the way for his installation as Iraq's new leader.

Although Mr. Chalabi's supporters outside the administration have been caustic in their comments about his treatment, there has been relative silence so far from Mr. Chalabi's supporters within the administration. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, who favored going to war in Iraq and was a patron of Mr. Chalabi, did not respond to numerous requests this week for an interview.

Mr. Wolfowitz's spokesman, Charley Cooper, said in an e-mail message that Mr. Wolfowitz believed that Mr. Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress "have provided valuable operational intelligence to our military forces in Iraq, which has helped save American lives." Mr. Cooper added in the message that "Secretary Wolfowitz hopes that the events of the last few weeks haven't undermined that."

The current views of Vice President Dick Cheney and his chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, are not known. Both strongly supported Mr. Chalabi before and during the war in Iraq.

Last Saturday, participants in the meeting with Ms. Rice and her deputy, Stephen Hadley, said Ms. Rice told them she appreciated that they had made their views known. But she gave no hint of her own opinion, participants said, and made no concessions to their point of view.

Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House of Representatives, also attended the meeting. A larger meeting later that day, with Mr. Hadley alone, included Danielle Pletka, a vice president of the American Enterprise Institute, a research institution in Washington.

In an interview, Ms. Pletka said that Mr. Chalabi had been "shoddily" treated and that C.I.A. and State Department people had been fighting "a rear guard" action against him.

"They've been out to get him for a long time," Ms. Pletka said. "And to be fair, he has done things and the people around him have done things that have made it easier for them. He is a prickly, difficult person and he drives them crazy. He never takes no for an answer, even when he should."

Ms. Pletka added: "There are questionable people around him — I don't know how close — who have been involved in questionable activities in Iraq. He is close to the Iranian government. And so all of these things have lent credence to the accusations against him."

Mr. Perle said the action against Mr. Chalabi would burnish his anti-American credentials in Iraq and possibly help him to be elected to political office. "In that regard, this clumsy and outrageous assault on him will only improve his prospects," Mr. Perle said.

Mr. Perle said that he had no business dealings with Mr. Chalabi, but that he believed the C.I.A. and D.I.A. were spreading false information that he did. He also said that Mr. Chalabi was not alone in supplying intelligence to the United States government that turned out to be false.

"I know of no inaccurate information that was supplied uniquely by anyone brought to us by the Iraqi National Congress," Mr. Perle said.

[Liz]

Mr. Perle said that he had no business dealings with Mr. Chalabi, but that he believed the C.I.A. and D.I.A. were spreading false information that he did. He also said that Mr. Chalabi was not alone in supplying intelligence to the United States government that turned out to be false. "I know of no inaccurate information that was supplied uniquely by anyone brought to us by the Iraqi National Congress," Mr. Perle said.

Man, don'tcha just love those Perlisms? I just don't know how he does it? I guess Dickie just drops 'em little "perles of wisdom" whenever he feels threatened.

(Sniffle) Poor Perle, he's a (sob) victim (bawl).

But I can tell just by what he said......Perle's really, really mad.

Well, fergawdsake, dammit, you'd be mad, too, if alla your carefully made, decades-long plans were going kerflooey and the guy you had your money on is outed as a double agent, who said he made-up WMD info, which made the President of the United States look bad.

I mean, it's not nice to cast aspersions on a President.

Conservative Americans........and I mean "conservatives"........don't like it when you hurt their conservative President.

[Dako no tane]

"Last Saturday, several of these Chalabi supporters said, a small delegation of them marched into the West Wing office of Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, to complain about the administration's abrupt change of heart about Mr. Chalabi and to register their concerns about the course of the war in Iraq."

So they "marched", did they? Interesting choice of word. Sounds dramatic and confrontational. I wonder if they goose-stepped?

[meenie]

Not to worry, we have a new PM for Iraq, with CIA connections.

[rrrod]

Chalabi cant be trusted even by the Iraqis..this guy is as slick as Clinton. Turn him over to Jordan for some foot therapy..NOW

[CONSERVE]

and R. James Woolsey, director of central intelligence under President Bill Clinton

Under president bill clinton and conservative can not be used to define some one.

[Liz]

Does seem like a contradiction in terms, doesn't it (/sarcasm)?

[F14 Pilot]

PING!

[Liz]

Socialistic Darwinism----survival of the fittest----is the law of the land in the Mideast cesspool. Only the most cunning survive, using treachery and thievery, at the expense of the weak.

Savvy people know (or should know) denizens of the Mideast swamp crawl the globe as agents, double agents and triple agents selling information to the highest bidder. They switch allegiances without batting an eyelash, when it becomes more profitable.

"Uriah Heep" Chalabi was running the classic "Intelligence For Sale" scam. Every con artist and their cousin came crawling out of the woodwork to pocket US tax dollars. Richard Perle was the author of it, and the fact that he is still defending him----after Chalabi has been outed----evidences just how much he had banking (pun intended) on conman Chalabi. Not to mention Perle's flawed judgement trusting in the embezzler Chalabi as the US-backed replacement for Saddam.

[Dave S]

Under president bill clinton and conservative can not be used to define some one.

Woolsey was one of our better recent CIA Directors. He almost never met with Clinton. They didnt get along. He has been a consistent hawk on Iraq. I think you are letting your contempt for Clinton bismirch a good man.

[Liz]

I almost died laughing when Chalabi said on MTP that he
wanted to go before the Congress to argue his innocence.

[nuconvert]

"... "Intelligence For Sale" scam. Every con artist and their cousin came crawling out of the woodwork to pocket US tax dollars. Richard Perle was the author of it, ..."

What are you alleging regarding Richard Perle?

[Liz]

The group included Richard N. Perle, the former chairman of a Pentagon advisory group (the Defense Policy Board), and R. James Woolsey, director of central intelligence under President Bill Clinton.

James Woolsey---Bush ally set to profit from the war on terror

The Observer, 11 May 2003

James Woolsey, former CIA boss and influential adviser to President George Bush, is a director of a US firm aiming to make millions of dollars from the 'war on terror', The Observer can reveal.

Woolsey, one of the most high-profile hawks in the war against Iraq and a key member of the Pentagon's Defence Policy Board (once chaired ny Perle), is a director of the Washington-based private equity firm Paladin Capital. The company was set up three months after the terrorist attacks on New York and sees the events and aftermath of September 11 (as does Perle's Trireme Partners) as a business opportunity which 'offer[s] substantial promise for homeland security investment'.

--SNIP--

__________________________________________________

Advisors of Influence: Nine Members of the Defense Policy Board Have Ties to Defense Contractors

Center for Public Integrity, 28 March 2003

Former CIA director James Woolsey is a principal in the Paladin Capital Group, a venture-capital firm that like Perle's Trireme Partners is soliciting investment for homeland security firms. Woolsey joined consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton as vice president in July 2002. The company had contracts worth more than $680 million in 2002. Woolsey told the Wall Street Journal that he does no lobbying and that none of the companies he has ties to have been discussed during a Defense Policy Board meeting. Previously, Woolsey worked for law firm Shea & Gardner. He has held high-level positions in two Republican and two Democratic administrations.

--SNIP--

SOURCE URL http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:YqjNla2H8zUJ:home.earthlink.net/~platter/neo-conservatism/woolsey.html+Woolsey+(CIA)&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[ex-snook]

"Mr. Chalabi, a favorite of conservatives "

'Upon further review - Mr. Chalabi, a favorite of conservatives liberal neo-cons

[wildbill]

So they "marched", did they? Interesting choice of word. Sounds dramatic and confrontational. I wonder if they goose-stepped?"

Naw, I think the NYT editor's style book says that conservatives always "march in lock-step."

[M. Dodge Thomas]

The above is the most astounding article I've ever read in the mainstream US press – you can almost hear the author's "Oh My God…. Holy #*$&%^ Shit" as she discovers that so many of the participants are willing, as the charges fly back and forth , to go on the record - and that so many of the people destined to be offered a last cigarette still seem to believe that this is some sort of Washington parlor game that's going to be played out on Sunday Afternoon talks shows without serious consequences for whoever is left standing once "Who Lost Iraq" get rolling.

This is potentially the most serious political scandal in American history – far worse, for example, that Watergate or Iran Contra – because it's immediately about the life and death matter of a horrible miscalculation: how a response to a declaration of war, an attack that killed 3000 American civilians, was transformed from a promising start applauded by much of the World first into the Gong Show of a bungled occupation run by warring factions in both the US and Iraq , then into a stomach-turning S&M video as American troops struggled under impossible conditions and incompetent leadership, and finally into a deadly farce conducted by self-interested fools desperately trying to cobble up the semblance of legitimate Government in Iraq even as they subvert the belief that we possess a competent government at home, men and women who still seem to believe, for example, that the Chalabis of the world matter to the future of Iraq anywhere other than within the labyrinths of their fantasies.

Now, it seems, the wheel has turned full circle, and the Right occupies the chair of infamy vacated by Left after the 1950s. Now, it is right wing unilateralist who now are found to have been the likely dupes of foreign intelligence services and their disinformation campaigns, to have leaked the classified information to further their private agendas, to have been on the payroll of the semi-official organs of other countries, to have been subject to seriously divided loyalties, to have consorted with questionable men and condoned unsound acts in pursuit of the greater good, and who now find that Historical Inevitability has abandoned them.

And I am afraid for my country, because this is going to get very, very ugly before it is through.

[Howlin]

So they "marched", did they? Interesting choice of word. Sounds dramatic and confrontational.

It would be a very SLOW march; there are at least three barriers and inspection points before you even set foot onto the White House driveway to get to the West Wing.

[Howlin]

Clinton didn't want to meet with him; he thought intelligence was "boring."

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Chalabi has/had documents on the Oil for Food scandal. He's lucky to be alive. That's why he's being smeared.

[WOSG]

"Conservative Americans........and I mean "conservatives"........don't like it when you hurt their conservative President."

ROFL!!

Real Conservatives are not suckers for a State Dept and CIA CYA move that blames an Iraqi politician

And they certainly NOT going to buy in the latest Leftist anti-Bush conspiracy theory hook-line-sinker: "Well, fergawdsake, dammit, you'd be mad, too, if alla your carefully made, decades-long plans were going kerflooey and the guy you had your money on is outed as a double agent, who said he made-up WMD info, which made the President of the United States look bad."

That is a slander not just against Chalabi but against the Bush white house. This is precisely why the leftist media is touting it... it's the media technique of 'dividing the right' - trying to create space between different factions. Problem is, the sources for this are the same 'anonymous leakers' who've been leaking anti-Bush anti-Iraq-war quotes for the past year.

"I mean, it's not nice to cast aspersions on a President."

Then dont imply he's part of the anti-Chalabi smear campaign when he isnt. Dont imply his administration 'looks bad'.