Tuesday, November 25, 2003

KING AHMED: I almost forgot to note a fascinating piece from yesterday's Post on Ahmed Chalabi. It's a bit hostile, but rightly so.

Lang raises the question of the millions that were appropriated by Congress for the Iraqi National Congress primarily because Chalabi lobbied for it. "Where did it go?" he asks.

State Department officials have suggested that Chalabi ran off with the money, according to several sources. The State Department conducted an audit that found nothing to indicate the money had been misused, but found few receipts to show how it had been spent. But then, according to a State Department staffer, word filtered down from the White House: no more audits of Chalabi. That infuriated the people at State.
Trust me, this article has lots of ammunition for us anti-Chalabis. And it seems that both Paul Wolfowitz and Bush himself aren't satisfied with King Ahmed either.
After the meeting with Rice, Chalabi reports that it went well but that Rice told him his "message has to be better." A senior administration official says that Wolfowitz also "read him the riot act." Clearly the White House was still irritated by his statement at the U.N. siding with the French.

[...] Jordan's King Abdullah didn't help matters: When he met with Bush recently, he is said to have delivered a broadside against his old nemesis, who was convicted of embezzling millions from a Jordanian bank. According to a friend of Abdullah's, the president reacted to the information with outrage at Chalabi.
I don't think he's not being the puppet the Pentagon wants him to be, but he's just corrupt and out for himself. It's not like he's switched sides. Not by a long shot.


Post a Comment

<< Home