Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Best coverage of the Chalabi/Iranian spy story: Laura Rozen

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:09 PM
Original message
Best coverage of the Chalabi/Iranian spy story: Laura Rozen
Folks - This story - and where it looks like it is leading - is the worst thing that I have seen in my life. Please read Laura Rozen's blog - the entries for the past two days alone. Then add related news stories (for example I need to find the story that detailed the background of the Chalabi associate who has fled to Iran, which indicated that US Intel knew of his association with Iranian intel since the late 1990s.)

To be fully blunt - it is very possible - given the pieces that are falling together - that the neocons in their blind desire to:
1) get the intel needed to justify their war (be it real or not), and
2) place a "friendly" head to the new country
that they have been blind to the out in plain open ties to Iranian intelligence - including (it appears) an ongoing connection to the person incharge of Iranian covert operations against the US.

Now, the Pentagon has been framing the increased fighting on the ground as "more sophisticated and coordinated" - infering it is coming from the remnants of Saddam Loyalists, bolstered by "foreign fighters" (al qeada implied.) Now - would Iranian coordinated efforts fit that same description? Is that what we are possibly looking at?

Here are a few bites from her recent blog entries (note Rozen has written for the Nation, Salon, the Economist, the Boston Globe among other publications)

snippet one:
From the Guardian's Julian Borger today:

"An intelligence source in Washington said the CIA confirmed its long-held suspicions when it discovered that a piece of information from an electronic communications intercept by the National Security Agency had ended up in Iranian hands. The information was so sensitive that its circulation had been restricted to a handful of officials.

"This was 'sensitive compartmented information' - SCI - and it was tracked right back to the Iranians through Aras Habib," the intelligence source said.

Hmm.

And this, later on: "An intelligence source in Washington said the FBI investigation into the affair would begin with Mr Chalabi's 'handlers' in the Pentagon."


http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/000720.html


snippet two:
What really is Ahmad Chalabi thought to have done with Iran? One too many friendly conversations too far? A meeting unreported? Passing off a bit of US operational intelligence that the Iranians likely already had?

That's not what I'm being told. It was suggested to me today to revisit the allegations in the CBS 60 Minutes piece from May 21, 2004. I was told that gets at the real line that Chalabi is believed to have crossed, between a guy who has a relationship of convenience with neighboring Iran, to a guy who is working for the bad guys.

---snip

So two important points here: US intelligence officials are telling CBS that there is "undeniable" evidence that:

1) Chalabi himself has been having unreported meetings with

2) A senior Iranian intelligence official "with a direct hand in covert operations against the United States." In other words, someone who plans operations to kill Americans.


http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/000719.html

There is so much more... best place to start (and then fan out to other sources) is www.warandpiece.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Robert Parry (who pushed the Iran Contra story) weighs in:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/052504.html

Bush Sr.'s Iraq-Iran Secrets
By Robert Parry
May 25, 2004


Before the Iraq War spins further out of control, former President George H.W. Bush should sit down his son, George W. Bush, and level with him about the real history of U.S. relations with Iraq, Iran and Israels Likud Party even if the father has to admit to illegal and unethical conduct in the process.

The latest Iraq embarrassment allegations that the longtime U.S. favorite Ahmed Chalabi and the intelligence chief for Chalabis Iraqi National Congress were Iranian spies derives from the younger Bushs continuing failure to see the Middle East as it is, not how he might like it to be. While Bush junior crafts hopeful nation-building plans, he doesnt seem to have the foggiest notion who the players are, where their true allegiances may lie or why these conflicting interests could undermine U.S. policy.

---snip---

Many of the overly optimistic assumptions behind the war, as well as much of the supposed evidence of Iraqi WMD stockpiles, came from Chalabi and his associates. After the invasion, U.S. forces discovered that much of the information was bogus.

Initially, many observers suspected that Chalabi had promoted the false information either to make money or to get the U.S. to install him in power in Iraq. But the new allegations suggest that Chalabi also may have been a stalking horse for Iranian leaders seeking to get the United States to do what Iran couldnt do: remove Saddam Hussein from power.

On May 21, Chalabis Baghdad home was raided by U.S.-backed Iraqi police as part of an investigation into suspicions that INC officials had passed sensitive intelligence about U.S. troop positions to Iran. A warrant also was issued for the arrest of Aras Habib, Chalabis top intelligence adviser, on a variety of charges. Appearing on U.S. news programs, Chalabi has denied the smear and blamed CIA Director George Tenet for spreading the allegations.

more....
long article - recounts the October surprise story and others - have to read well into it to get to the current story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. That is superb reporting--as usual for Parry.
Thanks so much for posting that. I've sent it out to my list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
July Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. And what's Chalabi doing with sensitive U.S. classified info? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Exactly - which is my answer to the question "why hasn't he been arrested"
because he KNOWS how the info that was passed on... got into his hands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. meaning?...Bush/Rove to Chalabi to the Iranians
and the military catching on, being that the solidiers are getting killed, caught Chalabi not knowing that the real source was of the info in the end was their commander in chief? hmmmmm...the worm turns
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I actually don't think it was bush - save his ignorance & trust
for the malevolent neocons even long after they have proven they are at best incompetent, at worst intentionally doing harm to the country.

in the Cheney, Lutti, Feith, Wolfie cabal. My best bet is that on orders of the above - there were joint efforts with Habib and DIA (reportedly 2 dia agents shared an office with Habib)... and that info was shared back and forth (Habib tasked with collecting intel from - I believe - Saddam's old papers - a joint effort with the DIA)... and that in this process intel that shouldn't have been shared - intel that few had the level of security needed to access - and that intel ended up in the hands of Iranian intelligence.

So indirectly back to bush. Directly back, in terms of orders and assignments to bush's neocon advisors and/or their direct underlings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. Once Again They Got PLAYED Big Time
Morons...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. and once again - because they were so blinded by what they wanted
they put OUR national security at risk. Like Plame - but even more obvious to the public if it ever comes out so clearly documented.

These folks are venal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
5. per Habib (the one who fled to Iran) from Josh Marshall
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/002992.php

(May 22, 2004 -- 02:17 AM EDT)
On the new charges that Ahmed Chalabi's 'intelligence chief' Aras Karim is in fact an Iranian spy, Knut Royce's piece in Newsday contains the biggest bombshells. This is a follow-up on his piece from yesterday.

The Post meanwhile has a lengthier, though less clear-cut account, which includes important new details and an interview with Chalabi's long-time Washington handler Francis Brooke.

(ed. note: Most of the articles discussing this issue refer to the man in question as Aras Karim Habib, though he is sometimes referred to as Aras Habib, Aras Karim, or Aras Habib Karim.)

---snip---

We've been discussing for some time that Chalabi's connections to the Iranians and his flow of money from the Iranians has been known about among Chalabi's Washington supporters for years. But suspicions that Aras Karim was an Iranian agent are not new either.

Take this October 13th, 1998 New York Times article, which says that "An F.B.I. report said Mr. Karim's cousin Aras Habib Muhamad Al-Ufayli, who had been the intelligence chief for the Iraqi National Congress, had a 'well-documented connection to Iranian intelligence.'"

---snip---
Two years later, Dr. Ali Yasin Mohammed Karim, of the six original detainees, was finally released from INS custody. And the following passage appeared in an August 19th, 2000 article in the LA Times (emphasis added)...

Attorneys for the INS have contended that there is a reasonable belief Karim is a danger to national security. They have argued that one of the doctor's cousins is a suspected Iranian intelligence agent, the doctor's travel patterns were suspicious, and he might have misled federal agents about how his brother Mohammed made it into the United States.

more...

Thanks Josh - I couldn't remember where I had read this - but if the way the pieces appear to fit together for me are correct - this information (that this information was out in the plain open and intentionally ignored) seems to be significant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
9. kick. IMPORTANT stuff here, folks!
Dots are connected here!

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. I think so too... the implications are staggering
but I didn't start the post framing it as a rant or counter rant at a particular radio host :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. So How Many Times By Your Count Has the Admin. Committed Treason?
I'd say this counts as treason
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. If one counts this? Seems to be three clear cut cases
taking us into war on KNOWN false information... or... use the legal grounds for impeachement that John Dean refers to in bush's NOT living up to the IWR before sending troops to war.

the Plame affair - with the biggest point missed by most of the public, that these folks were willing to risk national security in order to cover political ass - hasn't seemed to push into the public psyche that they destroyed a longstanding intelligence gathering operation that tracked the international flow of WMDs - (allowing for the disruption of that flow if/when about to fall in "terrorist or rogue state" hands.)

And this - particularly if my speculations are correct (I recognize at this point it is speculative) that the intel recently flowing to Iran could/has led to attacks against US interests on the ground in Iraq.

Your count?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. I think it's a kind of treason that they have pissed on so many treaties
that former governments signed onto--especially the fourth Geneva Convention. Isn't that grounds for impeachment at the least? If not criminal charges? By pissing on that convention in particular, they've endangered Americans (not to mention innocent Iraqis, Afghans, etc.) by breeding terrorists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I think the multiple violations of the Geneva Conventions
is exceptionally serious - and does present great danger to Americans (and others - as we have already seen.) This one also has the potential to do serious damage to this particular administration - as it appears that there is a paper trail leading pretty far up the chain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Yeah, 3 Counts of Treason by my Reckoning...Maybe 4
Edited on Tue May-25-04 03:18 PM by Beetwasher
and really bad one's too...Possibly four if one can make a case for criminal negligence/complicity in 9/11...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. I think an easier case is made for criminal negligence
they turned a blind eye on many things - derailed efforts - and placed Cheney in charge who did nothing (but his energy binge for industry) in the first 9 months of the year. Couldn't even be bothered to hold a single meeting, even when the "chatter" was escalating and "Tenet was going around with his hair on fire."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. You know something is wrong with DU when not even Will Pitt
can get people interested in this. His thread is off page one! :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. It Could Just Be Overload
Things are happening so fast and furious right now it's hard to keep up...How's this story playing in TV land?

They oughta be plastering that pic of Bush standing next to Chalabi all over the place w/ the caption "WH Duped by Iranian Spy Ahmed Chalabi"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. heh
once again post the same thing before I have read what your wrote (per overload.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. LOL!
Great minds and all that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Folks were distracted with the early Plame stuff
if I recall the magnitude of what they had betrayed to a little work for folks to see and glomb onto. Like this story there was a flurry of immediate discussion per speculation... then it branched out - but again the implications just sat there... unspoken. Then after a few discussions like this... steam started picking up - in terms of the bigger picture of what that story was about. Am hoping that will be the case with this as well.

I think folks see this as a past tense story. But it is definitely an active story. The intel that was passed - happened within the last month. They weren't talking about conning the neocons with prewar intel at that time. Pretty heavy stuff - perhaps folks are really burnt out on the heavy. There have been so many outrages as of late - maybe this is just too hard to take on at the moment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. That's probably true. It did take Plame a while to gather steam
and even then, it's still kind of just sitting there. I wonder if there's anybody anywhere--the media, the Congress or somewhere--who can synthesize this and make it really stick.

Now that I think of it, Watergate took a long while to boil, as well. I remember George McGovern's half hour ad on election eve 1972 when he went over the basics of the break-in. But it wasn't until June 1973, I think, that the story really exploded.

This story needs an explosion before election day!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
14. Neocon stupidity has screwed us all
Their arrogance and greed blinded them to the real consequences of invading Iraq, and Iran fed them the lies they wanted to hear through Chalabi. Now we get to watch as the Iranians use their influence in Iraq to take control of the country.

Good job you goddamned morons!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
25. Is The CIA Behind the Raid on Chalabi???
Edited on Tue May-25-04 04:17 PM by Beetwasher
I mean solely responsible. Think about this for a second. Rummy didn't know about it apparently. Could this be more payback from the intel agencies???? Could they have set up this raid of Chalabi independently from DOD to embarrass Rummy and the admin???? All the sources for this story are intel, including the claims that it's "rock solid" that he passed very damaging evidence on to Iran...And we all know how PO'd intel is at the admin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Yes we do, and we also know that you piss off the CIA at your peril.
At your peril.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. does seem to be a big case of that going around right now...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. My understanding is that the "goods" were delivered by
the Jordanians, during the King of Jordan's visit. Whole slew of directions that could be derived from. Laura Rozen speculates that the initial break in attitudes may have come from... the WH itself after Chalabi began speaking out against the US (as the US began to talk about the UN plan - which would cut Chalabi out). Seems that the key contact with Chalabi in Iraq is a former colleague (mentor?) of Rice who speaks frequently with George. So it is possible that he starts getting pissed off (we know how W reacts to "disloyalty") - and a window of opportunity to wedge action beyond the Neocons becomes visible through the King of Jordan's visit. Did the Jordanian's have the info ("irrefutable" we are told) and someone tip off that the time is right? Or did someone feed that info to the Jordanians? This is important because it shifts the whole game and allows the avalanche to start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. one more kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JetCityLiberal Donating Member (706 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-04 12:20 AM
Response to Original message
31. Incredible work here salin
Important information, bookmarked and will pass along.

Thank you for this salin. You do and have done great work here at DU. :thumbsup:



Again, this is VERY important and must read information.



JetCityLiberal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-04 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. Thanks for the feedback and encouragement
It seems to be an important story that many are quickly dismissing out of hand as more neocon tricks (which, in the end it could be, but it appears that there are so many threads to it that it seems unlikely, imo.) Only through trying to make sense of what is out there did I run across Laura Rozen's (war and piece) site (either through Josh Marshall, or through the Washingtonmonthly) - and she deserves a great deal of credit for following this much more closely than just about anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-04 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
33. Kick again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul 25th 2014, 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC