Not about the oil after all?

[redbird]

I didn't blog this for a couple of days, because I assumed everyone would see it: but apparently the "paper of record" doesn't think it's fit to print:

Iran has denied recent reports that it was using the neo-cons' darling Ahmed Chalabi to pass disinformation--lies, in ordinary English--to the Bush administration. Specifically, to the people who don't see any reason to bother verifying such things, if the information supports what they wanted to do anyway.

Maybe the war wasn't about the oil. Maybe the U.S. invaded Iraq because Iran wasn't happy about a hostile, secular government next door.

Comments

[acrobatty.livejournal.com]

I can't for the life of me understand how a story this big can turn up in Newsday -- not exactly the Podunk Peddler, y'know? -- and get ignored by everyone else. The only thing I can think of is that it came out Friday and the weekend papers were already in press, but that doesn't really make sense either. Maybe all the scooped media are desparately trying to confirm or disprove before they publish, so they'll have something new to say?

And yes, it is sickening. And if the public has the sense G-d gave bastard geese in Ireland, it should result in the Bushies being vomited out from high position.

[zsero.livejournal.com]

That's assuming that the accusations against Chalabi are actually true. They might not be (http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200405211643.asp), you know.

Also, the reasons for the invasion, as laid out, e.g., in the Congressional resolution authorising it, are all still true. And even many of the suspicions that weren't verified enough to make it into that resolution are turning out to be true after all.

Not only does British Intelligence still maintain that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Africa, we now have it confirmed from the very person who claimed to have debunked it, Joseph Wilson. While Bush's famous 16 words didn't specify Niger, and there may very well have been attempts elsewhere in Africa as well, the fact is that Wilson now admits that in fact he did find an Iraqi attempt to buy uranium from Niger, though he reported that it was unsuccessful. Which is irrelevant, since Bush's accusation was that they had tried to aquire it (thereby showing that they had an active development program for which they needed it), not that they had succeeded.

And of course there is the mustard gas that the Syrian terrorists were caught with in Jordan, supposedly enough to kill tens of thousands of people, and now the sarin shell.

Botton line: even if Chalabi was an Iranian spy, it doesn't affect the legitimacy of the war, and it certainly doesn't do anything for the ridiculous claim that the invasion was 'for the oil', something that has no basis in either fact or logic.

[avram]

Not only does British Intelligence still maintain that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Africa, we now have it confirmed from the very person who claimed to have debunked it, Joseph Wilson.

When did this happen? I’ve seen it mentioned that Wilson says (in his new book) that Hussein’s information minister, Mohammed Saeed Sahhaf, approached an unnamed Nigerian official in 1999 to discuss trade, and that when Wilson asked, the official “hesitated and looked up to the sky as if plumbing the depths of his memory, then offered that perhaps the Iraqi might have wanted to talk about uranium.” That’s hardly confirmation.

[tavella.livejournal.com]

It's one of the GOP talking points from a couple of weeks ago -- all the trolls were posting about it on Atrios and Dailykos. It's the same reference as Wilson mentioned in his original report , one official of some sort said 'Well, I did get approached about doing business with Iraq, I suppose it could have had something do with getting yellowcake.'

Poor little wingnuts. They really are having a hard time dealing with the fact they were lied to on every point and have backed a morally degenerate regime that is collapsing under the weight of its own evil and incompetence.

[redbird]

That the Defense Intelligence Agency believes that Chalabi is an Iranian agent is newsworthy, even if there's evidence that they're mistaken in that. Also, the claim isn't just that he was giving information to Iran: it's that the information he gave Bush et al., which was used to support the war, was lies supplied by the Iranian government.

[supergee.livejournal.com]

Before the Iranian spy story came out, I had already decided that anyone who trusted Ahmad Chalabi was either a moron or someone desperate for a proper source for what they want to do do anyway.

Re: Not about the oil after all?

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

there's a surprise. ahmed chalabi a sleezeball only out for his own profit? this isn't news to anyone who's been reading the early iraqi blogs and relevant references; they've been saying it from the get-go.

i wonder whether neo-cons are constitutionally unable to say "damn, we were wrong". i guess it does become difficult to admit to mistakes if one is an ideologue. which is why ordinary people should be extremely wary of voting for this mishpoke, regardless of what one thinks of saddam hussein and al-qaeda. they helped build these monstrous forces. they won't get my blood for putting them to rest under false pretenses now. i'd like to see some decency first.