No Comment

Do you find it odd that the US sent Chalabi up the river and the administration has no word on the subject?

. . . Chalabi's standing has gradually eroded, until yesterday, when a U.S.-backed raid on his compound marked a new nadir. Although Chalabi has always been a divisive figure, even quarters that once strongly supported him were distancing themselves yesterday. Many administration officials would not speak on the record yesterday because of the contentious relations some had with him.

"The vast majority of reports of his proximity to and influence on administration policy have been greatly exaggerated," said a senior administration official involved in Iraq policy who knows Chalabi. "The reality is that he was among a wide variety of Iraqi figures who made the case to an array of American officials over a period of time for the liberation of the Iraqi people." [emphasis added]

I doubt that's exactly why administration officials aren't speaking, and I find it similarly fanciful to say that a man who received a tenth of a billion dollars from Congress wasn't important to the government. In fact it seems to me that if the administration planned to abandon its wonder boy, it would come up with some sort of soundbyte to toss off on the press. Especially if they believe he sold American intelligence to Iran—if that's true, why not sing that song? What's with the silence?

UPDATE: Yglesias wants to know who in the US government gave Chalabi information—and then who in the US government decided to sic the FBI on Chalabi. Nothing like the government going after the government in the middle of a war to win the hearts and minds of the liberated!

Posted by Kriston at May 21, 2004 9:36 AM