BahirJ Posted April 26, 2004 Report Share Posted April 26, 2004 An interesting article that I would like to share it with you. As many pro-Saddam, anti-American, pro-Arab nationalists treat Dr. Chalabi phenomena as a threat. Is he a threat or a hope? In Defense of Dr. Chalabi – Who Is Lakhdar Brahimi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajer Posted April 26, 2004 Report Share Posted April 26, 2004 Below please find the latest from "Alzaeem" Alchalabi.. On his interview with FOX news on 04/26 CHALABI: Mr. Brahimi is an Algerian with an Arab nationalist agenda. He already is a controversial figure in Iraq. He is not a unifying figure. He is supposed to be a unifying figure, so he can choose a government that will be effective. And I hope that he will work out a way to respond to the wishes of the Iraqi people that is commensurate with what they think they should have. And I believe that he should be more sensitive to the realities of Iraq. CHALABI: First of all, the Iraqi people will reject entirely the participation of senior Baathists and those who have committed crimes in the government of Iraq at any level, and especially at the high level of government. But I want to clarify that Ambassador Bremer has not changed the de-Baathification policy. What he announced is an agreement with the de-Baathification Commission and the Governing Council. We came to an agreement that we must speed up the appeals process. And that's all we said. Today, he sent a letter to the Governing Council. Ambassador Bremer said in his letter that there is no change in the de- Baathification policy of the CPA and, in fact, the commitment to the de-Baathification is stronger than ever. And the Governing Council also issued a statement confirming this and saying that we are in agreement with Ambassador Bremer. So there is no change in the de-Baathification policy. CHALABI: There are no negotiations that are going on about Fallujah today. In fact, there are mediation efforts by some of the tribal leaders with the Iraqi Governing Council, and the CPA is also participating in those. But the fighters, nobody can bind the fighters. They are former Baathists of high rank, and they are also terrorists and members of the Zarqawi's group and Al Qaida. There is no negotiation with them. They are not going to be bound by any appeals if they don't feel like it. And any one of them, any group of them can upset any agreement, because they are not the ones that are being involved in the negotiations. They carry the guns and nobody is talking to them, and they should not. Those are terrorists, former Baathists, who are threatening the new order in Iraq, and they are threatening democracy in Iraq, and they are killing American soldiers. This is not the way to deal with this issue. The issue of terrorism must be dealt with firmly. We must work very hard to avoid loss of life. We must work very hard to avoid civilian casualties. And those terrorists and Baathists are holding the people of Fallujah hostage. We must release the hostages. CHALABI: The Iraqi people do not understand occupation. The Iraqi people do not want to be occupied, and the mistake initially was in not creating a provisional Iraqi government that would be the ally of the United States in the war against the terrorist, fascist Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein. Below please find the whole interview Posted by: Editor on Monday, April 26, 2004 - 08:00 AM The following is an excerpt from FOX News Sunday, April 25, 2004. CHRIS WALLACE, HOST, FOX NEWS SUNDAY: In just 66 days, the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq will hand over sovereignty to an interim Iraqi government. But despite the short time left, there is still all sorts of turmoil about who will be in that new government and how much power it will have. Right in the middle of all the controversy, our first guest joins us from Baghdad, Ahmed Chalabi, a member of the current Iraqi Governing Council. And, Dr. Chalabi, welcome. Good to have you with us. AHMED CHALABI, IRAQI GOVERNING COUNCIL MEMBER: Thank you. WALLACE: There are reports that the U.S. and the U.N. have decided to exclude almost all members of the current Governing Council when they create the new government to take power on June 30th, and that at the top of the list of those most likely to be excluded is you. Have you heard from either U.S. or U.N. officials that you are out? CHALABI: No. It is -- I have not heard anything. Neither has anybody in the Governing Council. And the Governing Council consists of leaders of the Iraqi people. Nobody can exclude them from the government of Iraq. WALLACE: Well, let me ask you about this, because the U.S. is relying on the U.N. envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, to pick the new government. What do you think of the U.S. relying on the U.N. and Mr. Brahimi to help create the new Iraq? CHALABI: The U.S. will follow the Iraqi transitional law, which Ambassador Bremer signed into law after the Governing Council agreed to it. And that, plus the CPA and the Iraqi Governing Council, choose the new government of Iraq. And I think it's not a good start for a new, sovereign government of Iraq to start with violating the transitional administrative law. WALLACE: What do you think of Mr. Brahimi? Do you think he's the right person to help advise in the creation of the new Iraq? CHALABI: Mr. Brahimi is an Algerian with an Arab nationalist agenda. He already is a controversial figure in Iraq. He is not a unifying figure. He is supposed to be a unifying figure, so he can choose a government that will be effective. And I hope that he will work out a way to respond to the wishes of the Iraqi people that is commensurate with what they think they should have. And I believe that he should be more sensitive to the realities of Iraq. WALLACE: Dr. Chalabi, I know that another mistake that you feel the U.S. is making is this so-called de-Baathification, reaching out to former members of Saddam Hussein's government and military. Now, on Friday, the U.S. administrator, Paul Bremer, said that Iraq needs some members of the old government and that you have gone too far in purging them. How will the Shiite community react if members of the former Sunni Saddam Hussein regime end up with big jobs? CHALABI: First of all, the Iraqi people will reject entirely the participation of senior Baathists and those who have committed crimes in the government of Iraq at any level, and especially at the high level of government. But I want to clarify that Ambassador Bremer has not changed the de-Baathification policy. What he announced is an agreement with the de-Baathification Commission and the Governing Council. We came to an agreement that we must speed up the appeals process. And that's all we said. Today, he sent a letter to the Governing Council. Ambassador Bremer said in his letter that there is no change in the de- Baathification policy of the CPA and, in fact, the commitment to the de-Baathification is stronger than ever. And the Governing Council also issued a statement confirming this and saying that we are in agreement with Ambassador Bremer. So there is no change in the de-Baathification policy. WALLACE: Let's turn to Fallujah. President Bush is reportedly deciding this weekend whether to end the negotiations and, OK, launch an attack on the insurgents in that city. If he does decide to do so, and if it turns bloody, as in almost all likelihood it will, what will be the reaction in the rest of Iraq? CHALABI: There are no negotiations that are going on about Fallujah today. In fact, there are mediation efforts by some of the tribal leaders with the Iraqi Governing Council, and the CPA is also participating in those. But the fighters, nobody can bind the fighters. They are former Baathists of high rank, and they are also terrorists and members of the Zarqawi's group and Al Qaida. There is no negotiation with them. They are not going to be bound by any appeals if they don't feel like it. And any one of them, any group of them can upset any agreement, because they are not the ones that are being involved in the negotiations. They carry the guns and nobody is talking to them, and they should not. Those are terrorists, former Baathists, who are threatening the new order in Iraq, and they are threatening democracy in Iraq, and they are killing American soldiers. This is not the way to deal with this issue. The issue of terrorism must be dealt with firmly. We must work very hard to avoid loss of life. We must work very hard to avoid civilian casualties. And those terrorists and Baathists are holding the people of Fallujah hostage. We must release the hostages. WALLACE: Dr. Chalabi, when this war began, you were a favorite of the Pentagon and of Vice President Cheney. Your group still gets -- although there's talk about cutting it off -- I think it's $340,000 a month for intelligence gathering. But there are increasing complaints here in -- among Bush administration officials that you gave the U.S. bad information into the lead-up to the war, that your organization coached defectors to tell horror stories to U.S. intelligence, that basically you sold the U.S. a bill of goods. CHALABI: Of course these are false charges. They were hyped up by people, journalists with an agenda and people who have tried to do blame shifting. I think this story should be put to rest after the revelations of Mr. Woodward and his book. He clearly lays the responsibility where it ought to be on the issue of weapons of mass destruction. And he clearly states who gave the United States government information and who was in charge in the United States of the information and its analysis. He does not say anything about us. In fact, he says the negative, that others -- many people in the United States did not believe we gave them false information, or, for most of the people who were interviewed, did not even say that this information had any significant impact on the decision of the U.S. to go to war. The U.S. has... WALLACE: Dr. Chalabi, let me give you one example that people cite, however. And this is the question of Saddam Hussein putting biological weapons labs on trucks. According to U.S. intelligence officials, the two prime sources for that information were people that your organization provided. One of them turned out to be a known fabricator, and the other, the prime source, who was code named Curveball, just turned out to be the brother of one of your top lieutenants. CHALABI: That's a lie. There is no Curveball that is the brother of any member of the INC leadership at the high level or at the low level. We don't know who he is, we never heard of him, and we have nothing to do with this information, and we never saw him. As for the other person, we presented him to the United States and they took his information. CHALABI: We did not coach him. They met him a few times, and they decided whether to take this information or not. We did not press him on them. We thought that it may be useful for them to talk to him. But that is not how it happened. The point is, this Curveball incident is an example of the blame-shifting and the lies that have been spread about our role in this. WALLACE: Dr. Chalabi, finally, I think a lot of people in this country are surprised where we find ourself, both in terms of the military situation and the political, one year in. What, if anything, do you think that the U.S.-led coalition has done wrong so far, and what do they need to do? CHALABI: The Iraqi people do not understand occupation. The Iraqi people do not want to be occupied, and the mistake initially was in not creating a provisional Iraqi government that would be the ally of the United States in the war against the terrorist, fascist Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein. WALLACE: Dr. Chalabi, we're going to have to leave it there. Thank you so much for joining us today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_Tajer Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 http://www.pukmedia.net/link/link-hawal/28-4/10.htm A growing upset by Iraqis agaisnt Al Ibrahimi.. They accused him of being pro Saddamees! Need to know that Ibrahimi was a deputy for the bad reputation Arab leage for long time.. According to the kirdish link abaove, there iare plans to have a big demostaration against the Ibrahim in Baghdad , may be on Thursday asking to abandon him as UN representatative to Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_Tajer Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 http://www.nahrain.com/d/news/04/04/28/nhr0428g.html Another important article by important Iraqi SHia scholar reflecting the growing anger among Shia and Kurd for the new announced American policy of reconsidering the Debaathification and what the wirtiter call it the new de Shiaiation on the hands of Ibrahimi and other Arab factionist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted April 29, 2004 Report Share Posted April 29, 2004 Tex, in this UN report he includes : Warns of Dramatic, Long-lasting Consequences of Bloody Confrontation In Absence of Peaceful Resolution of Standoffs in Fallujah, Najaf, Karbala This from Dorros about Alsader uprise Indeed I am noticing a growing suspicions by Iraqis toward Ibrahimi good will, may be becuase of his background as Arab nationalist and being working for the Arab leage which is considered by most Iraqis as a Saddam supporter. I personally feel that the man is doing his best .. All those who might not agree with some of the Ibrahimi's proposals , such as the policy toward Debaathification, need to raise their voice against it not against the man. It is good point though to hight light that his call for all Iraqis.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airedale Posted April 29, 2004 Report Share Posted April 29, 2004 I don't know if this is the place to post this NY Times article on the UN or not. just putting it out here; NY Times on the UN U.N. OIL PAPERS VANISH By NILES LATHEM April 29, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - The vast majority of the United Nations' oil-for-food contracts in Iraq have mysteriously vanished, crippling investigators trying to uncover fraud in the program, a government report charged yesterday. The General Accounting Office report, presented at a congressional hearing into the scandal-plagued program, determined that 80 percent of U.N. records had not been turned over. The world body claims it transferred all information it had - including 3,059 contracts worth about $6.2 billion for delivery of food and other civilian goods to the post-Saddam governing body, the Coalition Provisional Authority. But the GAO report also found that a database the U.N. transferred to the authority was "unreliable because it contained mathematical and currency errors in calculation of contract costs," the report found. The GAO findings, which were aired at a hearing of the House International Relations Committee, raise new questions about corruption and mismanagement in the biggest-ever U.N. aid program - and what has been called the biggest financial scandal in history. An earlier GAO report said Saddam ripped off over $10 billion. Committee Chairman Henry Hyde said the report raised serious concerns - and could have "a potential impact on the reputation and credibility of the United Nations." "If these charges prove true, some of the obvious victims are those Iraqis who failed to receive needed assistance," Hyde (R-Ill.) said. "But the damage extends further. The massive windfall resulting from this organized theft allowed Saddam to maintain his grip on the country, line his pockets and make companies and countries dance to his tune, with consequences we are still trying to contain." Investigators are interested in Benon Sevan, the U.N. official who managed the program. Sevan denied wrongdoing after his name appeared on an Iraqi newspaper's list of several officials, businessmen and others who profited from the program. The oil-for-food program, which the U.N. ran from 1997 until the war, allowed Iraq to sell oil in order to buy food and other civilian goods - thereby easing the sanctions imposed after the 1991 Gulf War. A former oil-for-food program coordinator testified at yesterday's hearing that in the early stages his U.N. superiors were openly hostile to U.S. efforts to contain Saddam. "For reasons I have yet to fully understand, several U.N. leaders approached the implementation of the oil-for-food program with more distrust towards the United Kingdom and United States than towards the regime of Saddam Hussein," Michael Soussan said. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan fired back. "If you read the reports, it looks as if the Saddam regime had nothing to do with it. They did nothing wrong - it was all the U.N.," Annan said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_tajer Posted April 30, 2004 Report Share Posted April 30, 2004 That is interesting ! How can we trust UN for managing our new government.. They need to turn over the missing papers first! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_Tajer Posted April 30, 2004 Report Share Posted April 30, 2004 http://www.nahrain.com/d/news/04/04/30/bgd0430g.html In Arabic.. Minister of education declared that the process of returning those teacjhers that had been disbanded by Saddam's regime is slow becuase there is no much vacancies.. They returned about 4700 teacher and there are a long list of them to be reviewed.. He also declared that those hight four level rank Baathee's are allowed to submitte a reconsideration request to get them back.. I just wonder on what bases did MR. Ibrahimi based his assumptions about the need for Baathess's high rank teacher.. Till now there is no place for those who were abondened by The Baathes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Gentleman Posted April 30, 2004 Report Share Posted April 30, 2004 Tex, in this UN report he includes : Warns of Dramatic, Long-lasting Consequences of Bloody Confrontation In Absence of Peaceful Resolution of Standoffs in Fallujah, Najaf, Karbala This from Dorros about Alsader uprise Indeed I am noticing a growing suspicions by Iraqis toward Ibrahimi good will, may be becuase of his background as Arab nationalist and being working for the Arab leage which is considered by most Iraqis as a Saddam supporter. I personally feel that the man is doing his best .. All those who might not agree with some of the Ibrahimi's proposals , such as the policy toward Debaathification, need to raise their voice against it not against the man. It is good point though to hight light that his call for all Iraqis.. Salim thank you for your reply I understand many Iraqi's do not TRUST Ibrahami or the UN and I am no exception. I do not trust Ibrahimi for the same reasons some posters here have pointed out....(his ties to the Arab League etc)....... and my overall trust of the UN is even less for failing to support the overthrow of Sadamns atrocious regime. This resulted from the reprehensible conduct of the UN Security Council by countries such as France, Germany and Russia who where protecting their sweetheart deals with Sadamn (Oil for Palaces), It also has been pointed out the UN ran away at the first hint of trouble when they did show up in Iraq and were bombed because of there own stupidity... However, the reason Ibrahimi is there in Iraq has been clearly expressed (by the UN) The USA and the Coalition will hold Ibrahami and the UN accountable to those expressed goals. I can tell you the USA does NOT TRUST and WILL VERIFY this outlined UN assisted program is followed to the letter. The Groups assembled from Iraqi scholars, technocrats, womens organizations, political parties, clerics, Turkomen, Sunni, Kurds Sunni, Shia, businessmen etc.... WILL be called together to pick NEW leaders for an INTERIM GOVERNMENT until elections can be held in Jan 2005. All Iraqs diverse people will be represented in these groups ... that is necessary to get agreements from competing factions of Iraq's people chosen for this interim period who will not favor one group over another. The key to it is protecting minority rights spelled out under the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL) until ALL Iraqis can choose representatives for themselves from every local area in organized and fair elections! .This interim period is necessary so Iraqis can see who from their respective groups best represent their interest before trying to elect someone they do not know anything about and it gives time for the NATIONAL elections to be organized for Jan 2005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.