corrente

Uh oh, Dan Okrent's all excited. Apparently Ahmed Chalabi's girlfriend Judy let fly with a shocker whopper which wasn't really a shocker or much of a whopper at all but rather more like a sloppy hooter got loose from its hopper. And right on TV to booter. On a Sunday! Uh my gawd! And now she, Miss Judy, is off getting drunk in a motel room in Miami - or something - and Dan can't get a hold of her and her stepdad Mr. Keller won't let Dan see her or even talk to her and none of her friends is fessing up a thing. Christ, it's like a Gidget movie - or something.

Talking on the Air and Out of Turn: The Trouble With TV, By DANIEL OKRENT - February 6, 2005

LAST Sunday, Times reporter Judith Miller appeared on MSNBC's "Hardball With Chris Matthews" to discuss the Iraqi elections. In the course of the conversation Miller said sources had told her the Bush administration "has been reaching out" to the Iraqi political figure Ahmad Chalabi "to offer him expressions of cooperation." She continued, "According to one report, he was even offered a chance to be an interior minister in the new government." This led Matthews to interrupt Miller, exclaim "Wait a minute!" and press her to elaborate.

[...]

But to anyone who has tried to follow the jagged contours of Ahmed Chalabi's connections to the Bush administration, Miller's statement was a shocker.

Oh yeah sure, it was a real shocker. It was so shocking I decided to revisit the transcripts of Ahmed Chalabi speaking with Wolf Blitzer at CNN (about the election in Iraq) earlier on that same Sunday.

BLITZER: So, what happens to you now? What position would you like to see - you're on one of the main Shiite lists that supposedly is going to be doing very well. Would you like to be the next prime minister of Iraq?

CHALABI: I would like to be in the assembly. In the case I win, I would like to be in the assembly because I think the assembly is the power center in Iraq. It is the most important power center.

BLITZER: But are you hoping that the assembly, eventually when they have to name a new prime minister, are they hoping that it might be you?

CHALABI: I'm hoping clearly to influence issues in the assembly. The most important thing is the constitution and the status of forces agreement and the security, the finance. All these things are very important, and I expect to be involved in them.

[...]

BLITZER: Mr. Chalabi, what about your relationship with the Bush administration right now? It was once excellent in the weeks, month, years leading up to the war. It's deteriorated, as you know. Do you still speak with top U.S. officials, and if you do, with whom?

CHALABI: No, I don't speak to top U.S. officials. I have not (UNINTELLIGIBLE) they have. And I think this was a hostility to (UNINTELLIGIBLE) by various U.S. authorities, which is almost nonexistent now. Contacts at the low level have started, and I expect them to continue at this rate.

Ok, so Chalabi has not spoken to US officials. Then again, maybe he has talked to US officials. "Contacts" having begun at lower levels and all. Blitzer continues:

BLITZER: Are you bitter about the way this has turned out?

CHALABI: Not at all. This is just about normal. I'm not bitter at all. I don't look back. I want to look forward. And my role in Iraq now is in the assembly.

Ok, so early in the interview Chalabi "would like to be in the assembly" and was expecting to be involved with the assembly, but, by the end of the interview, he's announcing that his "role in Iraq now is in the assembly." Well, dip me in shit. What's it gonna be Ahmed? In or out? Make up your mind because you're letting flies into the kitchen.

So then, is Miller simply confirming what Chalabi alluded to on CNN? Are those "sources" who are "reaching out", as Miller termed it, the same low level contacts Chalabi is speaking of with Blitzer? And are those people who "offered" Chalabi "a chance to be an interior minister in the new government", as Miller stated, also the same contacts Chalabi mentions? Well, Okrent? What does the Times know about that? Chalabi seems pretty confident that he's going to be sitting at that "power center" by the time he finishes talking with Wolf Blitzer hours before Miller appears on Hardball. Awright, let's let Okrent continue...

This piece of news hadn't appeared in The Times that morning; it didn't appear in The Times the next morning; as I write this column, on Friday, it still hasn't appeared. A lengthy analysis of the election aftermath by reporter Dexter Filkins, published Tuesday, didn't even hint of any current contact between Chalabi and the Bush administration.

Oooops! Danny boy, buy a fucking television! Sign up for cable! Check out transistor radios while yer at it. They're really neat too. And then, if ya have some time go read the CNN transcript from Sunday Jan 30: Wolf Blitzer

Okrent thrashes on:

Judging by their absence from the paper, one must conclude that either Miller's Chalabi revelations were wrong or unsubstantiated or that The Times is suppressing an important piece of news. If the first, the paper has suffered a blow to its credibility: Matthews introduced Miller as "an investigative reporter for The New York Times." The ID on the screen said "Judith Miller, 'The New York Times'." At five separate points in the show Matthews invoked her connection to The Times, as any host would.

Oh for Christ sake shut the fuck up with the paranoia and self important bellowing about suppressing an important piece of news etc. You fuckers at the NYT have been burying important pieces of news for years. Who do you think you're kidding. The problem is that your newspaper all too frequently has had its head up its own ass staring at its own glistening intestinal tract as if it were the greatest shit fit to print. That's part of the NYTimes credibility problem. It has no idea what the fuck is going on around it. The New York Times needs to PULL ITS HEAD OUT OF ITS OWN ASS and open a fucking window and let in some fresh air for a change.

Okrent rambles on becoming more excited and melodramatic:

If there's an act of suppression going on, the price is of course incalculable. But I don't remotely think that is the case. I've been able to determine with a very high degree of confidence that editors in the two departments most likely to have an interest in Miller's Chalabi assertions were unaware of them. (Miller was away from New York this week, and did not respond to messages I left on her office phone, her cellphone, and on e-mail. Executive editor Bill Keller declined to discuss the matter. "I'm sorry to be unhelpful on this one, but Judy faces a serious danger of being sent to jail for protecting a confidential source," Keller told me in an e-mail message. "I think this is not the time to be drawn into unrelated public discussions of Judy.")

Aw no. It's turned into a caper.

Look, any moron at the NYTimes who thinks that the Bush administration and its numerous spooky vassals from any number of spooky sources - be it CIA, Pentagon, NED, IRI, NDI or any other number of government and or covert networks operating on its behalf - haven't been in touch with Ahmed Chalabi and/or his associates is truly deluded. They should have their pencil sharpeners confiscated immediately. For God sake again. This is old stuff and it goes back to the Reagan administration's creation of covert quasi-private back channels for the purpose of manipulating elections all over the globe. Ever heard of the NED (National Endowment for Democracy)? What do you think George W. Bush was talking about during his Jan 2004 SOTU when he said:

As long as the Middle East remains a place of tyranny and despair and anger, it will continue to produce men and movements that threaten the safety of America and our friends. So America is pursuing a forward strategy of freedom in the greater Middle East. We will challenge the enemies of reform, confront the allies of terror, and expect a higher standard from our friend. To cut through the barriers of hateful propaganda, the Voice of America and other broadcast services are expanding their programming in Arabic and Persian - and soon, a new television service will begin providing reliable news and information across the region. I will send you a proposal to double the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, and to focus its new work on the development of free elections, and free markets, free press, and free labor unions in the Middle East. And above all, we will finish the historic work of democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, so those nations can light the way for others, and help transform a troubled part of the world. (Applause.) ~ George W. Bush (SOTU Jan 20, 2004) White House.gov

The NED, Dan.

They fuck with other people's elections, and every other thing they can get their hooks into. That's their spooky mission.

Controversial U.S. Groups Operate Behind Scenes on Iraq Vote - by Lisa Ashkenaz Croke and Brian Dominick

Washington-funded organizations are hard at work providing assistance to political campaigns in the lead up to next month’s nationwide elections, but critics suggest their participation is anything but benevolent.

Dec 13, 2004 - Even as the White House decries the ominous prospect of Iranian influence on the upcoming Iraqi national elections, US-funded organizations with long records of manipulating foreign democracies in the direction of Washington’s interests are quietly but deeply involved in essentially every aspect of the process. [continue reading: New Standard News]

Seems pretty likely secret agent Judy probably knows more than she's lettin' on. What exactly that is, is another matter. And that's probably why you can't find her, Dan. Who knows? Maybe she's in Wellfleet watchin' the tide go in and out. But WTF, everyone else knows this kind of shit goes on all the time. So go chase after Vin Weber. Maybe he'll tell ya all 'bout how it works. And buy a friggin' television while yer at it.

*