As we try to separate the wheat from the chaff in this extended Presidential election season, chock-a-block with candidates on both sides, it is a time-consuming exercise to parse all of the allegations made in the media and the candidates explanations of same.
I am extremely grateful to Tim Russert and Meet the Press for running a full-hour interview with every candidate who will accept his invitation to be on the show. Russert distills many of the charges leveled by the press (or in some cases, government reports) and gives the candidate an opportunity to respond that cannot compare with the fox-hole crouching that takes place in the debates.
As a New Yorker who lived under his regime, up to and including his so-called “heroism” on September 11, 2001, I am not a fan and was loathe to have to sit through another hour of his sanctimonious, ego-maniacal posturing. However, I consider it extremely important to understand the positions, personality and intelligence of each of the candidates, so when high-profile disputes arise in the one-on-one that is the main election event, it is far easier to place it all in context. For example, watching how W. dealt with McCain during the primaries in South Carolina put the “Swift-Boat” attacks on John Kerry in perspective. You can always learn something new, even about someone you already think you know very well.
Giuliani’s “security” consulting firm has done work for some clients with questionable ties to regimes that we might consider undemocratic. There have been calls for Giuliani to expose his client lists (both at Giuliani Partners and at the law firm he joined, Bracewell and Giuliani) so that the voting public may factor in any influence his high-paying clients may have on him. Of particular interest are the clients who arguably have connections to the very disaster that escalated Giuliani to national political status.
Giuliani Partners, which Rudy casually refers to as GP does unspecified “security and training” for an unspecified department of the government of Qatar. A Wall Street Journal article cited by Russert alleges that in 1996, the FBI sought to apprehend Khalid Sheik Mohammed (perpetrator of the destruction of the World Trade Center) within Qatar for his participation in a plot to blow up as many as a dozen airliners, only to lose him because he was tipped off by an Al Qaeda sympathizer within the government itself.
Russert additionally cited an article by Joe Conason of Salon.com, that alleges that the Emir of Qatar appointed as Minister of the Interior, Abdullah al-Thani, a strict Wahhabist, who has been identified by government reports and by the media as a protector of Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
The icing on this particular conflict-of-interest cupcake is the accusation of a CIA officer that Giuliani Partners (and by extension Giuliani) is taking money from the same accounts as people who protected Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
Giuliani’s defense, aside from outright laughter at similar allegations that he has done business with close associates of Kim Jong-Il and with a company run by Hugo Chavez, was to say that Qatar was an ally, who we should be cultivating. He denies working for the Interior Ministry, but declines to say which department he is working for. He denies any contact with al-Thani, but provides no guidance on who in the Qatari government did sign the contract.
He insists his work revolves around security and teaching the government of Qatar how to prevent terrorist (his word, not mine—I don’t believe in using this word in this context) attacks from Islamic Fundamentalists. He asserts that American companies, and particularly his, are being sought out on these matters because: a) Qatar was bombed “once, a while back”, and b) his firm employs many of the ex-FBI agents who tracked down and imprisoned the bad guys like KSM the first time around. He insists we should be partnering with anyone on the idea of security from terrorism, and that this provided his firm with good experience on this.
Setting aside the irony of Giuliani’s claim to be an expert at preventing acts of terrorism attacks when the SAME building in New York was successfully attacked TWICE by the same radical group, you have to wonder at the gall of someone who serves up this additional irony: we are selling you the expertise of the FBI who failed to catch the bad guy who masterminded the attack on my city, and was hiding out in your country, because a member of your government managed to outsmart my FBI and help the bad guy give them the slip. I mean really, how can anybody pitch this with a straight face? This is like Clyde helping Bonnie evade the sheriff and then asking the sheriff to teach him how to protect himself from getting shot by Bonnie.
This isn’t even a successful “protection” racket. This isn’t about Giuliani’s boys going in and trashing the store and then showing up later to charge the store owner to keep it from happening again. Why would Qatar need to pay GP to protect them, when they are busy doing “favors” for members of the Al Qaeda mobsters like KSM. They’re already earning their protection. It’s an insane logical proposition, unless you consider it an attempt to influence a future American President with a chip on his shoulder for Islamic Fundamental “terrorist” supporters and harborers to keep them out of it once the shooting starts.
So, I did learn something new about Giuliani after all. In addition to his fascist tendencies, his unsympathetic social policies (as evidenced by his actions, not his public support), his amoral private behavior (Bernie Kerik and Judith Nathan), and his desire to take credit for things he has not done (protecting the city from crime and terrorism), he is clearly fully experienced in the fine art of quid pro quo in politics. I’m so glad he is willing to turn his cheek for a third time to the radicals that struck New York. The only question is, what will they bomb this time, since there is nothing left of the World Trade Center?
Unsolicited opinions on life, the universe and--well, you get the picture!
