Things people have to believe if they think the Sudan/Clinton Canard is true
I wonder if those claiming that the Sudan offered bin Laden to Clinton \ have thought through exactly what they have to ignore for them to keep believing. It is mind boggling the mental contortions they must go through.
Over the past few years I've engaged in debate with an assortment of what I can only call fruitcakes, and that’s being polite. These guys are bonking nuts, loony tunes, in-effing-sane. It is like they will discount EVERYTHING, just to cling to the notion that there was some kind of Deal by the Sudan to give bin Laden on a “silver platter” to Clinton.
For them to “believe” this story, requires them to “believe” the following.
First they have to believe that the FBI lied to a Republican dominated Congress while giving testimony of what the intelligence said about bin Laden in 1996, and when bin Laden was identified as a Threat that we should actually do something about. And be able to “show cause through an indictment”; which was a requirement by the Sudan just to give bin Laden to the Saudi’s. Then they have to believe that the Republican dominated Congress let the FBI get away with this.
http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june04/al-qaida061804.htm
. . . She reported for duty in December 1996, just months after the FBI had opened, first, an intelligence investigation into Usama bin Laden, then a criminal investigation. . .
. . . We encourage you to read the full testimony. Among other things, you will learn:
When the FBI identified the first seeds of Islamic-extremist terrorism in the U.S.
Link to Testimony: http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress04/doran061604.htm
. . . The FBI's intelligence investigation into USAMA BIN LADIN (UBL) was opened in February 1996, [b]and the criminal investigation was opened in September 1996[/b]. . .
Next up are the 5 Republicans on the 9-11 Commission. They have to believe that each and every one of these guys is a liar. And they have to now believe that the Bush Administration is being Silent over these guys lying.
Fred Fielding: Counsel to the President of the United States, as deputy counsel from 1972-1974 and as Associate Counsel from 1970-1972. He also served as clearance counsel during the Bush-Cheney Presidential Transition.
Slade Gorton: Senator for 18 years, from 1982-2000. While in the Senate, Gorton served on the Appropriations, Budget, Commerce, Science and Transportation, and Energy and Natural Resources Committees. He served as chairman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee (1995-2001), the Commerce Subcommittees on Consumer Affairs (1995-99), and Aviation (1999-2000). He was also a member of the Republican leadership as counsel to the Majority Leader (1996-2000)
Thomas H. Kean: Former governor of New Jersey (1982-1990)
John F. Lehman: Secretary of the Navy under Reagan from 1981 till 1987, and a 25 year naval Reservist.
James R. Thompson: Illinois' longest-serving governor (1977-1991)
Here is what the 9-11 Commission had to say about this foolishness.
The Bin Ladin station was already working on plans for offensive operations against Bin Ladin. These plans were directed at both physical assets and sources of finance. In the end, plans to identify and attack Bin Ladin's money sources did not go forward. In late 1995, when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S. Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship. Sudan's minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.[/b] The chief of the Bin Ladin station, whom we will call "Mike," saw Bin Ladin's move to Afghanistan as a stroke of luck.
Next, add Mansoor Ijaz, the actual source of the details of the negotiations to the list of people they have to call a liar. See excerpt from Ijaz's National Review Article below.)
And if they want to take each sentence on the Clinton “Tape” literally; like the “They released him” sentence; they have to believe that the Sudan had bin Laden in Custody, and there is NO supporting evidence for that, even on Wingnut sites.
Then they have to believe that there is a Mega Conspiracy at the CIA to hide the truth; because none of the, oh so many, ‘off the record leaks’ or he books written by retired agent, have even hinted that this story is true.
Next they have to decide if Hannity was lying on his Radio Program when he said that the 9-11 Commission had "gathered" evidence "backing up the allegation"; or if he was lying 2 days on Hannity & Colmes when he claimed the commission had "ignored" the allegation. (If they ignored it, they could not have ‘gathered’ the evidence.)
Here is what the “source” as Hannity calls him actually had to say about this claim. I notice that Hannity doesn’t quote this part of the story when he claims to be quoting “the source”.
http://www.nationalreview.com/ijaz/ijaz200404150832.asp
. . . Rosslyn, Virginia, March 3, 1996. In late 1995, CIA Director John Deutsch withdrew over 100 fabricated intelligence reports on Sudan's alleged terrorist threats against U.S. diplomats, spies, and their children in Khartoum. In January 1996, Secretary of State Warren Christopher ordered the U.S. embassy in Khartoum closed on the basis of that bad intelligence over the objections of US Ambassador Tim Carney. On March 3, 1996, Sudan's defense minister El Fatih Erwa secretly met Carney, State Department official David Shinn, and a senior CIA Africa officer at a Rosslyn, Virginia, hotel. After receiving a list of eight demands from the CIA, of which providing detailed intelligence data and assessments on bin Laden and his al Qaeda followers was number two, Erwa reiterated Sudan's offer to extradite bin Laden to Saudi Arabia. Carney had received a similar proposal during his Khartoum exit interview with Sudan's foreign minister a month earlier. President Clinton, hoping the Saudi king would take bin Laden back and swiftly behead him, called Saudi Arabia's intelligence chief, Prince Turki bin Faisal, to vet the proposal. The Saudis said no, again. Erwa asked for a second meeting five days later.
Alexandria, Virginia, March 8, 1996. With only Erwa and the CIA Africa officer present during the second meeting, Sudan first offered to increase surveillance and hand over intelligence on bin Laden and his associates. Deemed insufficient to reflect the hard line Washington wanted to take with Sudan, Erwa made another offer. He told the CIA officer that if the U.S. could show cause through an indictment that bin Laden was complicit in or guilty of committing terrorist acts against Americans and the Justice Department was willing to try him on U.S. soil, Sudan would hand him over to U.S. authorities. The CIA officer's account of this meeting matches Erwa's and has been recounted in Richard Miniter's New York Times bestseller, Losing Bin Laden. There is no question that a prima facia offer was made. The question is how was it handled by the U.S. government's various organs once it was made.
Where is the gap of understanding in what the commission reported to the American people and what really happened? Nothing less than the very failure the commission was charged with trying to uncover, understand, and prevent in the future. An intelligence officer of the U.S. government received the offer, not a political official from the Clinton administration. The CIA officer was neither empowered to respond, nor inclined to take a controversial, perhaps not believable proposal from the representative of a pariah state to his superiors whom he knew were engaged in a war of words with the Clinton White House at the time. The offer was, quite literally, left on the table in that Virginia hotel room. . .
Over the past few years I've engaged in debate with an assortment of what I can only call fruitcakes, and that’s being polite. These guys are bonking nuts, loony tunes, in-effing-sane. It is like they will discount EVERYTHING, just to cling to the notion that there was some kind of Deal by the Sudan to give bin Laden on a “silver platter” to Clinton.
For them to “believe” this story, requires them to “believe” the following.
First they have to believe that the FBI lied to a Republican dominated Congress while giving testimony of what the intelligence said about bin Laden in 1996, and when bin Laden was identified as a Threat that we should actually do something about. And be able to “show cause through an indictment”; which was a requirement by the Sudan just to give bin Laden to the Saudi’s. Then they have to believe that the Republican dominated Congress let the FBI get away with this.
http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june04/al-qaida061804.htm
. . . She reported for duty in December 1996, just months after the FBI had opened, first, an intelligence investigation into Usama bin Laden, then a criminal investigation. . .
. . . We encourage you to read the full testimony. Among other things, you will learn:
When the FBI identified the first seeds of Islamic-extremist terrorism in the U.S.
Link to Testimony: http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress04/doran061604.htm
. . . The FBI's intelligence investigation into USAMA BIN LADIN (UBL) was opened in February 1996, [b]and the criminal investigation was opened in September 1996[/b]. . .
Next up are the 5 Republicans on the 9-11 Commission. They have to believe that each and every one of these guys is a liar. And they have to now believe that the Bush Administration is being Silent over these guys lying.
Fred Fielding: Counsel to the President of the United States, as deputy counsel from 1972-1974 and as Associate Counsel from 1970-1972. He also served as clearance counsel during the Bush-Cheney Presidential Transition.
Slade Gorton: Senator for 18 years, from 1982-2000. While in the Senate, Gorton served on the Appropriations, Budget, Commerce, Science and Transportation, and Energy and Natural Resources Committees. He served as chairman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee (1995-2001), the Commerce Subcommittees on Consumer Affairs (1995-99), and Aviation (1999-2000). He was also a member of the Republican leadership as counsel to the Majority Leader (1996-2000)
Thomas H. Kean: Former governor of New Jersey (1982-1990)
John F. Lehman: Secretary of the Navy under Reagan from 1981 till 1987, and a 25 year naval Reservist.
James R. Thompson: Illinois' longest-serving governor (1977-1991)
Here is what the 9-11 Commission had to say about this foolishness.
The Bin Ladin station was already working on plans for offensive operations against Bin Ladin. These plans were directed at both physical assets and sources of finance. In the end, plans to identify and attack Bin Ladin's money sources did not go forward. In late 1995, when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S. Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship. Sudan's minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.[/b] The chief of the Bin Ladin station, whom we will call "Mike," saw Bin Ladin's move to Afghanistan as a stroke of luck.
Next, add Mansoor Ijaz, the actual source of the details of the negotiations to the list of people they have to call a liar. See excerpt from Ijaz's National Review Article below.)
And if they want to take each sentence on the Clinton “Tape” literally; like the “They released him” sentence; they have to believe that the Sudan had bin Laden in Custody, and there is NO supporting evidence for that, even on Wingnut sites.
Then they have to believe that there is a Mega Conspiracy at the CIA to hide the truth; because none of the, oh so many, ‘off the record leaks’ or he books written by retired agent, have even hinted that this story is true.
Next they have to decide if Hannity was lying on his Radio Program when he said that the 9-11 Commission had "gathered" evidence "backing up the allegation"; or if he was lying 2 days on Hannity & Colmes when he claimed the commission had "ignored" the allegation. (If they ignored it, they could not have ‘gathered’ the evidence.)
Here is what the “source” as Hannity calls him actually had to say about this claim. I notice that Hannity doesn’t quote this part of the story when he claims to be quoting “the source”.
http://www.nationalreview.com/ijaz/ijaz200404150832.asp
. . . Rosslyn, Virginia, March 3, 1996. In late 1995, CIA Director John Deutsch withdrew over 100 fabricated intelligence reports on Sudan's alleged terrorist threats against U.S. diplomats, spies, and their children in Khartoum. In January 1996, Secretary of State Warren Christopher ordered the U.S. embassy in Khartoum closed on the basis of that bad intelligence over the objections of US Ambassador Tim Carney. On March 3, 1996, Sudan's defense minister El Fatih Erwa secretly met Carney, State Department official David Shinn, and a senior CIA Africa officer at a Rosslyn, Virginia, hotel. After receiving a list of eight demands from the CIA, of which providing detailed intelligence data and assessments on bin Laden and his al Qaeda followers was number two, Erwa reiterated Sudan's offer to extradite bin Laden to Saudi Arabia. Carney had received a similar proposal during his Khartoum exit interview with Sudan's foreign minister a month earlier. President Clinton, hoping the Saudi king would take bin Laden back and swiftly behead him, called Saudi Arabia's intelligence chief, Prince Turki bin Faisal, to vet the proposal. The Saudis said no, again. Erwa asked for a second meeting five days later.
Alexandria, Virginia, March 8, 1996. With only Erwa and the CIA Africa officer present during the second meeting, Sudan first offered to increase surveillance and hand over intelligence on bin Laden and his associates. Deemed insufficient to reflect the hard line Washington wanted to take with Sudan, Erwa made another offer. He told the CIA officer that if the U.S. could show cause through an indictment that bin Laden was complicit in or guilty of committing terrorist acts against Americans and the Justice Department was willing to try him on U.S. soil, Sudan would hand him over to U.S. authorities. The CIA officer's account of this meeting matches Erwa's and has been recounted in Richard Miniter's New York Times bestseller, Losing Bin Laden. There is no question that a prima facia offer was made. The question is how was it handled by the U.S. government's various organs once it was made.
Where is the gap of understanding in what the commission reported to the American people and what really happened? Nothing less than the very failure the commission was charged with trying to uncover, understand, and prevent in the future. An intelligence officer of the U.S. government received the offer, not a political official from the Clinton administration. The CIA officer was neither empowered to respond, nor inclined to take a controversial, perhaps not believable proposal from the representative of a pariah state to his superiors whom he knew were engaged in a war of words with the Clinton White House at the time. The offer was, quite literally, left on the table in that Virginia hotel room. . .
posted by Kuni at 8:11 AM
0 comments
