Another right wing claim about Clinton, what's the whole story?

[ButterflyBlood]

I've heard this the few times I got some posts in at Free Republic, more ranting about how it's Clinton's fault for 9/11 since Sudan offered to turn over bin Laden, and he refused. I read up that in fact Clinton's adminstration had the counterterrorism funding up until that point, and he actually did more against al-Qaeda than anyone else, actually ordering many strikes on actual al-Qaeda targets, as opposed to Chimpy's plan, which is apparentely to bomb the hell out of random Arab countries with a lot of oil. So what's the truth to the "Clinton refused bin Laden!" story?

[librechik]

1. Sudan said "if we were to get Bin Laden, would you take him?"

but we knew they didn't have him, and probably wouldn't be like;y tp get him, and Clinton wanted a legal surrender (Sudan has no extradition treaties, so it would basically be kidnapping) so he blew them off.

Now, in late September 2001 the Taliban HAD OBL, and desperately tried to get Bush to take him in exchange for leaving them alone, and Bush refused! and attacked Afghanistan a week or so later. It was astonishing. He was never serious about capturing OBL, only about getting a base for oil contol in the ME.

So don't let those misinformed RWers fool you--they are twisting the facts just like their heroes do.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

2. Page 113 of Al Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them"

Mr. Franken was nice enough to mention it, and even cite some quotes from Clinton staffers that deny the whole thing.
Apparently, the whole thing was arraigned by Mansoor Ijaz, a freelancer who stood to gain a LOT if sanctions against Sudan were lifted.
Apparently, Ijaz now works as a foreign correspondent at Fox News.

[Dogmudgeon]

3. The story is crap

A book was written by a mid-eastern con artist (and protege of the CFR) by the name of Mansoor Ijaz that the right took under their wing.

It's been largely discredited. The other post gives a much more accurate version.

Before Clinton left the White House, he warned Bush to watch out for bin Laden. Guess what happened.

--bkl

[rumguy]

4. The bottom line is that the peddler of this story has zero credibility

[Dr Fate]

5. We only have the word of a Fox "news" agent for that tale...

...As other posters have pointed out, that tale was fabricated by a Fox news agent- file it under "1001 Right Wing Lies About the Clintons"....

[Norbert]

6. Don't believe any of it.

I just got tossed in my face the "Clinton let bus bomber Mohammed Atta out of prison and he flew a plane into the North Tower on 9/11." Very convincing story but the only problem is it was the wrong Atta with not even the same first name. But he had the very same last name so that's close enough fot government work.

Believe NONE of the wingnut talk with out a couple of mainstream media (nom faux)of reputable book sources.

[papau]

7. Per State Dept- Sudan offer was Saddam to Saudi - but Saudi refused

to then send him to US.

Eventually Saddam indeed went to Saudi Arabia and was not sent to the US despite our requests.

As to secrets offerred by Sudan in 96- there were no secrets - just newspaper clippings.

The Sudan game was to remove the sanctions against Sudan and make Mansoor Ijaz a bit better off in this world - but nothing was ever put on the table.

But we had our WEEKLY meetings tracking Osama and discussing his plans, how to stop them, and how to get him - all such meetings were stopped by Bush in Feb 2001, as the planning for Iraq began - note the contract for supplies to US troops in Iraq being signed in 2001!

But does the media care?