What's the consensus - Clinton offered Osama in Sudan?

[Lurker]

I have heard rumors that Clinton was offered Osama back in the 90's by Sudan. Anyone have any detailed info on this or what is the consensus? Did the offer happen? What were the details? Did Clinton reject the offer and why?

Lurker

[The Central Scrutinizer]

This sounds like an urban myth to me. I've heard it before, but it just doesn't ring true.

[aerocontrols]

It's false, but Clinton said it was true.

[Grammatron]

It's false, but Clinton said it was true.

I r confused :confused:

[aerocontrols]

I r confused :confused:

So was he, apparently. He recalled a non-event as having happened to him, and recalled making a decision he could not have made, as he was never presented with the offer, but nevertheless recalls turning it down.

[varwoche]

Clinton denies it and the 911 commission stated it had... "not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim". Still, the facts seem murky as apparently Sudan and the US did have cooperative contact concering bin Laden.
article (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/17/international/asia/17osama.html?ei=5090&en=2b945263d3848ee1&ex=1281931200&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=print)

[pgwenthold]

Of course, when Clinton attacked Bin Laden's base in 1998, Arlen Spector accused him of trying to divert attention from the Lewinsky affair...

(that is true, according to Snopes)

[aerocontrols]

I have heard rumors that Clinton was offered Osama back in the 90's by Sudan. Anyone have any detailed info on this or what is the consensus? Did the offer happen? What were the details? Did Clinton reject the offer and why?

Lurker

Here ya go:

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.

President Clinton, in a February 2002 speech to the Long Island Association, said that the United States did not accept a Sudanese offer and take Bin Ladin because there was no indictment. (President Clinton speech to the Long Island Association, Feb. 15, 2002 (videotape of speech)). But the President told us that he had "misspoken" and was, wrongly, recounting a number of press stories he had read. After reviewing this matter in preparation for his Commission meeting, President Clinton told us that Sudan never offered to turn Bin Ladin over to the United States. (President Clinton meeting (Apr. 8, 2004)). Berger told us that he saw no chance that Sudan would have handed Bin Ladin over and also noted that in 1996, the U.S. government still did not know of any al Qaeda attacks on U.S. citizens. Samuel Berger interview (Jan. 14, 2004).

Both quotes from the 9/11 Commission Report, first from page 110, second from page 480 (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf)

[Manny]

Of course, when Clinton attacked Bin Laden's base in 1998, Arlen Spector accused him of trying to divert attention from the Lewinsky affair...

(that is true, according to Snopes)Specter is a weasel, but Snopes (or rather, the Washington Post article they cite) is unfair to him in this instance. He originally expressed concern that other nations might perceive it that way, but later that same day he basically said, "screw what others might think, this guy needed a bombing." (cite (http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/08/20/strike.react/))

As to the OP, I think the available evidence is that even if Sudan (or one of Sudan's low-level people) did make some kind of offer or tentative offer in '96 it didn't get up to the level where President Clinton or even his highest-level advisors would have made a go-no go determination. There might be a mid-level State department functionary somewhere lying awake at nights hoping no one ever goes through his files, but that's probably about it.

[BPSCG]

There might be a mid-level State department functionary somewhere lying awake at nights hoping no one ever goes through his files, but that's probably about it.Strobe Talbott, maybe? Higher than mid-level, but he was so spectacularly wrong about the Soviet Union that turning down an offer for OBL would have fit in with the usual calibre of his work without raising any eyebrows.

[Cylinder]

Of course, when Clinton attacked Bin Laden's base in 1998, Arlen Spector accused him of trying to divert attention from the Lewinsky affair...

(that is true, according to Snopes)

You mean, of course, when Clinton attacked targets in Afghanistan and the Sudan, citing the nexus of Iraq, WMD and Hussein's close operational ties to al Qaeda.

[BPSCG]

You mean, of course, when Clinton attacked targets in Afghanistan and the Sudan, citing the nexus of Iraq, WMD and Hussein's close operational ties to al Qaeda.Nononononono... Iraq had nothing to do with WMD or al Qaeda - haven't you heard?

[Mark]

I always find it interesting that the people here who hate Clinton the most, always try to use him as a confirmation of Bush's policies. It's kinda cute, in a way.

[Manny]

Well, Mark, it's not so much as confirmation of Bush's policies but confirmation of his status as a superhero who should rule us forever. In this instance, we see that Bush successfully lied years into the past. There's no way he could do that without flying around the world backwards so fast that it made time go backward. So by the logic of the Bush haters if we can only elect him again than by some time in his fourth term he can make it so 9-11 never happened! Just imagine how cool that'll be.

[Manny]

Well, Mark, it's not so much as confirmation of Bush's policies but confirmation of his status as a superhero who should rule us forever. In this instance, we see that Bush successfully lied years into the past. There's no way he could do that without flying around the world backwards so fast that it made time go backward. So by the logic of the Bush haters if we can only elect him again than by some time in his fourth term he can make it so 9-11 never happened! Just imagine how cool that'll be.

[BPSCG]

Well, Mark, it's not so much as confirmation of Bush's policies but confirmation of his status as a superhero who should rule us forever. In this instance, we see that Bush successfully lied years into the past. There's no way he could do that without flying around the world backwards so fast that it made time go backward. So by the logic of the Bush haters if we can only elect him again than by some time in his fourth term he can make it so 9-11 never happened! Just imagine how cool that'll be.That bears repeating!

[Mark]

Well, Mark, it's not so much as confirmation of Bush's policies but confirmation of his status as a superhero who should rule us forever. In this instance, we see that Bush successfully lied years into the past. There's no way he could do that without flying around the world backwards so fast that it made time go backward. So by the logic of the Bush haters if we can only elect him again than by some time in his fourth term he can make it so 9-11 never happened! Just imagine how cool that'll be.

Be honest (this is a serious, if hypothetical, question). If Bush repealed the 2 term limit (I realize he won't) and ran for a 3rd term, would you object? What if the alternative would guarantee a Democrat in the White House?

Not intending to be a smart-a$$; I really am curious.

[DaChew]

Specifically, one Mansoor Ijaz was involved in negotiating with Sudan for Bin Laden.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mansoor_Ijaz

[Manny]

Depends on who else ran. If the Democrats persist in nominating candidates so fecking stupid that they don't realize we're at war, then yes I'd vote for President Bush for a third term (nit: It's not that he "won't" "repeal the 2 term limit" but that he "can't.")

[wastepanel]

Be honest (this is a serious, if hypothetical, question). If Bush repealed the 2 term limit (I realize he won't) and ran for a 3rd term, would you object? What if the alternative would guarantee a Democrat in the White House?

Not intending to be a smart-a$$; I really am curious.

Wow...my blood just ran cold at the thought of 6 more years...

[Mark]

Depends on who else ran. If the Democrats persist in nominating candidates so fecking stupid that they don't realize we're at war, then yes I'd vote for President Bush for a third term (nit: It's not that he "won't" "repeal the 2 term limit" but that he "can't.")

Interesting. Thanks for the civil answer; I really was curious.

Btw, I am aware that he can't. Although he could attempt to start the process if he wanted to. There's no way it would happen before the end of his term, of course. Unless he declared martial law...

[BPSCG]

Btw, I am aware that he can't. Although he could attempt to start the process if he wanted to. How, since Constitutional amendments start either in the Congress or in the individual state legislatures?

[Grammatron]

Interesting. Thanks for the civil answer; I really was curious.

Btw, I am aware that he can't. Although he could attempt to start the process if he wanted to. There's no way it would happen before the end of his term, of course. Unless he declared martial law...

You might as well ask: What if Bush executes random people on TV, would you vote for him?

Pointless hypothetical situations that'll never happen are just that.

[Manny]

You might as well ask: What if Bush executes random people on TV, would you vote for him?

Pointless hypothetical situations that'll never happen are just that.Well, wait. Random random, or like maybe semi-preselected random?

[Grammatron]

Well, wait. Random random, or like maybe semi-preselected random?

As random as one can get.

[aerocontrols]

Well, wait. Random random, or like maybe semi-preselected random?

http://www.cineastentreff.de/teleschau/200541/1/200541_159078_1_012.jpg

Hello, this is Killian. Give me the Justice Department, Entertainment Division.

[jj]

Sounds like the kind of dirty-trick story that gets passed around by word of mouth to put a candidate at a disadvantage. Never really comes out in the open, but gets all the conspiracy theorists and woowoos all inflamed and activist.

[Manny]

Well, good thing you're on the case then, jj. That way, the very next time Bill Clinton is a candidate you can clear up the dirty trick which was perpetrated by, well, ur, him.