powell admits bin ladens allowed to leave US w/ gov't coordination

[zimv20]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/963025.asp?0sl=-10&cp1=1


MR. RUSSERT: The cover of Time magazine tomorrow, headlined, The Saudis: Whose Side Are They On in the War on Terror? — in this release from Vanity Fair magazine, “Former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke tells Vanity Fair that the Bush administration decided to allow a group of Saudis to fly out of the U.S. just after September 11 — at a time when access to U.S. airspace was still restricted and required special government approval. According to other sources at least four flights with about 140 Saudis, including roughly two dozen members of the bin Laden family, flew to Saudi Arabia that week — without even being interviewed or interrogated by the F.B.I.”
_ _ _ _Why was that allowed?
_ _ _ _SEC’Y POWELL: Well, I don’t know that that’s accurate. I don’t know the details of what happened. But my understanding is that there was no sneaking out of the country; that the flights were well-known, and it was coordinated within the government. But I don’t have the details about what the FBI’s role in it might or might not have been.

[bobindashadows]

Whoa, look at that top spin. Can anyone catch it before the whole thread is drawn into it?

The Clinton administration was offered the chance to nab bin Laden and turned them down. Bin Laden and 150 of his aides/family landed in Qatar to refuel on their way to Pakistan, and the Qatar authorities called up the U.S. asking what to do. The word from the administration was to let him go.

I'm sorry... did I just ruin the whole Bush-hating feeling of the thread?

[zimv20]

Originally posted by bobindashadows

The Clinton administration was offered the chance to nab bin Laden and turned them down. Bin Laden and 150 of his aides/family landed in Qatar to refuel on their way to Pakistan, and the Qatar authorities called up the U.S. asking what to do. The word from the administration was to let him go.


i'd never heard of this. do you have a link?

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by zimv20
i'd never heard of this. do you have a link?
It's all in a book entitled "Why America Slept" by Gerald Posner (I hope I got the name right...) I suggest you read the book. I'll do a quick google search to see if there's any online references to the research, and then I'll edit this post with a link.

I first learned of this when Mr. Posner came on Bill O'Reilly (keep opinions to self, keep thread on topic people) and talked about the book, and so I was interested, and so I bought it, and I thought it was a great read. Anyway, I'm off to google.

Here we go:
http://www.newsmaxstore.com/nms/showdetl.cfm?&DID=6&Product_ID=1489

they have the usual listing of bits of information about the book without giving too much away, but it mentions:
"how the Clinton administration passed on an opportunity to arrest bin Laden when his jet refueled in Qatar"

Unfortunately, they seem to mess up formatting a lot, from the few pages I've seen on their sites.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/4/03534.shtml

“When bin Laden leaves the Sudan on a chartered commercial airliner with 150 of his top aides and his family, he goes to Qatar to refuel on his way to Pakistan,” Posner recounted to Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly Wednesday night.

Posner continued: “And Qatar, being an ally of the U.S. calls up and says ‘what should we do with this guy?’

“And the word comes back from the top of the [Clinton] administration ‘let him land and proceed on to Pakistan.’”

[Mason]

Originally posted by bobindashadows
Whoa, look at that top spin. Can anyone catch it before the whole thread is drawn into it?

The Clinton administration was offered the chance to nab bin Laden and turned them down. Bin Laden and 150 of his aides/family landed in Qatar to refuel on their way to Pakistan, and the Qatar authorities called up the U.S. asking what to do. The word from the administration was to let him go.

I'm sorry... did I just ruin the whole Bush-hating feeling of the thread?

This story has been debunked and yet Republicans keep propogating this garbage. The FBI and CIA never believed that Sudan never had anything substantive to offer regarding Bin Laden.

[IJ Reilly]

Originally posted by Mason
This story has been debunked and yet Republicans keep propogating this garbage. The FBI and CIA never believed that Sudan never had anything substantive to offer regarding Bin Laden.

Supply some references. I'm interested in hearing both sides of this story.

[Mason]

Originally posted by IJ Reilly
Supply some references. I'm interested in hearing both sides of this story.

"Big Lies" by Joe Conason, page 205.

[zimv20]

regardless of the is-it-true-maybe-maybe-not clinton adminstration thing...

FAA has stopped all flights. the towers are down. bin laden is suspected immediately. so the bush administration allows several planes full of saudis, including some bin ladens, to fly around the country, then leave.

why?

why was it so important for them to leave?

why did the administration allow it?

[Taft]

Originally posted by bobindashadows
The Clinton administration was offered the chance to nab bin Laden and turned them down. Bin Laden and 150 of his aides/family landed in Qatar to refuel on their way to Pakistan, and the Qatar authorities called up the U.S. asking what to do. The word from the administration was to let him go.

This is a complete and utter lie. Sudan had information as to the whereabouts of bin Laden and offered to capture him and hand him over the the Saudis NOT the US government. When the Clinton administration contacted the Saudis about the deal, they flatly refused. They Saudis have long been the benefactors of terror and have continued the trend during the current administration.

Also, Clinton launched several offensives against bin Laden, even though it was technically illegal to do so under federal law at the time. (That provision has been abolished during the current administration).

The following was a report I construct for Clinton's culpability in the 9/11 attacks. All of the following facts are true and I can back them up with links.

If people are going to come here and make statements they should do their research first. And please don't rely on a single source for you information, you'll get a skewed perspective.

1993 WTC attacks

1993 WTC attacks happened 6 weeks after Clinton took office.
No hard evidence has ever been found that bin Laden was involved.
In fact, bin Laden wasn't even considered a threat by US officials at that time.
It wasn't until 3 years later that US began suspecting bin Laden as a dire threat.
Press at the time reported that the most likely cause of '93 WTC attacks was involved with Iran.


1996 Sudan offer

In 1996 Sudan officials offered to arrest bin Laden and place him in Saudi custody.
The US contacted Saudi officials who refused the deal.
Press has often incorrectly reported that Clinton "refused the deal."_ This is not the case.
There was no offer to hand bin Laden over to the US before the Sudanese deported him to Kabul.
Sudan also has a history of dubious offers of intelligence and the capture of terror officials.
They offer to help the US against terror only if sanctions are lifted against them.
The sanctions were imposed as a result of allegations of genocide against Sudan rulers.
Their help and intelligence has been refused by the US as the FBI and CIA deemed it not valuable.


Clinton's Campaign Against bin Laden

In 1998 Clinton signed a secret National Security Decision Directive.
The directive authorized a campaign to dismantle al-Qaida and capture or kill bin Laden.
Several attempts on bin Laden's life were made.
The cruise missile launched against a tent in the summer of '98 are the most famous and most often cited.
They have often been criticized as an attempt by Clinton to deflect attention away from the Lewinsky scandal.
They were actually part of a larger campaign.
In 1999, the CIA organized a Pakistani military unit to go into Afghanistan and capture or kill bin Laden.
The operation was aborted when the US-friendly ruler of Pakistan was ousted.
Later that year another attack on his convoy was made.
That attack hit the wrong truck and bin Laden escaped.
Clinton received tough criticism from the right for many of these actions.

Diplomatic efforts to capture bin Laden were also made.
The White House tried to get the Taliban to hand bin Laden over.
Clinton froze 250 million in Taliban asset to coerce them.
The State department also kept the Taliban internationally isolated.
The Taliban, however, refused
During the Clinton administration, the CIA and National Security Counsel instituted programs to take out al-Qaida and other terror groups.
They successfully thwarted many attacks and neutralized several terrorist groups.
The most famous is the thwarted attack at LA's airport on New Years Eve 2000.

Clinton was also praised by counter-terrorism officials shortly before leaving office.
Robert Oakley, former Ambassador for Counter-terrorism in the Reagan State Department, said, "Overall, I give them very high marks. ... The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama, which has made him stronger."
Paul Bremer, who also served as a terrorism expert under Reagan said the administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden."
bin Laden, of course, was later connected to the successful WTC attack in 2001.

Clinton sent anti-terror legislation to Congress after the 1993 bombing.
Clinton also tried to expand that legislation after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.
Those attempts failed, however, as a result of civil rights groups and anti-government groups lobbying.
Those extensions included provisions to turn away suspected immigrants, swifter deportation procedures and a new deportation court which could view secret and confidential evidence.
Clinton is often accused of being lenient on immigrants.
During the 2000 campaign Bush denounced that provision.
Other legislation introduced by Clinton in an effort to thwart terrorism was refused by the Republican congress.
One such piece of legislation cut out a loophole in tax law that terrorists used to launder money through off-shore banks.

Finally, federal spending on anti-terrorism measures increased dramatically between 1996 and 2001.
After 2000, federal money earmarked for anti-terrorism was at 12 billion.
FBI funding for counter-terrorism measures also increased (from 78 million to 609 million) from 1996 to 2000.


Taft

[Taft]

BTW, most of that information from the write up was from Joe Conason's new book. The information was also referenced against other stories on the internet.

I highly recommend Conason's new book. It is very well written and offers some valuable contract to the right wing pundits that have enjoyed so much popularity recently.

Taft

[IJ Reilly]

Thanks for the info. FWIW Joe Conason has sort of made a career out of exposing what he calls right wing conspiracies. Not to say he's wrong, but he isn't exactly an unbiased observer.

[michaello]

I remember reading about this when it happened - Then, like a lot of stories, it was quickly buried.

[Taft]

Originally posted by IJ Reilly
Thanks for the info. FWIW Joe Conason has sort of made a career out of exposing what he calls right wing conspiracies. Not to say he's wrong, but he isn't exactly an unbiased observer.

Yeah, I always take what Conason says with a grain of salt. He holds an uncomfortably close position to some very left on the internet. But many of the points he makes in his book are dead on and, to my knowledge, factually accurate.

Taft

[charboneau]

Originally posted by bobindashadows

I'm sorry... did I just ruin the whole Bush-hating feeling of the thread?
I don't know, does this story from those raving National Review left wing nutjobs affect the feeling any?

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york091102.asp

[charboneau]

another interesting link here (http://www.dirtybush.com/connectthesedots)