Posted on 06/30/2002 9:34:22 AM PDT by kattracks
Responding to former Vice President Al Gore's criticism on Saturday of the Bush administration's handling of the war on terrorism, Secretary of State Colin Powell blasted the Clinton-Gore administration for not accepting a deal for Osama bin Laden's extradition from Sudan negotiated by Pakistani-American businessman Mansour Ijaz in the late 1990's.
"Perhaps that's what Vice President Gore should have been talking about - what happened on their watch as opposed to the progress we've made on our watch," Powell told "Fox News Sunday," after being asked about Ijaz's claims.
In a Sunday Washington Post op-ed piece, Ijaz and former U.S. ambassador to Sudan Tim Carney detailed the Clinton administration's mishandling of both Sudan's bin Laden offer and overall U.S. relations with the country. In another reference to the Ijaz-Carney piece, Powell said the Bush administration had made progress, "not only in Afghanistan but, I would also submit, in Sudan."
"We've recently sent a presidential emissary to Sudan," Powell told "Fox News Sunday." "Sen. Jack Danforth, he's had very successful trips there. We now have a policy with respect to Sudan that will start to move them in the direction of cooperating with us in the campaign against terrorism."
Powell cited the Clinton-Gore bin Ladengate scandal after the former vice president slammed the Bush administration for failing to capture the 9-11 terrorist mastermind.
On Saturday Gore told a crowd of Democratic Party faithful, "They haven't gotten Osama bin Laden or the al Qaeda operation and they have refused to allow enough troops from the international community to be put into Afghanistan to keep it from sliding back under control of the warlords."
Before making reference Mr. Ijaz's allegations, Powell called Gore's remarks "patent nonsense" adding, "I notice the previous administration didn't even make a serious try (to get bin Laden)."
With his comments on Sunday, the Secretary of State becomes the highest ranking Bush administration official to endorse Mr. Ijaz's claims, which have been all but ignored by the mainstream news media except for the occasional op-ed column authored by the Pakistani-American businessman himself.
Meanwhile, Mr. Ijaz has come under fierce attack from the Clinton administration and their supporters in the press.
In a May radio interview, for instance, Democratic National Committee spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri called Ijaz "a liar" and "a crackpot." (See: DNC Spokesgal Trashes Key Bin Ladengate Accuser)
Clinton friendly media reporters like the New York Times' Judith Miller and NBC newswoman Andrea Mitchell have explained their own decisions not to cover Ijaz's claims by saying he lacks credibility. Miller said she established Ijaz's lack of credibility by contacting former Clinton administration sources.
In May, Ijaz told radio host Sean Hannity that he, Mr. Carney and the chief of Sudanese intelligence would be willing to give sworn testimony on bin Ladengate but had not yet been called by Congress. (See: Bin Laden-gate Witness Dares Dems: Depose Me on Clinton 9-11 Cover-Up)
Earlier this month, Ijaz told radio host Don Imus that former Clinton administration officials had mounted a campaign to block his testimony. (See: Bin Laden-gate Accuser: Ex-Clinton Officials Trying to Silence Me)
But with Powell's tacit endorsement, the bin Ladengate accuser's story it may be more difficult for congressional investigators and the press to ignore.
In their Sunday Washington Post op-ed piece, Ijaz and Carney added new details to their account of the Clinton administration's bin Ladengate intelligence failure:
"After offering to hand bin Laden over to U.S. authorities, Sudan expelled him..... Sudan gave U.S. authorities permission to photograph two terror camps. Washington failed to follow up. In August, (Sudan) sent an 'olive branch' letter to President Clinton through Ijaz. There was no reply.
"By election day 1996, top Clinton aides, including (National Security Advisor Sandy) Berger, knew what information was available from Khartoum and of its potential value to identify, monitor and ultimately dismantle terrorist cells around the world. Yet they did nothing about it."
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Al-Qaeda
Al Gore
Bush Administration
Clinton Scandals
Media Bias
hahahahahahahhahah.
and cigar boy is nothing but a lying parasite.
If that doesn't silence the jackals on the Left, nothing will...
FYI-- I'm communicating from my "backup browser"-- a 66 mhtz. 486 with a sticking keyboard & gritty trackball- so excuse the weird typos, they are hard to go back to & correct.
Keep talking Al ...
Why isn't this grounds for termination? It's a direct violation of Journalism 101. Oh, right, she works for the Times.
Yes it is. He has been with Arafat so many times, I was starting to wonder about him.
I wonder if anyone in the intellignce agencies have bothered to question Ijaz concerning their nuclear weapons program. A trained nuclear physicist, he and his father knew all the top players in Pakistan's weapons program.
You aren't kiddin'! My first thought was, FINALLY!!
Don Imus asked Joe Lieberman if had heard about this on his show and when Holy Joe claimed not to, Imus replied, "Oh yes you did!" The live audience meanwhile was booing Holy Joe.
Anybody else out there remember that recent interview?
Sen. Joseph Lieberman , D-Conn., was roundly booed on Friday after claiming he was completely clueless about reports that the Sudan was ready to hand over Osama bin Laden to ex-President Clinton way back in 1996.
Appearing via phone on the "Imus in the Morning" radio show, Lieberman began by saying that he wanted an independent commission to probe the "really important question" of "what [President Bush] was told and when was he told it" about intelligence that could have forewarned of the 9-11 attacks.
But Imus, who was broadcasting from New Hampshire before a live audience, also wanted to know if Liebermann was interested in probing allegations that the previous administration passed up chances to avert 9-11.
IMUS: Is there any truth that during the Clinton administration the Sudan offered to turn over Osama bin Laden and the Clinton administration took a pass on it?
LIEBERMAN: I don't know. But that would be a ... (Live audience erupts in boos)
IMUS: Of course you know.
LIEBERMAN: Of course I don't know. (Reacting to the boos) Hey, who's up there? Who's in that audience?
IMUS: You might want to rethink that New Hampshire primary.
LIEBERMAN: I've got a feeling those may be Republicans. We're going for Independents and Democrats. (End of Excerpt)
Lieberman said that questions about the Clinton administration's role in failing to deal with the al-Qaeda threat could also be examined by an independent 9-11 commission.
But he suggested it wasn't likely that Clinton had passed up an offer to nab the terror chief, noting that the ex-president had signed an order authorizing U.S. forces to "go after Osama bin Laden personally."
On a side note, has anybody noticed lately that Powell seems (how to say?) more "comfortable" with(in) the administration? Like he's happier or maybe more confident that Dubya is going down the right track? Maybe it's just me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.