Posted on 05/03/2004 10:07:09 AM PDT by kattracks
The Clinton administration prepared a secret indictment of Osama bin Laden in 1995 in connection with the Black Hawk Down attack two years before, but never filed it - a witness before the 9/11 Commission is set to testify on Friday.
"[U.S. Attorney for New York's Southern District] Mary Jo White was already working on a secret indictment against bin Laden as early as the late part of 1995," Clinton administration diplomatic troubleshooter Mansoor Ijaz told WABC Radio's Steve Malzberg on Sunday.
Clinton officials, said Ijaz, had "evidence in their hands" implicating bin Laden in the Oct. 1993 Mogadishu attack that killed 18 U.S. Army Rangers.
But they "weren't willing to use it to seek an indictment," he insisted.
Ijaz, who is scheduled to testify before the 9/11 Commission behind closed doors, said the investigation needs to focus on the question, "What caused that indictment not to be handed down?"
As early as 1994, said Ijaz, Sudanese officials had "made it clear [to U.S. officials] that they had very strong indications that bin Laden was closely behind and involved with the Mogadishu terrorist operations."
"At that time [the Clinton administration wasn't] willing to open all of that up," Ijaz maintained.
"But when the early 1996 decision came from the Sudanese to send their defense minister over [to negotiate bin Laden's extradition to the U.S.], there was no question that the Clinton administration was made very clear that bin Laden had casual ties in real terms to the group that killed our 18 [Rangers] in Black Hawk Down."
"Had they been able to take advantage of [Sudan's 1994 offer to share intelligence on bin Laden], the Clinton Justice Department could have indicted bin Laden, which would have enabled them to bring him to the United States," Ijaz contended.
In 2002, President Clinton confirmed to a New York business group that Sudan had indeed offered to extradite bin Laden, but explained, "I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."
But Ijaz said he personally briefed Clinton on Sudanese evidence of bin Laden's involvement in the Mogadishu attack.
"I took it directly to the president," he told Malzberg. "I put it on the table. I did it because the Sudanese were only able to do it at the lower levels of our government because nobody wanted to listen to them."
"And one of the things I'm going to tell the 9/11 Commission next Friday," the one-time White House operative warned, "is precisely what happened in my conversation with Bill Clinton personally, where I told him these things were possible - and what he said to me."
Though Ijaz has said he hopes to eventually testify in public, he's not leaving it up to the 9/11 Commission to get the word out.
"It's going to shock the nation when I bring all this out in a book - precisely how ignorant these people were about what they were doing," he told Malzberg.
Get Steve Malzberg's exclusive NewsMax.com column emailed directly to you at www.newsmax.com/malzberg.
When I Peter Jennings discussing this, then I'll believe it's important.
I'll also believe hell has frozen over!
The thought that some third-world savages would be impressed and/or intimidated by an *indictment* is beyond laughable. The ONLY thing that Clinton should have done at the time was make sure that UBL disappeared and would never again be heard from or cause any more problems. He knew damn well that UBL was nothing but trouble waiting to explode, and back then, it was before most people had heard of him and UBL could have just been made to go away without 99% of the public knowing or caring.
Instead we were led by effete wimps who put more value on stupid pieces of paper than on actually *accomplishing* things. As inarticulate as Bush may be at times, at least he gets things done, instead of just sitting there, pontificating and trying to pass off incessant navel-gazings as profound utterings.
If Clintigula had been President these past few years, he'd still be trying to cajole Mullah Omar into turning over UBL, as well as apologizing on a daily basis for whatever we did to offend the islamofascists and make them do this to us.
And while Bush came up here 3 days after the attacks and stood on smoldering metal to address the rescue workers, Clinton would have been cowering in a safe corner, crapping in his XXXL pants, and squinting his eyes while wagging his finger and vowing to "get" whoever was responsible for this.
9-22-00 In March of 1996, the chairman of Occidental Petroleum, an 18 billion dollar oil company, was an overnight guest in the Lincoln bedroom of the White House. Two days after the sleepover, Occidental's Political Action Committee (PAC) gave $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee. In 1997, the Washington Post revealed that the Clinton administration created an exception to a law that stood in the way of a business venture that Occidental wanted to pursue in the country of Sudan. Further investigation has uncovered additional information on this matter.
The Anti-Terrorism Law, Lincoln Bedroom and $100,000
In 1996, Congress passed and Bill Clinton signed what became Public Law 104-132. This law prohibits anyone in the United States from doing business with countries who are classified as state sponsors of terrorism. At the time, Occidental was pursuing an oil exploration deal with the country of Sudan, which is classified as a state sponsor of terrorism.
There was a 6 week period between when Congress passed this legislation and when Bill Clinton signed it into law. It was during this window of time that the chairman of Occidental stayed at the White House and Occidental's PAC gave $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee. In addition to the timing of the sleepover and the donation, a 9 year review of Occidental's political contributions found the amount of this particular donation is unprecedented, doubling the size of any other donation they have made during this period.
Bill Clinton and the Exception
The anti-terrorism law would have put an end to Occidental's plans in Sudan, but it contained a provision allowing the executive branch to make exceptions. The law went into effect during August of 1996. On the same day that the law became operative, the Clinton administration established an exception that allowed U.S. corporations and individuals to do business with Sudan.
Three months after the exception was instituted, the government of Sudan barred Occidental from participating in the oil deal. Sudan did this as a result of a newspaper article that appeared in the Washington Post, which revealed that the Clinton administration was giving military support to three nations who were enemies of the government in Sudan.
After Occidental could no longer profit from the exception, Bill Clinton closed it. Less than a year after Sudan barred Occidental from the oil deal, Bill Clinton issued an executive order containing language that mirrors the provision in the anti-terrorism law that his administration had excepted. In the executive order, Clinton stated that the policies of the government of Sudan were an "extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States," and declared "a national emergency to deal with that threat." Less than a year earlier, the Clinton administration stated that there was "nothing improper" in allowing the oil deal between Occidental and Sudan.
Al Gore and Occidental
In June of 2000, Al Gore said, "It takes somebody who is independent from big oil to take on big oil, and I’m independent from them . . ." At the time when the story about the exception was published, some of Al Gore's extensive financial dealings with Occidental were not widely reported.
In addition to campaign contributions, Occidental has been a benefactor of Al Gore and his father for many years. After Gore's father was defeated for reelection in 1970, Occidental hired him at a salary of $500,000 a year. In 1972, Occidental purchased a farm in Tennessee and promptly sold it to Gore's father, who turned around and resold the farm to Al Gore. Over the next decade, Occidental paid Al Gore $20,000 a year for the rights to mine minerals on this land. The payments added up to more than what Gore bought the land for, and during this entire period, Occidental never did any mining there. Presently, Al Gore is the executor of his father's estate, which contains more than $500,000 worth of stock in Occidental.
Timeline and Links
| 3-14-96 | Congress passes Antiterrorism bill (S. 735, Section 321). |
| 3-27-96 | Occidental chairman Ray Irani sleeps over White House. |
| 3-29-96 | Occidental's PAC donates unprecedented $100,000 to DNC. |
| 4-24-96 | Clinton signs Antiterrorism bill into law (Public Law 104-132). |
| 8-23-96 | Anti-terrorism law goes into effect. |
| 8-23-96 | Clinton administration Treasury Department creates exception to law, allowing Occidental to pursue oil deal in Sudan. |
| 11-96 | Sudan bars Occidental from oil deal. |
| 1-23-97 | Washington Post story published – Clinton administration says there was nothing improper in allowing Occidental to pursue deal. |
| 11-3-97 | Clinton issues Executive Order 13067 closing the exception. Calls Sudan an "extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States", and declares "a national emergency to deal with that threat." |
Ah another book for the masses!!!
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=www.rediff.com/news/2000/nov/28inter.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/nov/28inter.htm&h=174&w=169&sz=10&tbnid=yI7hhtc2rhQJ:&tbnh=94&tbnw=92&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmansoor%2Bijaz%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN
The Rediff Interview/ Mansoor Ijaz
Nov 28, 2000
[snippet]
How did your involvement in Pakistan's political and strategic affairs start?
As I developed a political voice in the US starting in 1993, Pakistan under Benazir Bhutto's second term was making a concerted effort to reconstruct its relationship with the Clinton administration. Initially we, the entire Pakistan American community, tried to help her achieve what were important objectives, including freeing Pakistan of US sanctions.
There was a unique opportunity to build on a new US administration's desire to help Pakistan as well as a new Pakistani administration elected on its commitment to change the old ways of doing business. Unfortunately, the unity of the Pakistani-American community quickly disintegrated into factionalism, hidden agendas and bruised egos and Benazir's people in Washington seized upon the fractures to pursue their own corrupt political and financial agendas.
I began to realise the leaders of Pakistan had no real interest in raising up their poor, desolate and disfortunate people. That realisation was crystalised when I went to Pakistan in December 1995 and found out for myself the exact mechanisms Benazir and her cronies were using to loot Pakistan's poor. They did so by manipulating IMF loans that were granted on the assumption that higher utility and telephone rates would bring in the money to service the loans and then moved the money into unofficial accounts for unauthorized use.
That is when I started writing publicly in the US about the evidence we had of corruption and mismanagement in her government. We hoped the exposure would either persuade her to change her ways or create a mechanism of external accountability from afar to protect those who had no capacity to speak up within Pakistani society. The first of my editorial series in The Wall Street Journal on Benazir's corrupt practices was responsible for sewing the seeds that led to her exit from the scene in Pakistan.
[snippet]
So did you volunteer, or were you asked to come into the Kashmiri fray?
No, I was asked. I would not volunteer for such a thankless task. But once I agreed to evaluate how I could help, my key concern was a strong desire to avoid the appearance of doing the bidding of the American government in Kashmir. At no time during the past year since I began this intervention has the US government asked me to do anything specific on its behalf in Kashmir.
As an American citizen with proximity to the President of the United States and senior national security council officials, I have enjoyed their support of my efforts and I did feel a responsibility to keep them informed of my activities to avoid conflicts of interest. But there was no driving force emanating from Washington.
If anything, the driving force for finding a plausible peace framework has been in New Delhi. My role was to clear a channel for Prime Minister Vajpayee and a man he considered responsible for the Kargil fiasco, General Pervez Musharraf, to talk to each other on a wavelength free of extremist rhetoric on both sides.
[snippet]
A last question: Your reactions to the recent American election...
Astute political observers call it "The great train wreck." America is about to enter a phase in its democratic life that is going to either demonstrate once and for all that American democracy is the best, or show that democracy in the end really doesn't work. Because either we're going to be able to govern ourselves by rising above the partisanship, or we are going to descend into the abyss of political infighting and bicker biting the likes of which we've never seen anywhere before.
I think a Bush administration would be better for the world than a Gore administration, simply because Bush has the capacity to put together a much more intelligent team of strategic foreign policy planners. The Clinton administration never had any strategic planners. Their strategic planner was the president himself… and he only planned what he wanted to plan. They didn't have anyone else in the framework who could look long-range and say let's develop a long-term policy and we'll deal with the potholes as we go along.
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.