Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Resentful west spurned Sudan's key terror files (Gobs of info offered on Terrorists)
The Observer International ^ | September 30, 2001

Posted on 09/30/2001 3:50:21 AM PDT by Aerial

Security chiefs on both sides of the Atlantic repeatedly turned down the chance to acquire a vast intelligence database on Osama bin Laden and more than 200 leading members of his al-Qaeda terrorist network in the years leading up to the 11 September attacks, an Observer investigation has revealed.

They were offered thick files, with photographs and detailed biographies of many of his principal cadres, and vital information about al-Qaeda's financial interests in many parts of the globe.

On two separate occasions, they were given an opportunity to extradite or interview key bin Laden operatives who had been arrested in Africa because they appeared to be planning terrorist atrocities.

None of the offers, made regularly from the start of 1995, was taken up. One senior CIA source admitted last night: 'This represents the worst single intelligence failure in this whole terrible business. It is the key to the whole thing right now. It is reasonable to say that had we had this data we may have had a better chance of preventing the attacks.'

He said the blame for the failure lay in the 'irrational hatred' the Clinton administration felt for the source of the proffered intelligence - Sudan, where bin Laden and his leading followers were based from 1992-96. He added that after a slow thaw in relations which began last year, it was only now that the Sudanese information was being properly examined for the first time.

Last weekend, a key meeting took place in London between Walter Kansteiner, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, FBI and CIA representatives, and Yahia Hussien Baviker, the Sudanese intelligence deputy chief. However, although the intelligence channel between Sudan and the United States is now open, and the last UN sanctions against the African state have been removed, The Observer has evidence that a separate offer made by Sudanese agents in Britain to share intelligence with MI6 has been rejected. This follows four years of similar rebuffs.

'If someone from MI6 comes to us and declares himself, the next day he can be in Khartoum,' said a Sudanese government source. 'We have been saying this for years.'

Bin Laden and his cadres came to Sudan in 1992 because at that time it was one of the few Islamic countries where they did not need visas. He used his time there to build a lucrative web of legitimate businesses, and to seed a far-flung financial network - much of which was monitored by the Sudanese.

They also kept his followers under close surveillance. One US source who has seen the files on bin Laden's men in Khartoum said some were 'an inch and a half thick'.

They included photographs, and information on their families, backgrounds and contacts. Most were 'Afghan Arabs', Saudis, Yemenis and Egyptians who had fought with bin Laden against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

'We know them in detail,' said one Sudanese source. 'We know their leaders, how they implement their policies, how they plan for the future. We have tried to feed this information to American and British intelligence so they can learn how this thing can be tackled.'

In 1996, following intense pressure from Saudi Arabia and the US, Sudan agreed to expel bin Laden and up to 300 of his associates. Sudanese intelligence believed this to be a great mistake.

'There we could keep track of him, read his mail,' the source went on. 'Once we kicked him out and he went to ground in Afghanistan, he couldn't be tracked anywhere.'

The Observer has obtained a copy of a personal memo sent from Sudan to Louis Freeh, former director of the FBI, after the murderous 1998 attacks on American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. It announces the arrest of two named bin Laden operatives held the day after the bombings after they crossed the Sudanese border from Kenya. They had cited the manager of a Khartoum leather factory owned by bin Laden as a reference for their visas, and were held after they tried to rent a flat overlooking in the US embassy in Khartoum, where they were thought to be planning an attack.

US sources have confirmed that the FBI wished to arrange their immediate extradition. However, Clinton's Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, forbade it. She had classed Sudan as a 'terrorist state,' and three days later US missiles blasted the al-Shifa medicine factory in Khartoum.

The US wrongly claimed it was owned by bin Laden and making chemical weapons. In fact, it supplied 60 per cent of Sudan's medicines, and had contracts to make vaccines with the UN.

Even then, Sudan held the suspects for a further three weeks, hoping the US would both perform their extradition and take up the offer to examine their bin Laden database. Finally, the two men were deported to Pakistan. Their present whereabouts are unknown.

Last year the CIA and FBI, following four years of Sudanese entreaties, sent a joint investigative team to establish whether Sudan was in fact a sponsor of terrorism. Last May, it gave Sudan a clean bill of health. However, even then, it made no effort to examine the voluminous files on bin Laden.


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 next last
THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS! Is this the Twilight Zone or what?
1 posted on 09/30/2001 3:50:21 AM PDT by Aerial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Freedom007, £inuxgruven
FYI
2 posted on 09/30/2001 3:53:04 AM PDT by Aerial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
Bookmark bump.
3 posted on 09/30/2001 4:13:50 AM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
Explains why sanctions against Sudan were lifted by the Bush Administration.
4 posted on 09/30/2001 4:16:20 AM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aerial -- A little something for the i42 library.
Could those guys screw up, or what?
5 posted on 09/30/2001 4:19:50 AM PDT by Ed_in_NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ed_in_NJ, OKCSubmariner, a history buff, t-shirt, LSJohn, Plummz, Fred Mertz, TerrOrWar
It wasn't a screwup. It was deliberate. Madeleine Albright may have insisted on this, but one of the Clintons had to be behind it. Catastrophic intelligence Failure - Clinton's Bin Laden GATE .

I'm glad to see a Brit paper is now on top of the story.

6 posted on 09/30/2001 4:31:26 AM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Never mind, Mad Maddie and Limp Louie will take the fall for Der Schlickmeister and Her Blackness. Some things never change.

Leni

7 posted on 09/30/2001 4:41:11 AM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
Go to the Mena Arkansas Airport 3 billion dollar cocaine deal under Governor Clinton (Iran/Contra). It was such an outrage that we twice elected him as President, with the media knowing all about it. Ollie North is now bucking for election.

In the Background, the FAA knew they had an airport security disaster being threatened by Bin Laden. Three horrifying reports to Congress had no effect. Nobody would even warn the flight crews as to the reality. Even the FBI knew.

With enough terrorists acts big enough, we get to usher in the enhanced Nazism of the New World Order! You know, that outfit announced by George Sr. when Gillespie told Hussein that the USA had no position on inter-arab rivalries and their consequences. So Hussein went into Kuwait.

Hasn't the news been saying things about Americans giving up freedoms? An inch-at-a-time, what do you think will be left in the end???

See -

Airline Safety ‘Net

- look to the TWA-800” and “Attack on America” links.


"The TRUTH! You can't handle the truth!" < end sarcasm>
8 posted on 09/30/2001 4:48:22 AM PDT by SKYDRIFTER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
They included photographs, and information on their families, backgrounds and contacts.

Most were 'Afghan Arabs', Saudis, Yemenis and Egyptians who had fought with bin Laden against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

Hmmm.. You have to wonder if the pictures& names the FBI are showing us are the accurate. Some folks are saying their identities were stolen. Sigh. Yet another failure under the X42, Albright , Freeh, Reno cabal.

9 posted on 09/30/2001 4:53:07 AM PDT by csvset
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal
I'd like to know what to do with this rage I have inside me. The Hildebeast and The Cancerous Nose will drive me to drink. This couple will NEVER come to justice.? Do you think God has something SPECIAL in store for them? I hope so!
10 posted on 09/30/2001 4:53:43 AM PDT by poweqi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SKYDRIFTER
Thanks for the links and info. Will absorb them.
11 posted on 09/30/2001 5:00:13 AM PDT by Aerial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
1) I wonder what Sudan wanted in return for their information. Remember, they've been enslaving people and persecuing Christians for years. Not someone I'd be ready to deal with.

2) Is it possible that Americans will finally learn, after over 50 years of watching Democrats royally screw up foreign policy and military issues (Yalta, Korea, Vietnam, Iran, etc., etc.) that we'll learn to never, ever elect another Democrat to the White House? I remember arguing this to my friends in 1992 that Clinton would do something to screw us up, but was told, much like the media was saying then, that foreign policy didn't matter.

3) Will Americans ever realize the amount of damage that Clinton has done to our nation? I think that we'll be suffering from the repercussions for years to come. Remember, China is always looming in the background.

12 posted on 09/30/2001 5:03:50 AM PDT by GreatOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
Is this the Twilight Zone or what?

I think that Washington believed that bin Laden could still be "managed" through at least '98. Most likely, the attack on the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan and the cruise missile attack on the bases in Afghanistan were "warnings", rather than serious attempts to destroy bin Laden or his organization. Bin Laden was regarded as a useful tool for destablilizing Central Asia, the Caucauses and the Balkans. The pursuit of larger strategic goals was seen as more important than the risk of a direct attack on the US.

13 posted on 09/30/2001 5:05:30 AM PDT by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore, OKCSubmariner
It's understandable that the CIA and the Clinton administration thought bin Laden could be managed if the embassy bombings, the OKC bombing, the first WTC bombing, and even perhaps the attack on the Cole were done for the convenience of -- and very likely at the bidding of -- the U.S. administration. And that would certainly explain why the interrogation of the bin Laden lieutenants being held by the Sudan was sabotaged by the bombing of the aspirin factory.
14 posted on 09/30/2001 5:10:59 AM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
He said the blame for the failure lay in the 'irrational hatred' the Clinton administration felt for the source of the proffered intelligence - Sudan, where bin Laden and his leading followers were based from 1992-96.

That's the famous Clinton "If they **** with me, I'll **** with them" attitude, that guided this country so "successfully" for eight years.

15 posted on 09/30/2001 5:14:00 AM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Except that we -- or at least I -- don't know yet of anything the Sudanese did that could be interpreted as f***ing with Clinton.
16 posted on 09/30/2001 5:24:52 AM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
You act surprised ... of course Clinton had an "irrational" hatred of Sudan; how much money do you think they could contribute to his "campaign" funds?
17 posted on 09/30/2001 5:25:46 AM PDT by fnord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: poweqi
You had best save a whole bunch of that rage for the citizens of the United States of America, who in their wisdom, brought Willy the worst, and hildabeast, into the sacred confines of the White House, and then, knowing who and what they were, elected them a second time, and for a whole bunch of other people who are fully deserving of a share.

I have said it many times as have many others on this forum, the blame starts at the top and goes all the way to the bottom. We didn't get snookered, we got put to sleep because all our effort was spent warning ourselves and others, what electing such individuals to public office would mean to the safety of our rights and freedom.

Eight years of policy that allowed the enemy time to set us up. Eight years of a government that thought its citizens were the enemy, and eight years of citizens who knew absolutely that the government was the enemy. They were, but another enemy had time to press their advantage while our vigilance was directed at what the government was and was not doing.

The Constitution of the United States of America states, "The Congress shall have Power To provide for the common Defence and general welfare of the United States". While the two major political parties were doing battle with each other, the real enemy was freely entering our gates. The Congress failed in their responsibility to the American People.

I don't think I need to say any more althought much more could be said. Monday morning quarterbacking is a bit easier than prophecy.

18 posted on 09/30/2001 5:28:37 AM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wita
Ditto!
19 posted on 09/30/2001 5:36:43 AM PDT by poweqi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LSJohn; golitely; thinden; rdavis84; Fred Mertz; malador; Criminal Number 18F
FYI
20 posted on 09/30/2001 6:31:27 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
This 'war' may well come to be known as the War of Saudi Succession. The Taliban were tied to a faction around Turki and the more nationalist 'anti-western' groups. Saudi princes tend to either read the Koran and the like, or worship Bachus, Venus & co. The former would prefer a more autonomous relationship with the West, the latter simply agree with Mel Brook that it's good to be the king. 9-11 almost certainly involved the two factions.
21 posted on 09/30/2001 6:35:01 AM PDT by a history buff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; acehai; roughrider; BlueDogDemo; zog; Joe Hadenuf; tpaine
FYI
22 posted on 09/30/2001 6:36:29 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Inspector Harry Callahan; tymesup; abundy; rwz; Proud American in Canada
FYI
23 posted on 09/30/2001 6:37:36 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: HalfIrish; Movemout; HENRYADAMS; abundy; headsonpikes; carenot
FYI
24 posted on 09/30/2001 6:38:44 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: poweqi
I'd like to know what to do with this rage I have inside me. The Hildebeast and The Cancerous Nose will drive me to drink. This couple will NEVER come to justice.? Do you think God has something SPECIAL in store for them? I hope

Yup.....this is going to be his legacy. More and more info is coming out about his failure to act on the info given him and he knows it. Why else is he stopping people on the street and telling them he "tried to get Bin Laden."

25 posted on 09/30/2001 6:40:38 AM PDT by RightWingMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: StoptheDonkey; John Locke; Leper Messiah; timestax; freedomnews; DWSUWF
FYI
26 posted on 09/30/2001 6:40:49 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Squantos; E.G.C.; monkeywrench; Alamo-Girl; gargoyle; FormerLurker
FYI
27 posted on 09/30/2001 6:41:46 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: _Jim, katze, silly
For your files.
28 posted on 09/30/2001 6:43:32 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore;, aristeides
Great observations!
29 posted on 09/30/2001 6:54:30 AM PDT by Lion's Cub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RightWingMama
Congress is charged with the responsibility for the common defense. They failed, but we shouldn't leave bill out of the equation.
30 posted on 09/30/2001 7:10:28 AM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RightWingMama
PS, Congress was too busy with their infighting and power plays to be overly concerned with common defense.
31 posted on 09/30/2001 7:11:58 AM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
America,Its not the economy stupid! Its this crook and bimbo that we placed in the White House named Clinton. He started this along with all of his liberal non-conforming friends. If you havent read Gary Aldrich's book "Unlimited Acces" read it and it shows how and where this began. Americas security was put on the back burner.PAYDAY SOMEDAY!
32 posted on 09/30/2001 7:13:20 AM PDT by gunnedah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Judge Parker; aristeides; roughrider; BlueDogDemo
" 'This represents the worst single intelligence failure in this whole terrible business. It is the key to the whole thing right now. It is reasonable to say that had we had this data we may have had a better chance of preventing the attacks.'

"He said the blame for the failure lay in the 'irrational hatred' the Clinton administration felt for the source of the proffered intelligence."

This explanation is spin. Not a chance in the world such information would be rejected inadvertently, or from "irrational hatred."

There's a reason some powerful people in the intelligence community didn't want to be in possession of it. The only rational (rational, but evil) reason I can come up with is that the decision maker[s] didn't want certain members of our own intelligence community to know who these people are/were because those certain members can't/couldn't be trusted to keep their mouths shut.

There are some loyal Americans in our intelligence agencies; otherwise we wouldn't know half what we do. Leaks from these folks may be our salvation.

33 posted on 09/30/2001 7:16:11 AM PDT by LSJohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: independentmind; Nita Nupress; Askel5; smorgle; carenot; Tymesup; AtticusX; SKYDRIFTER; FormerLurker
fyi
34 posted on 09/30/2001 7:19:08 AM PDT by LSJohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
--yes, but we are encouraged to rah rah rah cheerlead all our leaders and their (our) employees over the years. They can do no wrong, or "it's all the democrats fault". One or the other.

Still wondering when the klamath farmers will stop being terrorized by the bush republican administration. Whoops, more politically incorrect speech, I forgot, "he needs more time". Still wondering when any federal official or bureaucrat or employee is going to be fired and/or prosecuted for any malfeasance. Oh ya, "he needs more time". Oh no, "bush bashing". Not. It's reality stating. Let the bashes fall where they may, as far as I am concerned, the new elected rookie president honeymoon period is over.

35 posted on 09/30/2001 7:50:21 AM PDT by zog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Except that we -- or at least I -- don't know yet of anything the Sudanese did that could be interpreted as f***ing with Clinton.

Perhaps they didn't support him to his liking?

36 posted on 09/30/2001 8:00:30 AM PDT by MaeWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Exactly.

The same group has been at work before here in the United States.

You have to give Bubba credit, however. His modus operandi was clever indeed: gut intelligence gathering through "humanitarian" means by making it illegal to recruit anyone who is not in a leadership position, disassociate the government from regimes who have key intelligence by saying they sponsor terrorism.

And, of course, indirectly sponsor bin Laden by fabricating a humanitarian crisis in Kosovo so that the KLA can funnel money from sex slavery and drugs sales into the wonderful cause of Marxist/Islamic terrorism. All of this - and the export of key American technology to the Chinese, to Syria, to anyone who would donate a few million to the wonderful democrats.

And where are the terribly honest and forthright Republicans on all of this? They're forming coalitions with the sponsors of terrorism to ease our pain.

37 posted on 09/30/2001 8:00:43 AM PDT by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fnord
You act surprised ... of course Clinton had an "irrational" hatred of Sudan; how much money do you think they could contribute to his "campaign" funds?

Bingo.

BUMP

38 posted on 09/30/2001 8:02:49 AM PDT by MaeWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
Imagine how nice things would have been if Gore had slithered his way into the White House...

Business...as usual...

--Boris

39 posted on 09/30/2001 8:13:01 AM PDT by boris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aristeides; LSJohn; thinden; rdavis84; malador, SKYDRIFTER
Except that we -- or at least I -- don't know yet of anything the Sudanese did that could be interpreted as f***ing with Clinton.

My understanding is that the Sudanese were using aspirins as a birth control device. You know, "take one, stick it between you kness and hold it there." This cut down on the population growth of the Sudan, and limited the number of foreigners that Clinton could bring into the country. Consequently, Clinton blew-up the aspirin factory.

And people say he wasn't rational. The jokes on them.

40 posted on 09/30/2001 8:17:57 AM PDT by Judge Parker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Judge Parker
Clinton never turned down a dollar. So who got the benefit of the non-action? Let's see, didn't he hit non-targets with those cruise missiles?

If that info would have hammered binLaden's bank account; and Clinton turned it down, was there some protection going on?
41 posted on 09/30/2001 8:52:00 AM PDT by SKYDRIFTER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: LSJohn
There's a reason some powerful people in the intelligence community didn't want to be in possession of it. The only rational (rational, but evil) reason I can come up with is that the decision maker[s] didn't want certain members of our own intelligence community to know who these people are/were because those certain members can't/couldn't be trusted to keep their mouths shut.

And who else do we know has an active presence in the Sudan? Does not pursuing Islamic radicals in the Sudan benefit China, by any chance?

42 posted on 09/30/2001 9:02:38 AM PDT by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: LSJohn; aristeides
LSJohn wrote: The only rational (rational, but evil) reason I can come up with is that the decision maker[s] didn't want certain members of our own intelligence community to know who these people are/were because those certain members can't/couldn't be trusted to keep their mouths shut.

From the Article: They included photographs, and information on their families, backgrounds and contacts. Most were 'Afghan Arabs', Saudis, Yemenis and Egyptians who had fought with bin Laden against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

The rational reason for not wanting the Sudanese dossiers is that the CIA and MI6 already had the information.

43 posted on 09/30/2001 9:24:18 AM PDT by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Aerial
Is this the Twilight Zone or what?

No it's called the Clinton Administration.
They murdered Vince Foster.
They murdered Ron Brown.
They threatened Kathleen Willey's life.
They discredited Juanita Broadrick.
They smeared Jennifer Flowers.
They gave China our most sophisticated ICBM guidance technology in exchange for campaign contributions.
They gave China our most sophisticated multiple re-entry warhead technology for campaign contributions.
He told the MTV kids that our forefathers were a bunch of radicals with radical ideas.
He told the MTV kids that too much freedom is dangerous and freedom needs to be curtailed.
He "promised" that we would only be in Bosnia for one year.
He lied to a Grand Jury.
And on and on and on....

9/11 is nothing. Won't even be a footnote when the "Legacy" has finally played out. I've been saying for over a year that their legacy will ultimately take billions, not millions, billions of lives. Believe it!

44 posted on 09/30/2001 9:42:34 AM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
I believe.
45 posted on 09/30/2001 9:45:06 AM PDT by .30Carbine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Judge Parker
Sudan - the new stomping ground of team player John Danforth, appointed by the Bush administration.
46 posted on 09/30/2001 10:03:00 AM PDT by Tymesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Aerial Travis McGee
Analogy from me , albeit poor .........Sadly just as if a medical lab cures cancer they are unemployed and donations to cure cancer stop. Now, just as Counterrorist and Intelligence Agencies depend on a threat for "income" well I'm of the opinion they and the socialist's within goobermint will always do a half assed job so they can keep theirs per se......

Wack opinion on my part ???, maybe...... but then who'd have ever thought we'd see what we did this month........

Ya'll Stay Safe...

47 posted on 09/30/2001 10:10:59 AM PDT by Squantos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
The rational reason for not wanting the Sudanese dossiers is that the CIA and MI6 already had the information.

That would be a rational reason for not investing great resources in trying to obtain it, but not for rejecting it when offered. You accept it, review it, see whether it adds to your knowledge/understanding (but I agree with you that they already knew most of it.)

Refusing to accept it is powerful evidence of evil intent on the part of the decision-makers, whoever they were, and I'm not willing to assume it was only Clinton

48 posted on 09/30/2001 10:42:52 AM PDT by LSJohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Comment #49 Removed by Moderator

To: Judge Parker
Thanks. Clinton's "irrational hatred" is more like covering up for his buddies. He didn't want anyone looking into any of this. He was in cahoots with anyone who could be used to harm this country, or our interests.
50 posted on 09/30/2001 1:01:09 PM PDT by monkeywrench
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson