SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: LindyBill who wrote (45935)9/21/2002 9:57:23 PM
From: KLP  Respond to of 281500
 
Albright's dishonesty on Sudan knows no bounds
2002-04-17 18:31:02

(KLP Note: Found this today, speaking of birds...er ..hawks...Actually got around to reading the Vanity Fair Magazine Jan 2002 issue magazine today regarding Sudan, OBL, and the Clinton administration...will post a bit of that next...because of that article, I found this one...check out the link.....)

The European-Sudanese Public Affairs Council
17 April 2002
ummahnews.com

In December 2001, 'Vanity Fair' published a devastating expose of the Clinton Administration's mishandling of repeated offers by the Sudanese government, some dating back to 1996, to provide Washington intelligence on terrorism - particularly with regard to the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

Part of what was offered to the Clinton Administration were several hundred Sudanese files on al-Qaeda and its members. The Administration also passed up the opportunity of interrogating two al- Qaeda members who had clearly been involved in the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in east Africa. In keeping with its very questionable Sudan policy , the Clinton Administration rejected all of Sudan's repeated offers.

The implications of this studied indifference are clear. As 'Vanity Fair' stated: "September 11 might have been prevented if the U.S. had accepted Sudan's offers to share its intelligence files on Osama bin Laden and the growing al-Qaeda files." It had also earlier been revealed that in addition to offering the Clinton Administration intelligence on al-Qaeda, the Sudanese government had in 1996 also offered to extradite Osama bin-Laden - just as Khartoum had extradited the international terrorism known as "Carlos the Jackal" to France. This offer was also rejected by the Clinton Administration.

Unsurprisingly perhaps, prominent members of the Clinton Administration's foreign policy and national security team rejected the conclusions of the 'Vanity Fair' article, denying the sincerity of the offers.

Madeleine Albright, the former US Secretary of State; Samuel Berger, the former national security adviser; Thomas Pickering, former undersecretary of state for political affairs; and Susan Rice, former assistant secretary of state for African affairs claimed that Osama bin Laden had been involved in an attempted attack on U.S. forces in Yemen in 1992; had assisted with attacks on U.S. forces in Mogadishu in 1993; had "financed" the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993; and had "planned and prepared a car-bomb attack on U.S. soldiers in Saudi Arabia" in 1995. Susan Rice has also attempted to address her badly damaged reputation in, of all places, the May 2002 edition of 'Elle' magazine.

There are three points that should be made.

Firstly, the Clinton Administration, and its officials, have long shown remarkable dishonesty with regard to Sudan, especially regarding its claims of Sudanese involvement in terrorism. Former US President Jimmy Carter was able to ascertain that the Clinton Administration's 1993 listing of Sudan as a "state sponsor of terrorism" was not based, as it should have been, on strict legal criteria but rather on the basis of "allegations". This set the tone for all future Clinton Administration claims about Sudan and terrorism.

Albright, Berger, Pickering and Rice also accepted at face value over one hundred intelligence reports alleging Sudanese involvement in terrorism which were subsequently discarded as having been false. It is unclear how many of their subsequent claims about Sudan are similarly muddled or just deliberately dishonest.

Secondly, when challenged as to why the Clinton Administration passed up on the offer of bin Laden's extradition, Samuel Berger stated: "In the United States, we have this thing called the Constitution, so to bring him here is to bring him into the justice system. I don't think that was our first choice." Surely, if any of their subsequent claims about bin Laden's involvement in terrorism against American interests from 1992 through to 1995, as laid out in their response to the 'Vanity Fair' article, were true why did the Clinton Administration not jump at the chance of his extradition in 1996?

Thirdly, for all the attempts by his advisers to downplay the sincerity of the Sudanese offers, the simple fact is that former President Clinton displayed considerable courage in describing the refusal to accept Sudan's 1996 offer as "the biggest mistake" of his presidency.

Rather than desperately trying to distance themselves from their role in Clinton's "biggest mistake", his national security and foreign affairs team should have the courage to admit that their advice to the president was simply wrong. Those who advised him to ignore Sudan's offers, Albright, Berger, Pickering and Rice, are ultimately responsible for putting their deeply questionable Sudan policy and spin before the national security of their own country. They were all party to one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history. Had they not put spin before truth the events of 11 September may well not have happened



To: LindyBill who wrote (45935)9/21/2002 10:05:39 PM
From: KLP  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Re that Vanity Fair article re Al Qaeda, OBL, CIA, FBI and Clinton Administration.... As you know, VF doesn't seem to reprint their whole articles, but I do have the magazine, should anyone want any quotes or info from it. Drudge did seem to have a fairly good review of the article.

It made me wonder all over again, what in the heck was going on in the FBI under Freed, the CIA during Deutch's term, and the State Department under Albright....

MAG: SUDAN TRIED TO GIVE CLINTON ADMIN FILES ON BIN LADEN

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX FRI NOV 30 2001 10:30:08 ET XXXXX
drudgereport.com

NEW YORK --VANITY FAIR HAS OBTAINED LETTERS and memorandums that document approaches made by Sudanese intelligence officials and other emissaries to members of the Clinton administration to share information about many of the 22 terrorists on the government's most-wanted list, including: Osama bin Laden.

VANITY FAIR is set to unleash the story in January 2002 editions, publishing sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

MORE

THE MUKHABARAT, A SUDANESE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, spent the early to mid-1990s amassing copious amounts of information on bin Laden and his cohorts at a time when they were relatively unknown and their activities limited, author David Rose reports. From the fall of 1996 until weeks before the September 2001 attack on the World Trade Center, the Mukhabarat made repeated efforts to share its files on terrorists with the U.S. On more than one occasion senior F.B.I. officials wanted to accept the offers, but were apparently overruled by the State Department.

FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT and her assistant secretary for Africa, Susan Rice, declined to comment for this story.

ACCORDING TO TIM CARNEY, THE LAST U.S. AMBASSADOR to Sudan, whose posting ended in 1997, “The fact is, they were opening the doors, and we weren’t taking them up on it. The U.S. failed to reciprocate Sudan’s willingness to engage us on some serious questions of terrorism. We can speculate that this failure had serious implications—at least for what happened at the U.S. Embassies in 1998. In any case, the U.S. lost access to a mine of material on bin Laden and his organization.” He tells Rose, “It was worse than a crime. It was a fuckup.”

HOW COULD THIS HAVE HAPPENED? CARNEY CONTENDS that U.S. intelligence failed because it became “politicized”: the message from Sudan did not fit conventional wisdom at the State Department and the C.I.A., and so it was disregarded, again and again. Rose writes that the simple answer is that the Clinton administration had accused Sudan of sponsoring terrorism, and refused to believe that anything it did to prove its bona fides could be genuine. At the same time, perceptions in Washington were influenced by C.I.A. reports that were wildly inaccurate, some the result of deliberate disinformation.

ROSE REPORTS THAT, HAD U.S. AGENCIES EXAMINED the Mukhabarat files in 1996 when they first had the chance the prospects of preventing subsequent al-Qaeda attacks would have been much greater. Gutbi al-Mahdi, the Mukhabarat’s director general between 1997 and 2000, claims that if the F.B.I. had taken his offer in February 1998, the embassy bombings could have been prevented: “They had very little information at that time: they were shooting in the dark. Had they engaged with Sudan, they could have stopped a lot of things.” Rose writes that as late as the end of 1995, bin Laden was not judged important enough by the C.I.A. or the F.B.I. for anyone to mention him to U.S. Ambassador Don Petterson when Petterson talked to the Sudanese about terrorism, an indication that the U.S. knew very little about bin Laden’s organization or lethal capacity. “My recollection is that when I made representations about terrorist organizations Osama bin Laden did not figure,” Petterson says. “We in Khartoum were not really concerned about him.”

SOME OF THE MUKHABARAT’S FILES IDENTIFY INDIVIDUALS who played central roles in the bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in August 1998; others chart the backgrounds and movements of al-Qaeda operatives who are said to be linked directly to the atrocities of September 11. Among those profiled:

Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, another of those named on the F.B.I.’s most-wanted list, who set the plot for the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings rolling during two trips he made to Nairobi in the spring of 1998 from Khartoum, where he was apparently working for al-Qaeda. Rose writes that had the F.B.I. accepted al-Mahdi’s February offer, it might have foiled Mohammed’s plans by stepping in when he rented a villa in Kenya, gathered the bombers at the Hilltop Hotel in Nairobi, or helped stuff a pickup truck with TNT.

Two men carrying Pakistani passports and using the names Sayyid Iskandar Suliman and Sayyid Nazir Abbass, who arrived in Khartoum from Kenya a few days after the 1998 embassy bombings and rented an apartment overlooking the U.S. Embassy in Khartoum. They appeared to be reconnoitering for a possible future attack and are believed to be members of al-Qaeda. They also stayed at the Hilltop Hotel in Nairobi—the base used by other members of the embassy-bombing conspiracy. Sudan arrested the two men and offered to extradite them for trial, but the U.S. did not respond, instead opting to bomb the al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum, which was found to have no connection to bin Laden but made vaccines and medicine and had contracts with the U.N.

Wadih al-Hage, bin Laden’s former private secretary, now serving life without parole after his conviction in New York for his role in the 1998 embassy bombings, who was logged and photographed in Sudan. He is said to have moved among bin Laden’s cells and across four continents—information that surely would have been helpful in cramping al-Qaeda’s style had it been grasped in 1996.

Mamdouh Mahmoud Salim, a Sudanese born to Iraqi parents and an Afghan-war veteran who worked for two bin Laden companies until 1995. Salim provides a link to the New York suicide hijackers. From 1995 to 1998, he made frequent visits to Germany, where a Syrian trader, Mamoun Darkazanli, had signing powers over his bank account. Darkazanli has allegedly procured electronic equipment for al-Qaeda. Both men attended the same Hamburg mosque as Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi, who flew the two planes into the World Trade Center.

ACCORDING TO AL-MAHDI, THE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE kept tabs on the entire bin Laden “clique”: “We had a lot of information: who they are, who are their families, what is their education. We knew what they were doing in the country, what is their relationship with Osama bin Laden. And [had] photographs of them all.” A senior official from Egyptian intelligence, who has worked closely with the Mukhabarat, substantiates the account: “They knew all about them: who they were, where they came from. They had copies of their passports, their tickets; they knew where they went. Of course that information could have helped enormously. It is the history of those people.”

THE MUKHABARAT ALSO UNCOVERED A WEALTH OF information about bin Laden’s connection to Egyptian Islamic Jihad, including the fact that he hosted its founder, al-Zawahiri, in 1992. The group has since effectively merged with al-Qaeda. Yahia Hussien Baviker, the Mukhabarat’s deputy chief since 1998, says, “These files on the Egyptians could have been of great value to U.S. intelligence. If we’d had communication with the U.S., we could have been on the same wavelength. We could have exchanged notes.” A C.I.A. source tells Rose, “If anyone in the world understands the Egyptian side of this network, it’s Sudan.”

IT WAS NOT UNTIL MAY 2000 THAT THE U.S. SENT A JOINT F.B.I.-C.I.A. team to Sudan to investigate whether it was harboring terrorists; the country was given a clean bill of health in the summer of 2001. Just a few weeks prior to the September 11 attacks, the Bush administration requested Sudan’s information on al-Qaeda.

THE JANUARY ISSUE OF VANITY FAIR HITS NEWSSTANDS in New York on December 5 and nationally on December 11.