Anyone see the Washington Times DEFENDING Clinton?

[wyldwolf]

Bartcop has these exerpts:

First, Mr. Miniter recycles old, false Sudanese claims that the Clinton White House declined access to Sudan's intelligence files on al Qaeda and that an unnamed CIA official declined an offer from Sudan in 1996 to turn Osama bin Laden over to the United States.

No one should believe these allegations by Mr. Miniter's source, Fateh Erwa — a Sudanese intelligence officer known for his penchant to deceive — that there was an offer to hand bin Laden over to the United States. Certainly, no offer was ever conveyed to any senior official in Washington. Had the Sudanese been serious about offering bin Laden to the United States, they could have communicated such an offer to any number of senior Clinton administration officials. It did not happen.

Clinton wanted conclusions from his chief intelligence and law enforcement agencies before launching broad retaliatory strikes on al Qaeda and Taliban targets in Afghanistan. Definitive conclusions from the CIA and FBI on who was behind the Cole were not provided to Mr. Clinton for the remainder of his term.

Even without conclusions from the FBI and CIA on the Cole, bin Laden and his lieutenants were still hunted to the last day of Mr. Clinton's presidency for al Qaeda's 1998 attacks on our two embassies in Africa. And if the Clinton administration dropped the ball in responding to the Cole bombing, why didn't the incoming Bush administration pick it up in January, 2001?


http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030922-090026-8355r.htm

[Catherine Vincent]

1. The Washington Times?? Wonders never cease!

I may archive that article, the next time some idiot republican state how Bin Laden was practically offered to Clinton on a platter, I'll just put this link up.

Thanks.

[TexasEditor]

2. The Times they are a changin'

The press seems to be on a truth telling kick these days. Thanks for posting this.

[thebigidea]

3. not so fast

its an op-ed by Clinton NSC staff, hardly the Wash Times defending Clinton.

[wyldwolf]

4. The Times printed it...

...and the wingers will see it. There is the point. It is the equivalent of FOX News giving airtime to someone saying this.

[thebigidea]

6. yeah, but slightly disinengenuous to say the Wash Times is defending him

say the Nation runs a bit by some frothing right winger babbling about Bush - they may have run the letter, but THEY aren't the ones doing the commenting.

[wyldwolf]

8. They ran the piece...

... which is not their nature. The top brass had to approve it, which they did.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

7. Unfortunately, that's what we're reduced to.

A scoffed at Op-Ed in the WT.

Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

[wyldwolf]

9. Where is this being scoffed at?

[Padraig18]

5. True, but...

..the fact that that Moonie, wingnut rag would even PRINT IT is astounding! :)