Need help INRE: Clinton, Sudan, Bin Laden and rightwing lies(?)

[ProfessorPlum]

I know this has probably been kicked around here many times. But in Al Franken's book Lies and the Lying Liars . . . he claims that Sudan never made an offer involving Bin Laden, that it was originally suggested by one Mansoor Ijaz, who was full of crap, and that is that.

I've found several right wing sources that claim that Franken is not telling the truth here, and that Clinton himself has sort of said something a few years ago that could be interpreted as he did have a chance to "get" Bin Laden, but didn't take that chance because he couldn't do anything legally with him.

I'd like to know what the real deal is. I've found several quotes from members of the GOP saying things like "Clinton had Bin Laden handed to him on a silver platter THREE separate times, and did nothing!". While I'm sure this is a totally outrageous lie - is there ANY truth to it?

The rightwingers seem so sure of their little selves that they caught Franken out on this one. I'd hate for it to be true.

Thanks very much in advance for any help.

PP

[papau]

1. There was never an offer of Bin Laden to the US - period, What

was on offer - perhaps - might have been - in return for the US ok'ing the murders and terror export in Sudan - a transfer of Bin Laden to the Saudi's.

The Saudi's said that if that happen their would be no restraints on Bin Laden while in Saudi Arabia.

Mansoor Ijaz offerred up the Saudi transfer, and refers to that Saudi transfer as "giving the US Bin Laden"

Mad. Albright has many statements out that say the above - as do others.

[zbdent]

2. The truth is that the guy never had any connection to bin Laden - only

trying to get in favor, and saying "Hey, if we catch him, I will give him to you."

The guy had zero credibility.

[Gunit_Sangh]

3. I also seem to remember the big dog

making that loose comment, but that was from memory that turned out to be false. In a later interview, he had an opportunity to go back and review the records and correctly stated what had actually happened, ie it never happened.

That businessman who made the accusation wanted to open business relations in the Sudan but couldn't due to import/export restrictions enforced on Sudan. That businessman is the ONLY person who ever made the accusation, but as usual, the gop spin machine got ahold of it and repeated it enough times that it was taken as gospel.

Of course, this is from MY memory also :o

[never cry wolf]

4. The National Commission on Terrorism disagrees with the wingnuts

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/911rpt/32304dplmcyrpt.pdf

See the piece on bin-laden starting at the bottom of page 3.

See also Richard Clarke's book.

[ProfessorPlum]

5. Thank you, that's a great resource

Somehow, I'm not surprised that Franken is correct, and Rich Lowry and others are wrong.

[never cry wolf]

6. Here's a couple of others

http://www.makethemaccountable.com/myth/ClintonAndTerrorism.htm
http://www.blogd.com/archives/000526.html

I googled clinton+osama+sudan and found this but most of the hits were RWers trying to spread the myth. I barely got halfway down the page.