the whackjobs actually DO believe it. people believing that kind of garbage (or the Vince Foster nonsense, etc) is the ONLY way Republicans hold on to their power -- they have nothing to offer the country, so they simply smear and lie about their opponents.
BTW, the guy who initiated the Sudan/bin Laden story, Mansoor Ijaz: now working for FOX News.
2007-11-25 03:52:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Andrew 5
·
2⤊
6⤋
avail, has it mostly right, except for some details that weren't mentioned.
#1 Sudan was accused, for years, prior to offering Osama, of being a terrorist harboring state.
Now, if you have this country, that for years harbored terrorists, offering the most notorious one, without offering any others, would you trust them?
You and I both know they were only offering him to draw the heat away from everyone else they were supporting and harboring that were there.
Now if Clinton would have accepted the deal, he would have had to politicially ackowledge that Sudan wasn't harboring terrorists, therefore giving safe haven from the United States to any remaining terrorists in Sudan.
Had he done this, the right-wingers would be bashing him for allowing Sudan to remain a safe haven for terrorists.
Afterall, how could you justify continuing to call them of harboring terrorists if they offered Osama? You couldn't, right-wingers would be calling it Dem imperialism trying to spread socialism etc etc if Clinton decided afterwards to go into Sudan and round up a few more.
It basically breaks down to figuring out which right-wing conspiracy theory you wish to be accused of; the one where you didnt' bother(which can be proved otherwise), or the one were every other country becomes paranoid of you for invading a country who offered something far too good to be true.
So he tried to get Saudi Arabia, who had better relations with Sudan to accept him. Saudi Arabia wanted nothing to do with him. "it was too hot of a potatoe" for them to deal with. Which is what he was talking about in his speech, not what right-winger keep trying to claim it means.
#2 If Sudan's attempt was to help America fight terrorist, which it wasn't, they wouldn't have sent him to Afghanistan in the frst place. Everyone knew That was his escape route from American authorities, but they did it anyway. Which leaves doubt in my mind whether they were going to turn him over in the first place. It appears they were only playing politics to draw the heat off themselves as being a terrorist harboring country...and OOPS we didnt' know Afghanistan, was going to let him go...yeah suuuuuure they didn't. But it sure took the heat off Sudan for not letting him go didn't it?
#3 Sudan had many people who were loyal to Osama's goals. afterall, they harbored many other terrorists. What makes anyone think that people loyal to his cause were actually going to hand him over?
This is why our government was trying to get Saudi Arabia to handle the transfer, because they can somewhat be trusted more than a country[Sudan] that has already harbored terrorists.
Another problem that appears to have been a problem was our government was acting on poor data from the CIA. Some of it even appeared to be deliberatly falsified causing more distrust in Sudan and their actual intentions to hand him over.
Was it actually falsified, or where they really not intending to hand him over?
to late to tell now, but sending him to Afghanistan, sure is a good indication of their intentions.
But regardless, one thing is for sure, you're a conspiracy theory whacko if you question a Republican President, but it appears to be sound to right-wingers to make up conspiracy theory against Democrat ones. Imagine that!
2007-11-25 13:25:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Boss H 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Sudan never offered Osama Bin Laden to America or to Clinton. What happened, Sudan was Ordered by the Clinton administration to take Osama to Afghanistan. That is the Truth about the matter.
2007-11-25 11:54:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by sos 1
·
1⤊
6⤋
They have it in Clinton's own words. He was offered Bin Laden. But at the time didn't want to take him.
But you will believe any lie as long as a liberal is telling it and will ignore the truth as long a Republican is the one stating it.
2007-11-25 11:59:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
3⤋
The Right Wing still try to blame President Clinton for 9/11, the Iraq War spending, and the current state of the economy.
This shows you what type of people are in the Republican Party, they love to play the blame game, but they take no responsibility for their own disastrous actions.
That is why they will be voted out of the White House in Congress in 2008.
Because we cannot afford another Republican leading this nation.
2007-11-25 11:55:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
5⤋
A/ You dont know that it is a lie
B/ What media and politicians make of a fact or an "untruth" has nothing to do with it's validity
In my opinion the american right has lost very much of it's credibility and morale. I hope they regain both since it will be better for all in the end that way.
2007-11-25 11:50:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by morphriz 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
Smear tactics from the right, specifically Hannity
Sudan never offered Osama to the United States, he was offered to Saudi Arabia. Clinton's words on this have been twisted to match right-wing propaganda.
But he was never offered to the United States. And Clinton tried to get Saudi Arabia to take him, and that is exactly what his words that right-wingers keep trying to use as evidence is referring to.
After Saudi Arabia refused to take him, he ended up being transfered to Afghanistan, which did nothing but slap his wrist and let him go.
If you believe the right-wing, Sudan offered every terrorist leader that has ever existed to Clinton.
2007-11-25 11:55:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by avail_skillz 7
·
3⤊
5⤋
Denying the truth doesn't make it a lie.
losersrd has the correct link try it for a change a little reality would probably amaze you
2007-11-25 12:01:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by CFB 5
·
2⤊
4⤋
To keep people bickering, and not notice we're sliding right into a one world government
2007-11-25 11:57:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jim G 2
·
3⤊
3⤋
I hope they don't believe in this,since it's just a rumor.
The truth we don't know,but we know that this doesn't make any sense.
I wonder why they spread these rumors,they probably don't have any thing better to do......
2007-11-25 11:51:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
5⤋