In 1996, the Sudanese govt, responding to continued US State Dept pressure over its continuing support of international terrorism, offered to extradite Osama bin Laden to the US to face trial for the 1993 WTC bombing. However, the Clinton admin declined this offer on the purported grounds of insufficient evidence to try OBL before an American domestic court, and he was able to flee to Afghanistan where he cosied up with the Taliban, culminating with AQ's perpetration of 9/11. WI the Clinton admin had accepted Khartoum's offer ? How would a trial of OBL have progressed, and what would've been the wider international political, security and legal ramifications ? Could 9/11 have been prevented and AQ nipped in the bud ?
US accepts Sudan's extradition of OBL, 1996
- Thread starter Melvin Loh
- Start date
I don't really buy the 'insufficient evidence' thing. Sounds more like the Clinton administration not wanting to admit that their favorite rogue state wasn't. However, if they had accepted the extradition (the greatest favour they could have done the world at the time) and it actually had turned out that they really didn't have enough evidence...
Would I hate to be working in the intelligence community.
(Bar chat-up in progress 2001. "So, what do you do?" "I - err - I'm the guy who cleans out garbage cans at the municipal dump." "mm...not really, or?" "No. I ... really ... work for the CIA....Mideast desk." (lady walks away))
Would I hate to be working in the intelligence community.
(Bar chat-up in progress 2001. "So, what do you do?" "I - err - I'm the guy who cleans out garbage cans at the municipal dump." "mm...not really, or?" "No. I ... really ... work for the CIA....Mideast desk." (lady walks away))
Uhh. I see that someone else has seen that "Bin Laden" sounds like an overloaded garbage collecter.
(Off topic, but one of my local postmen has the same face as Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt. I live near Manchester Airport (UK).)