Senators Challenge Bush Administration’s Claim That Sudan Is ‘A Strong Partner In War On Terror’
Senators Challenge Bush Administration’s Claim That Sudan Is ‘A Strong Partner In War On Terror’
Last week, the State Department released its 2006 terrorism report, which included this judgment about Sudan: “The Sudanese government was a strong partner in the War on Terror and aggressively pursued terrorist operations directly involving threats to U.S. interests and personnel in Sudan.”
But Sudan remains on the State Department’s list as a state sponsor of terror. And as a result of state-sponsored genocide, hundreds of thousands of people have died in Darfur and 2.5 million more have been forced to flee their homes. On April 18 in a speech at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, President Bush criticized the Sudanese government:
Sudan’s government has moved arms to Darfur, conducted bombing raids on villages, they’ve used military vehicles and aircraft that are painted white — which makes them look like those deployed by humanitarian agencies and peacekeeping forces.
Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Olympia Snow (R-ME), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) wrote a letter today to National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell questioning the basis for the administration’s claim that Sudan “is a strong partner in the war on terror.” Feingold issued the following statement:
The Administration needs to explain why its recent terrorism report described the government of Sudan, a state sponsor of terrorism which has been behind the genocide in Darfur, as a “strong partner in the War on Terror.” As we seek to stop the genocide, it is critical that Congress have all necessary information related to this administration’s policies and priorities in Sudan.
In November 2001, Bush said partners in the war against terror networks would be put to a simple test: “You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror.” But today, when asked about the discrepancy in its Sudan policy, White House spokesman Tony Fratto replied: “Look, the situation in Sudan is complicated.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
54 Responses to “Senators Challenge Bush Administration’s Claim That Sudan Is ‘A Strong Partner In War On Terror’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Oh it’s complicated, well O.K. then, for a minute it looked like just more empty rhetoric and the usual Republic666an hyprocrisy.
May 4th, 2007 at 5:30 pmPerfect picture, Faiz.
The King may get his very own Holocaust Museum one day….
May 4th, 2007 at 5:32 pmFlip-flopper
May 4th, 2007 at 5:37 pmOh hell yes, supporting the Janjaweed rapist and murderers is a strong commitment to terror. Huh?
May 4th, 2007 at 5:37 pmFeingold and the others cited on this letter need to follow the money. I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that Halliburton lies somewhere at the bottom of this cesspool.
May 4th, 2007 at 5:41 pmBush was against the Sudanese government’s state-sponsored terrorism before he was for it.
May 4th, 2007 at 5:42 pmSudan? Darfur? Never heard of them.
May 4th, 2007 at 5:43 pmSo which is it? Is Sudan a sponser of terrorism or an exxential ally in the war against terrorism?
C’mon Shrub decide. Oh wait he is not the decider anymore; now he is the “Commander Guy”
May 4th, 2007 at 5:44 pmDidn’t Colin Powell say that genocide was occuring in Darfur? Didn’t Bush tell a Rwandan genocide survivor that a genocide would not happen “on my watch”?
Well, well, well……
Apparently Bush sold his watch.
-GSD
May 4th, 2007 at 5:44 pmTake that, Holocaust survivors!
May 4th, 2007 at 5:45 pmthere’s OIL in sudan, right?
May 4th, 2007 at 5:48 pmThe Administration needs to explain why its recent terrorism report described the government of Sudan, a state sponsor of terrorism which has been behind the genocide in Darfur, as a “strong partner in the War on Terror.â€in the War on Terror.â€
It’s easy to explain. The United States is the world’s largest Terrorist State. The Sudan, as a state sponsor of terrorism, is therefore on the same side as the United States.
May 4th, 2007 at 5:48 pmThere must be a profit motive involved.
May 4th, 2007 at 5:55 pmSuddenly the Sudan is a friend of ours in the so called “war on terror.”
There is money to be made - what other answer can apply?
“Complicated” my a**. Sudan has U.S support for one reason, and one reason only. OIL. The U.S. had no problem supporting a government which participates in genocide, violations of human rights, repression of their populations, and ad nauseum. This is an older article (2005), but there are clues in here, despite that U.S. companies aren’t supposed to do business with Sudan. Kind of like Iran, offshore subsidiaries and Cheney.
May 4th, 2007 at 5:57 pmwhew… for a bit i thought i’d gone too much off the wall…
May 4th, 2007 at 6:01 pmworried my oil question may have been out of line… somehow…
if not wrong… … i figured you all would tell me…
i got my answer…
#10 Katy, I think you’re right on the money! Oil is the reason for this whole mess.
May 4th, 2007 at 6:02 pmHe has lost his mind. Remove him…at once. Why isn’t the US promoting Bush’s ouster with mass protests like the Israelis?
May 4th, 2007 at 6:04 pmOil. Yes. There’s oil. And there’s the People’s Republic of China.
May 4th, 2007 at 6:17 pmWho cares about Sudan and dafur. It’s not our business!
May 4th, 2007 at 6:22 pmThe reason there are no mass protests against Bush is because nobody wants to assemble during the day because they have to go to work to save up for that news sports car…Monday night is “Dancing with the Stars” night, Tuesday and Wednesday nights are “American Idol” nights, Thursday night is “Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader” night, Friday and Saturday nights are party nights, and Sunday night is go-to-bed early night to recover from partying all weekend. Weekend days are for the beach. George Bush? Who’s he?
May 4th, 2007 at 6:25 pmThe Bush administration is urging Congress to pass a law that would halt dozens of lawsuits charging phone companies with invading ordinary citizens’ privacy through a post-Sept. 11 warrantless surveillance program.
May 4th, 2007 at 6:44 pmSo it’s complicated huh? That’s ok….Americans are smart people. Go ahead and tell us and I betcha we’ll understand.
May 4th, 2007 at 6:51 pmSince Raven is busy.
Screen Caption:
“I wish I could be like Ted Haggard”
May 4th, 2007 at 6:54 pmComment by xenon
Because Americans have become mindless, apathetic, ignoramuses.
May 4th, 2007 at 6:55 pmMay 4th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
republicans automatically “understand” because they have blind faith in their party; lies, flip-flops and all.
May 4th, 2007 at 7:01 pmI can remember when Bush was asked the names of leaders of four of the world’s hot spots and couldn’t name one. Karen Hughes came to Bush’s rescue with this lame-brained answer: “The person who is running for president is seeking to be the leader of the free world - not a Jeopardy contestant.”
May 4th, 2007 at 7:05 pmI’m sure Bush and the State Dept see Sudan as a Muslim country, and since they’re having a genocide, just think of all the little terrorists being nipped in the bud by the Sudanese government. “Sponsor of Terror” because, well, they are… and “Partner in the War on Terror” because they’re killing their own. Through Bush’s eyes, the genocide is probably the best thing that could happen in the Sudan. It kinda explains our policy toward them…
May 4th, 2007 at 7:06 pmI feel blessed just gazing at that picture of our King & savior. *deep breath* Ahhhhhh.
May 4th, 2007 at 7:25 pmSo it’s complicated huh? That’s ok….Americans are smart people. Go ahead and tell us and I betcha we’ll understand.
Comment by Dabb
Very well put. Perfectly stated.
May 4th, 2007 at 7:28 pmxenon: “Why isn’t the US promoting Bush’s ouster with mass protests like the Israelis?”
The way we do that here is impeachment. Without a supermajority in both houses, that can’t happen and any attempt is simply political theater.
May 4th, 2007 at 7:49 pmAnd it only makes good theater when there’s sex involved.
Heaven forbid we use the impeachment process to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law!
May 4th, 2007 at 7:58 pmIt’s not complicated at all. Women and children are being slaughtered. What else does the administration know? Not much is sure.
May 4th, 2007 at 7:59 pmThey need to impeach this entire bastard administration before it is too late.
May 4th, 2007 at 8:30 pmI feel blessed just gazing at that picture of our King & savior. *deep breath* Ahhhhhh.
Comment by Namtillaku
Wouldn’t Bush wish this to be true….
Are we ever going to regain respect for the office of presidency again? I remember back in the ’01’s when the lies were beginning to emerge… and how weird and strange for bloggers to be calling our president a liar… and how horrible it sounded to some. Not only is he a liar, he is a murderous sociopath bastard…. it has now become common place to see that in print from bloggers
May 4th, 2007 at 8:47 pmI had a dream.No better not go there you all will share my nightmare and our own civil war may begin…
If I may can I connect some of my own dot’s in the horrible genocide we are viewing and grieving over….Think back to 9/11, now remember where 16 of the suposed killers came from and who supported them..Answer Saudi Arabia..Now think on this, who by neglect or design allowed it to happen and then shifted a pre planned attack on Iraq and didn’t lift a finger to go after BenLauden….Well we all know the benlauden’s and bush’s have been in bed together forever, we also know the saudi prince and bush hold hand’s in the garden of evil in crawford..Now we have Sudan in their mass killings in Darfur. This is just more evil people working at the same end with in a tight knit group of dictator types, massive killings and war’s for oil and total domination..Nothing has ever happend to the saudis, benlauden and it appear’s we are stuck with our mass murderer’s and sudan will be a free card from bush like the rest…Am I making any sence to you all?…I have been watching and pondering all these things since 9/11 and the truth can not come out fast enough….Blessings we realy need them…Peace, many are getting it to soon and in the wrong way…Impeach, jail and seize their asset’s.
May 4th, 2007 at 9:16 pmFollow the money…Oil? Diamonds? The chimpcrew has an ulterior motive for everything. The first five years or so they tried to keep it hush hush. Now they don’t give a damn who knows…their going to get theirs and Fu#@ anyone who gets in the way.
What is so amazing is the 33%ers who think this is an honest man…a good “Christian Man”. The whole lot of them belong in Jail…or put before a firing squad.
May 4th, 2007 at 9:21 pmPatrick, I read some where the other day they are down to 22% now….Blessings
May 4th, 2007 at 9:25 pmAw jeez, guys. Georgie just misspoke AGAIN, that’s all. What he meant to say, was “The Sudanese government was a strong partner in the War OF Terror”. OF, not On, OF… the War OF Terror. Georgie was only off by one freakin’ l’il “f” and ya’ll are so upset.
May 4th, 2007 at 9:43 pmWho cares about Sudan and dafur. It’s not our business!
But Honduras, Panama, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Argentina, Venezuela, Chili, El Salvador, etc. are our business. Shut up already.
May 4th, 2007 at 10:28 pmAnybody remember the name of the guy who predicted a “million Mogadishus”?? He was lambasted big time.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:00 pmHe was also dead ass right.
RU…Nicholas De Genova…he is an extremist. He was not right about anything.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:15 pmThanks JPark, I just remembered that phrase, and it sounded like a pretty good prediction.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:19 pmYou are one walking freakin encyclopedia!!
RU…it would have been a good prediction. Unfortunately, he was hoping it would happen. I don’t like the administration policies but this guy wants the troops to pay for it. Not cool. Several assassins would be much more helpful.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:24 pmOnly with the Bush administration can a country both be a “strong partner in the war on terror” and be listed as a state sponsor of terror -at the same time.
And about the situation in Sdan being complicated; since when does Pres Bush “do nuance”?
The question is actually a very simple one: Is Sudan a partner against terror or a sponsor of it?
Which is it?
May 5th, 2007 at 12:36 amOh hell it’s simple…
…they omitted a word…
…”Perpetuating”…
…and misspelled another…
…”on” should’ve been “of”…
…”A strong partner in PERPETUATING war OF terror”…
…c’mon you guys…
…puppets (especially Bushites) make mistakes…
May 5th, 2007 at 12:38 amGregor, that isn’t the question. There is a genocide going on. Stopping that genocide and having a stable government may or may not change the Sudanese response to terrorism. I am not sure I care what their response would be as long as we stopped the genocide.
May 5th, 2007 at 12:55 amThere is a genocide going on.
Comment by JPark — May 5, 2007 @ 12:55 am
I understand that.
But it was Pres Bush himself who painted himself in a corner when he said “either with us or against us” in the war on terror, and that he would preemptively strike any nation that harbored terrorists.
As if he didn’t know that a nation could be both “with us”, and “harbor terrorists” at the same time.
I am not sure I care what their response would be as long as we stopped the genocide.
Frankly, I really don’t care either. I was trying to make the point that “with us or against us” was their own standard. One they are failing to live up to. What a surprise, I know.
May 5th, 2007 at 1:57 amThat’s the breaks if hundreds of thousands of people have to be murdered so “threats to U.S. interests” can be countered. WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The really f#cked up part is that any action taken under the “Decider” would have zero legitamacy because he has destroyed the already shaky creditibility we had as a force of humanitarianism. I wish I would be alive a hundred years from now to see how screwed humankind is.
May 5th, 2007 at 2:21 amIf the situation is “complicated” it means corruption. Somehow Sudan’s government is playing ball with the Bush administration, so they’re good guys again. Just like Saddam used to be a good guy and shaking Rummy’s hand even while he was killing his own people. But things got uncomplicated in Iraq when Saddam stopped playing ball and couldn’t be bought anymore. That’s when Iraq showed up on a short list of the axis of evil, and Pearle, Cheney and Wolfowitz plotted on how to a) get our bases over there b) grab the oil. Oops, I mean privatize.
May 5th, 2007 at 10:42 amMaybe Bush agian forgets which side he is on!
May 5th, 2007 at 11:34 amA Republican breaking ranks and siding with the Dems. Nice. The other 96 senators need to call BUsh on his crap.
May 5th, 2007 at 11:40 amI wonder where everyones favorite right wing stool softener, Exlaxley is with his bombastic speeches about “fightning terrorisms”…any comment Exlaxley?
May 5th, 2007 at 2:30 pmI wonder how Bush would feel if Janjiweed militia raped and knocked up his twin daughters. He still would be fine with Sudan? I guess so.
Genocide is the worst form of terrorism. Is it 2008 yet?
May 7th, 2007 at 2:35 am