In an update to “The pathetic Michael Scheuer,” John quoted a message from Tom Joscelyn reponding to what John had written:
You make a great point about the original indictment under the Clinton administration. Your argument is even stronger when you consider what Scheuer wrote in Commentary Magazine a few months back. Gabriel Schoenfeld wrote a devastating critique of the CIA titled “What Became of the CIA?” in the March edition of the magazine. Scheuer responded by writing a letter to the editor that was one of several published in the June edition.
In his list of self-proclaimed accomplishments, Scheuer claimed that he and his team “supplied all of the information used in the federal indictment of Osama bin Laden.” That would, presumably, include the passage that John cites from the original indictment.
Scheuer may also have played a hand in the analysis of the intelligence surrounding al-Shifa. Al-Shifa was the Sudanese pharmaceutical plant destroyed by the Clinton administration in response to the August 1998 embassy bombings and suspected of being a joint collaboration between Iraqi scientists and al Qaeda. This all happened while he was the head of the CIAs bin Laden unit and it makes sense that he would have been involved in some capacity. Some former Clinton administration officials now make the bizarre claim that this wasnt evidence of a relationship.
One last note on Scheuer: If you search the 9-11 Commission Report you will note that “Mike” is referenced quite a bit. We now know that “Mike” is Michael Scheuer. Did he have any influence on the language in the report which said there was no “operational” relationship? If so, one of the 9-11 Commissions sources has major credibility problems.
The article by Gabriel Schoenfeld that Joscelyn mentions has been made available by Commentary: “What became of the CIA?”