Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The real culprit of 9/11?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The real culprit of 9/11?

    Commentary: The real culprit of 9/11?


    By Arnaud de Borchgrave
    UPI Editor at Large


    Washington, DC, Jul. 22 (UPI) -- On the eve of the publication of its report, the 9/11 Commission was given a stunning document from Pakistan, claiming that Pakistani intelligence officers knew in advance of the 9/11 attacks.

    The document, from a high-level, but anonymous Pakistani source, also claims that Osama bin Laden has been receiving periodic treatment for dialysis in a military hospital in Peshawar, the capital of Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province adjacent to the Afghan border.

    The document was received by the Commission this week as its own report was already coming off the presses. The information was supplied to the Commission on the understanding that the unimpeachable source would remain anonymous.

    The report received by the 9/11 Commission from the anonymous, well-connected Pakistani source, said: "The core issue of instability and violence in South Asia is the character, activities and persistence of the militarized Islamist fundamentalist state in Pakistan. No cure for this canker can be arrived at through any strategy of negotiations, support and financial aid to the military regime, or by a 'regulated' transition to 'democracy'."

    The confidential report continued, "The imprints of every major act of international Islamist terrorism invariably passes through Pakistan, right from 9/11 -- where virtually all the participants had trained, resided or met in, coordinated with, or received funding from or through Pakistan -- to major acts of terrorism across South Asia and Southeast Asia, as well as major networks of terror that have been discovered in Europe."

    Even before the 9/11 Commission received the report on Pakistan's role in the terrorist attacks, the 9/11 Commission's own report stated: "Pakistan was the nation that held the key to his (bin Laden's) ability to use Afghanistan as a base."

    A spokesman for the Pakistani embassy categorically denied Thursday that Osama bin Laden had ever been treated "in any military hospital anywhere in Pakistan."

    "The reports, based on unnamed intelligence sources, are usually a figment of the writer's imagination," Mohammed Sadiq, Pakistan's deputy chief of mission in Washington told United Press International.

    Asked to comment on the claim that Pakistan was aware of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks before they occurred, Sadiq said: "This is basically the recycling of old charges, the unproven old charges ... We have been working very closely with the U.S. administration and it is important to note that the U.S. administration also has always rejected these charges as false. No one seems to know these imaginary intelligence sources."

    Pakistan is still denying President Pervez Musharraf knew anything about the activities of Dr. A.Q. Khan, the country's most prominent nuclear scientist who had spent the last 10 years building and running a one-stop global shopping center for "rogue" nations. North Korea, Iran and Libya did their shopping for nuclear weapons at Khan's underground black market outlet.

    After U.S. and British intelligence painstakingly pieced together Khan's global nuclear proliferation endeavors, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was assigned last fall to inform Musharraf.

    Khan, a national hero for giving Pakistan its nuclear ****nal, was not arrested. Instead, Musharraf pardoned him in exchange for an abject apology on national television in English. Few in Pakistan believed Musharraf's story that he was totally in the dark about Khan's operation. Prior to seizing power in 1999, Gen. Musharraf was -- and still is -- Army Chief of Staff. For the past five years, Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence chief reported directly to Musharraf.

    Osama bin Laden's principal Pakistani adviser prior to 9/11 was retired Gen. Hamid Gul, a former ISI chief who is "strategic adviser" to the coalition of six politico-religious parties that governs two of Pakistan's four provinces. Known as MMA, the coalition also occupies 20 percent of the seats in the federal assembly in Islamabad. Hours after 9/11, Gul publicly accused Israel's Mossad of fomenting the 9/11 plot. Later, Gul said the U.S. Air Force must have been in on the conspiracy as no warplanes were scrambled to shoot down the hijacked airliners.

    Gul spent two weeks in Afghanistan immediately prior to 9/11. He denied having met Osama bin Laden during that trip, but has always said he was an "admirer" of the al-Qaida leader. However, he did meet with Mullah Mohammad Omar, the Taliban leader, on several occasions.

    Since 9/11, hardly a week goes by without Gul denouncing the U.S. in both the Urdu and English-language media.

    In a conversation with this reporter in October 2001, Gul forecast a future Islamist nuclear power that would form a greater Islamic state with a fundamentalist Saudi Arabia after the demise of the monarchy.

    Gul worked closely with the CIA during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan when he was in charge of ISI. He was "mildly" fundamentalist in those days, he explained after 9/11, and indifferent to the U.S. But he became passionately anti-American after the U.S. turned its back on Afghanistan following the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, and began punishing Pakistan with economic and military sanctions for its secret nuclear buildup.

    A ranking CIA official, speaking not for attribution, said the agency considered Gul to be "the most dangerous man" in Pakistan. A senior Pakistani political leader, also speaking on condition his name not be used, said, "I have reason to believe Hamid Gul was Osama bin Laden's master planner."

    "Pakistan has harvested an enormous price," the anonymous report said, for its apparent 'cooperation' with the U.S., and in this it has combined deception and blackmail -- including nuclear blackmail -- to secure a continuous stream of concessions. Its conduct is little different from that of North Korea, which has in the past chosen the nuclear path to secure incremental aid from Western donors. A pattern of sustained nuclear blackmail has consistently been at the heart of Pakistan's case for concessions, aid and a heightened threshold of international tolerance for its sponsorship and support of Islamist terrorism.

    "To understand how this works, it is useful to conceive of Pakistan's ISI as a state acting as terrorist traffickers, complaining that, if it does not receive the extraordinary dispensations and indulgences that it seeks, it will, in effect, 'implode,' and in the process do extraordinary harm.

    "Part of the threat of this 'explosion' is also the specter of the transfer of its nuclear ****nal and capabilities to more intransigent and irrational elements of the Islamist far right in Pakistan, who would not be amenable to the logic that its present rulers -- whose interests in terrorism are strategic, and consequently, subject to considerations of strategic advantage -- are willing to listen to...

    "...It is crucial to note that if the Islamist terrorist groups gain access to nuclear devices, ISI will almost certainly be the source...At least six Pakistani scientists connected with the country's nuclear program were in contact with al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden with the thorough instructions of ISI.

    "Pakistan has projected the electoral victory of the fundamentalist and pro-Taliban, pro-al-Qaida Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) in the November elections as 'proof' that the military is the only 'barrier' against the country passing into the hands of the extremists. The fact, however, is that the elections were widely rigged, and this was a fact acknowledged by the European Union observers, as well as by some of the MMA's constituents themselves. The MMA victory was, in fact, substantially engineered by the Musharraf regime, as are the various anti-U.S. 'mass demonstrations' around the country.

    "Pakistan has made a big case out of the fact that some of the top line leadership of al-Qaida has been arrested in the country with the 'cooperation' of the Pakistani security forces and intelligence. However, the fact is that each such arrest only took place after the FBI and U.S. investigators had effectively gathered evidence to force Pakistani collaboration, but little of this evidence had come from Pakistani intelligence agencies. Indeed, ISI has consistently sought to deny the presence of al-Qaida elements in Pakistan, and to mislead U.S. investigators...This deception has been at the very highest level, and Musharraf himself, for instance, initially insisted he was 'certain' bin Laden was dead.

    "...ISI has been actively facilitating the relocation of the al-Qaida from Afghanistan to Pakistan, and the conspiracy of substantial segments of serving Army and intelligence officers is visible."

    "...The Pakistan Army consistently denies giving the militants anything more than moral, diplomatic and political support. The reality is quite different. ISI issues money and directions to militant groups, specially the Arab hijackers of 9/11 from al-Qaida. ISI was fully involved in devising and helping the entire affair. And that is why people like Hamid Gul and others very quickly stated the propaganda that CIA and Mossad did it."

    "...The dilemma for Musharraf is that many of his army officers are still deeply sympathetic to al-Qaida, Taliban militants and the Kashmir cause. The radical sympathies of many ISI operatives are all too apparent. Many retired and present ISI officers retain close links to al-Qaida militants hiding in various state sponsored places in Pakistan and Kashmir as well as leaders from the defeated Taliban regime. They regard the fight against Americans and Jews and Indians in different parts of the world as legitimate jihad."

    The report also says that "according to a senior tribal leader in Peshawar, bin Laden, who suffers from renal deficiency, has been periodically undergoing dialysis in a Peshawar military hospital with the knowledge and approval of ISI if not of Gen. Pervez Musharraf himself."

    The same source, though not in the report, speculated Musharraf may be planning to turn over bin Laden to President Bush in time to clinch his reelection bid in November.

    Staff at the 9/11 Commission did not immediately respond to requests for comments regarding the Pakistan memo.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-b...1231-9906r.htm
    Who killed Coc*k Robbin?
    I said the Sparrow,
    With my bow and arrow.
    I Lilled Co*k Robbin.


    Old nursury rhyme!
    Last edited by Ray; 16 Oct 04,, 21:10.


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  • #2
    I can believe that. I also believe that another culprit of 9/11 was our shotty Intelligence Service. It just goes to show that while a country is under sanctions doesn't mean that you can just totally turn your back and ignore that country. There are still things going on in those sanctioned countries that are vital and need to be communicated.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hey Guys,
      Whats all this conspiray that the Bin ladens have shares in American defence companies and that they funded the 1st Gulf-war or something? (Some Frenh documentary I saw the other Day.)

      Shouldn't their shares in those companies be terminated or somethin?
      "It is a little knowledge of science that makes you an Atheist, and it is an in-depth study of science that makes you a believer in God Almighty". [Sir Francis]

      Comment


      • #4
        For more proof of Pakistani involvement in 9/11 incident.
        http://www.pakistan-facts.com/articl...40825193825143

        Double game - General Pervez Musharraf hoodwinks America, and how
        Wednesday, August 25 2004 @ 03:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time
        The many layers of Parvez Musharraf are being unpealed as America gets to know its favourite generalissimo better. Only since March or thereabouts has the United States gotten suspicious that Musharraf is employing double standards about Al-Qaeda terrorism, similar to that about Lashkar-e-Toiba militancy in Jammu and Kashmir. Only terrorist groups opposed to him, that try to assassinate him, overthrow his military regime, are to be targeted on a priority basis, or targeted at all. Groups, on the other hand, that do not oppose him, and even support the general, but are violently inimical to the US and India, do not merit the same level of punishment, and are even provided succour on occasions.

        The case of Jaish-e-Mohammed versus the Lashkar is well known in the Indian context. Since after Masood Azhar was set free in the Kandahar hostage-for-terrorists swap, the JeM was actively encouraged by the Pakistani military regime, its fortunes tied to the fate of General Mohammed Aziz, Musharraf’s co-putschist of October 1999. But since 9/ 11 forced Musharraf into the US camp, and turned Aziz more jihadi, and more against his former mentor, the JeM felt the brunt of the attack, despite carrying out daring raids on the J and K assembly and Parliament House before the year 2001 closed. Aziz’s elevation to the ceremonial post of chairman, joint chiefs of staff committee, further turned the JeM against Musharraf, and it did the ultimate crime of plotting his twin failed assassinations with the Al-Qaeda in December 2003.

        The result is not only has the JeM felt the brunt of Pakistani government attacks and sanctions, its “nationalistic” task of prosecuting terrorism in J and K has been duly curbed. But simultaneously, the Lashkar, whose chief, Hafiz Mohammed Sayeed, alongwith the Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam’s emir, Fazlur Rehman, and other Jamaat leading lights, root for Musharraf, has been consistently armed and encouraged on its terror missions in Kashmir. Nearly all the recent suicide attacks in the Valley are the handiwork of the Lashkar or its front organisations, while the JeM faces a worse fate than mere curbs on its J and K activities. With other Musharraf-hostile groups like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Tehrik-e-Zafariya, Sipah-e-Sahaba, Harkat-ul Jihad-e-Islami, etc, JeM cadres run the risk of being handed over as Al-Qaeda sympathisers to the US, even though they may not necessarily be so. On the other hand, anti-US militants face no such immediate threat, provided they are not against Musharraf or his regime.

        This double-dealing came to light quite unexpectedly in joint US-Pakistani interrogation of some captured terrorists in March. This was the second interrogation of some of the terrorists within a space of weeks, and the first interrogation had been exclusively carried out by ISI officers. At the second joint interrogation were present FBI and CIA officers, and at least two of the CIA officers knew Pashtu, Dari, Urdu, and Arabic. During their interrogation, the terrorists, mostly low-level cadres, spilled the beans. They said that the top guns were released after the first interrogation because they were not against Musharraf.

        The US confronted Pakistan with this damaging disclosure, and was given an unsatisfactory explanation, that all the activities of the terrorist bosses released after the first interrogation had not come to light. Under US pressure, those of them who had not decamped were arrested, and for the first time, America got a true picture of Musharraf’s double game. Besides this incident, there were three other similar such which has robbed US confidence off their favourite generalissimo.

        One need for this deception is self-preservation, but it is also intimately connected to domestic politics, in Musharraf’s anxiety to perpetuate himself and military rule. Coming in the way is Pakistan’s 1973 constitution that has been the unreachable beacon for that country’s extinguished democracy, and like his predecessor dictator Zia-ul Haque, Musharraf has tried to supplant it with the controversial legal framework order or LFO. Since Pakistan’s last guided elections reduced the mainstream parties to minority positions, the ultra-right-religious political alliance of the Muttahida-Majlis-e-Amal is carrying on the campaign against the LFO, and boycotted several national assembly sessions in consequence. The reason for Musharraf’s current peace with MMA is the outcome of his present deception tactics regarding Al-Qaeda terrorism.

        Since the MMA controls the provincial governments of Baluchistan and North West Frontier Province, in whose FATA regions the Al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants have flourished since their ouster from Afghanistan, the MMA has been most opposed to Musharraf’s US-directed anti-terror operations there. The MMA and Al-Qaeda/ Taliban are one about their radical interpretation of jihad. Where Musharraf’s present peace with the MMA makes the difference is that it is open season for the Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists as long as they don’t attack him or his regime. If they do, they face the threat of being turned over to the Americans. Periodically, Pakistan has fulfilled the US’s quota of expectations, but the turned-over terror suspects are sometimes neither terrorists nor Al-Qaeda, as found in many of the Guantanamo detainees coming from Pakistan, or often, they are low-level operatives, just pawns, while the bigger fish have escaped. The wonder is not that the US has caught up with Musharraf’s deceptions now, but that it is carrying one with him, but maybe, it has no choice in the matter.

        US interests not just in Pakistan are being compromised, but it is under attack in its own backyard, in the Americas. Since the beginning of the year, Pakistan has pitched for better relations with Brazil and Argentina for its industrial and military technologies, Venezuela for its oil, and all of them plus Paraguay to buy its exported cotton, wheat, agro-products, glass, leather goods, and so on. Considered innocuous first, the US has got alerted to this relationship build-up following intelligence of Al-Qaeda attempts to set up terror cells in these countries, and establish safe corridors to penetrate America via unstable Mexico and Canada.

        How Musharraf and the Pakistan military come into this is two ways. Considered the “last frontier” of terrorism, if the Al-Qaeda partly shifts operations to the Americas, it would benefit by its proximity to the US, and take some of the US pressure off Pakistan. Two, the drug trade in South Asia and South East Asia, on which the Pakistan army enriched itself, has reached saturation levels, and because of border fences in the west and east, India is no longer an attractive or convenient transit route. Plus, the high terror alerts in Asia have hit the trade, but not in the Americas, which remain yet virgin and lawless. Diplomats say that the Pakistan military smells new opportunities in the region, and since the Al-Qaeda also desperately needs funds, there is a perceived common interest in going there.

        Musharraf’s deception should hardly surprise India, which once again faces heightened terrorist violence in Jammu and Kashmir, but the need is to seriously engage the US on this, when prime minister Manmohan Singh attends the UN General Assembly session next month. Because of Left pressure, the strategic engagement with America is not of the previous order, and this is to India’s loss. In the last few months, even though the US has seen through Musharraf, and taken steps to confront the Al-Qaeda threat on its own, the generalissimo has remained on American radar scenes by doggedly being there, while the Indian side has dropped out for no good reason. India cannot play down the threat from international terrorism while expecting heightened US concern on Kashmir-centric terrorism. Too long has General Musharraf played the ends against the middle, and his bluff should be called. (Public Affairs Magazine, NewsInsight)
        Last edited by lemontree; 19 Oct 04,, 13:03.

        Cheers!...on the rocks!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Meeeh...

          Comment


          • #6
            I don't find these articles surprising at all, really. In order for us to attack Afghanistan we needed a neighbor for staging our troops and supplies, etc. There really aren't any surrounding countries that aren't guilty in some way of harboring, training, and even providing for terrorism. I don't think there is a country in the area that universally says, "thank God for the Americans!" There are some that are more cooperative than others, but IMO there are none that agree with our politics. You could argue that their coorporation is motivated by the fear of eventual US retaliation.

            Comment


            • #7
              Fonniker,

              I don't think that any country in the Indian sub continent is fearful of the US.

              It must be understood that the sub continental nations are not pushovers.

              Yet they believe, that if the US is there for their good, then 'why not take it easy and look busy'.

              Of course, if you have another view, one would be interested in knowing so.

              Iraq or the Arabian countries have armed forces which are quite a joke (the array of weapon systems notwithstanding). The way the Iraqis messed their battle against the 3ID (?) is something that will go down in military history.

              The way the Arabs conducted their battles against Israel is also very interesting. So, is the Iraq - Iran War.

              Since I would be an 'interested' party I would not elaborate; maybe Colonel Wyu aka Officer of the Engineer could give his comments.


              "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

              I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

              HAKUNA MATATA

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Fonnicker
                I don't find these articles surprising at all, really. In order for us to attack Afghanistan we needed a neighbor for staging our troops and supplies, etc. There really aren't any surrounding countries that aren't guilty in some way of harboring, training, and even providing for terrorism. I don't think there is a country in the area that universally says, "thank God for the Americans!" There are some that are more cooperative than others, but IMO there are none that agree with our politics. You could argue that their coorporation is motivated by the fear of eventual US retaliation.
                Co-operation? they are surviving. They feed the US enough to them happy. You think they don't know where Osama is hidding. After all its there (****) doctors that are treating him for his renal problem. If Osama is killed, then the US will pull away and loose interest in them. They will not get the $aid and loan waivers that they have received till now. There economy is in tatters. The only thing that they manufacture well is jihadis and opium.

                Lets hope there is no 2nd 9/11.

                Cheers!...on the rocks!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by lemontree
                  You think they don't know where Osama is hidding.
                  if they do know it would be in thier best interest to turn him over before the election to keep favor with bush, or after the election in january, to win favor with kerry.
                  Whoever is unjust let him be unjust still
                  Whoever is righteous let him be righteous still
                  Whoever is filthy let him be filthy still
                  Listen to the words long written down
                  When the man comes around- Johnny Cash

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Asim Aquil
                    Meeeh...
                    Were you saying something?

                    Cheers!...on the rocks!!

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X