People seem surprised to find out via Wikileaks that the ISI funds the Taliban.

[EFerrari]

That's very odd considering that we know ISI chief Mahmoud Ahmed wired $100K to Mohammed Ata.


The Pakistan connection

There is evidence of foreign intelligence backing for the 9/11 hijackers. Why is the US government so keen to cover it up?

Michael Meacher
The Guardian
Thursday 22 July 2004 00.01 BST

Omar Sheikh, a British-born Islamist militant, is waiting to be hanged in Pakistan for a murder he almost certainly didn't commit - of the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002. Both the US government and Pearl's wife have since acknowledged that Sheikh was not responsible. Yet the Pakistani government is refusing to try other suspects newly implicated in Pearl's kidnap and murder for fear the evidence they produce in court might acquit Sheikh and reveal too much.

Significantly, Sheikh is also the man who, on the instructions of General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. It is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count. Why not?

Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers, was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to "retire" by President Pervez Musharraf. Why hasn't the US demanded that he be questioned and tried in court?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jul/22/usa.september11

You'd think people would remember something like that.

[dkf]

1. I've never seen this before. Interesting.

Was this always about Pakistan?

[truedelphi]

2. I saw you rheadline and I thought

"That's very odd considering that we know ISI chief Mahmoud Ahmed wired
$100K to Mohammed Ata."

And then I opened your article and saw that you had written:
That's very odd considering that we know ISI chief Mahmoud Ahmed wired
$100K to Mohammed Ata."

I hadn't forgotten. (For a moment I thought we were telepathic or something, though.)

[EFerrari]

5. LOL

[flyarm]

3. (8:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Intelligence Committee Chairs Meet with ISI Head

from my files:Timeline

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a091101mahmoodmeeting

(8:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Intelligence Committee Chairs Meet with ISI Head and Possible 9/11 Attack Funder as the Attack Occurs

From left to right: Senator Bob Graham (D), Senator Jon Kyl (R), and Representative Porter Goss (R).

Around 8:00 a.m., on September 11, 2001, ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed is at a breakfast meeting at the Capitol with the chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) and Representative Porter Goss (R-FL), a 10-year veteran of the CIA’s clandestine operations wing. Also present at the meeting are Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and the Pakistani ambassador to the US, Maleeha Lodhi, as well as other officials and aides. (Goss, Kyl, and Graham had just met with Pakistani President Pervez Mushrraf in Pakistan two weeks earlier (see August 28-30, 2001)). Graham and Goss will later co-head the joint House-Senate investigation into the 9/11 attacks, which will focus on Saudi government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, but will say almost nothing about possible Pakistani government connections to al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks (see August 1-3, 2003 and December 11, 2002). Note that Senator Graham should have been aware of a report made to his staff the previous month (see Early August 2001) that one of Mahmood’s subordinates had told a US undercover agent that the WTC would be destroyed. Some evidence suggests that Mahmood ordered that $100,000 be sent to hijacker Mohamed Atta (see October 7, 2001).
Pakistan's Demands - Graham will later say of the meeting: “We were talking about terrorism, specifically terrorism generated from Afghanistan.” The New York Times will report that bin Laden is specifically discussed.

[truedelphi]

21. Thank you Flyarm.

I am copying that to my HardDr.

[flyarm]

4. K&R ..but many many americans are truely unaware,sad to say..

:hi: :hi:

fly

[EFerrari]

6. There's something else, too. Some effect of our media

such that we really do forget.

Solly Mack and I noticed this over and over, tracking the torture stories, how often they were reported again as if for the very first time.

[flyarm]

9. yes indeed, that is part of the tactic being used on Americans..

then depending how dangerous the info is to the Gov..they will either let the story sit like it is new..or the other tactic is to say it is "OLD NEWS" as if it is not important..then it gats passed over quickly..

IN Plain sight..

and for deniability.

[MilesColtrane]

7. Baffling when you consider that Seymour Hersch, among others, have written about...

the ISI helping Osama Bin Laden and company escape Tora Bora back in 2001.

We just don't pay attention, and aren't very smart.

Especially during sweeps week.

[EFerrari]

8. I still think it's mostly the media.

They act like we only can handle short, simple stories. They always start from about scratch. In reality, people love to be reminded of things that they know. It makes them feel in charge or something.

And that's why Paul Thompson is a genius because he figured out that about 80% of what we can know is available in the media but it's fragmented. The historycommons is a great resource for putting together what you know you know but forgot because the media keeps telling you little piece of junk as if you have a brain the size of a mosquito's. lol

[flyarm]

10. it wasn't just ISI helping Bin Laden..our special opps had Bin Laden surrounded..

and then they were held up by OUR GOVERNMENT..that wouldn't let them go in and apprehend him..in fact they were basicaly given a stand down.

We wouldn't want to catch our CIA boogy man now would we? Who could spill the beans on the powers of the NWO..in our own counry..

[EFerrari]

13. Sure. But the ISI chief, what was his deal?

Did he want us to attack Afghanistan? What would it profit him? If we were in Afghanistan, maybe it meant we couldn't help India as much?

[flyarm]

14. I wish I could answer you, perhaps it has to do with moving poppies?

losts of money there to feed into banks world wide..or perhaps just to our banks? For a very steep profit..

I honestly don't know..I can only tell you what happened..as I told people when I did public speaking about it all..I am not evil enough to tell you the answers to.. why?? and motivation for these crimes.

But very good question..i just wish we would get the answer in our lifetimes!

[JonLP24]

11. K&R

I wish I could do it a thousand times.

[leftstreet]

12. K&R

[Sapphocrat]

15. I can only guess...

...not everyone has been following the money as have the precious few of us remaining PNAC-aware-ites.

And those who were most on top of it have disappeared (or have been disappeared).

That this should come as a revelation to anyone who claims to be... aware of anything at all... makes my chest hurt.

Where's Bernard Weiner when we need him? *sigh*

Aw, hell, where's the old let-the-chips-fall-where-they-may passion for the truth? That seems to be dead and buried, too.

Guess this stuff isn't as interesting as "Desperate Jersey Idol," or whatever the flavor of the week is.

Jeebus help us.

[EFerrari]

18. And meanwhile back at the ranch, Porter Goss investigated Charlie Rangel.

This Porter Goss.



Orwell rolls in his grave.

[Dystopian]

16. KandR.

peace~

[G_j]

17. "A Brief Refresher on the Taliban's Worst-Kept Secret"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8854467

[EFerrari]

19. Thank you! I've never read that. n/t

[SpiralHawk]

20. k and r

LIHOP