Musharraf suggests 9/11 paymaster was British agent

[paulthompson]

Pakistan President Musharraf's new book is being serialized in the London Times. Here's a curious excerpt referring to Saeed Sheikh, one of the 9/11 paymasters, an ISI agent, and the killer of reporter Daniel Pearl:

"It is believed in some quarters that while Omar Sheikh was at the LSE he was recruited by the British intelligence agency MI6. It is said that MI6 persuaded him to take an active part in demonstrations against Serbian aggression in Bosnia and even sent him to Kosovo to join the jihad. At some point he probably became a rogue or double agent."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2374550,00.html

There have been other suggestions to this effect, that Saeed was a Western double agent. Note for instance this entry of mine:

1999: 9/11 Funder Offered Deal to Turn Informant
9/11 paymaster Saeed Sheikh, imprisoned in India from 1994 to December 1999 for kidnapping Britons and Americans, meets with a British official and a lawyer nine times while in prison. Supposedly, the visits are to check on his living conditions, since he is a British citizen. (Los Angeles Times, 2/8/2002) However, the London Times will later claim that British intelligence secretly offers amnesty and the ability to “live in London a free man” if he will reveal his links to al-Qaeda. The Times claims that he refuses the offer. (Daily Mail, 7/16/2002; London Times, 7/16/2002) Yet after he is rescued in a hostage swap deal in December, the press reports that he, in fact, is freely able to return to Britain. (Press Trust of India, 1/3/2000) He visits his parents there in 2000 and again in early 2001. (Vanity Fair, 8/2002; BBC, 7/16/2002; Daily Telegraph, 7/16/2002) He is not charged with kidnapping until well after 9/11. Saeed’s kidnap victims call the government’s decision not to try him a “disgrace” and “scandalous.” (Press Trust of India, 1/3/2000) The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review later suggests that not only is Saeed closely tied to both the ISI and al-Qaeda, but may also have been working for the CIA: “There are many in (Pakistani President) Musharraf’s government who believe that Saeed Sheikh’s power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA. The theory is that ... Saeed Sheikh was bought and paid for.” (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 3/3/2002)


Coincidentally, today there's also a UPI article that supports connections between the ISI and the 9/11 plot, with this same Saeed Sheikh as a pivotal character. This is old news but there are some new details sprinkled in here and there:

Armitage's interlocutor Sept. 13, 2001, was Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad, the pro-Taliban chief of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency. At the time of 9/11, ISI had 1,500 agents distributed throughout Afghanistan. The Taliban regime was entirely dependent on the Pakistani lifeline.

At all times, Ahmad knew exactly where Osama bin Laden was located. His agents tracked his every move. ISI was also aware of the planning for 9/11. Gen. Ahmad was even accused of authorizing British-born Pakistani terrorist Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to make a $100,000 transfer to Mohammed Atta, the operational chief of the 9/11 conspiracy, a charge that met vehement denials.

"Sheikh Omar," as he became known, was tried and sentenced to death for the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal correspondent Daniel Pearl in 2002. But his ISI links spared him the gallows. There was little doubt some elements of ISI knew the outlines of the aerial plot against the U.S. and the evidence was turned over to the 9/11 Commission three days after its report had gone to press. It was never made public.

http://www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20060925-074525-1833r


So, if Saeed Sheikh was a key figure in the plot and may have been a British or US double agent at the same time, what does that mean?

[FoxOnTheRun]

1. lol... I suspect Musharaff is an agent himself

why is everybody writing books?

[Bryan Sacks]

2. Paul, have you seen this article?

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/south_asia/GA27Df05.html

Here's an excerpt from it:

"Another and even more suspicious aspect of US behavior toward Pakistan is what strategic analyst G Parthasarathi, a former Indian high commissioner to Pakistan, calls "an astonishing measure of American forbearance in dealing with a Pakistani terrorist involved in kidnapping American tourists in India, killing an American journalist in Karachi, the attacks on New York and Washington and the attack on our parliament". Parthasarathi is referring to Omar Sheikh Mohammad, who was released from an Indian jail in Kashmir along with two other prominent terrorists and escorted to Kabul by then Indian external affairs minister Jaswant Singh as a deal to save the lives of the passengers of Indian Airlines flight IC814 that had been hijacked from Kathmandu and taken to Kabul. Sheikh was later arrested for his involvement in the murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl in Karachi and sentenced to death.

Parthasarathi documents the instances of US forbearance toward this terrorist. Even though sentences of anti-terrorism courts in Pakistan are expeditiously confirmed and implemented, he says, Sheikh's appeal still lies pending. Eyebrows were raised when Sheikh surrendered to an Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) official, Brigadier Ejaz Shah, in Lahore and not to the police. Shah was known to be a protege of generals Musharraf and Aziz Khan.

Shah's subsequent nomination as high commissioner to Australia was rejected by the Australian government. He is now Pakistan's ambassador to Indonesia. What is interesting to note is that ambassadorial appointments are normally given in Pakistan to retired generals and not low-ranking ISI brigadiers.

It has now been reported by a respected Lahore-based Pakistani journalist, Amir Mir, continues Parthasarathi, that during his interrogation by US and Pakistani investigators, Sheikh revealed that he had been on the payroll of the Pakistani ISI and that the terrorist attacks on the Kashmir State Assembly building in October 2001 and the Indian parliament in December 2001 had the backing of the ISI.

Amir Mir has also confirmed that Sheikh transferred a sum of $100,000 that had been provided to him by then ISI chief General Mahmood Ahmed to Mohammad Atta - the leader of the hijackers involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks. He also alleges that the United States' Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) believes that Omar met Atta during one of his visits to Kandahar and knew of his plans for the September 11 terrorist strikes. On October 9, 2001, the Pakistani daily Dawn reported that the ISI director general, Lieutenant-General Mahmoud Ahmed, was fired after FBI investigators established a link between him and a $100,000 wire transfer to Atta in the summer of 2000. This report was also carried by the Wall Street Journal. Parthasarathi's comment: "There does appear to be a conspiracy of silence on this score, because Syed Omar Sheikh is evidently a man who knows too much and can embarrass both the Musharraf dispensation and the Bush administration."

I have never seen either the 'Parthasarathi documents'. An article by him from a couple of weeks before contains much of the same information as above.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/01/12/stories/2005011200300800.htm

another interesting article does not contain the claim that Ahmed authorized the funding of the plot, but lends support to claims that the IS I was linked to Bin Laden beyond the 9/11 attacks

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/sep/10raman.htm

In this review of Mir's recent book, from just a few weeks ago, the charge that Ahmed was involved in the attacks is repeated by this reviewer of Mir's work. here's the relevant excerpt from the article:

Investigations into the September 11 plot revealed that ISI's then-head, hardliner pro-Taliban Lieutenant-General Mahmood Ahmad, ordered Sheikh Omar Saeed to wire US$100,000 to Mohammad Atta, the chief hijacker. In October 2001, Musharraf forced Ahmad into retirement after the FBI displayed credible evidence of his involvement in the terror attacks and knowledge that he was playing a "double game"

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HH26Df01.html

Here's what all of this means to me: we can't be certain of where the bottom is. But the fact that the person who helped fund the plot was a guest of the Administration during the week of the 9/11 attacks, and is still free speaks volumes about our covert operations and the hypocrisy of our official stance toward terrorism. Not that this is news to most here. It also makes them guilty, by their own standards, of consorting with the enemy. Worse, since who can tell where the bottom is, there's every reason to believe they could BE the enemy and no one could ever confirm or disconfirm with absolute certainty. That's the point.

[Nozebro]

3. Who are you saying is the "they" that could "BE the enemy"? EOM

nt

[Bryan Sacks]

4. sorry for the unclarity

What I meant was: those who are sworn to protect the US could fairly easily be the enemy, or consort with the enemy to attack the US, and simply through indirection leave little or no trail that they have done so. They could do this, I am saying, because they ALREADY have deep and lasting contacts with those who wish to do harm to the US. This is a scandal, and it's standard operating procedure for covert action at the same time.

[FoxOnTheRun]

5. Such persons are called Moles

[paulthompson]

9. Wow, Bryan

Great research. I did not know of that, I'll have to buy the book. You really should join us making new timeline entries. We have a new on-line entry form system now that makes it much easier for vols to contribute than ever before.

[KJF]

6. He's beginning to sound like...

... one of those people who plays all sides, for example Ali Mohamed or Assem Jarrah.

Also, I see that the money Saeed Sheikh is supposed to have wired in August 2001 was actually sent just a couple of days after Mohamed Al Kahtani was refused entry. The reasons he was refused entry include not having much money (USD 2,800) and having only a one-way ticket. The operatives usually had more than this and the second reason (only a one-way ticket) was discussed by Al Hawsawi and KSM as being one of the main ones (at least according to their substitutions for testimony at the Moussaoui trial).

Also, KSM's substitution for testimony contains an interesting redaction:

Money Sent to 9/11 Hijackers

Sheikh Mohamed explained that al-Shehhi was sent USD 81,000 via al-Baluchi for al-Shehhi's, Atta's and Jarrah's flight training (redacted) Most of these types of transfers were made by al-Hawsawi who was located in the UAE. (p. 36)
http://rcfp.org/moussaoui/pdf/DX-0941.pdf

I wonder what the redaction is. Anyway, what transfers?

[KJF]

7. Transfers? What transfers?

AFAIK Al Hawsawi is only supposed to have made 1 (one) transfer in support of the plot - USD 4,900 to Banihannad's UAE bank account on August 20, 2001. Otherwise, he supported the plot by paying the hijacker's living expenses in the UAE, buying their tickets and giving them a little money for traveller's cheques in the UAE. Al Hawsawi estimates he spent about USD 8,000 on the hijackers, plus the money for Banihammad, that gives us USD 13,000 in expenses. He also sent money to Binalshibh and other AQ operatives. What did he do with the USD 6,500 he got from Uthman Al Shehri (brother of Wail and Waleed) in August 2000? He skimmed USD 1,600 and then sent it to Banihammad?

The section is entitled "Money Sent to 9/11 Hijackers" and it says "Most of these types of transfers". To me, it looks like Al Hawsawi made more than one transfer.

[KJF]

8. Ransom money

I thought this was interesting.

... Omar Sheikh settled in Lahore but visited Afghanistan on four occasions to train operatives. He claims that during these visits he met Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar, and that although he was not a permanent member of al-Qaeda he helped to finance it through ransom money generated from kidnappings.

It really looks like the e-mail exchange in August 2001 did take place, as claimed by the Indians.

According to this piece, OSS is going to actually use Musharraf's book as evidence to get him out of the death penalty:

A BRITISH militant sentenced to death in Pakistan for his role in the murder of the American journalist Daniel Pearl wants to use evidence from President Musharraf’s memoir to save himself from the hangman.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2377294,00.html

Crikey!

[paulthompson]

20. My prediction

When Saeed Sheikh was arrested, it was mentioned in the media that he'd been promised he would only have to spend about 3 to 4 years in prison. Musharraf in recent weeks has been emptying Pakistan's jails of all al-Qaeda and Taliban, as recent news report. However, he can't let Saeed go, yet, because he's too high profile. There's even a movie coming out about the killing of Daniel Pearl starring Brad Pitt and Angelie Jolie. But with Musharraf's book, he lays the groundwork for Saeed's release. Probably in a year or two, maybe after the hubbub of the movie dies down, they'll appeal his case and let him go or at least greatly reduce his sentence. That's my speculation.

[DrDebug]

10. Double agents are very common and are not rogue

That's just the illusion they are trying to put across. Double agents are intermediates were one branch connects to the other branch. We should stop thinking of intelligence agencies as national agencies or unrelated agencies, because - unlike the normal world - they are a global organization with people like Saeed Sheikh being intermediates were Great Britain, the United States and Pakistan converge. The whole operation and organization is global and independent of governments.

Daniel Hopsicker's research into al-Cokeda makes it perfectly clear that their drug running operation is much larger than just the CIA and even the CIA part sure as hell isn't the government agency in Langley anymore. He currently has a story about the Czech Wolfgang Bohringer - former buddy of Mohammed Atta - who after some minor financial fraud (only a couple of millions or so) in Azerbaijan, set up a flight school in Kiribati which is probably meant as an transfer point for the Australian drug market ( http://www.madcowprod.com/ )

So there is nothing rogue about double agents, it is merely the illusion they are trying to sell like it was a bad apple from their organization, because they don't like you to know that CIA = MI6 = NSA = BND = Le Cercle = ISI = ... and that they've forged a massive alliance decades ago. All those alphabet agencies are just factions of the same Octopus. And President Musharraf knows it as well and is just pretending that it isn't related to Pakistani government.

[reprehensor]

11. John Newman on the MI6 possibility

In regard to the notion that Sheikh was MI6, researcher John Newman has also speculated about that, but Sheikh is clearly just as ISI as MI6 as Al-Qaeda. One big happy family of terror;

http://reprehensor.gnn.tv/blogs/10734/John_Newman_Former_Military_Intelligence_July_22nd_2005

...This 28 year-old British national of Pakistani extraction left the prestigious London School of Economics in 1993 to hook up with Pakistani terrorists in Bosnia. After that he took up Jihad and trained in the terror camps in Afghanistan. In 1994 he tried to spring a terrorist leader from a jail in India, by luring an American and 3 Britons to locations where they were kidnapped, but the plot failed, and he ended up in jail instead, the hostages were rescued.

Pakistan’s Intelligence Service, (the ISI), paid for his lawyer, but he was never tried during his 5 years of incarceration. In 1995, five hostages, including an American, were killed in an attempt to spring Omar Saeed Sheikh from jail. An Indian citizen was murdered in 1999 when Al Qaeda and the ISI succeeded in freeing Saeed Sheikh by hijacking Indian Airlines flight 814.

Bin Laden immediately appointed Saeed Sheikh as a member of the Majis Al-Shura, the elite political council of Al Qaeda, and referred to Sheikh as his special son. No attempt was made to arrest him when he returned to Pakistan; the ISI gave him a home, and protection from the police. He lived openly and frequented swanky parties attended by senior government officials. US government sources told Newsweek he was a ‘protected asset’ of the ISI.

During his imprisonment there was no indictment and no trial in India, there were no indictments in Britain or the United States either. Despite his kidnapping of British citizens he was allowed to immediately travel to London… go figure.

On January 2nd, 2000 the British Foreign Office spokesman would only say that this was so because he was a British Citizen and had not been convicted of any offenses overseas. There was no conviction because there had been no trial, and Britain could have indicted and tried Said Sheikh if they’d wanted to, the fact is, they didn’t want to.

They waited until after a September 2002 conviction for the murder of Daniel Pearl, (most Americans know about this man), to ask questions of the Indian government about his connections with the first kidnapping.

The British press called this long delay a mystery, but the outraged families of Sheikh’s victims condemned it, and called their government’s decision a disgrace, and a signal to others to do the same.

The Americans did not act either. Even though he had kidnapped an American citizen in 1994, and another American had died in an attempt to break him out in ’95. These events led to no indictment in 1994, no indictment in ’95, and there was no indictment after the hijacking of flight 814 in 1999. The United States would wait until after the 9/11 attacks to take action, sealing an indictment of Saeed Sheikh for the 1994 kidnapping in November 2001.

The question is, why? Did the United States not indict Saeed Sheikh because he was a British informant?...

------------------------

Testimony in pdf form;
http://www.house.gov/mckinney/20050722transcript.pdf

[Jon Gold]

14. Are you even allowed...

To post here? Doesn't your contract with 911Blogger.com specify that you can only post there?

:)

[seemslikeadream]

12. paulthompson DrDebug reprehensor

Love of my heart eternally.

[DrDebug]

17. Thanks, you will always have a special place in my heart as well

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
- Martin Luther King, jr.

I know where you stand and you are a rare exception in this strange society where apathy, carelessness, hatred, and ignorance dwell among most of their inhabitants. Some pretend to be different, but very few are. You are one of them SlaD ;)

[seemslikeadream]

19. we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy

A Time to Break Silence

Martin Luther King: Beyond Vietnam

"True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."


Listen here to King's speech

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence.htm



Now, it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war.


As that noble bard of yesterday, James Russell Lowell, eloquently stated:

Once to every man and nation comes a moment to decide,

In the strife of Truth and Falsehood, for the good or evil side;

Some great cause, God's new Messiah offering each the bloom or blight,

And the choice goes by forever 'twixt that darkness and that light.

Though the cause of evil prosper, yet 'tis truth alone is strong

Though her portions be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong

Yet that scaffold sways the future, and behind the dim unknown

Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.

And if we will only make the right choice, we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of peace.

If we will make the right choice, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood.

If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.




DrDebug
Meet me at the bank of the beautiful river When your journey has end i & i will discuss about this matter Jah nuh dead

[Jon Gold]

13. Thanks Paul...

For everything you do.

FYI... here are all of the articles I have compiled regarding Pakistan and 9/11...

http://www.911blogger.com/node/2203

Again. Thank you.

Hi Bryan!

[KJF]

15. Federal Authorities: USD 100,000 wired to Atta from Pakistan

This must have been around for ages, but I've just seen it:

As to September 11, federal authorities have told ABC News they've now tracked more than $100,000 from banks in Pakistan to two banks in Florida to accounts held by suspected hijack ringleader Mohamed Atta.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/specials/attacked/transcripts/abctext_093001.html

According to the current version, no money was ever wired from Pakistan to anybody, let alone Atta. Although the joint account is supposed to have received around USD 100,000 from Ali in the UAE in summer/autumn 2000. In fact, if Atta had a second bank account, they ain't saying: AFAIK only one has been disclosed, the joint account with Shehhi, No. 0573000259772, opened on 7 July 2000 with SunTrust. However, if they really did have 35 bank accounts (14 with SunTrust), which the FBI claimed in 2002, then there's a few they aren't telling us about.

[Nozebro]

16. OBL was smart enough to stop using a satellite phone to avoid detection

but we are asked to believe that he was stupid enough to allow an easily-traced $100K to be WIRE-transferred to a bank in Florida. That little deal was an intentional part of the
inside job aka 9/11, perhaps for use in framing Pakistan or setting up the sender to become a 9/11 patsie.

THAT'S the most important aspect of the transaction. The wild goose chase that focuses on something, ANYTHING but the truth that 9/11 was an inside job. "They" want to keep the focus on the absurd conspiracy theory that OBL was the perp, not Bushco.

[seatnineb]

18. Excellent point Nozebro..maybe the ISI chief was framed! n/t

[paulthompson]

21. Good catch

I'm not at all surprised to see that came out in the time period just prior to Oct. 7, 2001, when the story about the ISI Director's ties to Saeed Sheikh came out and things were suddenly spun in a different direction.

There is this interesting bit in my timeline that matches it:

July 31, 2003: FBI Claims 9/11 Money Came from Pakistan
John S. Pistole, deputy assistant director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, testifies before a Congressional committee. He states the 9/11 investigation “has traced the origin of the funding of 9/11 back to financial accounts in Pakistan, where high-ranking and well-known al-Qaeda operatives played a major role in moving the money forward, eventually into the hands of the hijackers located in the US.” (US Congress, 7/31/2003) Pistole does not reveal any further details, but in India it is noted that this is consistent with previous reports that Saeed Sheikh and ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed were behind the funding of 9/11.

------
Of course, the 9/11 Commission chose to completely ignore that.

[KJF]

22. Matt's cracked it

I thought this was fairly meaningless when I first read it, but actually it's the key:

Mid-July - Mid-August 2001: Mohamed Atta Seen Shopping and Purchasing Money Orders in Punta Gorda, Florida
Jean Waldorf, the owner of The Shipping Post, a mail service business in Punta Gorda, Florida, will later report seeing Mohamed Atta and an unidentified associate visiting her store some four to six times. According to Waldorf, Atta purchases US Postal money orders in denominations of $100 to $200, paying for them with cash, but she does not know how they are spent. Waldorf says that the money orders, which can only be cashed in the US, are “not traceable.” The owner of a local childcare center, Anna Brookbank, later says she recognizes Atta, having seen him shopping at a Punta Gorda supermarket during this period. Punta Gorda is about 30 miles south of Venice, where Atta, along with Marwan Alshehhi, previously attended flight school (see July 6-December 19, 2000). According to official accounts, the only time Atta was in this area was during his time at the flight school.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a0701attainpuntagorda#a0701attainpuntagorda

Follow the CNN link for 10/1/2001 and you get this:

Sources: Suspected terrorist leader was wired funds through Pakistan

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As much as $100,000 was wired in the past year from Pakistan to Mohamed Atta, the suspected leader of the terrorist hijackings, CNN has been told by law enforcement sources.

Pakistan is a common conduit for money going in and out of Afghanistan, home to Islamic militant Osama bin Laden, the leading suspect in the attacks. But at this point it's not known exactly where the funds may have originated.

Sources said the wire transfers from Pakistan were sent to Atta through two banks in Florida. Then, Atta allegedly would obtain money orders -- a few thousand dollars at a time -- to distribute to others involved in the plot in the months before the hijackings.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/10/01/inv.pakistan.funds/

So the reason the FBI is falsifying the hijackers' movements in the US is that the connection to OSS (who isn't Al Hawsawi) would otherwise be apparent. OSS was wiring money to Atta's accounts on the Gulf Coast straight from Pakistan, not from Dubai. Neat, huh? There should be a paper trail as long as your arm...

btw, How much do your sunglasses cost?

[JackRiddler]

23. KICK!!!!

All the old and new pieces coming together so well...

[Jon Gold]

24. Here you go...

Pakistan In Review

In the last few weeks, some REALLY interesting information has surfaced regarding the Pakistani ISI's relationship to "terrorism", and Western Intelligence's relationship to the ISI.

I wrote a really big article about this, but I lost it all when dz was paid by the CIA to move the site to a new server (that's a joke).

Anyway, I'm just going to put the important quotes out there for people to see...

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=69438&postcount=1

President Musharraf of Pakistan said the West was responsible for "breeding terrorism in his country by bringing in thousands of mujahideen to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and then leaving Pakistan alone a decade later to face the armed warriors."

Musharraf also restated the supposed threat he received from Richard Armitage. "Help us and breathe in the 21st century along with the international community or be prepared to live in the Stone Age."

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=69858&postcount=3

I say restated because it was first reported by .

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=69872&postcount=5

Richard Armitage denied ever saying that, "but did not deny the message was a strong one."

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=69883&postcount=9

Bush "denied knowledge of a phone conversation in which the US threatened to attack Pakistan."

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70115&postcount=1

A leaked document from Britain's Ministry of Defense, "accuses Pakistan's intelligence agency of indirectly supporting terrorist groups including al-Qaida and calls on Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf to disband the agency."

It also specifically accused the ISI of being involved in the 7/7 bombings.

"Indirectly, Pakistan (through the ISI) has been supporting terrorism and extremism _ whether in London on (July 7, 2005) or in Afghanistan or Iraq."

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70170&postcount=6

Mumbai (Bombay) police commissioner AN Roy said today, "We have solved the 11 July bombings case. The whole attack was planned by Pakistan's ISI and carried out by Lashkar-e-Toiba and their operatives in India."

So the ISI was allegedly involved in both the 7/7 bombings, and the 7/11 bombings as well.

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70127&postcount=4

Musharraf said "I totally, 200% reject it. I reject it from anybody - MoD or anyone who tells me to dismantle ISI."

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=69821&postcount=1

There was a lot of "hoo-ha" last week, "when a defendant accused Pakistan's intelligence service of threatening his relatives in the South Asian nation after he testified that the spy agency played a role in training Islamic militants."

"We are in uncharted territory here," said Sajjan Gohel of the Asia-Pacific Foundation, a counter-terrorism think tank here. "It hasn't happened before. The ISI has always been a murky organization. There have always been suspicions of a nexus between them, terror groups in Pakistan and Al Qaeda. But here you have a guy from the UK giving testimony that is very relevant because the ISI is supposed to be the key ally in the hunt for bin Laden. And it's concerning that a country that is supposed to be an ally in the war on terror is intimidating witnesses, almost 'Godfather'-style."

Paul Thompson http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70066&postcount=1>reported, "It is believed in some quarters that while Omar Sheikh was at the LSE he was recruited by the British intelligence agency MI6. It is said that MI6 persuaded him to take an active part in demonstrations against Serbian aggression in Bosnia and even sent him to Kosovo to join the jihad. At some point he probably became a rogue or double agent."

And...

“There are many in (Pakistani President) Musharraf’s government who believe that Saeed Sheikh’s power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA. The theory is that ... Saeed Sheikh was bought and paid for.”

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12678

Nafeez Ahmed wrote a huge article on the "continuity" of Western/Al-Qaeda relations in the Post-Cold War period.

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70092&postcount=1

Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad, is "accused of authorising British-born Pakistani terrorist Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to make a $100,000 transfer to Mohamed Atta, the operational chief of the September 11 conspiracy, a charge that met vehement denials."

Wanna bet the ISI is 3 for 3?

Think it's time we asked why the financier of the 9/11 attacks, the head of the ISI, was meeting with Principals in Washington D.C. the week prior to and on the day of 9/11?

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70087&postcount=1

And why George W. Bush still refers to Pakistan, in light of all of this information, as "Allies" in the "War On Terror?"

I do.

[Nozebro]

25. Your post contains unsupported claims & a lack of knowledge of current

geopolitical relations between India and Pakistan.

First of all, the $100K alleged to have been wired to M. Atta could have been for any purpose -- including his trips to topless bars and consumption of copious quantities of noze candy. There is no proof that it was terrorism-related.

India and Pakistan are not exactly cozy partners, so it's unsurprising that India would accuse Pakistan of being behind the 7/7 attacks. Pakistan could as easily accuse India.

[Jon Gold]

27. Did the 9/11 Commission

Look into the $100,000 wire transfer? It was on the list of questions submitted by the family members. No, it wasn't. Therefore, it is suspect. To my knowledge, the FBI confirmed the $100,000 wire transfer. The fact that the ISI sent ANY money to an alleged 9/11 hijacker is supsect. The relationship between India and Pakistan is part of the reason I used the word "alleged".

[Nozebro]

28. Wire transfer IS suspect. But, of what? What makes the most sense, in

my opinion, is that the wire transfer was part of a plan to frame someone, some agency, or even the country of Pakistan itself. Maybe all of the above.

[seatnineb]

29. So what IF the head of Mossad had given 100000 dollars to Atta?

........ if an American Muslim journalist had been killied in Irsael whilst chasing 9/11 leads......and that it was elements tied to Mossad that had carried out the killing of this same journalist....

...oh....and that the head of the Mossad had wired 100000 dollars to Atta a couple of months before!

....then I am pretty sure that you,Kevin Fenton,Paul Thompson,Bryan Sacks and Jack Riddler would have said Isreal had been framed!......


But with regards to Pakistan.........

What did Pakistan or military/intelligence/political elements within Pakistan stand to gain by backing AlQuida?

[robertpaulsen]

30. I thought Musharref had been making a lot of noise lately...

And I wondered what the hell was provoking him, if perhaps he feared for his life and was trying to draw attention to himself. Thanks for providing a bit more perspective on this, Jon Gold. 3 for 3 indeed, I wonder what's next on the agenda.

Speaking of Lashkar-e-Toiba, I recall linking some info on them in my signature paper, American Judas. Might be old info you've read before, but you might find it interesting:

2. Lashkar-e-Toiba - or LET is a terrorist group of Pakistan, consisting of Pakistani, Afghan and Arab cadres, headed by Pakistani office-bearers, with its headquarters at Muridke near Lahore. Its annual conventions at Muridke are attended, amongst others, by serving and retired officers of the Pakistani military and intelligence establishment, by serving and retired scientists of the Pakistani nuclear and missile establishment and by political leaders.

Amongst those, who regularly attend its annual conventions, are Lt. Gen. (retd) Hamid Gul and Lt.Gen.(retd) Javed Nasir, both former Directors-General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI),Dr. Abdul Qadir Khan, the self-styled father of the Pakistani atom bomb, Dr.Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood, the former scientist of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission who was recently detained by the Pakistani authorities under US pressure for being in contact with bin Laden and Mohd.Rafique Tarar, former President of Pakistan.(http://www.saag.org/papers4/paper381.html )

To finance its day-to-day activities, the LeT leverages its contacts in Saudi Arabia as well as launches donation campaigns with overseas Pakistanis, especially middle class and wealthy Punjabis in Britain, Australia and the Middle East. According to Jane's Terrorism & Insurgency Centre, Osama bin Laden has also financed LeT activities until recently. The LeT, under its new name JuD, uses its outreach networks including schools, social service groups and religious publications to attract and brainwash recruits for jihad in Kashmir and other places.(http://www.crikey.com.au/politics/2004/05/18-0003.html )

Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) has been showing increasing interest in taking jihad to the Muslims of the Eastern Province of Sri Lanka. The LET is very close to the ISI and it would not have taken its initial moves to explore the possibility of using Sri Lanka as a clandestine base for its activties and for creating sleeper cells there without the knowledge and prior clearance of the ISI.(http://www.saag.org/papers11/paper1026.html ) Since there is such a close relationship between ISI and this terrorist organization whose conventions ISI officials and A.Q. Khan attended, it is important to take a closer look at ISI, as well as another cited convention attendant, Dr. S.B. Mahmood, to uncover the relationship they share with al Qaeda and expose how their actions aided them.

[reprehensor]

26. Nafeez Ahmed: Pakistan and the Terror Nexus

http://nafeez.blogspot.com/2006/09/pakistan-and-terror-nexus.html

[pdevlinbuckley]

31. New article available at From The Wilderness

Musharraf names 9/11 suspect as possible British asset
Fails to mention links to 9/11, ISI, CIA
From The Wilderness
By Devlin Buckley

October 25th 2006, 4:47 - The man identified by the FBI as one of the primary financers of the 9/11 attacks, Omar Sheikh, may have worked for British intelligence during the 1990s, according to a newly released book by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.

“It is believed in some quarters that while Omar Sheikh was at the LSE (London School of Economics) he was recruited by the British intelligence agency MI6,” Musharraf writes in his book, In the Line of Fire: A Memoir. “It is said,” Musharraf notes, “that MI6 persuaded him to take an active part in demonstrations against Serbian aggression in Bosnia and even sent him to Kosovo to join the jihad.”1

The man in question, Omar Sheikh, became infamous in 2002 when he was sentenced to death for the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, a crime Musharraf and several others claim Omar did not commit.2

While Omar Sheikh’s reported ties to Pearl’s death have been making headlines for years, his alleged links to 9/11, as well as to Pakistani and Western intelligence agencies, have gone significantly underreported.

Similarly, several key points have been omitted from Musharraf’s book, perhaps in an attempt to cover up embarrassing and possibly criminal activities of Pakistani and US officials.

Musharraf’s book does not mention Omar Sheikh’s alleged role in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, nor does it mention Omar’s widely reported connections to Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, nor does mention Omar’s alleged history with the CIA.

A brief review of such details would have revealed startling information. ...

FULL ARTICLE

[KJF]

32. Not a bad article

Just a couple of comments on stuff you missed out.

(1) Saeed Sheikh was very closely connected to the Jaish i Mohammad, a Kashmiri jihadist organisation, which was founded by another of the prisoners released following the Air India hijacking, Maulana Masood Azhar. You can find an interesting article about the Jaish i Mohammad here:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/terrorism/pakistan-crackdown.htm
It was written by Daniel Pearl three weeks before he was kidnapped.

(2) Bernard Henri-Levy apparently claims Saeed Sheikh actually took out some of the "put options" there has been so much talk about, although I haven't read his book yet.

(3) Some sources say the 2001 money for Atta went through a charity, for example:

In early 2001, officials say that Ansari moved $250,000 from a Dubai financial and leasing company to the Al-Rasheed Trust that funded terrorists in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Pakistan, and Kashmir.

The money transfer was facilitated by an Al-Qaeda terrorist Mohammed Musa who was a financial consultant to Al-Rasheed Trust.

Musa is absconding from Pakistan since the 11-September terror attacks and officials say he might be in Saudi Arabia.

The bulk of Ansari’s donation to Al-Rasheed was moved to the Taliban, a smaller portion to terrorists groups in Kashmir and Pakistan, and $100,000 to Mohammad Atta.
http://www.indiareacts.com/nati2.asp?recno=518

The Al Rasheed Trust was one of the very first entities to have its assets frozen. However, although it may have occasionally provided a little money to Al Qaeda, most of its money went to charitable purposes and the Jaish i Mohammad, with which it shared offices. So why were its assets frozen at the same time as Osama's - there's no way on this earth it was a major financial vehicle for Al Qaeda? The Jaish i Mohammad's assets weren't frozen for another 10 days. I would not be surprised if the other two anomolies on the initial asset-freeze list, Al Wafa (a Saudi backed charity working in Afghanistan) and the Mamoun Darkazanli Import-Export Company (Darkazanli's personal assets were not frozen until 2 October either), were also used to channel money to Atta the FBI is prefering to keep quiet.


Also, you say the transfer was confirmed by Dennis Lormel, but the footnote for this (No. 3) is missing. Do you have a link? I'm not so sure about this. AFAIK all the initial briefings in the US (around 30 September, that said 100,000 had been wired from Pakistan to Atta in two transfers) were anonymous. When it was mentioned at a committee hearing that Lormel was present at in early October (2nd?), Lormel didn't comment on it. This indicates to me that Lormel was already backpedalling by then.

[seatnineb]

33. My take......Sheik tried to infiltrate or frame the ISI .

Musharraf says that it was in fact the Lahore police who arrested Sheik on 2/12/02.....as opposed to Sheik handing himself into the ISI at least a week before this date...according to Sheik himself.

Just a hypothesis:

Sheik...by saying that the ISI had him a week before the official date of his capture .....implies he was an ISI man(in fact he says he handed himself into Brigadir Shah(a former ISI operative).

But what if Sheik is trying to make it look like he is an ISI man in order to frame them....when in reality... he may have had nothing to do with them.......could explain why Musharraf seems to be highlighting that Sheik was in fact an MI6 operative.....

The dynamics between the CIA and ISI to Mossad must be understood in order to untangle this mess.