Al Qaeda: a US connection? —Shaukat Qadir 31-07-2004
The question about the connection between Al Qaeda (more specifically, Osama bin Laden) and the US refuses to die. On July 27, the British newspaper The Guardian carried an article “The Pakistan connection and the US silence over an execution” by Michael Meacher, a British Labour Party MP and a former minister for environment.
Meacher begins with the claim that Omer Sheikh, under sentence of death for the murder of US reporter Daniel Pearl, is actually innocent, though he provides no evidence of Sheikh’s innocence or someone else’s guilt. He then goes on to make a rather preposterous accusation that former DG-ISI, Lt-Gen (retd) Mahmood Ahmed was the actual financier of the 9/11 attack and had used Omer Sheikh to transfer funds to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. Again, Meacher makes the allegation without substantiating it. Lt-Gen Mahmood may have a lot to answer for, but not this.
Meacher goes on to weave the tapestry from facts and fiction and argues that there is collaboration between the CIA, perhaps even the State Department, and the ISI to cover up all such facts. In other words, the US and Pakistan governments have colluded to hide facts to prevent the disclosure of their involvement in the cloak-and-dagger stuff they have been indulging in in Afghanistan since the Soviets invaded that country.
Conspiracy theories are generally fantastic, but this one must be ranked among fairytales. Even so, this is not the first time such accusations have been made. In his speech in the House of Representatives on September 5, 2001 US congressman, Ron Paul stated, “Osama bin Laden, a wealthy man, left Saudi Arabia in 1979 to join American-sponsored so-called freedom fighters in Afghanistan. He received financial assistance, weapons and training from our CIA, just as his allies in Kosovo continue to receive the same from us today”. Earlier, during his testimony before a congressional committee on July 12, 1999, on “The Locus of Terrorism”, Michael Sheehan, the State Department spokesman, was asked again and again about the US government’s role in supporting the Taliban. Not only did he continuously evade the question, but when pinned down said he would only do so in-camera. By then, of course the Taliban had begun to be viewed as supportive of Al Qaeda and Osama.
Representative Dana Rohrabacher did not mince his words when he stated in the same session that “Bill Richardson and Rick Inderfurth, high-ranking members of this administration [he was talking about the Clinton administration], personally visited the region to discourage the opposition from attacking the Taliban when they were vulnerable. So what we hear about terrorism are crocodile tears from this administration, let us remember this administration is responsible for the Taliban. But none of the terrorism, which we will hear about today, by Mr bin Laden or others, would be taking place with Afghanistan as their home base if it weren’t for the policies of this administration”.
Meacher, therefore, is not alone in his views and, while some of it may seem fantastic, there are some facts that do raise questions. For instance, he writes, “A fourth witness is Sibel Edmonds. She is a 33-year-old Turkish-American former FBI translator of intelligence, fluent in Farsi, the language spoken mainly in Iran and Afghanistan, who had top-secret security clearance. She tried to blow the whistle on the cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who orchestrated the September 11 attacks, but is now under two gagging orders that forbid her from testifying in court or mentioning the names of the people or the countries involved.
She has been quoted as saying: “My translations of the September 11 intercepts included [terrorist] money laundering, detailed and date-specific information … if they were to do real investigations, we would see several significant high-level criminal prosecutions in this country [the US] … and believe me, they will do everything to cover this up.” This deserves a response.
Meacher also establishes a link between the CIA and the ISI, which really needs no establishing. However, his inference from this connection is not that easy to swallow: that anything known to the ISI is due to the CIA connection.
Intelligence organisations are by definition, non-transparent and secretive; consequently, even while collaborating, they do not share all information; also as a consequence of their secrecy they often give rise to such theories, founded and unfounded.
The CIA and the ISI are guilty of many errors of judgment and conspiracies that backfired on them. There is little doubt that both these agencies collaborated in strengthening the Taliban until 1997 and, while the US policy began to tilt against the Taliban after they had arrested Emma Bonino and nineteen journalists with her, for photographing an Afghan woman, the CIA continued to play along with the ISI, supporting the Taliban in the hope that they could prevail over the Northern Alliance.
The two agencies also have a lot to account for in their errors of commission and omission, not only in Afghanistan but elsewhere also. I do hope that someday they will reveal what was going on.
The author is a retired brigadier. He is also former vice president and founder of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI).
I have alway believed it wasn’t the Al-Qaida nor the Muslims who carried out the September 11 attacks and this is further proof.
There is far too much secrecy & conspiracy that the US is not revealing at the moment but some day the US will eventually spill the beans themselves and reveal the truth.
Yup that really reads like it wasn’t compiled by some hick in the back office of the ministry for little intelligence and too much time.
