Mahmoud Ahmad and The Secret Cult of 9-11

Among the most troubling of the "connections" of the 9-11 event, is the "hob-nobbing" of members of the Bush Reich with the Saudi Royal family all the while 15 of the purported "hijackers" were Saudi nationals. As it happens, Osama bin Laden, the Western Media's new "Boogie Man," is Saudi born. The recent "revelation" about the funding of some of the terrorists through the medium of an "innocent Saudi Princess" with "philanthropic tendencies" amounts, according to Michel Chossudovsky, to a Red Herring - an irrelevant topic that is presented in order to divert attention from the real issue: the connections between the Bush Reich and the Saudis. In order to come to some understanding of the problems we are facing, a little history assembled by Chossudovsky is in order.

In 1979, the CIA launched a covert operation in Afghanistan. The CIA used Pakistan's military intelligence apparatus as a "go-between" so as to "cover" their own activities. Pakistan had a big bone to pick with Russia, and willingly assisted. Pakistan wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a war waged by all muslims against the Soviet Union. The CIA sponsored guerrilla training that was integrated with the teachings of Militant Islam. Osama bin Laden was a recruit into this operation, and it is even possible that he didn't know that his training, the funding, and the idealogy came straight from the CIA. In other words, Osama was an "intelligence asset," as opposed to an "intelligence agent." An "asset" is somebody whose ideas and activity can be manipulated from behind the scenes to serve a certain purpose even if they are not aware of the true puppet master.

So, Pakistan had a bone to pick, the CIA promised to help them to achieve their goals of breaking up the Soviet Union, and proceeded to pour money and expertise into Pakistan, which was then used to train tens of thousands of Muslim radicals in Pakistani Madrasahs.

Now, it is common knowledge that the U.S. and the CIA supported the Mujahideen. This was even discussed in the Congressional record as being a response to the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. Everybody nodded their heads and said: "yes, that's okay. Certainly we want to protect those poor Afghanis from the Russian bear eating them up." What is not generally known - and little noted by the mainstream media, is that the CIA's military-intelligence operation in Afghanistan had been launched PRIOR to the Soviet invasion. It was, in fact, designed to deliberately trigger a civil war, to engage the Soviet Union, and bring it down.

In 1998, Zbigniew Brzezinski - National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter - said:

According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on 24 Decempber 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion, this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention. [...]

We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would. [Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Advisor Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998]

In other words, when the Soviets justified their intervention by saying that there was a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, they were telling the truth, but nobody in the West believed them. Brzezinski further said:

That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap... The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: "We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire. [Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski]

And it was for that purpose - bringing the Soviet Union to its knees - that the Taliban was given aid by the CIA via Pakistan, that Islamic Fundamentalism was promoted, and arms and training were given to future terrorists.

Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa tells us:

While the "Islamic Jihad" - featured by the Bush administration as "a threat to America" - is blamed for the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, these same Islamic organizations constitute a key instrument of U.S. military-intelligence operations not only in the Balkans and the former Soviet Union, but also in India and China. While the Mujahideen are busy fighting on behalf of Uncle Sam, the FBI - operating as a U.S. based Police Force - is waging a domestic war against terrorism, operating in some respects independently of the CIA, which has - since the Soviet-Afghan war - supported international terrorism through its covert operations.

Confronted with the evidence and history of CIA covert operations since the Cold War era, the U.S. Administration can no longer deny its links to Osama. While the CIA admits that Osama bin Laden was an "intelligence asset" during the Cold War, the relationship is said to "go way back" to a bygone era.

According to the CIA, an "intelligence asset" - as distinct from a bona fide "intelligence agent" - need not be committed to the pursuit of U.S. interests. Rather, it is meant to act and/or behave in a way which serves U.S. foreign policy interests. Intelligence assets are invariably unaware of the precise functions and roles they are performing on behalf of the CIA on the geopolitcal Chessboard. In turn, for these covert operations to be "successful," the CIA will use various proxy and front organizations such as Pakistan's extensive military intelligence apparatus. Most post-September 11 news reports consider that these Osame-CIA links belong to the "bygone era" of the Soviet-Afghan war. They are invariably viewed as irrelevant to an understanding of the September 11 crisis. Lost in the barrage of recent history, the role of the CIA, in supporting and developing international terrorist organizations during the Cold War and its aftermath, is casually ignored or downplayed in the Western Media.

A blatant example of post-September 11 media distortion is the "blowback" thesis: "Intelligence assets" are said to "have gone against their sponsors; what we've created blows back in our face." In a display of twisted logic, the U.S. government and the CIA are portrayed as the ill-fated victims. [War and Globalisation, Chossudovsky, 2002]

In other words, the CIA, the Bush Reich, the Media - everybody and his brother - are clucking and nodding about that bad Osama who "went against his father" and tricked his CIA/Pakistan intell handlers. Nothing could be further from the truth. The CIA has NEVER SEVERED ITS TIES TO THE Islamic Militant Network.

What is more, Congressional documents confirm that members of the Senate and House of Representatives KNOW about the relationship of the current administration to international terrorism. They are fully cognizant of the links between the Bush gang and Osama. They know exactly that Osama was a pawn in the hands the Clinton administration, and now the Bush administration. They also KNOW that the "War Against Terrorism" is really a War against the American People by their own government.

Republicans and Democrats have given their full consent to Bush and the gang to take America apart. In other words, a major war in Central Asia, supposedly to "crush" international terrorism, has been launched by the U.S. government, which created "international terrorism" as a part of its foreign policy. The whole thing has been fabricated to act on America exactly as it was fabricated to act on Russia as described above.

Again let me repeat: The War on Terrorism is a LIE and the pretext to wage this war - the "terrorist attacks" on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have been created and executed by the Bush Reich and their minions.

This is the single most important thing for anybody in the world to discover and understand today.

The September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon are the biggest frauds in American History.

Manipulation of thought and public opinion is historically, the way masses of people are controlled with the least amount of effort. It was true in ancient times, it is true today. Machiavelli described the ways and means of accomplishing such control in great detail, and he was merely describing what he observed as the Standard Operating Procedure of his day. If anybody thinks things have changed, think again. And just as there were "clappers" planted in the audience of any play or political rally or other forum where masses of people gathered, so are "clappers" planted in our world in the form of the Mass Media and "professional debunkers." What this means, of course, is that WORK must be done to discover the TRUTH of any given situation. And that is, of course, what most people do NOT want to do. As Bertrand Russell noted:

Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth, more than ruin, more even than death....Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man.

And thinking is most definitely what the Control System wishes to suppress. And they do this by "debunkery." Debunkery's chief tool is to call anything to be debunked: "Conspiracy Theory," pronounced with a sneer of contempt.

There exists in our world today a powerful and dangerous secret cult.

So wrote Victor Marchetti in his book The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence. In this book, Marchetti tells us that there IS a "Cabal" that rules the world and that its holy men are the clandestine professionals of the Central Intelligence Agency.

In our opinion, the CIA is but one "arm" of the cult, just as Benedictines were but one order of the Catholic Church. To borrow from, and paraphrasing, Marchetti:

This cult is patronized and protected by the highest level government officials in the world. It's membership is composed of those in the power centers of government, industry, commerce, finance, and labor. It manipulates individuals in areas of important public influence - including the academic world and the mass media. The Secret Cult is a global fraternity of a political aristocracy whose purpose is to further the political policies of persons or agencies unknown. It acts covertly and illegally.

And we are seeing it happen before our very eyes!

Now, for anybody who has been subjected to the contempt and derision of the "professional debunkers," please notice that the above is what is being said by an insider. And there are many insiders who say similar things once they have escaped to the outside. And also notice that this insider was censored. People only seek to keep secrets when revealing those secrets will harm them in some way. And in the case of the current administration, the biggest secret they want to keep is the Truth about the Events of September 11, 2001. Because it is upon this "event" that everything else that has followed is based!

Without 9-11 there would be no passage of laws abrogating the Constitution.

Without 9-11, there would be no talk of War.

Without 9-11, Bush would probably be facing criminal charges for rigging an election in cahoots with his brother Jeb, Katharine Harris and Bob Graham and others.

Without 9-11, Bush would not have been able to rig the mid-term election, which most certainly happened, because it is hardly likely that the voters turned out in such numbers because they were PLEASED with the current state of affairs.

In 1958, Aldous Huxley wrote Brave New World in which he stated:

The older dictators fell because they never could supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles and mysteries. Nor did they possess a really effective system of mind-manipulation.

Under a scientific dictator, education will really work - with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.

Our world is currently managed by a VERY "scientific dictator," and Bush is only its puppet.

"We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order." [David Rockefeller, Statement to the United aNations Business Council, 1994, quoted by Michel Chossudovsky]

Chossudovsky points out that there are two facts that we must always keep in mind:

1) The conspirators are working to convey the illusion of democracy. They "fabricate dissent." In other words, they must create and finance their own political opposition. In order to appear legitimate, they must actively encourage the type of "criticism" which does not challenge "their right to rule."

2) The 9-11 Terrorists did not act in a vacuum. They were instruments in a carefully planned intelligence operation supported by Pakistan's ISI, which owes its allegiance and existence to the CIA.

Both of these factors play into the comment made by David Rockefeller quoted above. They are part of the "right major crisis" which has been created and implemented in order that the NATIONS will accept the New World Order. And notice that the "New World Order" is not anything like the many prognosticators of the past 50 years suspected. It is not "out there" in the form of the Catholic Church or the European Union. It is right here, at home, in the body politic of the Bush Reich.

The question is, of course, what was Rockefeller referring to above in his remark "We are on the verge of global transformation..."?

The "standard answer" that the Debunkers would like us to believe is that this probably refers to more or less the development of science so that a "global community" is desirable, and also that communication and exchange on a global scale would mandate a global ruling council to coordinate everything.

That's a reasonable explanation, right? Sounds good to me. I liked it for years.

However, some questions about a few interesting subjects that I had almost twenty years ago led me to understand that not only is nothing as it seems, it never has been. And, when we consider the remarks of President Woodrow Wilson about "a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive..." that even the most powerful men on the planet speak about it only in whispers, we just might think we have a bit of a problem here on the BBM.

Of course, part of the art of setting up diversionary information to cover up what is really going on consists in attributing the activities of the Bush Gang to all sorts of monetary motives. To many researchers, it's a matter of oil and greed. And certainly, at some level, this must be true. There are most definitely those individuals on the chess-board who believe that what they are doing is going to put power and money into their hands and this fiction is undoubtedly promoted from the inside of the insiders in order to motivate their minions and keep them in line.

But, when you consider the fact that economics - as it relates to money or valuable goods - is a completely artificial system, and when you consider the facts about oil and energy, you come to a sort of full stop because those answers no longer work.

Playing games with the economy in order to make more money is a simple matter at the levels of power we are discussing. Diplomatic and financial deals to gain control of oil and resources is also a simple matter at those levels.

Those who propose that wars are fomented to redistribute power and resources are missing the obvious fact that all of that can be easily accomplished via the simple "carrot and stick" method of diplomacy.

In other words, everything that is being played out on the world stage of politics and power and greed is all a FACADE. It is a PLAY put on for the benefit of the MASSES of humanity.

For years this issue of just who is on first has been managed rather publicly by the production of endless books about the Rothchilds, the Rockefellers, the British Royal Family, the Catholic Church secret societies, and on and on. As I wrote in an article for a little New Age publication back in 1995:

All of the events of our world and aspects of our lives both temporal and spiritual, are like movements through a maze which constantly recreates itself. Every effort of research to discover the truth ends in a dead end of the maze. But, with dedication and knowledge we are sometimes able to get a glimpse of things before the clouds and howling mists swirl in to obscure our vision while the maze reforms itself.

What is there?

A hyperdimensional presence on our planet is real. Those who choose to close their eyes to this reality do so at their own peril. There is overwhelming and irrefutable evidence based on the government's own documents that our highest public officials and the elite of our security and intelligence organizations have been deliberately and persistently lying to tax-paying citizens on the subject of hyperdimensional beings for the last 50 years or more.

A hyperdimensional control system has been noted at many points in history of great disaster or mass death. Examination of the records and documents has led some scholars and researchers to conjecture that many of history's Darkest Hours have been CREATED by from some sort of "hyperdimensional space" and its denizens, commonly called "aliens" in the present day.

We come back, then, to the comment of David Rockefeller: "We are on the verge of global transformation..." which we have juxtaposed with the comments of President Woodrow Wilson about "a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive..." that even the most powerful men on the planet speak about it only in whispers... and we understand that it is NOT Greed or Oil or simple Power that is driving the Controllers behind Bush and the Gang. Certainly, it is possible that they may think that these are their objectives, but certain factors that emerge as we observe the events of the past 14 months argue against that.

The key that unlocks our understanding of the factors in question is the clear and evident SCHEDULE that Bush is following. Anybody paying attention can see that all ordinary factors of the dynamics of socio-political relations are being completely ignored, brushed aside, and obviated to follow a SCHEDULE. That is to say: TIME is of supreme importance to the Bush Gang.

WHAT this "TIME Factor" might mean - what the SCHEDULE might relate to - makes very little sense when we subtract the arguments for greed and power and oil. However, the TIME Factor - the SCHEDULE - makes a LOT of sense when we consider the factors that it is key to. Those factors have to do with the convergence of certain facts that emerge from a wide field of study which includes history, geology, astrophysics, and physics - which contribute to our awareness of hyperdimensional realities, the cyclic nature of Time, and the evidence that these cycles are marked by Global Cataclysm. It is only with this knowledge that we begin to come to some understanding of what is driving the Bush Reich.

We have addressed these subjects in great detail in our book: The Secret History of The World.

Coming back now to our present problem: The fact that the entire 9-11 Event was a creation of the Secret Cult which counts among its lower echelon members George Bush and his Gang of Warmongers, we notice above all other things that it seems that the Secret Cult is driving Bush and the Gang according to a SCHEDULE. Michel Chossudovsky writes:

The "war on terrorism" and the development of the authoritarian State are occurring at the outset of a huge global economic depresssion marked by the downfall of the State institutions, mounting unemployment, the collapse in living standards in all major regions of the world, including Western Europe and North America, and the outbreak of famines over large areas.

At a global economic level, this depression could be far more devastating than that of the 1930s. Moreover, the war has not only unleashed a massive shift out of civilian economic activities into the military-industrial complex, it has also accelerated the demise of the welfare state in most Western countries.

Five days before the terrorist assaults on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, President Bush stated almost prophetically:

I have repeatedly said that only time to use Social Security money is in times of war, times of recession, or times of severe emergency. And I mean that. [September 6, 2001]

The recession and war buzzwords are being used to mould U.S. public opinion into accepting the pilfering of the Social Security fund to pay the producers of weapons of mass destruction - i.e. a massive redirection of the nation's resources towards the military industrial complex. [Michel Chossudovsky]

We have to understand here that Chossudovsky is a professor of economics. He is very astute and he sees much deeper than the average thinker. But he has not taken certain other factors into account, and so his remarks about the "outbreak of famines" gets lost for the average reader in the economic considerations.

One has to wonder just where following THAT remark might lead?

In the strictest of material terms, it might be thought that these facts are acting on the Bush Reich in a certain way: they wish simply to decimate large numbers of human beings for the sake of "economics." They are aware that in a "let them eat cake" society, what the inevitable results of millions of hungry people can be: Madame Guillotine for the Elite. And so, to prevent the rolling of their own heads on the block, they are making a pre-emptive strike to sustain their own controls. After all, in a world without enough food for its people, what good is oil and money?

But again, even that consideration does not help us to deal with the obvious TIME element - the SCHEDULE. Bush has a series of dates by which he MUST accomplish certain things, and so far, nothing has gotten in his way for longer than a day or two. Even if he comes across as a moron or crazy or a psychopath, make no mistake about it: he has access to data that the rest of us do NOT have. And this data is what is driving the SCHEDULE. There IS an "EMERGENCY," and Bush and the Gang KNOW about it. Let me remind you again that following the trail of logic leads us to understand that this "emergency" cannot be merely a desire for more money or more oil.

And so we have an idea that this "event" that David Rockefeller mentioned -"We are on the verge of global transformation..." and we find a deeper meaning to the comments of President Woodrow Wilson about "a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive..."

Note added: The recent revelation of the Secret Pentagon Report has confirmed the above speculations. See: Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies.

The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents. 'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

So, to recapitulate: if we do the research, if the mountain of government documentation is examined, we discover that the Militant Islamic groups are very likely created and funded by the CIA. The current U.S. foreign policy is NOT geared towards curbing Islamic fundamentalism - Radical Islam - it is designed to promote it, to inflame it, and to bait it to attack.

The development of radical Islam in the wake of September 11, in the Middle East and Central Asia, is consistent with Washington's hidden agenda. They plan to sustain rather than combat terrorism with a view to destabilizing societies around the world and to prevent the creation and growth of possible genuine social movements that might combat the New World Order plans of the Bush Reich. You can bet that the CIA continues to support the development of Islamic Fundamentalism, Christian Fundamentalism, Jewish Fundamentalism, and New Age Fundamentalism mainly through COINTELPRO, though not exclusively.

In the short term, Fundamentalism creates social and ethnic divisiveness. It makes it impossible for large groups of people to organize against the New World Order of the Bush Reich. We are, indeed, experiencing a Global COINTELPRO program that has something for everyone - the Devil's Supermarket of religions and beliefs, so to say. These organizations often foment "opposition to Bush" or the "American Agenda" in a way designed by the CIA handlers so that it does not constitute any real threat to the Bush Reich's main, global agenda.

And this brings us again to the ONLY thing that can be effectively utilized to stop the Juggernaut of the Bush Reich: TRUTH. The truth of their complicity in the 9-11 event.

Once the people understand that they are being hoodwinked, induced to support a LIE, that Bush and the Gang are Wolves in Sheep's clothing, that we have all been led down the primrose path just like Little Red Riding Hood and that the Wolf disguised as Grandmother is about to swallow us whole, only then will the people just simply refuse to participate in this madness, and only then will we have the opportunity to discuss other alternatives to the future that Bush and the Gang are planning on creating for all of humanity.

And so, after long and careful analysis of the situation, we can see that the primary thing that is NOT being addressed is the illegitimacy of the presence of George W. Bush in the White House and WHY that fraud was perpetrated.

Everyone in the U.S. went around in a daze during the election "scandal." Everyone asked "why is this happening?" And now it all begins to make sense. The people do not realize that there are EVIL men behind this administration, and that America is NOT engaged in a War against Terrorism - America is engaged in a war of Global Conquest and international terrorism has been effectively created BY the Bush Reich as the excuse to decimate the human population on this planet.

People can only be UNIFIED by the TRUTH of 9-11 being known to everyone from the smallest child in kindergarten to the oldest recipient of Social Security.

The Bush Administration, aided by the Mass Media, have worked very hard to eliminate any possibility of public inquiry into 9-11 or the election fraud. They are using Fear and Disinformation to control the masses. We are told almost daily that Osama and other terrorists are under the bed. And you can be sure that any terrorists that are actually found under our beds will have been put there by Bush and the CIA.

On May 16th, 2002, The New York Post dropped a "bombshell" in its headline: BUSH KNEW!

As Michel Chossudovsky points out, what this was designed to do was act as a "red herring." It was an "irrelevant topic" presented to divert attention away from the real issue. Because, of course, the real issue were the many questions being asked not only about the strike on the Pentagon that was questionable in more ways than one, but also the little leaks here and there that suggested that there was something going on behind the scenes. So, in order to completely divert suspicion, the Screaming Headlines were produced, got everybody's attention, and then the media talking heads just explained everything away.

Instead of focusing on direct culpability as one might think was suggested by the headlines, the discussions focused on the many "warnings" and "clues" of "possible terrorist attacks." And of course, these were all explained away as a "failure of intelligence" and "how could Bush possibly know what was going to happen?" The lame explanation was given that "yes, the FBI and the CIA knew something was cooking," but they "failed to connect the dots." And then, the apology given by House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt: "This is not blame placing... We support the President on the war against terrorism - have and will. But we've got to do better in preventing terrorist attacks."

And so, the Mass Media distracted everyone's attention away from the total idea of political deception by a pre-emptive apologia. Nothing at all was said about the years and years of ongoing political deception, the manipulations and activities of the CIA, the connection of the CIA to Osama Bin Laden and most especially NOT the link between Al Qaeda and Pakistan to the CIA right to the Oval Office of the White House and the Planning Rooms of the Pentagon.

It is certainly true that the rank and file of FBI agents probably are not privy to the details of the CIA's role in creating and driving the "Militant Islamic Network," but at the upper levels of the FBI, it is certainly known. And again, it is certainly WELL KNOWN among the members of Congress and the House of Representatives. So, the New York Post bomb managed to underscore the weakness of the FBI, the "failure of intelligence," and ignored completely the basis of the Islamic Militant Groups - the CIA.

Note added: Now, after Condoleezza Rice's testimony, we see that this angle is being driven home: a "failure of intelligence."

Which brings us back to General Mahmoud Ahmad having breakfast with Bob Graham and others on the morning of 9-11.

On May 16, shortly after the New York Post bomb was dropped, Michel Chossudovsky informs us that Condoleezza Rice held a press conference to address the issue. At this press conference something very interesting happened: an Indian journalist asked Ms. Rice a question and in the public transcripts of this interview, it went as follows:

Q: Are you aware of the reports at the time that (inaudible) was in Washinton on September 11. And on September 10, $100,000 was wired from Pakistan to these groups here in thie area? And while he was here, was he meeting with you or anybody in the administration?

Rice: I have not seen that report, and he was certainly not meeting with me.

Now, what was excluded in the publicly released transcripts of this press conference - what was actually IN those brackets where we see the word "inaudible?"

Here is the copy of the Federal News Service, May 16, 2002, Special White House Briefing:

Q: Are you aware of the reports at the time that THE ISI CHIEF was in Washington...

Back up now - feets don't fail me - this is a real clue here and we have Michel Chossudovsky to thank for this one.

WHY is this being hidden by the media? WHY is the designation of the individual who was in Washington being covered up in this stupid little gaffe - this "(inaudible)" when it was clearly audible and heard by others and recorded?

WHO is being concealed?

The ISI Chief: General Mahmoud Ahmad. Remember our little collection of FACTS from Michel Chossudovsky?

1) The purported 9-11 ringleader - Mohammed Atta - according to ABC news, was financed by "unnamed sources in Pakistan." According to Agence France Presse and the Times of India, an official Indian intelligence report informs us that the 9-11 attacks were funded by money wired to Mohammed Atta from Pakistan, by Ahmad Umar Sheikh, under orders from Pakistani intelligence chief General Mahmoud Ahmad. The report said: "The evidence we have supplied to the U.S. is of a much wider range and depth than just one piece of paper linking a rogue general to some misplaced act of terrorism."

2) General Mahmoud Ahmad was in the U.S. on September 11. He arrived on the 4th on a "routine visit." It was confirmed by news sources that Ahmad met with a number of U.S. officials.

Colin Powell,
Richard Armitage,
Marc Grossman,
CIA Director George Tenet,
Senator Bob Graham, chairman of Senate Intelligence Committee,
Senator John Kyl, Senate Intelligence Committee,
Rep. Porter Goss, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee,
Senator Joseph Biden, Chariman of Foreign Relations Committee.

And we come back to that most interesting item: On the morning of September 11, General Mahmoud Ahmad was having breakfast with Florida's senator, Bob Graham - chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Also present at breakfast was Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S. Maleeha Lodhi. There were other members of the Senate and House Intelligence committees present. And that leads us right back to the Oval Office of the White House. Suddenly, all the pieces begin to fall into place.

When the news [of the attacks on the World Trade Center] came, the two Florida lawmakers who lead the House and Senate intelligence committees were having breakfast with the head of the Pakistani intelligence service. Rep. Porter Goss, R-Sanibel, Sen. Bob Graham and other members of the House Intelligence Committee were talking about terrorism issues with the Pakistani official when a member of Goss' staff handed a note to Goss, who handed it to Graham. "We were talking about terrorism, specifically terrorism generated from Afghanistan," Graham said.

Mahmoud Ahmed, director general of Pakistan's intelligence service was "very empathetic, sympathetic to the people of the United States," Graham said.

Goss could not be reached Tuesday. He was whisked away with much of the House leadership to an undisclosed "secure location". Graham, meanwhile, participated in late-afternoon briefings with top officials from the CIA and FBI." [Stuart News Company Press Journal, Vero Beach, FL, September 12, 2001 as quoted by Michel Chossudovsky]

Notice above that Goss and "much of the House Leadership" was "whisked away to an undisclosed secure location. This fact stands in stark contrast to the handling of President Bush, the Commander in Chief, who apparently, continued to dilly dally in an unsecured elementary school, careless of his own safety as well as the safety of the children. Even if Condoleezza Rice was telling the truth about not meeting with the Pakistani ISI chief, she certainly knew something because she did not even suggest that the Secret Service ought to immediately secure the person of the President whether he wanted to be secured or not. As is noted on an exhaustive Timeline of Bush's activities on 9-11:

Getting back to the breakfast meeting from which much of the House Leadership was whisked away to an undisclosed secure location, the Miami Herald, on September 16, 2002, confirmed the meeting, and included the fact that General Ahmad also met with Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Graham said the Pakistani intelligence official with whom he met, a top general in the government, was forced to stay all week in Washington because of the shutdown of air traffic. "He was marooned here, and I think that gave Secretary of State Powell and others in the administration a chance to really talk with him," Graham said. [Miami Herald as quoted by Michel Chossudovsky]

In fact, the News of Pakistan reported the visit BEFORE September 11:

ISI Chief Lt. Gen. Mahmoud's week-long presence in Washinton has triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council. Officially, he is on a routine visit in return for CIA Director George Tenet's earlier visit to Islamabad. Official sources confirm that he met Tenet this week. He also held long parleys with unspecified officials at the White House and the Pentagon. But the most important meeting was with Marc Grossman, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. One can safely guess that the discussions must have centred around Afghanistan ... and Osama bin Laden. What added interest to his visit is the history of such visits. Last time Ziauddin Butt, Mahmoud's predecessor, was here, during Nawaz Sharif's goernment, the domestic politics turned topsy-turvy within days. [Amir Mateen, News Pakistan, September 10, 2001 as quoted by Michel Chossudovsky]

Nawaz Sharif was overthrown by General Pervez Musharaf. General Mahmoud Ahmad, who became the head of the ISI, played a key role in the military coup. [Michel Chossudovsky]

It was in the news (even if the major media sources deliberately ignored it), so how come Condoleezza Rice didn't know about it?

The existence of an ISI-Osama-Taliban-CIA-US government axis is a matter of public record. However, what was NOT expected - obviously - was the revelation by Indian intelligence - that the $100,000 bux was paid to Mohammed Atta on the orders of the guy having breakfast with Bob Graham - the same guy who was meeting with all the likely conspirators.

The Bush administration's relations with pakistan's ISI - including the week of meetings and "consultations" with General Mahmoud Ahmad prior to September 11 - raise not only the issue of "cover-up" but of DIRECT COMPLICITY. At the very least, this suggests that key individuals within the U.S. military-intelligence establishment knew about the attack in some detail and failed to act. At worst, it suggests that the many irregularities noted about the behavior of Bush and his gang prior to, during, and following the 9-11 attacks were indicative of direct participation in the planning of the events, even to the "piggy-backing" of the drone plane attack on the Pentagon to divert suspicion away from the U.S. military.

What is crystal clear, however, is that this war is not a "campaign against international terrorism." It is a war of conquest with devastating consequences for the future of humanity. and the American people have been consciously and deliberately deceived by their government. [Chossudovsky]

Another interesting note is the comment that the last time the ISI chief of Pakistan was in Washington, the "domestic politics turned topsy turvy within days." Did the CIA help General Pervez Musharraf to overthrow Nawaz Sharif and now the favor was being returned? Just a little matter of the transfer of $100,000 bux - thirty pieces of silver to betray the American people?

Now, let's back up just a short while before the September 11 attack. Michel Chossudovsky reveals that, on September 9, the leader of the Northern Alliance, Commander Ahmad Shah Masood, was assassinated. The Northern Alliance informed the Bush administration that the ISI of Pakistan was implicated in the murder.

However, if you do a web search for articles on this matter, you will find that the Western Media repeatedly says that Masood was assassinated by "Arab militants" - very often specifically naming Al Qaeda. What is omitted is the official statement: A "Pakistani ISI- Osama - Taliban axis" [was responsible for] plotting the assassination by two Arab suicide bombers. [...] "We believe that this is a triangle between Osama bin Laden, ISI, which is the intelligence section of the Pakistani Army, and the Taliban." [The Northern Alliance Statement released on September 14, 2001, quoted by Reuters News Service on September 15, 2001]

So, the complicity of the ISI in relation to Osama and the Taliban IS a matter of Public Record and is also in the Congressional transcripts.

However, what we see on the surface is that General Mahmoud, the head of the ISI, was having breakfast with Bob Graham in Florida on the morning of September 11, and that a couple of days later - with full awareness of the connections between ISI and Taliban - including the assassination of Masood just two days earlier - the Bush Administration announced that it would "directly cooperate" with Pakistan's ISI. Isn't that just a little bit like asking the fox to watch the henhouse? How did they DO that?

It was simple. The Western Mass Media, in full support of the Bush Reich (as is evident throughout the events of the past 14 months) remained completely silent on the role of Pakistan's ISI, even to the extent of inserting an (inaudible) in the published text of the question asked of Condoleezza Rice on May 16, 2002. It was NOT a coincidence that this question was addressed by an INDIAN journalist. So it was that the cover-up of ISI's position in the Taliban-Osama axis was underway and America declared Pakistan to be the "friend and ally" of America in those dark days following 9-11. And how did they explain it?

U.S. officials had sought cooperation from Pakistan [precisely] because it is the original backer of the Taliban, the hard-line Islamic leadership of Afghanistan accused by Washington of harboring bin Laden. [Reuters, September 13, 2001 as revealed by Michel Chossudovsky]

Never mind, of course, that just two days before 9-11, ISI was implicated in the assassination of Masood. Of course, not everybody was asleep on this one. At a State Department Briefing on September 13, a journalist asked Colin Powell:

[Does] the U.S. see Pakistan as an ally or, as the "Patterns of Global Terrorism" pinted out, "a place where terrorist groups get training." Or is it a mixture?

Powell's reply: We have provided to the Pakistani government a specific list of things we think would be useful for them to work on with us, and we'll be discussing that list with the President of Pakistan later this afternoon. [Michel Chossudovsky]

"Patterns of Global Terrorism" just happens to be the U.S.'s own publication... and the journalist was quoting it... This document confirms that the government of President Pervez Musharraf was part of the international terrorism "axis" saying:

Credible reporting indicates that Pakistan is providing the Taliban with material, fuel, funding, technical assistance, and military advisers. Pakistan has not prevented large numbers of Pakistani nationals from moving into Afghanistan to fight for the Taliban. Islamabad also failed to take effective steps to curb the activities of certain madrasas, or religious schools, that serves as recruiting grounds for terrorism.

It also says:

The designation of state sponsors of terrorism by the United States--and the imposition of sanctions--is a mechanism for isolating nations that use terrorism as a means of political expression. US policy seeks to pressure and isolate state sponsors so they will renounce the use of terrorism, end support to terrorists, and bring terrorists to justice for past crimes.

The United States is committed to holding terrorists and those who harbor them accountable for past attacks, regardless of when the acts occurred. The US Government has a long memory and will not simply expunge a terrorist's record because time has passed. The states that choose to harbor terrorists are like accomplices who provide shelter for criminals. They will be held accountable for their "guests'" actions. International terrorists should know, before they contemplate a crime, that they cannot hunker down in safehaven for a period of time and be absolved of their crimes. [published April 30, 2001, reported by Michel Chossudovsky]

Now, isn't that just a peach!

In April of 2001, the U.S. declares Pakistan to be a "state sponsor" of terrorism, declares in its own publication that "The states that choose to harbor terrorists are like accomplices who provide shelter for criminals. They will be held accountable for their "guests'" actions, and on September 11, the head of the ISI - ostensibly one of those individuals who one might think is being described above- has breakfast with Bob Graham after a week of closed door "consultations" with all kinds of fun folks in Washington. In short, the Bush Reich was hunkered down in a huddle with those who were directly - right up until two days before the 9-11 attacks - aiding and abetting "international terrorism" - and then they go and announce, two days after the attack on the World Trade Center, that "U.S. officials had sought cooperation from Pakistan [precisely] because it is the original backer of the Taliban, the hard-line Islamic leadership of Afghanistan accused by Washington of harboring bin Laden" !!!?

What happened to: "The US Government has a long memory and will not simply expunge a terrorist's record because time has passed" and "The United States is committed to holding terrorists and those who harbor them accountable for past attacks, regardless of when the acts occurred" ????

Dubya announced on September 13th that the Pakistan government had agreed "to cooperate and to participate as we hunt down those people who committed this unbelievable, despicable act on America."

Watch it Georgie: Your nose is growing.

On the same day, September 13, Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf agreed with Washington that General Mahmoud Ahmad would be sent to meet with the Taliban and negotiate with them to turn over that bad, bad boy, Osama bin Laden. So, our good buddy General Ahmad, being sufficiently fortified by his breakfast with Bob Graham, left immediately to "deliver the ultimatum" to the Taliban - and no doubt some cash and a pat on the back.

At American urging, Ahmad travelled [...] to Kandahar, Afghanistan. There he delivered the bluntest of demands. Turn over bin Laden without conditions, he told Taliban leader Mohammad Omar, or face certain war with the United States and its allies. [Washington Post, September 23, 2001, referenced by Michel Chossudovsky]

Yeah right.

Of course the "negotiations" failed. They were intended to fail. How can you have a war if Osama gets turned over??? If he had been extradited, there would have been no pretext for the "war against terrorism." There would be no pretext for the current beating of the drums of war against Iraq. Heck, if Osama had been turned over, there would be no possibility that we could all be terrorized with the regular and repeated Osama Is Under Your Bed routine.

Well, everything was going along just swimmingly - the conspirators had everything under control... until... On Sunday, October 7th, just prior to the bombing of Afghanistan, General Ahmed was removed as head of ISI.

What happened to our good Breakfast Buddy?!

Apparently, at some point in the days before the bombing of Afghanistan, something extremely devastating occurred. We get a "hint" in the following:

As to September 11th, federal authorities have told ABC News they have now tracked more than $100,000 from banks in Pakistan, to two banks in FLORIDA, to accounts held by suspected hijack ring leader Mohammed Atta. As well, this morning, Time Magazine is reporting that some of that money came in the days just before the attack and can be traced directly to people connected to Osama bin Laden. It's all part of what has been a successful FBI effort so far to close in on the hijackers' high commander, the money men, the planners and the mastermind. [Statement of Brian Ross reporting on information conveyed to him by the FBI, ABC News, This Week, September 30, 2001, referenced by Michel Chossudovsky]

Now, just what the heck happened here? This statement was made on September 30, and it alludes to the fact that "just days before" the 9-11 attack took place, money was sent from a bank in Pakistan to two banks in FLORIDA.

The statement by ABC news makes the most intriguing remark that the money trail leads right to the "hijackers' high commander, the money men, the planners and the mastermind."

And we already know that General Mahmoud was having breakfast in Florida on the morning of 9-11 and that he had been in Washington and other places since September 4th. Again we notice that Florida is the "center of action" of a LOT of very strange things. It was the center of action for the rigging of the election that put Bush in the White House. It was where Bush was physically located at the time of the 9-11 attacks. It was where the hijackers were said to have lived and trained. It also happens to be the state that is governed by Dubya's brother Jeb. Lot of coincidences going on there, don't you think?

But again, the ABC report was important for what it omitted: it made NO mention whatsoever of the ISI or General Mahmoud Ahmad.

But apparently, Bob Graham's grits n' grub partner was NOW an embarrassment and had to be ditched in a hurry!

Why?

Because on the 9th of October the Times of India sez:

While the Pakistani Inter Services Public Relations claimed that former ISI director-general Lt-Gen Mahmud Ahmad sought retirement after being superseded on Monday, the truth is more shocking. Top sources confirmed here on Tuesday, that the general lost his job because of the "evidence" India produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the World Trade Centre. The US authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen Mahmoud.

Senior government sources have confirmed that India contributed significantly to establishing the link between the money transfer and the role played by the dismissed ISI chief. While they did not provide details, they said that Indian inputs, including Sheikh's mobile phone number, helped the FBI in tracing and establishing the link.

A direct link between the ISI and the WTC attack could have enormous repercussions.

The US cannot but suspect whether or not there were other senior Pakistani Army commanders who were in the know of things. Evidence of a larger conspiracy could shake US confidence in Pakistan's ability to participate in the anti-terrorism coalition. Indian officials say they are vitally interested in the unravelling of the case since it could link the ISI directly to the hijacking of the Indian Airlines Kathmandu-Delhi flight to Kandahar last December.

Ahmad Umar Sayeed Sheikh is a British national and a London School of Economics graduate who was arrested by the police in Delhi following a bungled 1994 kidnapping of four westerners, including an American citizen. [quoted by Michel Chossudovsky]

In other words, India's intelligence service had information about the money exchange that could implicate Bush and Co and was probably "blackmailing" the U.S.

Note added 2004: We also notice that India and Israel have been buddying up recently, so it is obvious that India's blackmail is paying off.

According to the FBI files, Mohammed Atta was "the Lead Hijacker" and the "head conspirator." They carefully avoided talking about General Ahmad or the ISI. And Western news articles also seem to have avoided the fact that Sheikh was a Brit with a degree in ECONOMICS.

But it seems that there was more to this little "link" than met the eye. Agence France Press confirmed the report:

A highly-placed government source told AFP that the "damning link" between the General [Mahmoud Ahmad] and the transfer of funds to Atta was part of evidence which India has officially sent to the U.S. "The evidence we have supplied to the U.S. is of a much wider range and depth than just one piece of paper linking a rogue general to some misplaced act of terrorism," the source said. [ref. Michel Chossudovsky]

Whoa! Talk about your not-very-veiled threat here!

So, what happened to that awful General Ahmad who was having breakfast with Bob Graham, and then was caught paying money to Mohammed Atta? Was he a "rogue general" or a "double agent" who was chowing down on grits and eggs, biscuits and gravy, with that good ole boy Bob Graham, all the while he was using his cell phone to transfer the big payoff to the guys just down the road so they would get those jets fired up and on target?

Well, he was appointed to the position of Governor of Punjab. Nice cushy retirement for a job well done! And even though Pakistan apparently REWARDED their "rogue general," the U.S. continues to scratch Pakistan's back.

The Times of India wasn't done playing cat and mouse with the U.S. On the 11th of October, Michel Chossudovsky points out that the following appeared:

The United States could well consider naming Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) a foreign terrorist organisation judging by the revelations spilling out now about its nefarious activities that have not only troubled India but also jeopardised Washington's battle against terrorism. [...]

Pakistanis are apt to snicker at the frequent Indian invocation of ISI for all its problems. But recent disclosures of the spy agency's dirty tricks is earning it the mistrust of even its mentors in Washington. Following last week's expose showing the money trail of the September 11 terrorist attacks leading to Pakistan with possible ISI connections comes the disclosure now that renegade ISI operatives visited Kandahar last month to help the Taliban prepare its defences and strategy against US attacks.

The clandestine visit, which came after the September 11 carnage, was reportedly made in defiance of military ruler Pervez Musharraf's orders. It was this skunk works which resulted in the replacement of the ISI chief earlier this week, according to Ahmed Rashid, author of a well-received book on the Taliban.

"Senior retired army officers said Gen. Musharraf was infuriated when informed of the officers' trip because it could have jeopardized Pakistan's relations with the United States and Britain. There is no suggestion that Gen. Ahmad knew about the trip either, but he nevertheless resigned as ISI chief," Rashid, whose work is highly respected in western circles, wrote in an article published simultaneously in London's Daily Telegraph and The Washington Times. [...]

Indian intelligence agencies have long mapped the ISI operations, ascribing to it everything from terrorism to drug-running, and even subverting Pakistan's own democracy. Indian officials have also noted that several former ISI chiefs have been given important diplomatic assignments, including ambassadorships to key European countries, to enable Islamabad advance its nuclear program. Former ISI chiefs like Hamid Gul and Javed Nasir have grown old preaching the destruction of India and pontificating about its imminent collapse. [...]

Washington has been far more credulous about the ISI and has frequently entertained both former and incumbent spymasters, evidently under the illusion that the maverick organisation is still beholden to the CIA for the close ties developed during the "golden" 1980s decade. That was when the two organisations worked hand in glove to arm the Afghan Mujaheddin ("Mooj" in CIA parlance) against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. [...]

Although the two agencies fell out in the early 1990s amid reports of financial skullduggery by the ISI and a spat over weapons inventory, especially missing Stinger missiles, Washington continued to engage important Pakistani spooks. It was mandatory for all new ISI chiefs to pay their respects - in appearance at least - to Langley and Foggy Bottom, home of the CIA and the State Department respectively. Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharief chief spymaster Gen. Ziauddin was in Washington a fortnight before he (Sharief) was deposed and Musharraf's chief spook Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed was also here on the day of the terrorist attack and he (Ahmed) was sacked thereafter. [...]

Why the Bush administration continues to consort with the ISI, when there is probably enough material to proscribe it, is something of a mystery.

Well, it's not really too hard to figure it out. When ABC news reported:

... federal authorities have told ABC News they have now tracked more than $100,000 from banks in Pakistan, to two banks in FLORIDA ... some of that money came in the days just before the attack and can be traced directly to people connected to Osama bin Laden... the hijackers' high commander, the money men, the planners and the mastermind...

...they were telling the truth. They are all members of the same CULT.

Remember, we need your help to collect information on what is going on in your part of the world!

We also need help to keep the Signs of the Times online.

Check out the Signs of the Times Archives

Send your comments and article suggestions to us signs_at_cassiopaea

You are visitor number .

Mahmoud Ahmad and The Secret Cult of 9-11

Laura Knight-Jadczyk