General Mahmoud Ahmad, the Pakistani ISI Chief, and 9/11
Most people who have done some serious reading into 9/11 know about the leader of the Pakistani ISI, General Mahmoud Ahmad (also Mahmood Ahmed) and the fact that he wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta (the 9/11 hijacker "ringleader") shortly before 9/11.
This, of course, is something the US media likes to completely ignore, and it helps that the 9/11 commission did not bother to report this fact. The tremendous irony is that the Pakistanis are supposed to be our great allies in "the war on terror", yet there is an incredibly strong linkage between the Pakistani ISI and Al Qaeda and specifically the fact that the ISI Chief helped fund the 9/11 attacks.
One might even wonder if the report that General Ahmad wired money to Atta was really true, if not for another fact.
Shortly after 9/11, the US pressured Pakistani leader Musharref to remove General Ahmad from his post as leader of the ISI.
Again, this is something the US media likes to completely ignore, and it is even worse that the 9/11 commission completely ignores this story as well. But the implication is clear: the Bush administration knew there was a problem with General Ahmad.
Yet, rather than try to bring this man to justice, what does the US do? It quietly removes him from power.
Can you say "cover-up"?
Can you say "treason"?
Can you say "outrageous"?
I knew you could.
This, of course, is something the US media likes to completely ignore, and it helps that the 9/11 commission did not bother to report this fact. The tremendous irony is that the Pakistanis are supposed to be our great allies in "the war on terror", yet there is an incredibly strong linkage between the Pakistani ISI and Al Qaeda and specifically the fact that the ISI Chief helped fund the 9/11 attacks.
One might even wonder if the report that General Ahmad wired money to Atta was really true, if not for another fact.
Shortly after 9/11, the US pressured Pakistani leader Musharref to remove General Ahmad from his post as leader of the ISI.
Again, this is something the US media likes to completely ignore, and it is even worse that the 9/11 commission completely ignores this story as well. But the implication is clear: the Bush administration knew there was a problem with General Ahmad.
Yet, rather than try to bring this man to justice, what does the US do? It quietly removes him from power.
Can you say "cover-up"?
Can you say "treason"?
Can you say "outrageous"?
I knew you could.
posted by spooked at 8:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home