Bhutto: Pressed For Truth

The CIA funded the ISI & Al Qaeda, the US suppo... (more)
Added: December 29, 2007
The CIA funded the ISI & Al Qaeda, the US supports ISI Musharraf and his millitary dictatorship. The US doesn't support democracy. The US does support terrorism that it creates. Bhutto was a threat to the US's war on terror, and a threat to a dictatorship that the US backs.

"Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader."

Omar Sheikh and British intelligence

Musharraf claims that Omar Saeed Sheikh was a British intelligence agent. Of course, Musharraf would say something like that, as it takes the heat off his own country for some of the things that Omar Sheikh has allegedly done, all supposedly on behalf of Pakistani military intelligence. On the other hand, Musharraf's story fits. Omar Sheikh was from a well-to-do family, educated at a public school, and had excellent marks. Athletic, aggressive, and intelligent. A young Muslim male at a time when such an agent might well be useful. A text-book mark for British intelligence recruitment. Like all alleged terrorists, he suddenly turned into a violent Islamist religious extremist, and ended up in an Afghan training camp (where Aukai Collins knew him as Umar). As usual with all these 'terrorists', all his old friends now say they have trouble imagining such a thing happening to him. He was supposedly radicalized in Bosnia, but Bosnia seems to have been both a school for Islamic terrorists, and the foundation for NATO/German/French/British/American shenanigans in manipulating Islamist terrorist groups in the proto-WarOnTerror phony fight as a ruse for the ClashOfCivilizations-leading-to-NewMiddl eEast crapola. So either it is a legitimate 180 degree personality change, or he is fitting into the role he has to play to infiltrate Islamist terrorist organizations on behalf of British intelligence. Which do you think it is?

Omar Saeed Sheikh first made a name for himself by kidnapping and executing four 'tourists', three British and one American, an interesting choice of target. He has subsequently been traded for a planeload full of hijacked Indians, and been convicted of murdering Daniel Pearl (the latter conviction put into question by Musharraf's remarks). Most famously, he allegedly wired $100,000 to Atta on behalf of Pakistani intelligence (who the big-conspiracy theorists claim was working on behalf of the CIA), and even received back from Atta the excess money Atta didn't need.

I've always had trouble with this story. Why would Pakistani intelligence send Atta a relatively small amount of money using a method, and an agent, that could be so easily traced back to them? Why would they take the risk of receiving Atta's left-over money? On the other hand, if Omar Sheikh was working for British intelligence, with a mandate to put the blame for 9--11 on Pakistani intelligence, sending Atta some easily traced money, and receiving some money back, all to frame Pakistan, makes perfect sense. All the sources for the story are out of India, which has an obvious motive in implicating Pakistan. Of course, this scenario involves the necessity that British intelligence had foreknowledge of the nature and details of the 9--11 plot, and was working hand-in-hand with the plotters to further the bin Laden/Islamic terrorist/Pakistani back-story of September 11.