Why the CIA is not interested in ending al-Qaeda

"Mullah Haji Abdul Samat Khaksar, the No 2 Taliban official in U.S. custody, has been waiting months for the CIA to talk to him. The former Taliban deputy interior minister says he has valuable information for the U.S. - and may be able to help locate former Taliban leader Mullah Omar.... but no senior intelligence official has come for a full interview. The CIA will not comment... he says he has sent five letters to the US embassy in Kabul offering to pass on information about al-Qaeda hideouts in Afghanistan... He claims to have information about al-Qaeda links to ISI, the Pakistani intelligence agency that has been a key partner in the U.S. war on terror. In exchange for his information, Khaksar wants safe passage for his family to a location of his choice. Though he has had trouble getting US intelligence officials to listen, Khaksar fears his former comrades are playing close attention and want him silenced."
'The Taliban Guy the CIA Won't Question'
Time Magazine, 25 February 2002, European print edition, p21
(click here to access scanned image)

"American warplanes have had al-Qaeda and Taleban leaders in their sights as many as ten times over the past six weeks, but have been unable to attack because they did not receive permission quickly enough, US Air Force officials complained yesterday..."
Pilots had leaders of al-Qaeda 'in their gunsights'
London Times, 19 Nov 2001

"[Northern Alliance commander] General Dawood said that Alliance intelligence intelligence sources in the city had reported that at least two large Pakistani planes had landed at Konduz airfield to extricate 'military personel' on Tuesday night, followed by at least two more flights on Wednesday night..... Asked why the US, which controls the skies over Afghanistan, should have allowed such flights, he replied: 'That is a question that you will have to put to the Americans'...."
Alliance threatens to massacre Taleban's foreign fighters
London Times, 16 November 2001, p3 print edition (click here to access scanned image)
(on-line version excludes the question put to General Dawood)

"... in late September and early October, leaders of Pakistan's two Islamic parties negotiated bin Laden's extradition to Pakistan to stand trial for the September 11 attacks. The deal was that he would be held under house arrest in Peshawar. According to reports in Pakistan (and the Daily Telegraph), this had both bin Laden's approval and that of Mullah Omah, the Taliban leader.... Later, a US official said that 'casting our objectives too narrowly' risked 'a premature collapse of the international effort if by some luck chance Mr bin Laden was captured'.... "
Daily Mirror 16 November 2001

Dear Fight Smart Readers - So there you have it from the mouth of the US administration itself. Even if they are forced by domestic public opinion to catch bin Laden at some point (or to fake his capture or death), the CIA is not interested in ending al-Qaeda. Are they really that duplicitous? Well, why not ask Yvonne Ridley?
nlpwessex

"Yvonne Ridley, the British journalist captured by the Taliban, this week makes the extraordinary claim that Western intelligence agencies tried to get her killed to bolster public support for the air strikes on Afghanistan."
Independent, 9 Dec 2001

"The Pentagon has set up a covert unit to wage an information war that could include feeding false stories to foreign media, according to a report yesterday...In the 1970s CIA disinformation was picked up from the foreign media by American news organisations..... Victoria Clarke, the Pentagon spokeswoman, would not discuss the Office of Strategic Influence. "
Pentagon 'ready to lie' to win War on Terror
London Times, February 20, 2002

The more al-Qaeda is displaced from one country to another the more the US has a pretext for military and political action against whichever country it chooses - the last thing the CIA wants at this stage is the end of al-Qaeda. But why is the US so keen to prolong the 'War Against Terrorism' in this way.....?

Baffled by this situation? Before taking a look at more of this type of material at the bottom of the page (including a revealing Daily Telegraph report issued only this week) try first this 'hypothetical' scenario from Bernard Weiner to get a feel for the context

Bernard Weiner, a playwright and poet, was the San Francisco Chronicle's theater critic for nearly two decades. A Ph.D., he has taught American politics and international relations at Western Washington University and San Diego State University, and has written for The Nation, Village Voice, The Progressive and other political journals.

The "Shallow Throat" Documents: A Pre-9/11 Bush & Co. Scenario

By Bernard Weiner

t r u t h o u t | February 19, 2002

The Bush Administration seemed to have everything so well coordinated after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. How, many wondered, could they have put the whole shebang together so quickly? We may never know all the details, but recently some minutes of a pre-9/11 Bush inner-cabinet meeting have come our way, from someone inside the Administration.

We're not at liberty to reveal that mole's identity, but the job held by this person -- whom we'll call "Shallow Throat" -- includes access to important papers and thus the undated transcript below, believed to have been recorded in July or August of 2001, could well be authentic.

P [presumably George W. Bush]: This Jeffords thing is terrible, Karl! Why the hell didn't you massage the guy? With the Dems in charge of the Senate, we can't push anything through anymore, and Lott is steaming! Our entire conservative program is on hold!

KH [presumably Karen Hughes]: Karl's already groveled, Mr. President. Many times since June. We all blew that one. Let's figure out what to do NOW.

VP [presumably Vice President Dick Cheney]: The Democrats are gloating; they know they have our agenda stymied. We've got to do something, something dramatic, to regain the momentum.

KR [presumably Karl Rove]: Dick's right. It's got to be something big, something that will change the way things work in Washington. Not just a new piece of legislation but something that will reduce liberal power now and for the next generation.

CR [presumably Condoleeza Rice]: "Something big." Those same words have been picked up in known terrorist circles. The word is that Osama bin Laden's organization is planning "something big," against America, probably in America. We've been watching him closely, but not -- .

DR (interrupting) [presumably Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld]: We've been unable to find out what he means by "something big," and a date and time. But clearly he and his boys are excited by what's about to happen. If he initiates an attack on American soil, your stock as commander-in-chief shoots up a mile.

VP: Exactly. But his Something Big has to be countered by our Something Bigger. Look what happened to Clinton. The African embassies were bombed and Clinton flung a few missiles at Sudan and Afghanistan, all for show. Nothing changed. Something's got to change, Mr. President, if and when you decide to take action.

CR: From the wider perspective, the U.S. could act because the new face of warfare in the 21st Century is terrorism -- cyber, biological, chemical, nuclear -- threatening all countries. We'd have instant support.

DR: The reason why bin Laden can keep coming up with one attack after another against American interests is that he's been offered sanctuary by the Afghan regime, the Taliban. If we go after bin Laden, we should go after them as well. Overthrow the Taliban, hunt down bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network.

P: You forget, Don, that we were negotiating with the Taliban just a few months ago, even invited them to Texas. We thought we could convince them to protect the pipelines that our friends want to build through Afghanistan. But those Islams wanted too much money -- imagine, threatening us with sabotage of the pipeline if we didn't cough up the dough.

CR: Well, we can kill two birds with one stone, if we take on the Taliban for harboring bin Laden. Get them, put him in a box. But that's still a halfway measure, as I see it. It doesn't address the problem of how to rule effectively, with the Democrat majority in the Senate.

P: As I've always said, things sure would be a lot easier if I were a dictator. (laughter)

KH: Very funny, Mr. President. But maybe you're on to something here. If we were to go all the way, whole hog on the barbecue -- by which I mean a full-scale war on terrorists, wherever they are --

CR (interrupting): Bin Laden's organization has sleeper agents in nearly 60 countries, we're told.

KR: That's it! We make this a PERMANENT war on terrorism, no clear-cut victory because no end in sight, get the country all riled up, frightened -- and no doubt there will be more terror attacks on American soil, so we won't be making all this up out of nothing -- and you'll get your easier rule, Mr. President. The Democrats will back you all the way for fear of looking like the unpatriotic namby-pambys they are; we'll play the war and patriotism and national-security cards for all they're worth. And you're in charge, totally, Mr. President, for two terms.

JA [presumably Attorney General John Ashcroft]: I think you guys have got the foreign part down pat. I've been sitting over here trying to figure out the domestic part, and I've got a few ideas.

JA: Well, think back to when we on the Right could more or less run the show in this country: When we had communists as the common enemy. No matter what you think of Joe McCarthy, he put the fear of God into liberals and leftists. Nobody wanted to be considered even a little bit pink. We can do that with terrorism, too. Once bin Laden and his boys deliver whatever they're going to deliver, it'll be easy to bell our liberal cows, make them seem treasonous if they argue with what we're doing.

KH: I'm already thinking of how we might phrase that one, John: "You're either with our hunt for terrorists or you're a supporter of the terrorists," something like that.

VP: I do indeed. But I think you can take that idea further. Make it universal. We retaliate against bin Laden's organization all over the world, and you say to other countries: "If you're not with our war on terrorism, you're with the terrorists and you'll have to suffer the consequences."

CR: It's brilliant! The world will have to give in to us, or risk being attacked by us. It's better than Nixon's madman strategy.

DR: Powell's not going to go for it, you know. He'll whine about our allies in Europe and how we have to consult them and so on.

VP: Well, we will consult, we will. AFTER we've begun to move on what we want to do, of course. (laughter)

KH: You realize what we're talking about here, don't you? It takes my breath away. As the only superpower in the world, we're finally going to assert, openly and boldly, American authority all over the globe. It's like us as the Roman Empire. With nobody to stop us. It's power and profit and freedom all around. And a fully supportive, patriotic, martial-type society at home.

P: I like it. But I especially like what John was talking about: being able to act without having to fly through all that Democrat ak-ak in Congress. If we play our cards right, we should be able to get anything we want in the way of legislation, budget allocations, tax cuts, conservative judges, eventually repeal of Roe v. Wade, removal of all those old Clinton environmental regs that hogtied our business friends.

KR: And, best of all, with so much of our budget locked up for the war on terrorism, and with our tax cut tying up funds for the next ten years, we can drastically reduce all that Democrat social spending and not have to pay any political price for it. It's the war, stupid, not us.

P: But I don't want to be blindsided, by anything. No more Jeffords! I need to know if there's anything out there that could blow up in our faces.

VP: This has GOT to be absolutely confidential. But my friends at Haliburton say that Kenny Boy's company is leaking money badly. Might be a good time to examine your portfolios, if you get my drift.

KH: You mean there's a danger Enron could go under? No way! The company is too big and successful.

KR: If this is true, we're all in big trouble. We've got Enron money and Ken's hands all over this administration; we even let him pick officials regulating the energy industry. Christ! We could get hurt on this one.

P: Let's not go crazy here. It's just boring old Republican business practices. There'll be a big thing made of it for a while and then it'll go away. It's not serious; it's not sex.

DR: And we can always ratchet up the war if an influence-peddling probe starts to get too hot for comfort, play a little wag-the-dog distraction game. Invade Iraq or something. Hussein is an even better villain than bin Laden anyway -- mean-looking, you know what I mean?

P: Well, you stay on top of this one, Dick. And keep your records private, executive-privilege them if you have to. Worse comes to worst, it'll wind up in the Supreme Court.

The transcript ends at that point. Again, we can't prove the genuineness of the document brought to us by "Shallow Throat." But it kinda passes the smell test, don't you think?

Actions speak louder than words. Judge for yourself...... Just look at this stuff (below).... in addition to the material at the top of the page, it is endless.... Just what do most of the mainstream media think they are doing not piecing this material together to give the big picture and spelling out to the people what is really going on in the bogus 'War Against Terrorism'? It seems tyranny is not the exclusive preserve of the 'government behind the government' in Washington.
Shame on the media that remains silent. Shame!

"European intelligence experts dismiss the Bush 'war on terrorism' as deception and reveal the Realpolitik behind the aggression against Afghanistan......intelligence experts say the terror attacks of September 11 could not have been carried out without the support of a state secret service.... Andreas von B'low served on the parliamentary commission which oversees the three branches of the German secret service while a member of the Bundestag (German parliament) from 1969 to 1994, and wrote a book titled Im Namen des Staates (In the Name of the State) on the criminal activities of secret services, including the CIA..... 'Ninety-five percent of the work of the intelligence agencies around the world is deception and disinformation,' von B'low said, which is widely propagated in the mainstream media creating an accepted version of events. 'Journalists don't even raise the simplest questions...' ' "
American Free Press, 4 Dec 2001

"US generals made it clear by the end of November that they believed senior al-Qa'eda operatives were inside Tora Bora. A convoy of several hundred Arab fighters, including bin Laden and his close associates, entered it from Jalalabad on the night of Nov 12, and the US bombing around the base intensified three days later. The US strategy bore little logic for those suffering the brunt of the attacks. 'When we round up a pack of stray sheep, we send in shepherds from four sides, not just one,' said Malik Osman Khan, a one-eyed tribal chief whose 16-year-old son Wahid Ullah was one of more than 100 Afghan civilians killed in the intense US bombing ....The eastern Afghanistan intelligence chief for the country's new government, Pir Baksh Bardiwal, was astounded that the Pentagon planners of the battle for Tora Bora had failed to even consider the most obvious exit routes. He said: 'The border with Pakistan was the key, but no one paid any attention to it. And there were plenty of landing areas for helicopters had the Americans acted decisively. Al-Qa'eda escaped right out from under their feet.'..."
Daily Telegraph, 23 Feb 2002

"On August 26 [2001], FBI headquarters was notified by French intelligence that Moussaoui [Sept 11 hijacker suspect] had ties to the Al Qaeda organization and Osama bin Laden. Even this report did not spur the agency to action. A special counterterrorism panel of the FBI and CIA reviewed the information against him, but concluded there was insufficient evidence that he represented any threat, despite his refusal to answer questions and the French allegations. Moussaoui was not even transferred from INS detention to FBI custody until after September 11."
The strange case of Zacarias Moussaoui: FBI refused to investigate man charged in September 11 attacks
World Socialist Web Site, 5 Jan 2002

"But what of Bin Laden? He was originally offered for extradition by Sudan, but then apparently allowed to head for Afghanistan in 1996 with barely a whimper from the US. Here is the world's most wanted man, explaining how he acquired his substantial arsenal during the 1980s: 'I settled in Pakistan, in the Afghan border region. There I received volunteers, trained by Pakistani and American officers. The weapons were supplied by the Americans, the money by the Saudis'....."
Guardian, 18 December 2001

"[CIA] Director Tenet [is] the only Clinton holdover in the Bush cabinet...The real question here is: how could Tenet and the CIA screw up yet again? ... The final straw may very well be the 'escape' of Osama bin Laden, Dr. Al Zwahiri (Anwar Sadat's convicted assassin) and other al-Qaeda leaders. How - with every satellite, overflight, radio intercept and on-the-ground agent imaginable - could these criminals have crossed into a country that's a supposed ally? Especially an ally whom we have plied with money and debt relief since September 11?..."
Newmax.com 13 Dec 2001

"The Taliban's unprecedented offer to extradite bin Laden to a third country, well before the Sept. 11 attacks, was reported by the Times of London in February. In September, this newspaper reported on the often cozy relationship between Washington and the Taliban. Last month, the Washington Post reported that Sudan had offered in 1996 to extradite bin Laden, who was wanted at that time for attacks on U.S. servicemen in Saudi Arabia."
Toronto Star, 27 Nov 2001

"Pakistani fighters trapped in the besieged city of Konduz have been airlifted to safety in Pakistan with the apparent consent of the United States... The deserters are believed to have been joined by some retired soldiers, including operatives of Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s main spy agency....It is not thought that many of those who were flown back to Pakistan, including deserters, were detained on their return...."
US 'allows Pakistani fighters to escape'
London Times, 24 Nov 2001

"The fate of John O'Neill, the Irish-American FBI agent who for years led US investigations into Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network, is the most chilling revelation in the book Bin Laden: The Hidden Truth, published in Paris this week... He complained bitterly that the US State Department - and behind it the oil lobby who make up President Bush's entourage - blocked attempts to prove bin Laden's guilt..... In August 2001, O'Neill resigned in frustration and took up a new job as head of security at the World Trade Centre. He died in the September 11th attack... Bin Laden supported a fundamentalist group called al-Muqatila... Al-Muqatila wanted to assassinate Gadafy, whom it considered an infidel. According to the former MI5 agent David Shayler, British intelligence - also in league with al-Muqatila - tried to assassinate Gadafy in November 1996. It was because of British collaboration with al-Muqatila that the Interpol warrant [to arrest bin Laden] was ignored, Brisard says..."
US efforts to make peace summed up by 'oil'
Irish Times, 19 Nov 2001

"FBI and military intelligence officials in Washington say they were prevented for political reasons from carrying out full investigations into members of the Bin Laden family in the US before the terrorist attacks of September 11....the restrictions became worse after the Bush administration took over this year".
FBI claims Bin Laden inquiry was frustrated
London Guardian, 7 Nov 2001

"The main [September 11] suspect [Zacarias Moussaoui] in US custody .... had been picked up by immigration authorities in August but the FBI refused to let its field agents search his laptop computer which contained clues as to the September 11 mission....."
'FBI arrogance and secrecy dismays US'
London Times, 3 Nov 2001
(note this story appears to have been removed from the Times Web Site)

"Dubai, one of the seven emirates of the Federation of the United Arab Emirates, North-East of Abi-Dhabi. This city, population 350,000, was the backdrop of a secret meeting between Osama bin Laden and the local CIA agent in July. A partner of the administration of the American Hospital in Dubai claims that public enemy number one stayed at this hospital between the 4th and 14th of July..... While he was hospitalised, bin Laden received visits from many members of his family as well as prominent Saudis and Emiratis. During the hospital stay, the local CIA agent, known to many in Dubai, was seen taking the main elevator of the hospital to go to bin Laden's hospital room. A few days later, the CIA man bragged to a few friends about having visited bin Laden. Authorised sources say that on July 15th, the day after bin Laden returned to Quetta, the CIA agent was called back to headquarters. [i.e without attempting to arrest bin Laden, nlpwessex]... According to Arab diplomatic sources as well as French intelligence, very specific information was transmitted to the CIA with respect to terrorist attacks against American interests around the world, including on US soil. A DST report dated 7 September enumerates all the intelligence, and specifies that the order to attack was to come from Afghanistan."
The CIA met Bin Laden while undergoing treatment at an American Hospital last July in Dubai
Le Figaro, 11 October 2001

"Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.... he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban."
BBC Online, 18 September, 2001 :"'US 'planned attack on Taleban'"

July 2002 Update

"Afghans still marvel that 1,000 cars and lorries escaped in the night.... Locals still talk of the night-time escape, past the Bala Hissar fortress and south through the Logar Valley, when the advisers escaped US airstrikes. Mohammed Rahim, a local businessman, said that the al-Qaeda convoy arrived between November 1 and 15. 'We don’t understand how they weren’t all killed the night before because they came in a convoy of at least 1,000 cars and trucks,' he said. 'It was a very dark night, but it must have been easy for the American pilots to see the headlights.' The next evening the convoy moved on. 'The main road was jammed from eight in the evening until three in the morning.'..."
How bin Laden's huge convoy gave American forces the slip
London Times, 22 July 2002

"...In George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, the enemy of the state is personified in Emmanuel Goldstein. Goldstein is the Osama bin Laden figure of the novel, an elusive figure who is never seen, never captured but believed by all patriotic citizens of Oceania (Orwell's fictitious state, an amalgamation of North America and Europe) to be an evil genius bent on their destruction. Since Goldstein is never captured, Oceania's battle against him must never cease. Sometimes it wages war on one country said to be aiding the nefarious Goldstein, sometimes on another. The battleground may change but the war never ends. It cannot. The government's very existence depends upon it...."
Bush Counts On War Without End
Toronto Star, February 12, 2002

"While the United States is relentlessly bombing Afghanistan with the official aim of getting Osama bin Laden, one of bin Laden's top collaborators is running a terrorist training camp in an area of Kosovo that is under U.S. control."
'U.S. Protects Al-Qaeda Terrorists in Kosovo'
Executive Intelligence Review, 2 November 2001

"By joining hands with the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), which intelligence sources say bankrolls itself by selling heroin and cocaine, the United States also would become partners of a sort with Osama bin Laden, the international terrorist behind last year's bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the Washington Times reports. According to the newspaper's sources, the KLA is linked to an extensive organized crime network headquartered in Albania. In 1998 the State Department listed the KLA as an international terrorist organization that supported itself with drug profits and through loans from known terrorists like bin Laden.... 'They were terrorists in 1998 and now, because of politics, they're freedom fighters,' a top drug official told the Times."
THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, May 28, 1999

"The Pentagon has set up a covert unit to wage an information war that could include feeding false stories to foreign media, according to a report yesterday. A senior Pentagon official was quoted as saying that the information battle 'goes from the blackest of black programmes to the whitest of white'. The proposals appeared to have been leaked by Pentagon officials who fiercely oppose them and hope to ensure widespread outrage at home and abroad and increased scepticism about US statements on the War on Terror, especially in countries where they are expected to have an impact. As the Bush Administration attempts to build support for expanding the War on Terror, officials at the new Office of Strategic Influence are aiming to form opinion in friendly and unfriendly countries with carefully placed information that supports their case. Under plans that have yet to be approved by Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, disinformation, or 'black programmes', could be one of the weapons in the new campaign, The New York Times reported. It was unclear under what circumstances false news items would be relayed, but the plan is to influence public opinion and policymakers in the Middle East, Asia and even Western Europe....Among the suggestions are that the job of disseminating disinformation be undertaken by outside groups that reporters would not immediately realise were linked to the Pentagon.....One complication could be US laws that ban the Pentagon and CIA from undertaking propaganda activities in America. The Defence Department could fall foul of the law if stories placed by the unit are picked up by the American media and later found to have been false. In the 1970s CIA disinformation was picked up from the foreign media by American news organisations..... Victoria Clarke, the Pentagon spokeswoman, would not discuss the Office of Strategic Influence. "
Pentagon 'ready to lie' to win War on Terror
London Times, February 20, 2002

"The four recorders from the other two hijacked planes - American Airlines Flight 77, which was flown into the Pentagon and United Flight 93, which crashed near Somerset, Pa. - were recovered within days [but details of the recordings were not made public, nlpwessex]. FBI Director Robert Mueller said Flight 77's data recorder provided altitude, speed, headings and other information, but the voice recorder contained nothing useful [oh, yes? - nlpwessex]. He declined to say what was gleaned from recorders on Flight 93, whose passengers evidently fought the hijackers before the Boeing 757 went down in a field, killing all aboard."
Associated Press, 23 Feb 2002

"...[Dasquie]: 'Since March or April 2001 we had tracked this story, because just after the United Nations' decision against the Taliban, it was crazy to see Taliban leaders coming into Washington and having meetings. Christina Rocca arrived at the State Department in June, and we knew her background at the CIA; she had managed all the relations between the agency and Islamic groups in Central Asia. Since around June I have been focused on Rocca. We made requests. The embassy said it was impossible. ......We describe the meeting of Rocca and some Taliban leaders in Islamabad in August 2001. There are documents to support it. And at the same time in Washington there are lots of meetings of the energy policy task force and lots of oil company representatives around Dick Cheney. The task force's conclusion is that Central Asia oil is a very important goal. .....' "
Interview with salon.com by authors of 'bin Laden - The Forbiden Truth', 8 Feb 2002

"...by the time the third plane hit the Pentagon, nearly an hour after the first hit, hard questions were being asked: how could this have happened, why hadn’t air traffic controllers and the military done something?... To double-check our own understanding of the system, IEEE Spectrum asked an air traffic control expert, who requested anonymity... Procedures dictate that controllers alert the U.S. military when a hijacking is known to be under way. The typical response is for the Air Force to scramble intercept jets...."
'Hard Questions to Answer'
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
(Spectrum Online)

"At some point, when the nation has moved beyond grief and vengefulness, CIA Director George Tenet and FBI Director Robert Mueller will have to explain how the $10 billion-a-year anti-terror system failed...."
Time Magazine, 24 September 2001

Terrorist reprisals are all but certain now that the U.S. has launched its military campaign to 'eradicate' terrorism. For this reason, a proven solution to terrorism is especially urgent. Please follow the link below, read carefully, and act decisively. There is no other effective defense against terrorism.
Please click here