It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is General Ahmad to people what WTC7 is to buildings on 9/11?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 01:56 AM
So many things happened on 9/11, prior to 9/11 and in it's aftermath. To say that the whole situation concerning the events of that day were and are confusing and complex seems like an understatement.

Despite that, one event caught the attention of a lot of people and caused a great deal of extraordinary puzzlement. That was the collapse of WTC7. Larry Silverstein's explanation for the collapse of that building did nothing more than beg numerous other questions. It was a little like David Copperfield having a wardrobe malfunction in the middle of one of his illusions. It threw everything else into question, even among the 'innocent lambs' in the back row.

Innocuous and comparatively little, WTC7 started to overhadow the awful grandeur of the main event, the collapse of the twin towers. WTC7 became an integral force in the minds of people questioning the official version of 9/11. The collapse of WTC7 became of paramount importance for truth seekers.

My question: "Is Genera Ahmad of Pakistan's ISI, the WTC7 among people connected to the events of that day?" Is he the weakest link at the lynchpin holding the whole fraud together?

The FBI confirmed in late September, in an interview with ABC News (which went virtually unnoticed) that the 9-11 ring leader, Mohammed Atta, had been financed from unnamed sources in Pakistan:

"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 . . . "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 hijacker's high commander, the money men, the planners and the mastermind."

The FBI had information on the money trail. They knew exactly who was financing the terrorists. Less than two weeks later, the findings of the FBI were confirmed by Agence France Presse (AFP) and the Times of India, quoting an official Indian intelligence report (which had been dispatched to Washington). According to these two reports, the money used to finance the 9-11 attacks had allegedly been "wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan, by Ahmad Umar Sheikh, at the instance of [ISI Chief] General Mahmoud [Ahmad]." 10 According to the AFP (quoting the intelligence source):

"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."

If the 9-11 Commission is really looking for a smoking gun, it should look no further than at Lieutenant-General Mahmoud Ahmad, the director of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) at the time.

In early October 2001, Indian intelligence learned that Mahmoud had ordered flamboyant Saeed Sheikh - the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl - to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of hijacker Mohamed Atta's two bank accounts in Florida. ...

Mahmoud's involvement in September 11 might be dismissed as only Indian propaganda. But Indian intelligence swears by it, and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed the whole story: Indian intelligence even supplied Saeed's cellular-phone numbers. Nobody has bothered to check what really happened. The 9-11 Commission should pose very specific questions about it to FBI director Robert Mueller when he testifies this month.

If it can be shown that General Ahmad wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta in the days leading up to 9/11 is he not indictable as a co-conspirator in the "terrorist attack?" And here is the key point: Is he not indictable EVEN ACCEPTING THE "OFFICIAL" VERSION? If so, why has he not been indicted? Why have numerous administration apologists not called for his indictment? Does anybody remember Manuel Noriega?

9/11 truthers, focus. Call for the indictment of General Ahmad. He is the human equivalent to WTC7.

[edit on 26-6-2007 by ipsedixit]

posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:21 PM
Yes he is. Thankyou for pointing that out.

Since there is little likelihood that the crew in charge of the American judicial system will issue an extradition order, I suggest that, cap in hand, right thinking Americans, Truthers and Bushwackers alike, approach the Spanish Supreme Court, indictors of ex-Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, and request them to issue an order for the arrest of General Ahmad, since his victim country is still too punch drunk to think of it themselves.

Incidentally, wonderful thread. Kudos to you. Keep up the good work.

posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 05:11 PM
I know how you feel ipsedixit. I will offer thoughts -

IF Ahmad wired $100,000 to Atta, this shows SOMETHING - another red carpet rolled out, this time by a top Pakistani. The US also rolled out the carpet for these guys, turning a blind eye every chance possible, even as Atta trained to fly in Florida under Jeb Bush's watch. Was Ahmad then involved in an anti-American plane to have the US attacked, and wa then brazen enough to kick it with top Congressional intel guys on the in DC on the very morning of that attack to rub slat in the wound? He was undeniably here on 9/11, the ISI does have a cose relationship with al Qaeda, but the wire transfer, from what I"ve heard, is based on Indian intelligence sources, in a good spot to see such things or to make them up.

There's been a lot of talk of Saudi involvement too, and the impression that the US unequivocally backs these regies feeds into the cover-up menttality - I find it more likely the coverup meme re: Pakistan and Arabia (not necc. "Saudi" forever) is somehow engineered, a series of blank-check threats tying these two Islamic nations tentatively to 9/11 - it might help them stay in line with the US knowing they're only a few steps from being declared enemy states. Recall that we're in a multi-decade struggle here agains vrious Arab and Muslim bad guys, and having a sword draped with a veil to the throats of the top oil-producing nation and religious hub of the Arab world (Saudi arabia), and the only nuclear-armed Muslim country (Pakistan), might be highly useful...

In short, I don't know about Gen. Ahmad's personal motives, but would advise against jumping to overly-obvious conclusions.

posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 07:19 PM
Thanks for the response CausticLogic. I think that the situation between the US government(s) and it's various clients/servants/business partners overseas is every bit as nuanced as you suggest and one would be ill advised to move to hasty conclusions. And certainly any evidence supplied by India would have to be looked at carefully.

My point however is also a subtle one.

When you look at the controversy surrounding 9/11, i.e.: the official theory of the 19 highjackers versus the various alternative theories usually amounting to some degree of insider culpability, people divide into those who support the government's story or who attack it.

There is some suggestion in the press that the story of General Ahmad's involvement in wiring Atta the money IS part of the government version of the events of that day, at least if it were to be written by the FBI.

The odd thing about this is that there have been no calls for Ahmad's extradition. Now, I realize that some people on the goverment's side in all of this are there because if the government is the chief perpetrator, though not in on the scam, they approve of what the government has done, think America needs the oil and think 3000 dead New Yorkers is the price of continued American dominance.

The people described above , ironically, agree with Alex Jones' or Webster Tarpley's version of events, but they are complicit in the crime and they are certainly not going to call for the extradition of Ahmad.

Another group of thinkers know that the intelligence services of the world play complex games that don't have rules. These people trust the government and believe the wheels of American justice will eventually get all the perps no matter where they are. They are willing to give Uncle Sam the time he needs. They are not going to call for the extradition of Ahmad.

The next, and I have to think, the largest of the groups are ordinary Americans who never think much about politics and pitch in and send their kids off to war when called upon. This is the group who I would have expected to be screaming for Ahmad's extradition. This is the group that Bill O'Reilly rants to every night. If you believe in truth, justice and the American way, you call for this sucker's (Ahmad's) extradition and you put him on trial and put him away and go after the next one until you get them all.

But it's not happening. Nobody is calling for Ahmad's head. Why?

Two reasons, I believe:
1.] Most of them have never heard of Ahmad. Most of them don't know anything about anything except their own families, jobs and hobbies. Certainly neocon fellow travellers (like O'Reilly) in the media are not going to clue them in on Ahmad's importance, which is that HE IS THE ONLY POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED AND REACHABLE 9/11 PERP.

2.) The second reason is the interesting one. These ordinary people are scared. They know something is wrong. They are like a herd of antelope or a school of fish that hesitates, waiting for a leader to choose a new direction for them, which they will then plunge into as brainlessly as they did every other move in their lives. All in all, this group will not call for the extradition of Ahmad unless that call is made by someone else first..

That brings me to the last group of people, the 9/11 Truth movement. I think that because the 9/11 story is so big and the movement so fractured, the significance of the (now retired) Pakistani general is not widely understood.

In a room full of felons he just looks like another felon. His uniqueness is that he is the only perp that everybody agrees is a perp. If you can make that case to the mainstream, then you can enlist the weight of the mainstream to further what should be the Truth Movement's agenda, i.e.: to get Ahmad into court where he can start spilling the beans on the administration perps.

Hence the analogy to WTC 7. Of all the buildings on 9/11 you get the most traction with the most people talking about that building. Same with General Ahmad. He becomes the toe that gets the prosecutorial bodies in the administration's door.

One of the biggest mysteries of this whole story to me is that no one on any side of the issue has called for his extradition. This, to me, is almost beyond belief, but it is true.

[edit on 23-7-2007 by ipsedixit]

posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 09:36 PM
why did he need $100k?....i understand needing a bit of money for plane tickets....but they were cheaper pre 9-11

unless that article i read about they having inside people working for AA, having them plant the weapons they needed on the plane was accurate....

some people dont believe that 9-11 was commited by terrorists...and in order for them to go with this...they'd have to admit there was at least one....

edit for clarity

[edit on 23-7-2007 by wenfieldsecret]

edit for stupidity

[edit on 23-7-2007 by wenfieldsecret]

posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 12:27 AM
Why he needed the $100K is a good question. It's food for investigative thought. It would be interesting to know how the money was spent, on whom it was spent.

What interests me even more is why General Ahmad chose to direct Saeed Sheik (al Quaida affiliate) to wire the money instead of arranging the payment in a more subtle way, or why General Ahmad was using a cell phone to communicate a sensitive directive like that. Wouldn't a public service announcement be just as effective?

Quoting the Asian Times (

Mahmoud's (My own note: Mahmoud is General Ahmad) involvement in September 11 might be dismissed as only Indian propaganda. But Indian intelligence swears by it, and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed the whole story: Indian intelligence even supplied Saeed's cellular-phone numbers. Nobody has bothered to check what really happened. The 9-11 Commission should pose very specific questions about it to FBI director Robert Mueller when he testifies this month.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

This is the kind of thing the Indian secret service would jump on with glee. (Long time US ally and pain in India's ass, Pakistan, uses some of that generous American military aid money to assist in savaging New Yorkers.)

Is General Ahmad that stupid? It might be well here to remember that Pakistani politics is a full contact sport. It's not like running for office in my home town or likely yours. I doubt that Ahmad is anything but razor sharp, which is not saying that he is a renaissance man or anything but rather, a top dog hooligan. So what's going on?

One possibility is that for some operational reason, things happened just as the Indian security services said and Ahmad was caught out because he didn't know that the Indian secret service had Saeed Sheik's cell number.

Another possibility is that as a favor to or perhaps at the specific request of, let's say, and I know that it's an obviously preposterous notion, the Vice President of the United States, Pakistan's ISI decided to make it clear to anyone investigating 9/11 that Mohammed Atta was in the employ of al Quaida.

Now this is where the ISI's own interests come into play. ISI thinking would go something like this:

Yes, yes, yes, of course we will be pleased to assist Mr. Cheney, but let's be just a little clumsy about it so that we will be discovered to have played a part, a very ambiguous part, yes, but a part nonetheless in the savaging of New Yorkers. Our own crazy Islamic fundamentalists will think that we are good fellows and will go back to their prayer rugs.

ISI thinking would continue: The wonderful thing about this is that we will have assisted our powerful and dangerous ally, the US, in their crazy machinations and we will have soothed and pacified the lunatics yapping at our heels at home, in one stroke.

Continuing: The beauty and humor of it is that we will have done it by being clumsy foreigners. What is that one word that illiterate American scientists use for everything? Yes, elegant. It is elegant. And what is more, these stupid oafs will have to shield us from their own justice system, because if they allow us to be indicted, we will just tell the truth, that the money was sent at the request of . . . ah, elegant.

I think the American people would want to talk to General Ahmad. I think they would have some serious questions for him.

[edit on 24-7-2007 by ipsedixit]

[edit on 24-7-2007 by ipsedixit]

posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 02:24 AM
i didnt follow all that well....

so you're saying that the general knew something was going down and wired the monies for the future benefit of it?...but what....?

and still what does he need 100k for?

posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 06:11 AM
You should try to get hold of the video, Mohammed Atta and the Venice Flying Circus. It would make a lot of what I'm saying more intelligible. What I wrote is very clear. You should just reread it until you take it all in. It's better for you if I don't spoon feed you.

As far as the money goes, I don't know if it is known whether Atta even knew it had been sent, let alone accessed it. In reality the money is most likely unimportant. The important thing is the electronic trail put down like breadcrumbs to lead from Atta to Sheik and on to ISI (their little joke on . . . someone.)

posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:21 AM
Having allowed some time to pass since last posting it also occurred to me that General Ahmad's clumsiness might be indicative of another kind of ambiguity. It might have been intended as an attempt to throw a monkey wrench into the long range plans of the neocons. The Pakistanis can hardly be supposed to be sympathetic to the aspirations of their stalwart friends in the Bush administration. Another fillip of "elegance" to add to the meaning of that cell phone call.

Also, can't you just hear them chortling in ISI headquarters as they revel in the idea that it was the "alertness" of the Indian secret service that functioned as the on switch for their little gambit. The general was probably forced to buy his fellow officers dinner to offset his unseemly brilliance. The esteemed general probably pauses, in retirement, to smile now and then at the thought of a coup like that.

Let's go over the effects of that one cell phone call (in reality it was probably more than one call.):

1. To provide assistance in response to a request from the American clandestine services to tie Atta in an obvious way to al Qaida, thereby fulfilling the obligations of an ally and long time friend.

2. To provide proof to one's own lunatic fringe that one is sympathetic to their views and is doing what one can to participate in the great game of tying Uncle Sam's shoelaces in knots.

3. To plant a clue that will unmask the 9/11 operation as an inside job in order to prevent long term implementation of the aspirations of the "project for the new american century."

4. To bitch slap the Indian secret service just because it's so much fun to do it.

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 01:23 PM
Thanks for posting this. It's very helpful. While it's about Pakistani ISI, and 911 -- it got me thinking (that and the old James Bond movie, 'The World Is Not Enough'), is if Russian intelligence actually reports to City of London, as does CIA and BND and MI-5/6.

How did I get here from there?

Brown Brothers, Harriman financed the Bolshevik revolution and Hitler and the U.S. and Great Britain in all it's wars during this century, and well as supplying arms and technology and financial transfers and 'acceptance trades' to Soviet Russia.

BBH is a shareholder of BOE and FED.

Sutton says Skull & Bones finances war and revolution in order to control.

Therefore, since we all at ATS primarily agree WTC/911 was an inside job, and that there are moles (triple-agents) infiltrating (or selling out) every intelligence agency -- to what extent are Brown Brothers Harriman/Rockefeller/Halliburton/Kroll/NWO/New American Century folks/and the nationally Sovereign City of London international 'acceptance bankers' (who create their own money with a signature) immune, i.e. how do we get a voice in the media to communicate with the mass of mankind?

Any thoughts?

posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 03:10 PM
reply to post by counterterrorist

Thanks for posting to this thread. I've been wondering for a while now how many views it had received and was too lazy to painstakingly hunt for it through page after page of 9/11 threads. 382 views. Wow. I've noticed on ATS a lot of threads are viewed in inverse proportion to the importance of the issues discussed in them. I think this is one of those threads.

I remember when I first posted the OP, it was almost a month before anybody bothered to post on the issue raised, i.e. why hadn't General Ahmad been extradited, or even questioned. I finally had to bump the thread in my own comical clown style and finally did get a response. Most of the other posts in the thread turned out to be mine.

That tells you something. People on the truther side of the issue don't seem to realise how important Ahmad is to the 9/11 story and don't want anything to do with him. People on the Bushwhacker side of the 9/11 story do realise how important Ahmad is to the 9/11 story and don't want to have anything to do with him. At least we all agree on one thing. Forget about Ahmad.

You ask "how do we get a voice in the media to communicate with the mass of mankind?" For one thing, we wait until Bushelzebub leaves office. There is a chance that things will open up a little then. Of course even if we had the chance to communicate with the mass of mankind, chances are that that august body would do nothing anyway. A charismatic truther leader that people can't ignore would be nice, but as far as I can see, that person doesn't exist, no offense to Alex Jones.

With the exception of a few brave souls in Hollywood, all your touchy feely righteous activists in celebrityville have kept their big fat publicity loving pie holes shut. We need gutsy people who know how to get attention. MLK types, Gandhi types, Saul Alinsky types, people with ideals, balls of steel and a gift of gab. They are rare.

[edit on 1-8-2008 by ipsedixit]

posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 04:37 PM
I saw this story on Alex Jones infowars site and thought I would include it here as an update on Pakistan's sneakiest general, the inimitable Mahmood Ahmad. Apparently Joe Biden met with Ahmad on 9/13/01.

The following excerpt from the story, if true, bolsters what has already been written in this thread.

It is common knowledge that Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, going under the name Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad, sent about $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta, a fact confirmed by Dennis Lormel, director of FBI’s financial crimes unit. (ipsedixit emphasis) Former Pakistani president Purvez Musharraf told the London Times Sheikh was recruited by MI6, took an active part in demonstrations against the Serbs in relation to their role in Bosnia, was sent Kosovo to join the jihad alongside Harkat ul-Ansar, later Harkat ul-Mujahedeen, and attended ISI training camps. Muslim convert Aukai Collins, who fought with Islamic Chechen irregulars, claims Harkat ul-Ansar received support from Osama bin Laden, the documented CIA asset.

[edit on 24-8-2008 by ipsedixit]

top topics


log in