Wikileaks’ War Logs Highlight Global Intelligence Facade Of ‘War On Terror’

flashie
flashie: CIA funds ISI – ISI funds Taliban, Al Qaeda

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
Monday, Jul 26th, 2010

The Wikileaks Afghanistan War Logs, publicly released today, highlight and corroborate what we already know about the “war on terror” – it is a vast and decompartmentalised intelligence operation.

The London Guardian reports:

“A stream of U.S. military intelligence reports accuse Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spy agency of arming, training and financing the Taliban insurgency since 2004, the war logs reveal, bringing fresh scrutiny on one of the war’s most contentious issues.”

The reports are said to have been mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, prompting one senior U.S. intelligence officer to describe them as a mixture of “rumours, bullshit and second-hand information”.

However, it has been common knowledge for years that the ISI created the Taliban and Al Qaeda as we now know them, acting in its capacity as a direct front for U.S. intelligence.

Before 9/11, Pakistan worked directly with the CIA to create the Taliban in Afghanistan. Selig Harrison from the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars stated:

“The CIA made a historic mistake in encouraging Islamic groups from all over the world to come to Afghanistan. The U.S. provided $3 billion for building up these Islamic groups, and it accepted Pakistan’s demand that they should decide how this money should be spent.

The old associations between the intelligence agencies continue. The CIA still has close links with the ISI (Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence).

Today that money and those weapons have helped build up the Taliban, Harrison said. The Taliban are not just recruits from ‘madrassas’ (Muslim theological schools) but are on the payroll of the ISI. The Taliban are now “making a living out of terrorism.”
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: Harrison confirmed that the creation of the Taliban had been “actively encouraged by the ISI and the CIA and that Pakistan had been building up Afghan collaborators who would “sustain Pakistan”.

Al Qaeda was a joint CIA/ISI intelligence database of mujahudeen fighters they had recruited in the late 70s and eighties to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

It was later revealed via de-classified Defence Intelligence Agency documents of 2001 that the DIA was aware that the ISI was sponsoring the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the Bush Administration chose to ignore its findings.

B Raman, former additional secretary in the Cabinet Secretariat, analysed three recently de-classified DIA documents of 2001 relating to the Taliban and Al Qaeda and said, “From these documents, it is clear that the DIA knew of the ISI’s role in sponsoring not only the Taliban, but also the Al Qaeda.”
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: No surprise then that in 2003 two senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Richard G. Lugar, Republican of Indiana, and Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware (now vice president), went on record to state that Pakistan’s ISI was sheltering Taliban fighters along the border, thus undermining the stability of Afghanistan.

The Senators told the New York Times that there was evidence that ISI might be helping the Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives along the border infiltrate into Afghanistan.

Then in 2005 CIA officer Gary Schroen, who spearheaded U.S.’ search for Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, stated that ISI officials are very well aware of the whereabouts of the leadership of Al Qaeda, including Bin Laden himself.

The veteran CIA officer said that regardless of how much reward money America offers, “Bin Laden would not be captured and handed in” because the leadership of Pakistan, including Musharraf, are afraid of the internal political consequences.

Two days before 9/11, the leader of the Afghan Northern Alliance, Commander Ahmad Shah Masood, was assassinated. The Northern Alliance informed the Bush Administration that the ISI was allegedly implicated in the assassination, stating:

“A `Pakistani ISI-Osama-Taliban axis’ [was responsible] of 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,”
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: Thus the Afghans that would be fighting on the side of the U.S. in the upcoming war after 9/11 are on record with their belief that the ISI and Al Qaeda are intimately connected. Yet the Bush administration began operating with Pakistan and the ISI as an ally.

Not even the corporate media could whitewash these facts and so explained it away by alleging that U.S. officials had sought cooperation from Pakistan because it was the original backer of the Taliban, the hard-line Islamic leadership of Afghanistan accused by Washington of harboring Bin Laden.

Then the so called “missing link” came when it was revealed that the head of the ISI was the principal financier of the 9/11 hijackers.

In various terror attacks, alerts and foiled plots since 9/11, further links between Al Qaeda, the ISI and U.S. and British Intelligence have emerged.

As Professor Michel Chossudovsky has pointed out in his excellent expose, all these links are even corroborated by the House of Representatives International Relations Committee. A Statement in 2000 by Rep. Dana Rohrbacher, Hearing of The House International Relations Committee on “Global Terrorism And South Asia” highlighted that U.S. support funneled through the ISI to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden has been a consistent policy of the U.S. Administration since the end of the Cold War:

…[T]he United States has been part and parcel to supporting the Taliban all along, and still is let me add… You have a military government [of President Musharraf] in Pakistan now that is arming the Taliban to the teeth….Let me note; that [U.S.] aid has always gone to Taliban areas… We have been supporting the Taliban, because all our aid goes to the Taliban areas. And when people from the outside try to put aid into areas not controlled by the Taliban, they are thwarted by our own State Department… At that same moment, Pakistan initiated a major resupply effort, which eventually saw the defeat, and caused the defeat, of almost all of the anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: In July 2007, Tom Fingar of the office of the Director of National Intelligence told a Congressional hearing that he believed the Bush administration was allowing the leadership of Al Qaeda to operate freely in Pakistan and had chosen not to disrupt its activities.

“It’s not that we lack the ability to go into that space, but we have chosen not to do so without the permission of the Pakistani government.” Fingar said.

Fingar’s claims were supported by the revelation that a secret military operation in early 2005 to capture senior members of Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal areas was aborted at the last minute after top Bush administration officials decided it was too risky and could jeopardize relations with Pakistan.

“The U.S. has provided $5.6 billion in coalition support funds to Pakistan over the past five years, with zero accountability,” said Congressman Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., at the hearing.

“Why is Pakistan still being paid these large sums of money, even after publicly declaring that it is significantly cutting back patrols in the most important border area?” he asked.

Pakistan and the ISI is the go between of the global terror explosion. Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus, which literally created and sponsored the Taliban and Al Qaeda, is directly upheld and funded by the CIA. These facts are not even in dispute, neither in the media nor in government.

These facts were also recently highlighted by Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, who admitted that the CIA and his country’s ISI together created the Taliban and are still providing support.

The Taliban’s spread into Pakistan has also been connected to intelligence driven plots to Balkanize the middle East.

When a whistleblower, Qari Zainuddin, a tribal leader of the South Waziristan, who defected from the Pakistani Taliban claimed that the group was working with U.S. intelligence to destabilize the country, he was assassinated just days later.

Last November, the LA Times, citing current and former U.S. officials, reported that the CIA has paid millions of dollars to the ISI since 9/11, accounting for as much as one-third of the foreign spy agency’s annual budget, and that the funding, initiated covertly under Bush, has continued under Obama.

A major London School of Economics study, released last year, also highlighted the ongoing relationship between the ISI and the Taliban.

The Pakistani ISI is a CIA front and controls terror cells at the discretion of the highest levels of the U.S. military-industrial complex.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: There is a great need to perpetuate the mythical war on terror in order to maintain the pretext for the geopolitical genocide currently being undertaken by globalist advances into the middle east “rogue” (independent) nations.

As our governments assert that they are doing everything in their power to dismantle the global terror network, the reality is the exact opposite. The criminal intelligence networks assembled it, they sponsored it and they continue to fund it using our tax dollars. As any good criminal should, they have a middleman to provide plausible deniability. That middleman is the ISI and the military dictatorship of Pakistan.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: dave you might need a bong after this and fog you might want to hand your rifle in and get a job as a gas pump attendant somewhere warm bro
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: no reptiles black birds pentagrams or icke here
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: There is a great need to perpetuate the mythical war on terror in order to maintain the pretext for the geopolitical genocide currently being undertaken by globalist advances into the middle east “rogue” (independent) nations.
13 years ago Report
0
FogofWar
FogofWar: "However, it has been common knowledge for years that the ISI created the Taliban and Al Qaeda as we now know them, acting in its capacity as a direct front for U.S. intelligence."

This isn't clearly known, and it is not shown in the reports; this is a personal theory of your own. Do not pass bias on the reports based on personal opinions Flashie; this is what causes media sources to be discredible.


"Before 9/11, Pakistan worked directly with the CIA to create the Taliban in Afghanistan. Selig Harrison from the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars stated:

“The CIA made a historic mistake in encouraging Islamic groups from all over the world to come to Afghanistan. The U.S. provided $3 billion for building up these Islamic groups, and it accepted Pakistan’s demand that they should decide how this money should be spent."

yet again, you mix personal emotion and opinion in with truths. In the 1980s, the US encouraged Islamic parties to stand up against the Soviet Union; and for those who are unaware of how the Mujahadeen started their fight against Soviet communist rule, it was in exile in Pakistan.


"Today that money and those weapons have helped build up the Taliban, Harrison said"

...and that's why the Taliban is using Soviet weapons right?


"Harrison confirmed that the creation of the Taliban had been “actively encouraged by the ISI and the CIA and that Pakistan had been building up Afghan collaborators who would “sustain Pakistan”."

Actually, that was the creation of the Mujahadeen, NOT the Taliban; and that did help sustain Pakistan, as it prevented communist takeover of them as well by keeping the USSR out!


"Al Qaeda was a joint CIA/ISI intelligence database of mujahudeen fighters they had recruited in the late 70s and eighties to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan."

Strange Flashie; I have read through Wikileaks.org's report; and nowhere was that stated anywhere. The fact that you cannot report confirmed facts without adding personal suspicions is why you never made it as an actual reporter.


"It was later revealed via de-classified Defence Intelligence Agency documents of 2001 that the DIA was aware that the ISI was sponsoring the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the Bush Administration chose to ignore its findings."

The wikileaks released reports were from *******10; how can this 2001 document be in there?


"The Senators told the New York Times that there was evidence that ISI might be helping the Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives along the border infiltrate into Afghanistan."

Yet, The NEW YORK TIMES says that the documents only show that a short time ago there was "LESS HARMONY BETWEEN THE US AND PAKISTAN."


"Then in 2005 CIA officer Gary Schroen, who spearheaded U.S.’ search for Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, stated that ISI officials are very well aware of the whereabouts of the leadership of Al Qaeda, including Bin Laden himself."

and in 2005, Pakistan was not in the fight against the Taliban like we were; since they were essentially acting neutral; there was nothing to do.


"Thus the Afghans that would be fighting on the side of the U.S. in the upcoming war after 9/11 are on record with their belief that the ISI and Al Qaeda are intimately connected. Yet the Bush administration began operating with Pakistan and the ISI as an ally."


"The Northern Alliance informed the Bush Administration that the ISI was allegedly implicated in the assassination, stating:"

Note the word ALLEGEDLY!

Allegedly: (adverb)

Used to convey that something is claimed to be the case or have taken place, although there is no proof.

(oxford dictionary)


All I did was post your own quote there Flashie; you just disproved your own "evidence". Perhaps you shouldn't assume your ALLEGATIONS are facts!
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: im only on 1st para so bear with me fog. dont blow a fuse i almost did tonight...

fog its steve watsons opinion.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: im just playing advocate now, but 'Actually, that was the creation of the Mujahadeen, NOT the Taliban' arent we actually just talking about generations of afghani soldiers/fighters. i mean mujahidin isnt a word exclusive to afghani peeps, its arabic word used to describe fighters not from any particular country?

maybe an arabic speaker can confirm
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: fog chill out. i did write as staff writer for a playstation mag for a while. kinda blagged that tho. im a landscape gardener btw.

and if you notice the top of my posts its a journo called steve watson who works for alex jones who wrote this not me.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: im not assuming anything just presenting alternative opinions to ponder on.
im quite happy to research steve watsons claims further to see if its hype or not.
13 years ago Report
0
FogofWar
FogofWar: "Not even the corporate media could whitewash these facts and so explained it away by alleging that U.S. officials had sought cooperation from Pakistan because it was the original backer of the Taliban, the hard-line Islamic leadership of Afghanistan accused by Washington of harboring Bin Laden."

The Mujahadeen was formed within Pakistan; NOT the Taliban. The Taliban emerged out of SOME members of the Mujahadeen. Quit twisting facts and posting half truths and allegations as proof Flashie.


"Then the so called “missing link” came when it was revealed that the head of the ISI was the principal financier of the 9/11 hijackers."

Nowhere to be found in any of the documents released on wikileaks.


"As Professor Michel Chossudovsky has pointed out in his excellent expose, all these links are even corroborated by the House of Representatives International Relations Committee. A Statement in 2000 by Rep. Dana Rohrbacher, Hearing of The House International Relations Committee on “Global Terrorism And South Asia” highlighted that U.S. support funneled through the ISI to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden has been a consistent policy of the U.S. Administration since the end of the Cold War:"

The Taliban and al Queda didn't emerge until the end of the Cold War, and the US funding to members of both that fought with the Mujahadeen happened during the Cold War. This is like saying that the US is responsible for Stalin because we fought alongside him against Hitler.

"At that same moment, Pakistan initiated a major resupply effort, which eventually saw the defeat, and caused the defeat, of almost all of the anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan."

Almost all? The "anti-Taliban" forces in Afghanistan are at their highest ever, numbering into the hundreds of thousands. Currently, the ANA is 160 units of 5 ground corps, spread regionally throughout Afghanistan, and one air corps.

http://www.afghanconflictmonitor.org/securityforces.html

The ANA is working to achieve their 134 000 soldier expansion as we speak. Far from almost defeated.


"“It’s not that we lack the ability to go into that space, but we have chosen not to do so without the permission of the Pakistani government.” Fingar said."

In other words, the US doesn't want to INVADE Pakistan....aren't you against the US "invading" the Middle East anyways Flashie?????


"Fingar’s claims were supported by the revelation that a secret military operation in early 2005 to capture senior members of Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal areas was aborted at the last minute after top Bush administration officials decided it was too risky and could jeopardize relations with Pakistan."

It was a US Navy SEALS mission; and it cost the life of one of the men; this was not in the report however; as the report was not of top secret information; thus no Special Operations information was present.


"Pakistan and the ISI is the go between of the global terror explosion. Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus, which literally created and sponsored the Taliban and Al Qaeda, is directly upheld and funded by the CIA. These facts are not even in dispute, neither in the media nor in government."

The REAL facts aren't in dispute; but you have chosen to neglect the REAL facts Flashie.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: i just remembered what that ex cia dude said on the youtube vid i posted a while back.

he said if its a choice between conspiracy and incompetence, he'd choose incompetence.

youre not sold on the notion that elites are duping us all are you fog? it just isnt possible that all of this is a shady op for the new world order?

if not then what is it? a labratory of death for psychopaths? a game? the report said the cover ups came from the ground up, its not good news and my mind keeps flashing the pics of that american woman who had the arab guy on a lead like a dog and all those other ugly pics that leaked years ago. wtf is going on over there.. now we know.

remember months ago when i posted about female soldiers getting raped by males queueing for the toilets on u.s. bases? and you said it was nonsense but Jack chimed in what id posted was credible?

it was only days ago david and others were talking about islam being the worlds most evil religion and why dont muslims speak out against it.

well, us westerners have that freedom apparently so maybe we should practise what we preach and lead by example
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: chill out bro.

i keep saying its a news article not somthing i made up. ask steve watson, i cant speak for him.

'The Mujahadeen was formed within Pakistan; NOT the Taliban. The Taliban emerged out of SOME members of the Mujahadeen. Quit twisting facts and posting half truths and allegations as proof Flashie.'

again its fact twisting talking about mujahidin like theyre some branded army im pretty sure mujahidin are any muslim fighters defending muslim soil.

bro, i dont have any desire or need to twist or post ANY half truths. what do you take me for? you think ive got some agenda? my only agenda is distingushing shit from shinola.

WHAT DO I NEED TO TWIST DISTORT OR HALF TRUTH AFTER WIKI DROPPED THIS TODAY? ITS FROM THE HORSES MOUTH, LIKE THE PHOTOS OF IRAQIS BEING HUMILIATED AND TORTURED. I DONT HAVE TO EXPLAIN ANYTHING, THE ARMY IS DOING A GOOD ENOUGH JOB NO?

please man, youre a reasonable dude, dont jump into this, im actually interested in what you think about the report generally not after a war
13 years ago Report
0
davidk14
davidk14: Flashie,
I….I….I….OMG. At first I was going to just jump your shit because I thought were out of your mind. I decided to wait and see. I was watching O’Reilly tonight and a segment came up regarding these leaked documents. We knew a lot of the leaked material but what we, or should I say I, davidk14, did not think would be possible, that the US government would be in bed with the Pakistani ISI with the knowledge that they were supporting our enemies.

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a very well respected commentator, came on O’Reilly as a guest and just went ballistic. He said that he has been for years telling people of these Pakistani abuses and that we, “…wed a vile, unfaithful and duplicitous partner” referring to Pakistan. He is positive that Pakistan is hiding Bin Laden. He is just sick that not only the Bush administration but the Obama administration knew all of these issues but hid them from the American public. We are in a political mess there but the worst part is that we are funding a government that funnels funds, military supplies to the terrorists that are killing our troops. Not only that, but Pakistan allows war materials from N. Korea and Iran to make their way to the terrorists as well.

I’m very weary of conspiracy theories and stuff like that, but when facts like what was leaked to the New York Times and other media outlets which support these theories, I just go nuts. Although I have reservations about pulling out for what this might do to US troops in the future, I just can’t see losing more troops to a cause that has been compromised.

There isn’t a commander that would commit troops to a theatre of operations knowing that the enemy is being funded and supplied weapons…. by his own government. Just doesn’t make any sense.

Damn politicians.


.
13 years ago Report
1
flashie
flashie: im against any illegal violence fog. whether its u.s. invading middle east or al qaeda or mossad killing civilians.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: hello david.

so its imcompetence? whats up with this report? if theres no conspiring
13 years ago Report
0
FogofWar
FogofWar: Flashie, next time you should try going directly to the source; instead of taking the story from second hand sources.


The wikileaks reports released were more than 91,000 documents revealing details of CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS between the Pakistani military and Afghan insurgents. They describe acounts of corruption, brutality and kidnapping by members of the AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE. There is a report of a Taliban using a heat-seeking missile to down a helicopter in 2007, possibly killing a Canadian soldier.

"The reports cover most units from the US Army with the exception of most US Special Forces' activities. The reports do not generally cover top secret operations or European and other ISAF Forces operations."

taken directly from the source:

http://www.wikileaks.com/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_*******10


The reports show times, locations and even serial numbers from vehicles hit by IEDs on roads, as well as successful missile attacks against helicopters, and crash locations.

The wikileaks reports were, according to Julian Assange, founder of wikileaks.com, to show of the "war crimes" he believes have been committed. Julian Assange's actions should be seen as a crime all on their own.

The reports of supposed torture and abuse occurring by insurgents handed over to Afghan National Police is not new. These reports have been a debate in Ottawa here in Canada for a number of years. There has been ongoing cases about just that; and what should have, and could be done about it. One must also remember the emotion involved in war. These insurgents being handed over are known for committing crimes against the families of the very members of the Afghan National Police that are detaining them. How would you act if you arrested the man who blew your son up in front of you?

The information in these reports that is new is the locations of IED hits; the vehicles hit; their make, serial number, time and date, extent of damage, casualty reports, direction of travel, etc.

The location of IEDs tells the Taliban exactly which IED took out the vehicle. The Taliban uses several different models of IEDs; and knowing which ones have taken out vehicles tells them which model of IEDs are most effective. What type of vehicles tells them what armour the IED was facing, the extent of damage; how effective the blast was, the time and date; when our convoys are en route, and the direction and location gives them our routes.

Thanks to these reports; the Taliban now have official records of their success and failures; our routes of travel; and effectiveness of armour.

Thanks to the a~^x%~*x on wikileaks; our soldiers are now facing even more danger.

We risk our lives to protect your right to free speech; and these a%@x~x&z used that right to kill more of our soldiers fighting for that right.

There are some things that are not meant to be released to the public; and when you see tens more 18 to 20 year old boys coming home in body bags; you'll understand why!
13 years ago Report
1
flashie
flashie: There isn’t a commander that would commit troops to a theatre of operations knowing that the enemy is being funded and supplied weapons…. by his own government. Just doesn’t make any sense.

^ever heard of compartmentalise ? why would they need to inform the commander that?

but damn the politicians? now youre getting it. sorta. how about puppet politicians? lets not make them the scapegoats wont the devil be happy if we do that. it goes above politicians dont you think david?
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: 'How would you act if you arrested the man who blew your son up in front of you?'

i wouldnt send a gunship up to kill random reporters and cilvilains and rejoice in the gunner saying 'go on just grab the gun' like the wikileak vid before, i wouldnt round up some civilians and take photos of them performing mock swy acts and ask a colleague to pose grinning thumbs up, nor would i send cowardly drones via a ps2 controller to do the job for me and i certainly wouldnt advocate suicide bombings either.
13 years ago Report
0
FogofWar
FogofWar: "im just playing advocate now, but 'Actually, that was the creation of the Mujahadeen, NOT the Taliban' arent we actually just talking about generations of afghani soldiers/fighters."


No. The Mujahadeen were a group of men that fought Soviet forces in Afghanistan from throughout the 1980s. The word Mujahadeen means "holy warrior", and any person who took up arms to fight the Soviet invasion forces was called this. Thus, the Mujahadeen is no more a word than soldier. Because I am a soldier, does not mean that I am in the same organization as the North Korean soldiers. There were many organizations within the Mujahadeen; and the one that Osama bin Laden was involved with was a Saudi based group that the US did NOT in fact deal with. The organizations the US dealt with fought WITH bin Laden, as in on his side, but not FOR bin Laden. The Mujahadeen was to Afghanistan what the Allies were to Nazi Germany. A Canadian soldier did not fight FOR Stalin; but he did fight side by side with Soviet soldiers. This is no different.

In 1990, after the USSR had already left; an organization within the Mujahadeen formed the Taliban, under rule of Mohammed Omar. What you do not understand is that the vast majority of the Mujahadeen (What the US supported in Operation Cyclone), formed the Northern Alliance that you spoke of; the group that has been fighting AGAINST the Taliban since their annexation of power in 1996. So if you want to make the claim that the US "indirectly funded the Taliban", then you must also admit that the US "indirectly gave birth to, and funded the organization that resisted the Taliban".

"i mean mujahidin isnt a word exclusive to afghani peeps, its arabic word used to describe fighters not from any particular country?"

Like the word soldier is to us.
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: 'We risk our lives to protect your right to free speech; and these az$@y@#@ used that right to kill more of our soldiers fighting for that right.'

no one in afghanistan or sadams iraq was threatening our freedom of speech.
how on earth are any muslims (unless theyre invading on a grand scale, like the west done- which isnt possible) a threat to our freedom of speech fog?
13 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: yes thats what i meant its meaning soldier, there was muhajids in croatia sure.

i hope so too, someone has a right to protect their own soil?
13 years ago Report
0
Page: 123