PDA

View Full Version : Pakistan ISI and Atta


Docker
23rd October 2006, 11:25 AM
This appears to be the biggest smoking gun in the whole 9/11 affair.
The money man, Mahmood, was having a cosy meeting in Washington while thousands of people died in an operation he funded.

He has never even been questioned by the FBI. Very tellingly, the 911 Commision claimed the funding was of little importance. I find this astounding

MikeW
23rd October 2006, 11:26 AM
The money man, Mahmood, was having a cosy meeting in Washington while thousands of people died in an operation he funded.
Please tell us your evidence for him being the "money man" and funding the operation.

Docker
23rd October 2006, 11:33 AM
Please tell us your evidence for him being the "money man" and funding the operation.

The FBI admits it. Besides, the mere suggestion of it should arouse some sort of investigation.

I went to 911myths and they just danced round the issue and did'nt refute it. The 911 Commision never looked at it. New investigation needed

Donal
23rd October 2006, 11:33 AM
And exactly why would he place himself at the scene of the crime with his fellow conspirators? It seems to me that people trying to pull this sort of thing off should be distancing themselves from each other. Please explain why him being in Washington has any significance at all.

MikeW
23rd October 2006, 11:34 AM
The FBI admits it.
Link?

The 911 Commision never looked at it.
How do you know that?

chacal
23rd October 2006, 11:35 AM
"The FBI admits it" means in CT that Alex Jones said that "it's all admitted" and he's never wrong.

Docker
23rd October 2006, 11:36 AM
And exactly why would he place himself at the scene of the crime with his fellow conspirators? It seems to me that people trying to pull this sort of thing off should be distancing themselves from each other. Please explain why him being in Washington has any significance at all.

Criminals often visit the scene of their crime. I just find it an insult to the families that this man has never been questioned and the inquiry they had to lobby for thought the funding of 9/11 was insignificant.

Docker
23rd October 2006, 11:38 AM
Link?


How do you know that?

It says in the report that they considered the funding was of little importance. The funding of the worst terrorist attack in history isn't a big deal?

DavidJames
23rd October 2006, 11:39 AM
It says in the report that they considered the funding was of little importance. The funding of the worst terrorist attack in history isn't a big deal?

You've been asked multiple times now to support your claims, please do so.

chacal
23rd October 2006, 11:41 AM
It says in the report that they considered the funding was of little importance. The funding of the worst terrorist attack in history isn't a big deal?

The Jones Report?

MikeW
23rd October 2006, 11:41 AM
It says in the report that they considered the funding was of little importance.
That is not evidence that they didn't look into the issue. Do you have any?

Pardalis
23rd October 2006, 11:44 AM
Hi Docker.

If you have any links to information about this I'd like to see it (links to irrefutable sources that is, please no Alex Jones and no Hopsicker).

Thanks.

Donal
23rd October 2006, 11:57 AM
Criminals often visit the scene of their crime.

Link? Proof? anything? I've heard anecdotal evidence of serial killers doing that, but usually in actual criminal enterprises, the conspirators distance themselves from any link to the crime.

And don't you see your logic as a little circular?

The proof he committed a crime it is that he visited the scene of his crime.

I just find it an insult to the families that this man has never been questioned and the inquiry they had to lobby for thought the funding of 9/11 was insignificant.

And you don't think its insulting to tell the FBI how to do their job? Or that you are latching on to these people's pain?

T.A.M.
23rd October 2006, 12:04 PM
Docker:

Welcome to the JREF Forum on Conspiracy Theories. All views here are tolerated, no matter what side of the argument they fall on.

Everyone:

This is old, and far from a smoking gun.

The report is based on one report from the Times of India which said that Indian Intelligence officials (who have nothing against Pakistan, right?) confirmed that this guy was involved in wiring money to Atta. It has never been confirmed. All other magazine that ran the story, including the Wall Street Journal, based all of their storys on this one article from the Indian Times.

FBI have NOT come out and admitted it, unless there is some statement directly from them, in a news article I missed somewhere...if so, please, give us a link to it so I may read it.

TAM

Cylinder
23rd October 2006, 12:25 PM
Everyone settle down. The invisible pixie that lives in by back garden assures me that Docker has it all wrong.

jon
23rd October 2006, 12:34 PM
The 9/11 Commission Report talks about Al Qaeda funding from pp169-72; there's more specific info on the hijackers in Chapter 7. So far as I can tell, they never say funding is of little importance.

Muckar-duva
23rd October 2006, 12:43 PM
The 9/11 Commission Report talks about Al Qaeda funding from pp169-72; there's more specific info on the hijackers in Chapter 7. So far as I can tell, they never say funding is of little importance.

I have the same recollection as you do. I just skimmed the pages now, and it's quite detailed. I would recommend Docker to read at least those pages from the commission report.

MikeW
23rd October 2006, 12:44 PM
The relevant quote comes from here:

To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance. Al Qaeda had many avenues of funding. If a particular funding source had dried up, al Qaeda could have easily tapped a different source or diverted funds from another project to fund an operation that cost $400,000–$500,000 over nearly two years.
Page 172
9/11 Commission Report

JamesB
23rd October 2006, 12:47 PM
And exactly why would he place himself at the scene of the crime with his fellow conspirators? It seems to me that people trying to pull this sort of thing off should be distancing themselves from each other. Please explain why him being in Washington has any significance at all.

Ahh, but you forget, in the conspiracy world people do everything possible to draw attention to themselves, like Larry Silverstein admitting to blowing up WTC7 in a PBS interview, Bush telling the Secret Service to not evacuate the school during the attack, and the conspirators placing thousands of explosives in 3 different occupied office buildings, just to marginally increase the psychological effect of the airplane crashes.

Garb
23rd October 2006, 12:51 PM
Ahh, but you forget, in the conspiracy world people do everything possible to draw attention to themselves, like Larry Silverstein admitting to blowing up WTC7 in a PBS interview, Bush telling the Secret Service to not evacuate the school during the attack, and the conspirators placing thousands of explosives in 3 different occupied office buildings, just to marginally increase the psychological effect of the airplane crashes.

And of course stealing a bunch of gold bars for no reason whatsoever.


George Bush loves goooooooollldddd!

defaultdotxbe
23rd October 2006, 12:54 PM
And of course stealing a bunch of gold bars for no reason whatsoever.


George Bush loves goooooooollldddd!
and make 2 million in put options, but then never claim it

Muckar-duva
23rd October 2006, 12:59 PM
That quote is brilliant, as it comes after a detailed description of how aQ survived on donations, transferred money manually and secretively, and so on. That ole saying about quotemining: what was that again?

JamesB
23rd October 2006, 01:13 PM
If I remember right, doesn't that Indian article (one vaguely sourced newspaper article by your arch-enemy qualifies as "proof" in CT-land) say he sent $100,000 to Atta on September 10th, 2001? What the $@%* was he going to do with 100 grand the day before the attack?

Gravy
23rd October 2006, 01:26 PM
The 9/11 Commission Report talks about Al Qaeda funding from pp169-72; there's more specific info on the hijackers in Chapter 7. So far as I can tell, they never say funding is of little importance.They did more than that. They issued a 155-page monograph on 9/11 terrorist financing. (http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/911_TerrFin_Monograph.pdf)

Gravy
23rd October 2006, 01:28 PM
This appears to be the biggest smoking gun in the whole 9/11 affair.
Welcome, Docker.

Since this appears to be the biggest "smoking gun," and you have no evidence for it, what does that say about the rest of your "smoking guns?"

Just asking questions and demanding answers.

Gravy
23rd October 2006, 01:30 PM
If I remember right, doesn't that Indian article (one vaguely sourced newspaper article by your arch-enemy qualifies as "proof" in CT-land) say he sent $100,000 to Atta on September 10th, 2001? What the $@%* was he going to do with 100 grand the day before the attack?Place some put options. And then really screw up by buying 100,000 shares of American Airlines.

Skibum
23rd October 2006, 01:34 PM
I love drive by trollings. Too bad he doesn't realize he grabbed his lil brothers squirtgun istead of his dads UZI.

Muckar-duva
23rd October 2006, 01:45 PM
I love drive by trollings. Too bad he doesn't realize he grabbed his lil brothers squirtgun istead of his dads UZI.

You know what I'd do if I had a gun replica in my face? Laugh. That's right.




[/irony tag- I even hate box cutters- I have stitches on my arm, originating from one- 10 of them.]

gumboot
23rd October 2006, 03:27 PM
Even were these claims true, I find the "why won't the FBI talk to him" thing rather funny.

I mean, the CIA get enough Flak for kidnapping random nobodies from around the world and sneaking them off to private facilities.

I'm sure the Pakistani government would not be impressed if the US abducted their head of intelligence.

Pakistan was a vital ally for the US in Afghanistan. Unfortunately Pakistani Intelligence is also very buddy buddy with OBL, and he's rather popular in the country.

-Gumboot

MarkyX
23rd October 2006, 03:33 PM
JREF ninjas pwn.

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/8226/irwinshewold142800hny6.th.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/my.php?image=irwinshewold142800hny6.jpg)

Pardalis
23rd October 2006, 03:55 PM
JREF ninjas pwn.

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/8226/irwinshewold142800hny6.th.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/my.php?image=irwinshewold142800hny6.jpg)

Only Ninjas can make shoe markings with their bare feet... ;)

CurtC
23rd October 2006, 09:02 PM
What the $@%* was he going to do with 100 grand the day before the attack?
Strippers?

But seriously, first-class airline tickets on cross-country flights, purchased on the day of travel, can be quite expensive, and they did buy 19 of them. That number doesn't seem unreasonable, allowing for extra in case of unforseen situations. It's the unconfirmed source that makes me think this story is bogus, not the amount.

gumboot
23rd October 2006, 09:05 PM
Strippers?

But seriously, first-class airline tickets on cross-country flights, purchased on the day of travel, can be quite expensive, and they did buy 19 of them.


There are records for the purchase of the tickets, are there not? They were purchased earlier than this weren't they? With credit cards? I'd be amazed if a first class transcontinental ticket on an American airline costs $5,000, regardless of when it is purchased.

-Gumboot

ETA. I just went through the process of booking a ticket on an AA flight from Newark Liberty Airport to LAX, flying first class, departing about 11am, 24 Oct (that's about 11 hours from now). It would cost me $974.30.

eeyore1954
23rd October 2006, 09:38 PM
If I remember right, doesn't that Indian article (one vaguely sourced newspaper article by your arch-enemy qualifies as "proof" in CT-land) say he sent $100,000 to Atta on September 10th, 2001? What the $@%* was he going to do with 100 grand the day before the attack?

i think he took that money to the strip club

Dog Town
23rd October 2006, 09:45 PM
i think he took that money to the strip club

They saw Armageddon!

eeyore1954
24th October 2006, 04:05 AM
If I remember right, doesn't that Indian article (one vaguely sourced newspaper article by your arch-enemy qualifies as "proof" in CT-land) say he sent $100,000 to Atta on September 10th, 2001? What the $@%* was he going to do with 100 grand the day before the attack?


That is exactly right an article in a newspaper written in a country where Pakistan is hated is of course a valid source. Whereas something like the NIST report or the 9/11 commision is a pack of lies. Because we all know those scientists on the NIST report would be quick to put out information that even school aga children with rudimentary knowledge of physics can tell is incorrect and all the people on the 9/11 commision and their staff were also happy to coverup any lies they found in order to protect the president or other perpetrators. In CT land it is correct.

Just about anything will be accepted as truth if it bolsters their position.
The FBI met with Bin Laden at the hospital. I'm surprised George and Marvin Bush weren't the nurses.
The WTC was shut down even though only one person has come forward to recall it.
Condoleeza (sp?) Rice warned the SF mayor not to fly

So on and so on ...

WildCat
24th October 2006, 04:50 AM
Criminals often visit the scene of their crime.
They always do in cartoons and cheesy made-for-TV movies...

You do realize that real life isn't a cartoon, don't you?