Gary North's REALITY CHECKNumber 84 October 18, 2001 70,000 GRADUATES OF BIN LADEN UNIVERSITY On October 11, Winston Churchill spoke to the National Press Club in Washington. Shirley MacClaine served as his channel. Actually, it was Winston Churchill, the grandson, son of Randolph Churchill and Pamela Beryl Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman. His mother was the lady who, in 1992, introduced Washington Democrats socially to W. J. Clinton of Arkansas. She held one of her famous Party parties for him. For this, late in her maritally astounding career, Clinton appointed her the U.S. Ambassador to France. Churchill gave a rousing speech on the war against terrorism. Midway in the speech, he got to the topic at hand: funding. I find it ominous. It is impossible to guess how long it will take to apprehend bin Laden and his henchmen and to bring them to justice. That it will be done in time, I have no doubt. Meanwhile, the overthrow of the cruel, barbaric Taliban regime which harbors him is clearly the top priority. This is an alien regime, established only in the past five years with funding and arms from the Arab countries, by way of Pakistan, which acted as godfather to the creation of the Taliban. Their rule has been so brutal and so disastrous that an estimated one in four Afghans have fled as refugees to Iran or Pakistan, creating a massive humanitarian crisis in the region. Once the Taliban have been overthrown, a high priority must be to cut off the funding -- not only for the terrorists, but also for the fundamentalist madrassas, the theological schools established in numerous countries around the world where the gospel of Islamic purity and anti-Western hatred is preached. Unbelievable though it may seem, no country has been more responsible for this than Saudi Arabia, the West's principal ally in the Middle East. In order to appease and deflect criticism of their pro-Western leanings and opulent lifestyle, the Saudi ruling family, in an act of consummate folly, has poured vast resources into the establishment of these schools and religious universities in their own countries and overseas. They now find that they are riding a tiger of extreme fundamentalism, entirely of their own creation, which threatens the very foundations of their hold on power. As a result, today almost half the young Saudi males coming onto the jobs market have only religious qualifications, making them not only unemployed, but effectively unemployable. In consequence, barely one in four is able to find a job. The rest make a fertile field of disaffection, from which bin Laden is able to recruit new generations of suicide bombers, hijackers and terrorists. And it is no coincidence that many of last month's hijackers were Saudi citizens. More horrifying yet, if that were possible, if estimates attributed to the CIA are to be believed, in recent years some 70,000 militants have passed through bin Laden's terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, and are currently dispersed across no fewer than 55 countries around the world, including our own. New attacks are inevitable, and some undoubtedly will succeeded before this hydra-headed monster of international terrorism is destroyed. While it will be difficult for the Saudi government to bring its extremist theological schools under control and integrate them as they must within the state education system, if it fails to do so it is inevitable that the Saudi ruling family will sooner or later -- and probably sooner than later -- forfeit its hold on power and be drowned in a tidal wave of fundamentalism. What is the likelihood that the Saudis will shut down these schools? Not high, surely. The Saudis are already distancing themselves from the United States. This article appeared the day after we began bombing Kabul. RIYADH: The US ally Saudi Arabia said on Monday that it was unhappy about the bombing of Afghanistan, sending the clearest signal yet that its relations with Washington are being tested by the war on terrorism. Interior Minister Prince Naif broke Saudi silence on the bombing late on Sunday, telling reporters that the kingdom opposed terrorism but did not approve of the US response. "We wish the United States had been able to flush out the terrorists in Afghanistan without resorting to the current action ... because this is killing innocent people," he said. . . . "It's unbelievable the way the feeling here has changed from sympathy to anger in such a short time," a Western analyst based in Riyadh said. "More sensitive and astute decision-making on both sides is required to handle a relationship which has become extremely difficult to manage. Every aspect of it is under pressure." . . . http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/oct2001-daily/16-10-2001/main/main14.htm Churchill argued that money to the Taliban has come from Arab states through Pakistan. I don't know about the Arab states, although I suspect that this is the case. With respect to Pakistan, it's becoming ever clearer: big money came from our new-found ally. From day one, Pakistan has backed the Taliban. The American press will not touch this story. Now this aspect of the war is getting juicy. The head of Pakistan's version of the CIA, called the ISI, recently retired. It is pretty clear that he was quietly forced out because of pressure from the United States. Here's why it had to be so quiet. The following information comes from the INDIA TIMES, which, regarding Pakistan, is not what I would call an unbiased source. But the American press will not follow this lead. It's a "not worth pursuing" story. [Note: the TIMES does not publish dates on its news reports. This is a very peculiar policy.] While the Pakistani Inter Services Public Relations claimed that former ISI director- general Lt-Gen Mahmud Ahmad sought retirement after being superseded on Monday, the truth is more shocking. Top sources confirmed here on Tuesday, that the general lost his job because of the "evidence" India produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the World Trade Centre. The US authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen Mahumd. Senior government sources have confirmed that India contributed significantly to establishing the link between the money transfer and the role played by the dismissed ISI chief. While they did not provide details, they said that Indian inputs, including Sheikh's mobile phone number, helped the FBI in tracing and establishing the link. http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1454238160 Can this story be true? Is there evidence? Not as much as there was two weeks ago. According to INDIAREACTS, . . . we reported in our Intelligence section on Saturday (Intelligence, "Pak GHQ fire could be sabotage," 13 October 2001) that the five-hour fire that raged through a section of the Pakistan army headquarters in Rawalpindi on 10 October could have been staged. The fire entirely destroyed cell 320 containing files of Afghan operations and dossiers on the Taliban leadership since 1995. General Musharraf had created a new Afghan division after he took over. But all files on the Taliban prior to that were lost in the cell 320 fire. Firemen were prevented from dousing it from the inside and ordered to see that it did not spread to other parts of the building. . . . But how is it that the fire raged for five hours despite the presence of modern fire-fighting equipment from Belgium that was ordered not to be used? Who ordered that? Why? . . . Again, this is an Indian publication. But the following information is bothersome. Second, we are now told that Musharraf had stalled a US-Pakistani army plan to grab Osama Bin Laden in October 1999. The plan approved by deposed Pakistan prime minister Nawaz Sharief and former US president Bill Clinton entailed training Pakistani commandos to make the grab. The commandos were trained but Musharraf deposed Sharief in a coup and cancelled the plan. http://www.indiareacts.com/home.asp What we have today is an anti-Taliban alliance that is not what I would call rock-solid. * * * * * * * * * * Advertisement * * * * * * * * * How To Remain Safe When Panic Strikes During markets in crisis, most investors can't tell up from down. Yet, during 100 years of turbulent times, one trading system helped guide famous traders through the Great Depression, both World Wars, Vietnam, the 70's inflation crisis and the first WTC bombing in 1993. Now, in a new time of crisis, investors are turning to it again. Recently, we've seen gains of 300% on Pier 1 in a single day...260% on Varian in 5 days...155% on Mellon Bank...and another 131% on Hershey... The system is so easy you can practice it on the back of an envelope. Click here for more information: http://www.agora-inc.com/reports/AGTD/BestInvestment * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * SHORT MEMORIES In issue Number 81, I raised the question of how long the attack on Afghanistan has been in works. Based on a June 26 story in INDIAREACTS, we know that the formation anti-Taliban alliance goes back to early summer or late spring. Subsequently, I came across a March 15 story in JANE'S that indicates that India joined the anti-Taliban alliance early last March. So, plans were being readied no later than late last winter. As far as the American public was concerned before September 11, nothing important was happening in Afghanistan. Bin Laden was not front-page news. The destruction of our embassies in 1998 was forgotten. The American public usually forgets fast. If Churchill is correct, bin Laden has 70,000 recruits operating in some capacity around the world. We should assume that his network informed him that something big was being planned. If he was the mastermind behind the hijacking, as appears likely, he must have intelligence sources that could surf the Web in search of stories on the Administration's plans. Google.com works for terrorists, too. Americans must be prodded, and prodded hard, to get their attention. The American public has never cared about terrorism, just so long as it's off-shore. Two American embassies blown up? Oh, well. These things happen. The U.S.S. Cole attacked? Oh, well. These things happen. Until September 11, the story of bin Laden was "not worth pursuing." Consider the testimony before the House Committee on International Relations. Hearings took place on July 12, 2000, 14 months before the attack. These hearings dealt with "Global Terrorism And South Asia." Nobody in the American media paid any attention. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican, cross- examined several witnesses from the State Department. According to the editor of the Website on which this cross- examination is now posted, Rep. Rohrabacher exposed the following information: The U.S. deliberately sent 'humanitarian aid' only to Taliban-controlled areas; The U.S. State Department refused to act on information concerning the location of Osama bin Laden's headquarters in Afghanistan. U.S. officials tricked the Anti-Taliban opposition into disarming, though the officials knew Pakistan was airlifting weapons to the Taliban. This allowed the Taliban to wipe out most of the opposition forces. Most of the following exchange is posted on the Emperor's Clothes, one of the gutsiest sites on the Web. Jared Israel is blowing holes daily in the government's stories on Afghanistan. This document is especially infuriating. It is one more example that our senior diplomatic officials have not had a clue as to what to do about bin Laden for years. But bin Laden surely knew what to do about them: producing 70,000 graduates. Because of bipartisanship in the war effort, all of this information has gone down the official memory hole. Rohrabacher has closed ranks with the Democrats in Congress. This information will not be dredged up again by the Republicans for many years, if ever. Click through. Read the whole preposterous exchange. Prepare to be disenchanted with the State Department. Again. (That the State Department really is located in a part of the District of Columbia called Foggy Bottom seems too perfect.) Here are some extracts from Rohrabacher's statement. After a year of requesting to see State Department documents on Afghan policy -- and I would remind the committee that I have -- I have stated that I believe that there is a covert policy by this administration, a shameful covert policy of supporting the Taliban -- the State Department, after many, many months -- actually, years -- of prodding, finally began giving me documents, Mr. Chairman. And I have, in the assessment of those documents, I have found nothing to persuade me that I was wrong in my criticism. And I might add, however, that there has been no documents provided to me, even after all of these years of requesting it, there have been no documents concerning the time period of the formation of the Taliban. And I would, again, I would hope that the State Department gets the message that I expect to see all those documents. And the documents that I have read, Mr. Chairman, indicate that the State Department, time and again, has had as its position that they have no quarrel, or that it would give them no heartburn, to have the Taliban in power. This, during the time period when the Taliban was struggling to take over Afghanistan. And although the administration has denied supporting the Taliban, it is clear that they discouraged all of the anti-Taliban supporters from supporting the efforts in Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban. Even so much as when the Taliban was ripe for being defeated on the ground in Afghanistan, Bill Richardson and Rick Inderfurth, high-ranking members of this administration, personally visited the region in order to discourage the Taliban's opposition from attacking the Taliban when they were vulnerable, and then going to neighboring countries to cut off any type of military assistance to the [opponents of the] Taliban. This, at a time when Pakistan was heavily resupplying and rearming the Taliban. What did this lead to? It led to the defeat of all of the Taliban's major enemies except for one, Commander Massoud, in the north, and left the Taliban the supreme power in Afghanistan. . . One last note. Many people here understand that I have been in Afghanistan on numerous occasions and have close ties to people there. And let me just say that some of my sources of information informed me of where bin Laden was, they told me they knew and could tell people where bin Laden could be located. And it took me three times before this administration responded to someone who obviously has personal contacts in Afghanistan, to even investigate that there might be someone who could give them the information. And when my contact was actually contacted, they said that the people who contacted them were half-hearted, did not follow through, did not appear to be all that interested, appeared to be forced to be talking to him. BOMBS AWAY We have heard relatively little about how the bombing raids are going, militarily speaking. We have heard that bombs fell on Kabul initially. Then there were attacks on other cities. Of what military significance are bombed-out cities? The old line about Afghanistan's already being bombed into the stone age is accurate. Bin Laden is not in a penthouse in the Kabul Hilton. There is no Kabul Hilton. We have also heard about the amazing accuracy of U.S. satellite surveillance. I have no doubt that it is extremely accurate. On October 11, USA TODAY ran a story on this technology. U.S military and spy satellites are searching aggressively for signs of Osama bin Laden and are providing military planners with near-real-time high-resolution photographs and data about specific regions of Afghanistan, officials say. Although many Americans anticipated swift military retaliation, little is likely to happen until satellites scan hundreds of thousands of square miles of Afghanistan's rugged terrain. "We have to have a feel for the terrain and for the weather, which we provide with our satellites, and we have to have a feeling for the weapons that potentially could be employed," says Rear Adm. James McArthur, director of operations for U.S. Space Command at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs. McArthur says the space technology in use today over Afghanistan is a dramatic improvement from that used in the Persian Gulf War. New satellites can process information at much faster speeds and allow ground forces to have up-to-the-moment information. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2001/10/5/attack-space-search.htm#more Very impressive! But then this question occurs to me: If the Bush Administration has been planning this attack to take out bin Laden since last March or even earlier, isn't it likely that the spy satellites' work has been completed by now? And if it hasn't, how long are we talking about before it's ready? Missiles now are guided by satellite rather than lasers, which makes them much more accurate than the laser-guided strikes in Kosovo just 2 years ago. It's incredible how close-up these satellite images can get. The most impressive photo I have seen is this one. It's so lifelike that it's eerie. See for yourself. (It may take some time to download, bit it's worth it.) http://www.wired.com/news/gallery/0,2072,47450-1964,00.html Well, what do you think? Have you ever seen anything like it? OK, OK. So it's not a satellite photo. So, sue me. But the photo is real. It started circulating on the Web last week. It's from an anti-American Islamic rally in Bangladesh. The protestors were carrying a poster. The Reuters photo service enlarged part of that poster. You have seen the result. An editor at the Reuters photo desk in Washington said the photo not doctored. There are some strange Islamic poster-makers in Bangladesh, I guess. YEARS, IF NECESSARY The President has said that it may take two weeks, two months, or two years. We are going to get bib Laden. This reveals tenacity on the President's part. But this question is political. If bin Laden eludes capture, then he will take on an aura on invincibility in the Middle East. The question today isn't what bin Laden can do to us. The question is what his imitators will try to do. The longer the U.S. drops bombs Afghan cities, with or without the presence of the Taliban, the more likely the existing rulers in Islamic nations will have to deal with a growing sense of outrage from their own people, who may be opposed to terrorism, but who are not ready to accept the idea of a war launched on non-military targets by the United States. There may be a logical plan behind strategic bombing, but everything we have learned since 1940 tells us that civilian populations resist, and, if anything, become more supportive of their government, when they are bombed. This was true during the London blitz, the Berlin air raids, and Japan, until we dropped two atomic bombs. Getting bombs dropped on them makes civilians more angry at the enemy. If our satellites are as accurate as everything we have heard, then we ought to be able to pinpoint where bin Laden is. If we can't pinpoint him, then it's counter- productive to bomb what is left of those cities. We are seeing no TV coverage, for obvious reasons: no TV crews. CONCLUSION We are now engaged in a war that we cannot win -- not against bin Laden, but against the Islamic terrorist network. This is the latest in a series on no-win wars: from Korea, through Vietnam, to Iraq, and Somalia. Now we confront international terrorism. At best, we can delay its escalation. Terrorism is too decentralized to be eliminated. We can't "cut off its head and then kill it," as we were supposedly going to do to Saddam Hussein, but didn't. In the meantime, Arab governments of the Middle East are facing rumblings from below: bad economies, unemployed young men, and a growing sense that the West is vulnerable to terrorism. Arab rulers will back our interests only for as long as it's in their interest. This is a revolutionary situation. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To subscribe to Reality Check go to: http://www.dailyreckoning.com/GetReality.cfm * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * If you enjoy Reality Check and would like to read more of Gary's writing please visit his website: http://www.freebooks.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * If you'd like to suggest Reality Check to a friend, please forward this letter to them or point them to: http://www.dailyreckoning.com/GetReality.cfm * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ******* To REMOVE yourself from this list, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or go to our web interface at: http://www.agoramail.net/home.cfm?list=RealityC
