Introduction Jihad in America In 1994, PBS aired a documentary called Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America. Steven Emerson produced and narrated the documentary. As the title suggests, the documentary was about a group of Islamic terrorists who had taken up residency in America.

Terrorists Among Us (Various radicals speaking in America.wmv) By the late eighties / early nineties, there were quite a few radical Islamic terrorists who were living in America and who were trying to convince their followers to wage jihad. Throughout his documentary, Emerson shows a bunch of these Islamic radicals speaking at various locations throughout America as you can see. Terrorism conference in Kansas City (Kansas City terrorist meeting.wmv) Steven Emerson: “In 1989, some of the world’s most influential leaders of radical Islam held a conference attended by Sheikh Mohammed Siam, a leader of Hamas from Palestine, Abdullah Anas, a leader of the Algerian Islamic Front, Rashid Ghannushi, head of the radical Tunisian fundamentalist group called Ennahda, Tofi Kustaffa, a leader of the Muslim Liberation Party based in Jordan, Yousef alQaradhwi, a militant Muslim leader originally from Egypt. This conference was never intended to be broadcast. It was a secret gathering to expand jihad networks and terrorist operations. Actual Hamas terrorists failed to protect their identities boasted of their successful executions.” Anonymous terrorist: “Sixteen Jewish soldiers were killed.” Steven Emerson: “But this gathering did not take place in the Middle East. It happened in the heartland of America, Kansas City, Missouri. All of these groups have established bases in the United States and have many graduates.” At least 12 conferences in America in the last 5 years (At least a dozen meetings in America in the last five years.wmv) Steven Emerson: “We have documented at least a dozen similar conferences that have taken place in America in the past five years, where militant leaders from around the world have praised acts of terrorism and urged their followers to wage jihad.” What is amazing is that these foreign terrorist leaders decided to come to America and hold a terrorism conference. And not just one conference. They held at least 12 conferences. I mean, how stupid is the CIA if they can’t even figure out that all these terrorist leaders have come to America to hold a terrorism conference not once, not twice but twelve times? And how crazy were those terrorist leaders to hold terrorism conferences in the middle of America? Logically, the only reason they would have been willing to hold twelve terrorism conferences in America is because they felt the U.S. government was their ally. Of course, this begs the question, why did those terrorists believe that the U.S. government was their ally? To answer this question, Emerson provides a little background information.

The Al Kifah Refugee Center CIA Aids the Mujahideen (CIA 1.wmv) Steven Emerson: “The trail began 15 years ago, with the invasion of Afghanistan. Hoping to halt the spread of communism, the United States actively backed the Mujahedeen, Afghanistan’s Islamic rebels dedicated to spreading jihad. The CIA channeled almost $3 billion to the Mujahedeen through the intelligence service of neighboring Pakistan.” In other words, those “Islamic terrorists”…they were our allies. They helped us remove the Soviets from Afghanistan. Steven Emerson: “Charles Cogan helped run the operation for the CIA.” Charles Cogan: “As far as the U.S. side of it was concerned, this was an agency operation. The training was carried out by the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate at …, and in the interior of Pakistan too. I would say that over the sweep of the Cold War this was the most successful covert action that the U.S. engaged in. This was a very remarkable event. The Soviet Union had invaded a country which was not within their orbit and they were forced to withdraw from it and this was a clear reversal of Communism.”

Pakistan Gives CIA Money to Extremists At one point in his video, Emerson describes the people whom were receiving CIA money. “…Pakistan was funneling more and more of the CIA's money to the most radical Afghan Muslims. In the end, they would contribute to the expansion of Jihad around the world.” Emerson makes it sound like the CIA was just giving Pakistan a bunch of money and letting them decide which Afghans to give the money to. But that’s not the way Cogan described what happened. Cogan claimed that the CIA ran the operation. Remember, he referred to the operation as an “agency operation.” The agency is short for the Central Intelligence Agency. You can bet that they knew exactly who was getting their money and that they supported giving American money to “the most radical Afghan Muslims.” And not only that, the CIA wanted those terrorists to expand their jihad around the world. From their viewpoint, they had created an army of radical Muslims and they wanted to use them not only in Afghanistan but elsewhere. Of course the CIA denies this. But as you will see, there is overwhelming evidence that this is what they in fact did.

Iranian Revolution / Assassination of Sadat After talking about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Emerson goes on to briefly talk about the Iranian Revolution and the assassination of Anwar Sadat, the former President of Egypt. He then goes on to talk about Abdullah Azzam.

Abdullah Azzam and the Al Kifah Refugee Center Abdullah Azzam and Afghanistan (Abdullah Azzam.wmv) Steven Emerson: “It was in this environment that Sheikh Abdullah Azzam rose to prominence. Born in Palestine, Azzam fought against Israel and against Arab regimes he believed were puppets of the west. In the early 1980s Azzam went to Peshawar, Pakistan, to set up a support network for the holy warriors. The American headquarters was called the Al Kifah Refugee Center but when translated, the Arabic on their own letterhead reads the Office of Services to the Holy Warriors. It provided money, weapons – and most important – recruited thousands of Muslim fighters from outside Afghanistan. Azzam helped transform the war against the Soviets into a full-blown international Jihad, or holy war.” In his documentary, Emerson never explicitly says that the CIA worked with Abdullah Azzam and his Al Kifah Refugee Center to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan. However, he did say that the Al Kifah Refugee Center had offices in America. And he did interview a CIA official who said the operation to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan was run by the CIA. As such, I think it’s fair to say that the CIA was working with Abdullah Azzam and his Al Kifah Refugee Center. In fact, I have proof of this, which I will show you later on. The reason why Emerson is ambiguous about the relationship between the CIA and the Al Kifah Refugee Center is because he does not want his viewers to have the impression that the CIA controlled the Al Kifah Refugee Center, even though it did. And you will understand shortly why Emerson concealed this fact. Azzam based in Masjid Al-Farooq / tours the U.S. (Al Kifah Refugee Center Abdullah Azzam.wmv) Steven Emerson: “From the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn, Abdullah Azzam and others would go around the country raising money and preaching holy war.” That’s actually not the Al Kifah Refugee Center. That’s actually Masjid Al-Farooq. In Arabic, the word “masjid” means “mosque” and the word “al” means “the.” So when translated to English, the phrase Masjid Al-Farooq means The Farooq Mosque. At one point, the Al Kifah Refugee Center was located inside that mosque. Incidentally, the Al Kifah Refugee Center inside that mosque was not the only one in America. Al Kifah Refugee Center in 38 U.S. cities (Al Kifah Refugee Center Abdullah Azzam.wmv) Steven Emerson: “The Al Kifah Refugee Center set up an elaborate support and recruiting network coast to coast, with branches in more than 38 American cities. You would think that the Al Kifah Refugee Center would not have been able to set up offices in 38 U.S. cities without the knowledge and approval of the U.S. government…

Al Kifah Refugee Center sends 200 people to Afghanistan to fight

Overlay: From the article “Missing Blast Suspect’s Portrait Drawn in Shadows of Militancy New York Times 3/20/1993 As for the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn, “at its height it collected funds for Afghan war refugees and it sent as many as 200 young fervent Arab immigrants to Pakistan and then Afghanistan to fight…”

Al Kifah Refugee Center aligned with Sayyaf and Hekmatyar

Overlay: From “After Blast, New Interest in Holy-War Recruits in Brooklyn” New York Times 4/11/93 It “was aligned with two factions” in Afghanistan. “One was the party of Abdul Rasul Sayyaf…” “Mr. Sayyaf operated with heavy private and Government backing from Saudi Arabia as well as from the Muslim Brotherhood…” The Al Kifah Refugee Center “also had ties to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar,” the leader of the “Islamic Party.”

Hekmatyar receives the most money from the U.S.

Overlay: From “After Blast, New Interest in Holy-War Recruits in Brooklyn” New York Times 4/11/93 “…despite the militant anti-Western stance of their leader, Mr. Hekmatyar’s forces received more [U.S.] Government money than any rebel group.” This shows you two things. First, the fact that an Islamic extremist appears anti-Western does not mean that the CIA does not control them. They could just be taking on an anti-Western appearance in order to boost their appeal. Second, this provides further evidence that the Al Kifah Refugee Center was a CIA operation. If Hekmatyar was the CIA’s number one guy in Afghanistan and the Al Kifah Refugee Center was sending him recruits, isn’t it logical to argue that the Al Kifah Refugee Center was also a CIA operation?

Newsweek says Al Kifah was a CIA operation

Overlay: From “The Road To September 11” Newsweek 9/30/01 And in fact, according to Newsweek, the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn was run by the CIA. This is how they described it. “…the diaspora of young Arab men willing to die for Allah congregated at the Al-Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., a dreary inner-city building that doubled as a recruiting post for the CIA…” And you will notice that in the paragraph above, Newsweek says that the CIA provided passports to many of the Mujahideen so they could come to the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn after the war.

Osama bin Laden and the Al Kifah Refugee Center Osama and Azzam founded Al Kifah Osama and Azzam cover sheet

This CIA document shows that…

Osama and Azzam CIA document page 2

“…Azzam met with [Osama] bin Ladin in Afghanistan. Azzam knew bin Ladin’s family and that bin Ladin had significant sums of disposable income…” “…Azzam convinced bin Ladin that he (bin Ladin) had the ability to create a network that could significantly enhance Mujahedin abilities to recruit fighters and obtain contributions from around the Islamic world for the war effort. Shortly thereafter, bin Ladin joined Azzam in Peshawar and they formed the Maktab al-Khidmat (MK).” In English, the phrase Maktab al Khidmat means the Office of Services. Instead of saying the full name of Azzam’s organization, the Office of Services to the Holy Warriors, people often shortened the name to the Office of Services, or Maktab al Khidmat in Arabic. The important thing to note here is that the organization referenced in this CIA document is the same organization that Steven Emerson is talking about. And remember that this organization is also known as the Al Kifah Refugee Center. We can probably forgive Emerson for not mentioning that Osama bin Ladin cofounded the Al Kifah Refugee Center as this video was aired in 1994, before most people knew who Osama bin Laden was. But the history of bin Laden in Afghanistan is important. To further understand this history, let’s now take a look at a book written by Ahmed Rashid. The book is called “Taliban.” The book, of course, deals with the history of the Taliban. Chapter 10 is called “Global Jihad: The Arab-Afghans and Osama bin Laden.” The chapter contains the history of what Osama bin Laden did in Afghanistan during the eighties. Osama bin Laden went to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets. He is the son of Mohammed bin Laden, a Yemeni who immigrated to Saudi Arabia. While living in Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Laden founded a construction company which is known today as the Saudi Binladin Group, the largest construction company in the world.

The bin Laden family is rich

Overlay: From page 131 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid Mohammed bin Laden “was a close friend of the late King Faisal.” Apparently, being friends with the Saudi Royal Family has its benefits as his company was able to become “fabulously wealthy on the contracts to renovate and expand the Holy Mosques of Mecca and Medina.” His son, Osama bin Laden, played an important role in the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. He led the Saudi contingent in Afghanistan.

ISI wanted a prince

Overlay: From page 131 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid Originally, “the ISI … wanted … a Royal Prince to lead the Saudi contingent…”

Princes didn’t want to go

Overlay: From page 131 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid “But no pampered Saudi Prince was ready to rough it out in the Afghan mountains. Bin Laden, although not a royal, was close enough to the royals and certainly wealthy enough to lead the Saudi contingent.”

Osama built roads and depots in Afghanistan

Overlay: From page 132 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid The fact that his family ran the largest construction company in the world came in handy as Osama bin Laden was able to use personnel and equipment from the Saudi Binladin Group to “build roads and depots for the Mujaheddin” in Afghanistan.

Osama built Khost tunnel complex

Overlay: From page 132 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid “In 1986 he helped build the Khost tunnel complex, which the CIA was funding as a major arms storage depot, training facility and medical centre for the Mujaheddin…”

U.S. and Pakistan trained people at Osama camp

Overlay: From page 132 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid Osama bin Laden once told Ahmed Rashid that “volunteers were trained by Pakistani and American officers” at his training camps.

America supplied weapons, Saudis supplied money

Overlay: From page 132 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid He also told Rashid that, “The weapons were supplied by the Americans, the money by the Saudis.” I mention these stories of CIA collaboration with Osama bin Laden because I have sometimes heard people falsely argue that the actions of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan were somehow separate or independent from the actions of the CIA. These stories show that Osama bin Laden was in fact working closely with the CIA to defeat the Soviets.

The First Conference of Jihad in Brooklyn starring Azzam In addition to not liking the Soviets, apparently, Abdullah Azzam didn’t like America either. (Abdullah Azzam.wmv) Abdullah Azzam: “The world today is arbitrarily ruled by Jews and Christians, the Americans, the British, and others. And behind them, the fingers of international Jewry, with their wealth and their women and their media.” (Abdullah Azzam First Conference of Jihad.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Abdullah Azzam was the keynote speaker at what was called the First Conference of Jihad, held not in the Middle East but in Brooklyn, New York. Azzam instructed his audience to wage jihad wherever they were, even in America.” Abdullah Azzam: “The jihad, the fighting, is obligatory on you, wherever you can perform it. And just as when you are in America you must fast unless you are ill or on a voyage, so too must you wage jihad.” As you can see from the video, Emerson is showing Masjid Al-Farooq as the place where the First Conference of Jihad took place. The CIA knew about what was going on at the mosque and must have had it under surveillance. Perhaps the CIA didn’t like what Azzam said about jihad in America because the following year he was killed. The killers have still not been identified, which in my mind makes it likely that they were working for a western government. The death of Azzam, however, did not end the Al Kifah Refugee Center, though it did result in a name change.

Al Kifah bombs WTC and African Embassies

Overlay: From page 131 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid According to Rashid, after the Soviets left Afghanistan “the Makhtab would emerge at the centre of a web of radical organizations that helped carry out the World Trade Centre bombing and the bombings of US Embassies in Africa in 1998.” In other words, the Office of Services, otherwise known as the Al Kifah Refugee Center, became Al Qaeda. Rashid explains the name change from the Office of Services to Al Qaeda on page 132 of his book.

Al Kifah named changed to Al Qaeda

Overlay: From page 132 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid “After the death of Azam in 1989, [Osama bin Laden] took over Azam’s organization and set up Al Qaeda or Military Base as a service centre for Arab-Afghans and their familes…”

The Al Kifah Refugee Center Extends Its Reach Beyond Afghanistan Emerson doesn’t say that Al Kifah turned into Al Qaeda Emerson never says that the Al Kifah Refugee Center became Al Qaeda. Again, we can forgive him for this, as the video as published in 1994 and nobody had heard of Al Qaeda at this time. Emerson does, however, talk about the expansion of jihad from Afghanistan to other places. It’s not just Afghanistan any more (Abdullah Azzam.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Now, the enemy was no longer just the Communists, but Jews, Christians and moderate Muslims who they accused of being part of a conspiracy to defeat Islam.” (Terrorism in Israel, Egypt, Algeria.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Islamic holy warriors began launching terror attacks against Israel, Egypt, and Algeria.” (Abdullah Azzam First Conference of Jihad.wmv) Steven Emerson: “…the militants rage was not limited to the Middle East. Increasingly, the Islamic holy warriors focused their anger on the West especially America.” FBI says there is a worldwide terrorist network Emerson talked to an FBI agent about this worldwide terrorist network that the CIA spawned. (Global Terrorist Network.wmv) FBI Agent: “What is unique is the international nature, the connection all the way from North America, Europe, the Middle East, Pakistan, Afghanistan, over into Southeast Asia. It is much more global than any kind of terrorist network that we’ve had to deal with in the past.” I find it hard to believe that these Islamic fundamentalists can sustain this network without outside support. Given that the CIA created these fundamentalists in the first place, it seems only logical that they maintained control of them after the war in Afghanistan. While the CIA takes credit for running the operation to remove the Soviets from Afghanistan, they seem to have a hard time explaining what came next. I’m not exactly sure what the official CIA story is for what happened afterward. But it seems like their story is that they just stopped everything and forgot that the Al Kifah Refugee Center – now Al Qaeda – had 38 branch offices in America. Al Kifah Refugee Center supports jihad around the world (Al Kifah Refugee Center Abdullah Azzam.wmv) So after the war in Afghanistan, what happened to those 38 Al Kifah Refugee Centers in America? Steven Emerson: “These centers became clearinghouses and recruiting offices to support jihad around the world.” If the CIA supported the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, isn’t it reasonable to suspect that they supported them when they attacked other countries as well? What Came Later Came Later (CIA2.wmv)

Here’s Charles Cogan trying to explain the actions of his former assets. Notice how nervous he is. Charles Cogan: “We had really very few illusions, that's not to say that we could have predicted that some of these Mujahideen might have turned against the U.S. or the West later on. But as I say our focus was on hitting and hurting as much as possible the Soviet forces in Afghanistan. I don't think we have really anything to be apologetic about. These were the fighting assets and we had to aid them. What came later, came later.” Why so nervous, Cogan? Is it because you worry that someone might discover the truth and refute your bullshit explanation?

El Sayyid Nosair Connecticut shooting range (Connecticut shooting range El Sayyid Nosair.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Radicals conducted military exercises at shooting ranges and training camps in at least nine U.S. locations, including this one in Connecticut. Groups of Islamic militants fired semi-automatic weapons and trained with explosives. According to FBI intelligence reports, groups would come every weekend and shoot a thousand rounds a day into silhouette shaped targets. One of the leaders was an Egyptian immigrant named El Sayyid Nosair.”

Learn shooting before going to Afghanistan

Overlay: From “After Blast, New Interest in Holy-War Recruits in Brooklyn” New York Times 4/11/93 You may be wondering why the FBI allowed those militants to reside in America and learn how to shoot things. And of course, the answer is they needed to learn how to shoot before going to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets. According to the New York Times, before the people recruited at the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn went to Afghanistan, “the recruits received training in using rifles, assault weapons and handguns.” In this article, the Times specifically mentioned El Sayyid Nosair as having received this training. “Court papers showed that he received weapons training during the summer of 1989 at the High Rock Shooting Range in Naugatuck, Conn.”

Nosair assassinates Meir Kahane (Connecticut shooting range El Sayyid Nosair.wmv) Steven Emerson: “In November 1990, Nosair was arrested for the murder of militant rabbi Meir Kahane.”

Nosair’s supporters happy “Nosair was ultimately convicted of weapons charges but unexpectedly the jury acquitted him of the Kahane murder. His supporters were elated.”

Judge says the verdict made no sense The judge called the verdict outrageous. (Alvin Schlesigner verdict made no sense.wmv) “It was irrational almost, in terms of the evidence that I saw at that trial. It just, it made no sense, common or otherwise, to have reached that verdict – particularly with the other verdicts that were reached. So I think it was outrageous.” Presumably, the U.S. government had the jury acquit Nosair because they wanted to embolden his comrades at the Al Kifah Refugee Center (which was by now actually Al Qaeda). The government wanted Al Qaeda to believe that they still supported them. And the acquittal did embolden his comrades. They would soon bomb the World Trade Center.

FBI claims they overlooked the boxes Shouldn’t the government have prevented the WTC bombing? You may be wondering, if his comrades bombed the World Trade Center, shouldn’t the government have known about the plot beforehand? Shouldn’t the FBI have investigated his friends and had them under surveillance? Shouldn’t the CIA have been watching them? These people were the same people whom the CIA used to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan. The CIA knew about them. Shouldn’t they have been able to prevent them from attacking the World Trade Center? Of course the FBI and the CIA could have prevented Al Qaeda from attacking the World Trade Center. But they didn’t. And so one must conclude that the U.S. government wanted them to attack the World Trade Center. (El Sayyid Nosair No Conspiracy Here.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Even though Nosair had ties to an international radical network, police never investigated the possibility of a larger conspiracy.” U.S. official: “There is no indication at all of any conspiracy of a nature that’s been spoken of. The facts indicate at this point it was a lone gunman who committed a homicide.” (FBI claims to have missed El Sayyid Nosair’s documents.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Nosair was brought to this holding cell in Lower Manhattan after his arrest. By then detectives had searched his apartment and found 47 boxes full of personal possessions and papers. But investigators dismissed those papers as irrelevant religious materials. It was only after the bombing of the World Trade Center that law enforcement reexamined those papers and realized they had overlooked one of the largest collections of terrorist materials ever found in the United States. The papers included plans to blow up American skyscrapers. The documents would reveal that Nosair was at the heart of a worldwide terrorist network headquartered right here in the United States.” (Michael Cherkasky 1.wmv) Michael Cherkasky: “Unfortunately, we had that information. It was there. And we didn’t see it.” Steven Emerson: “Michael Cherkasky was the Chief of Investigations for the Manhattan District Attorney at the time of the bombing.” Michael Cherkasky: “Looking back at it, there was enormous amounts of significant material in those boxes. Whether they were the precise plans…no, I don’t think so. But were there very strong indications that this man and a group of compatriots were involved in terrorist activities which could ultimately lead to a disaster like the World Trade Center? The answer is yes.” Michael Cherkasky: “Only when we started looking at that material and we started finding things and seeing things clearly for the first time that we became agitated because honestly we hadn’t seen it before and excited because we now thought we had more of a clue about tracing the history of this group and more of an idea about what had actually happened here.” The FBI claims that they did not examine the documents Nosair had until after the World Trade Center bombing. It is not credible to argue that law enforcement would not read the documents they seized from a murder suspect. And in fact, I have proof that law enforcement did in fact read Nosair’s documents right after they seized them.

FBI investigating terrorists after Kahane murder

A little over a week after Nosair murdered Kahane, the New York Times ran a story called “F.B.I. Investigates Groups of Zealots Who Praise Kahane Slaying.” Let’s read the first two paragraphs from that story. “The Federal Bureau of Investigation is scrambling to investigate the Muslim groups associated with the Masjid al-Salam mosque in Jersey City, where El Sayyid A. Nosair, the man accused of killing Rabbi Meir Kahane, worshiped, according to high-level law-enforcement officials.” “Although the New York City police say they believe Mr. Nosair acted alone, one law-enforcement official said the investigation into Rabbi Kahane's death had opened ’a window’ into several radical fundamentalist groups. Besides looking at possible links between these groups and the shooting of Rabbi Kahane last week at a Manhattan hotel, the F.B.I. fears that these groups may be capable of terrorist activities at a time of heightened tensions in the Middle East, the high-level officials said.”

Government says Nosair acted alone

A little over a week after the New York Times said the arrest of Nosair had “opened a window” to several extremist Islamic groups, the FBI publicly contradicted that story. “There is no evidence that Mr. Nosair is linked to any Mideast terrorist organization, District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau said in announcing the indictment.” Given the story the Times published a week ago, that statement is ridiculous. So why did he make it? Why does the FBI insist that they did not read Nosair’s documents when they obviously did? The CIA must have told the FBI to drop their investigation. The CIA did not want the FBI to destroy their terrorism network, which was now Al Qaeda.

The FBI says what was in Nosair’s boxes

Overlay: From “Kahane Suspect Said to Have Arms Cache” New York Times 12/11/90 This article proves that the government read Nosair’s documents soon after the Kahane murder. The New York Times published this article about a month after the murder. If look at the bottom of page one of this article you will see… “…Nosair’s home also contained ‘literature relating to guns, weapons and combat, including subjects such as bomb-making, hand grenades, security and listening devices, ‘Arms in Afghanistan,’ ‘Explosive Traps,’ ‘How to Teach Yourself to Shoot Like an Expert,’ ‘The Nine Don’t’s of Fighting Discipline,’ and a guide to buying guns and ammunition.’’” Clearly these documents are not “irrelevant religious material.” Clearly the FBI did examine the documents Nosair had in his apartment when he murdered Kahane. Or else how did the New York Times get a list of those documents? Is the FBI claiming that, “Hey, we didn’t look at these documents but the New York Times did and uh, we don’t read the New York Times so we didn’t know that Nosair had this material?” And notice that one document was called, “Arms in Afghanistan.” Presumably, Nosair was given this document because he was involved in the war to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan. Again, that effort was run by the CIA. The fact that he had that document (while living in America) tends to show that he was working with the CIA.

Nosair had classified U.S. military documents Now let’s see what Emerson claims was in those boxes. (Michael Cherkasky 1.wmv) Steven Emerson: “The boxes included formulas for bomb making, detailed instructions on attacking aircraft, assassination targets, and even classified U.S. military documents.” Presumably, the CIA gave him those “classified U.S. military documents.” Perhaps “Arms in Afghanistan” was one of those “classified U.S. military documents.” Again the war to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan was a CIA operation. The fact that Nosair had these documents implies that he was working with the CIA to remove the Soviets from Afghanistan.

Nosair in prison Nosair directs group while in prison Amazingly, Nosair continued to work for Al Qaeda while he was in prison. And the U.S. government let him. This proves that our government wanted Nosair to carry out his acts of terrorism. (El Sayyid Nosair leads the group from jail.wmv) Steven Emerson: “From his prison cell, Nosair continued to organize the campaign of terror. Prison logs show that he met with several of the conspirators to help plan the World Trade Center bombing.” So after not stopping Nosair from killing Kahane, the government allows him to organize the attack on the World Trade Center… from jail. Somehow, the prison, which should be monitoring his communications with the outside world, just missed that part. Cherkasky on Nosair’s activities in jail (Michael Cherkasky on El Sayyid Nosair’s imprisonment.wmv) Michael Cherkasky: “He was a soldier when he shot Kahane and in some ways his status was elevated to be a soldier, a trainer, an example, a martyr for the movement who was allegedly continually demanding that the movement move forward, that they take more strident action, that he was sitting in jail for what he had done and that others had to pick up the mantle.” So while Nosair is urging his followers to kill more people, the prison officials who should be monitoring this conversation are doing…what?

FBI records jail conversations between Salameh and Nosair

Apparently they were monitoring these conversations because the FBI did indeed have Mohammed Salameh under surveillance before he attacked on the World Trade Center. The FBI began monitoring him after he visited El Sayyid Nosair in prison. “…the F.B.I sought to electronically eavesdrop on conversations in prison between El Sayyid A. Nosair, who is serving time in Attica state prison in connection with the slaying of Rabbi Kahane, and Mohammed A. Salameh…” “Whether tape recordings were made was something officials refused to confirm yesterday.” The FBI probably didn’t want to acknowledge the existence of the tapes because Nosair and Salameh probably discussed the attack on the Trade Center. If the FBI said they had tapes which suggested that Salameh was going to bomb the World Trade Center people would wonder why the FBI didn’t stop the attack. Of course, the mere fact that the FBI had Salameh under surveillance before the attack shows that the FBI knew the attack was coming.

Many WTC terrorists visited Nosair

And Salameh wasn’t the only World Trade Center bomber who visited Nosair in jail. “Many of the suspects were also fervent supporters of El Sayyid A. Nosair…” “They showed up at Mr. Nosair’s trial and have visited him at Attica state prison.” You would think that the FBI would be monitoring these people…

U.S. subpoenaed terrorists 5 months before WTC bombing

And indeed they were. “Five months before the World Trade Center bombing, about 20 members of the two mosques in Brooklyn and Jersey City where several trade center suspects worshipped were subpoenaed to appear before a Federal grand jury.” “The subpoenas, issued to people who had visited El Sayyid A. Nosair in prison or attended his trial, indicates that Federal agents had been pressing harder than was previously known to make inroads into the small émigré world from which the trade center suspects came.”

FBI photographed the terrorists in 1989

Overlay: From “F.B.I. Has Kept 2 in Bomb Trial Under Surveillance Since 1989” New York Times 2/8/95 Actually, FBI surveillance of the terrorists goes back much further than that. The FBI had photographed the terrorists in 1989, four years before the bombing of the World Trade Center. “James P. Fogle, an F.B.I. agent … said he photographed several suspects as they came in and out of a mosque at 552 Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn on July 2, 1989.” The mosque at that address is Masjid Al-Farooq. “He and other agents then followed the men as they drove to the Calverton shooting range near Riverhead, L.I., where Mr. Fogle photographed them firing what he said were AK-47 assault rifles and 9millimeter semiautomatic pistols at targets.”

Obviously, the government wanted to keep tabs on their assets.

Emad Salem FBI has an informer

And not only did the FBI have the terrorists under surveillance before the bombing, they also had an informer who had infiltrated the group. “Court papers filed in connection with the World Trade Center bombing say for the first time that a confidential informer provided information to investigators about the activities of Mohammed A. Salameh, the first suspect arrested in the Feb. 26 explosion.” “The informer was said to have helped Mr. Salameh learn to drive a van approximately two days before the World Trade Center explosion.”

Emad Salem worked for the FBI since 1991

“…the informant, Emad A. Salem, was working for the Federal Bureau of Investigation since at least November 1991. The revelation that Mr. Salem was in contact with the Federal Government that long ago raises new questions about why the F.B.I. was unaware of the plot to bomb the World Trade Center on Feb. 26.”

Emad Salem: people don’t listen (Rare 1993 News report showing FBI involvement in WTC Bombing.flv) Amazingly, Emad Salem apparently taped the conversations he had with his FBI handlers. And in those tapes you can hear Salem say that he warned the FBI of the World Trade Center bombing before it happened. And you can hear the FBI agent apparently agreeing with Salem. Emad Salem: “Since the bomb went off, I feel terrible. I feel bad. I feel here is people who don’t listen.” FBI Agent: “Hey, I mean, it wasn’t like you didn’t try and I didn’t try. You can’t force people to do the right thing.”

Emad Salem: You were informed

Overlay: From “Tapes in Bombing Plot Show Informer and F.B.I. at Odds” New York Times 10/27/93 At another point in their conversation, Salem said, “You were informed. Everything is ready. The day and the time. Boom. Lock them up and that’s that. That’s why I feel so bad.”

Wife of Emad Salem

Other people confirmed that Salem had warned the FBI in advance. “Barbara Rogers, the former wife of the informer, Emad A. Salem, said that the day after the explosion, Mr. Salem was upset and told her the bombing could have been averted if the F.B.I. had heeded his warnings. He had told the agency that several buildings had been targeted, she said, and he gave them names of several men, including Mahmud Abouhalima and Ibrahim A. Elgabrowny, who were later arrested in the case.”

Mahmud Abouhalima Abouhalima participated in the bombing of the WTC

One of those two men, Mahmud Abouhalima, was convicted of bombing the World Trade Center and was sentenced to “240 years” in prison. The story of his life is pretty interesting.

Al Kifah Refugee Center recruited Abouhalima

Mahmud Abouhalima was one of the people recruited at the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn. “…he was known as one of the committed. Several times, his acquaintances say, he left his home to go fight for months at a time with the rebels trying to topple the Soviet-installed government in Afghanistan.”

Abouhalima overstays his visa by 5 years / granted permanent residence as a farmer

Overlay: From Missing Blast Suspect’s Portrait Drawn in Shadows of Militancy New York Times 3/20/93 Abouhalima came to “the United States on Oct. 4, 1986, with a German passport and a tourist’s visa…” According to the New York Times, he “overstayed his visa by five years, and it was not clear how he left and reentered the country to go to Pakistan.” Not clear how he left and reentered the country? Hmmm…let me guess… the CIA told immigration to give him a special exception to enter and leave the country. While in America, “he worked as a cabdriver.” Nevertheless, “Abouhalima became a permanent resident through a special exemption in the 1986 Immigration Reform Act under which he claimed an exemption as an agricultural worker.”

How did Abouhalima get an exemption as an agricultural worker when he was a cabdriver who overstayed his tourist visa by five years? Let me take another guess…same answer. The CIA told immigration to make him a permanent resident. So the guy whom the CIA presumably helped enter and leave the country on multiple occasions using a tourist visa for five years too long, which allowed him to obtain permanent residency under a special exception for agricultural workers when he was really a cab driver, that guy helped detonate a bomb at the World Trade Center. And the CIA didn’t know that he was going to do it? I don’t think so.

Egypt knew Egypt warned of WTC bombing

Not only did the U.S. government know about the World Trade Center terrorist network in Brooklyn, the Egyptian government also knew about that terrorist network. And they warned us about that network before the bombing. “President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt said today that the United States could have prevented the bombing of the World Trade Center if American officials had heeded his country’s warnings about an Islamic fundamentalist network in the United States.”

Reasons for WTC bombing CIA used the WTC bombing to lash out at other governments

You may be asking yourself, why did the CIA have Al Qaeda detonate a bomb inside the World Trade Center? There were several reasons. Here’s one. The CIA used the bombing an excuse to lash out at other governments. Throughout the investigation, the New York Times would hint at foreign involvement in the plot. Presumably whenever the CIA wanted an excuse to lash out at this or that government, they would leak a story to the New York Times which hinted at that country’s involvement in the bombing. In the immediate aftermath of the bombing, however, the government told the Times that there was no foreign involvement. “More and more, one leading law enforcement official said, the bombing is seen as an act by ill-trained New York-area plotters operating independently and without direct orders from a foreign government or international terrorist network. But he cautioned that this view could change as the investigation progressed.” The New York Times printed this article on March 26.

WTC bombing a conspiracy from abroad / money from Iran and Germany

A month later the New York Times was singing a different tune. On April 25, the Times said, “signs are mounting that the most notorious terrorist attack on American soil was part of a wide conspiracy that involved the payments of large sums of money from abroad.” The U.S. government traced this money to Iran and Germany.

WTC case has “some fascinating turns”

Overlay: From “Officials Link $100,000 From Abroad To World Trade Center Blast” New York Times 4/25/93 “This case has some fascinating turns coming up in it,” said one law enforcement official. “There’s some real surprises in there. It’ll be a bigger show before it’s over.”

We Try To Blame Iraq Ramzi Yousef the Iraqi NYT says Ramzi Yousef was an Iraqi

Overlay: From “Missing Suspect Charged In Trade Center Bombing” New York Times 4/1/93 One of the countries we apparently wanted to pressure was Iraq. Shortly after the attack, the New York Times reported that Ramzi Yousef, the person who organized the attack, had Iraqi parents, which suggested that Iraq might somehow be involved in the attack.

U.S. investigating the connection between Iraq and the WTC bombing because of Yousef

“…investigators are examining whether the World Trade Center bombing could have some relation to Iraq. Their interest was sparked by a missing Iraqi, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, who came to America last September on a flight from Pakistan, and disappeared after the bombing.” However, the information about Yousef’s parents seems not to be true. In fact, the consensus now seems to be that his parents were Pakistani. But presumably, the U.S. government lied about his parents so they could implicate Iraq in the bombing.

Abdul Rahman Yasin Two informers flee to Iraq

And there was another apparent connection to Iraq. According to the New York Times, the FBI claimed “that two brothers who gave crucial information about the bombing may have fled to Iraq.” Presumably, the U.S. government sent those informers to Iraq so they would have an excuse to pressure the Iraqi government.

The fact that they fled to Iraq intrigues investigators

And after the bombing, in their comments to the New York Times, government officials did imply that Iraq was behind the bombing. “The fact that both suspects are believed to have fled to Iraq has intrigued investigators who are trying to determine whether a foreign government was behind the attack…”

FBI questions & releases Abdul Rahman Yasin & U.S. indicts him on 8/4

One of the brothers who fled to Iraq was Abdul Rahman Yasin. He “had been questioned by the F.B.I. and released almost immediately after the bombing of the World Trade Center.” Apparently, releasing him wasn’t such a great idea because on August 4 the government indicted him in connection with the attack. The government accused him of helping to “mix explosive chemicals in the month leading up to the bombing.”

Defense incredulous that U.S. allowed Yasin to leave

The lawyers for the other suspects were incredulous that the government had allowed Yasin to leave the country. “The issue is, why was he allowed to go considering the information they had after the bombing,” said one of the lawyers for the defense. “They knew he would go to a country with no relations with the United States, making his return an impossibility. That man knew more than anybody and that’s the man they allowed to leave.”

Laurie Mylroie Laurie Mylroie blames Iraq

In fact, not too long after the bombing, the neocons began blaming Iraq. Laurie Mylroie led the charge. She wrote a series of articles and books about the connection between Saddam Hussein and the terrorists behind the World Trade Center bombing.

James Woolsey supports Mylroie

Not surprisingly, former CIA director James Woolsey was a big supporter of Mylroie. He wrote the foreword for one of her books. The subtitle of that book was “The First World Trade Center Attack and Saddam Hussein’s War Against America.” In the foreword, Woolsey called the book “brave” and “lucid.”

Screwing Up the capture of Ramzi Yousef Reward kabuki starring Ramzi Yousef

Overlay: From “Reward Is Stymied In Towers Bombing” New York Times 7/23/93 Regardless of whether Yousef was Iraqi or Pakistani, he was certainly an asset of western intelligence agencies. I won’t say he was solely an asset of the CIA, however, because he was apparently educated in Britain, which implies that he was actually their asset to begin with. In any event, in the wake of the bombing, we showed everyone that Yousef was working for us. Why else would we bungle the effort to arrest him? We bungled the search for Yousef in several ways. To begin with, our government failed to offer a reward for his capture in the immediate aftermath of the bombing. The State Department and the FBI engaged in a game of kabuki. The State Department blamed the FBI for not offering the reward. “…a State Department spokesman, Michael McCurry, acknowledged that the department had denied a request by the F.B.I. in early April for the State Department to provide a substantial reward in the case.” “Another State Department official said the department had since made plain that it believed the F.B.I. should provide the reward, and that it had the money to do so.”

So, in other words, the FBI said the State Department should pony up the money for the reward. The State Department said the FBI should come up with the money. And while both sides blamed each other nothing got done. Rather than bureaucratic incompetence, this was bureaucratic kabuki intended on allowing Yousef to remain free.

Snowe says they would have offered a reward for Yousef if they wanted to

Overlay: From “Reward is Stymied in Towers Bombing” New York Times 7/23/93 In fact, one congresswoman essentially admitted that the whole thing was kabuki and that the government did not want to offer a reward. “…Representative Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine, said, ‘They could solve it if they really wanted to.’”

Government “fears” Yousef will get away because of no reward

And because the U.S. government failed to promptly offer a reward for the capture of Yousef, American “officials say privately that they fear the United States may have squandered a crucial chance to track down Mr. Yousef before he disappeared in the Middle East.”

FBI slow to add Yousef to FBI’s most wanted list

In fact, refusing to set a reward for Yousef’s capture was not the only thing the government screwed up. “After he was first identified as a suspect in the case on March 31, F.B.I. officials said they would move swiftly to add him to its most-wanted list. But it was not until April 19 that the F.B.I. could decide whose place on that list Mr. Yousef should take.”

Pakistani smuggling route Terrorists use smuggling air route

Here’s another reason why we had Al Qaeda bomb the World Trade Center. We wanted an excuse to demand that Pakistan crack down on an air route which was used to smuggle in undocumented aliens. Two of the bombers, Ahmed Ajaj and Ramzi Yousef, used this air route to travel to America. According to the New York Times, this air route “had become so notorious for bringing undocumented aliens into New York that American officials said they suspected official Pakistani complicity.”

Pakistan cracks down on air route

Overlay: From “Bomb Suspects Used Notorious Path to U.S.” New York Times 5/21/93 Of course, after it was learned that those two terrorists used that air route, the American government proceeded to threaten the Pakistani government and the Pakistani government took action. Their action “produced a sharp drop in the numbers of inadmissible aliens disembarking from Pakistan International Airlines flights in April, and so far this month.” “We’ve seen a dramatic turnaround, a dramatic improvement,” said one U.S. official.

Used WTC bombing to make our previous allies our enemies And here’s a final reason why we had Al Qaeda bomb the World Trade Center. We needed an excuse to make those people our enemy. Until the attack, those Islamic extremists were our friends. They helped us defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan. But after the Soviets left, we didn’t want them to be our allies anymore. The last thing the West wants to do is to ally itself with Muslims. So we needed an excuse to make them our enemy. The bombing did that.

But first we must pressure Egypt / Mubarak meets Arafat

To be more precise, the bombing started that process. We needed to use those Islamic extremists for a while longer, particularly the ones in Brooklyn. We needed them to help us attack Egypt. At this time, Egypt was participating in the negotiations between Israel and Palestine. Egypt has always played a role in the negotiations between those two countries, and they did so again in 1993. In April of that year, for example, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak met with Yasser Arafat in order to restart the negotiations. We had Al Qaeda attack Egypt because they were on the other side of the negotiations. Egypt was on the side of Palestine. We were on the side of Israel. And we wanted to force Egypt into supporting the agreement Israel wanted. So we had our Islamic extremists attack Egypt. And attack they did. They nearly overthrew the Egyptian government.

Egypt: no agreement means war / Egypt must prove it’s a key player

Overlay: From “Egypt and P.L.O. Confer on Talks” New York Times 4/14/93 Egypt was making its own threats. According to the New York Times, Hosni Mubarak said “that unless peace can be established between the Palestinians and the Israelis further regional conflicts will erupt.” That sounds to me like Mubarak was threatening to start a war unless the negotiations turned out the way he wanted. For proof that America wanted Egypt to act in a certain way during the negotiations, consider what this observer said. “Egypt has to prove to the United States that it’s a key player,” Mohammed Sid Ahmed, a political commentator, said. “The Americans are questioning now whether their investment in Egypt is reaping fruits in terms of stability. One way to exhibit a quick performance is on the peace talks.”

Islamic Group flattens Egyptian tourism industry

So who did we use to attack Egypt? We had a group of terrorists called the Islamic Group attack the Egyptian tourism industry. These attacks had a devastating impact on the economy as tourists stopped coming to Egypt. “By some estimates, up to 60 percent of tourist reservations have been canceled nationwide,” said the New York Times. Tourism is a critical part of the Egyptian economy. The New York Times called the tourism industry Egypt’s “most important source of revenue.”

Arab Afghans did the bombings

Overlay: From page 136 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid Don’t believe me that the CIA controlled the Islamic Group? Then consider this. According to Ahmed Rashid, the “bombings carried out in Egypt by Islamic groups were also traced back to Egyptian veterans trained in Afghanistan.” Remember, in Afghanistan those militants participated in a CIA operation. So if later on those militants attacked Egypt, isn’t it reasonable to think that the CIA had them do it?

Omar Abdel Rahman Sheikh Rahman comes to America Sheikh Rahman leads the Islamic Group

Still don’t believe that the CIA controlled the Islamic Group? Then how do you explain the fact that their leader, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, led the group from Brooklyn? According to the New York Times, Sheikh Rahman had a group of “followers in Egypt, known as The Islamic Group” which conducted a “series of killings both in Egypt and the United States, including the recent attacks against foreign tourists” in Egypt. He is the same person that Emerson and the FBI accuse of orchestrating the assassination of Meir Kahane and the bombing of the World Trade Center.

Emerson talks about Sheikh Rahman (Michael Cherkasky 1.wmv) Michael Cherkasky: “…it was a long term conspiracy that had been hatched by Sheikh Rahman.” (Omar Rahman 1.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, leader of a militant Egyptian movement, came to the United States in 1990. He would soon assert control over the Jihad movement in the U.S. The killing of Kahane was the first act of terrorism planned and carried out by Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman’s foot soldiers.” Seif Ashmawy: “Omar Abdel Rahman was accused in Egypt of enticing people to kill Sadat. He got away with it. He came here. I heard him myself talking about jihad. And I heard him and I understand how he could convince people in the way of jihad, in the wrong meaning of the word jihad.”

Sheikh Rahman becomes imam of Masjid Al-Farooq

Overlay: From “Islamic Leader on U.S. Terrorist List Is in Brooklyn” New York Times 12/16/90 Sheikh Rahman came to the U.S. in the summer of 1990. Immediately after arriving in America, “Sheik Abdel-Rahman was invited to be the imam [of Masjid al-Farooq].” Remember that Masjid Al-Farooq was the home of the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn. And so when Sheikh Rahman became the imam of Masjid Al-Farooq, he also became the head of the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn. Basically, he took up where Abdullah Azzam left off.

Sheikh Rahman recruits throughout America (Omar Rahman recruiting in America.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Sheikh Abdel Rahman actively recruited followers across the country.” Like Abdullah Azzam, Sheikh Rahman recruited fighters for the war in Afghanistan, at least initially. Omar Abdel Rahman: “The obligation of Allah is upon us to wage jihad for the sake of Allah. It is one of the obligations which we must undoubtedly fulfill. And we conquer the lands of the infidels and we spread Islam by calling the infidels to Allah and if they stand in our way then we wage jihad for the sake of Allah.”

Sheikh Rahman and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar

Overlay: From “After Blast, New Interest in Holy-War Recruits in Brooklyn” New York Times 4/11/93 Sheikh Rahman “…had a close relationship with Mr. Hekmatyar…” Remember that out of all the rebel groups in Afghanistan, the CIA gave the most money to the group led by Hekmatyar. So if Sheikh Rahman was close to Hekmatyar, he was also probably close to the CIA.

Switching from Afghanistan to Egypt

Overlay: From “Suspect in Blast Believed to Be in Pakistan” New York Times 3/18/93 Sheikh Rahman came to America about a half year after Abdullah Azzam was assassinated. It looks like the CIA brought Sheikh Rahman to America so he could replace Abdullah Azzam as the leader of the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn. Apparently, the CIA wanted a high profile extremist to replace Abdullah Azzam. And remember that Sheikh Rahman became famous for ordering the death of Anwar Sadat, the former president of Egypt. This is the guy the CIA recruited to replace Abdullah Azzam. Assuming Sheikh Rahman really was a CIA asset that means the CIA was probably responsible for the assassination of Sadat. Actually, there was another person who ran the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn (alongside of Sheikh Rahman). His name was Mustafa Shalabi. He did not get along with Sheikh Rahman. “The sheik and Mr. Shalabi had a power struggle over control of the mujahedeen fund-raising group, according to acquaintances of the two men, with the sheik trying to use the funds for his own efforts to promote an Islamic revolution in Egypt against the Mubarak Government.” “Mr. Shalabi was found murdered in his Sea Gate home in March 1991.” No one has ever been prosecuted for killing Shalabi. Mostly likely, Rahman had him killed and the government didn’t prosecute him because they wanted him to kill Shalabi. They wanted to shift the focus of Al Qaeda from Afghanistan to Egypt. By this time, the Russians had left Afghanistan. And so now was the time to go after Egypt. In fact, this is probably why Abdullah Azzam was assassinated. He was focused on Afghanistan. But the CIA wanted to shift their focus to Egypt.

America allows Sheikh Rahman to stay & leave & reenter Detectives claim to discover Sheikh Rahman while investigating Nosair

Don’t believe me that the CIA brought Sheikh Rahman into the U.S. to replace Abdullah Azzam? Then how do you explain how immigration handled the situation? On December 16, 1990, the New York Times told everyone that Sheikh Rahman was living in Brooklyn. This is the guy who was involved in the assassination of Sadat. And he was living in America. So what did the government do? Did they arrest him? No. Did they deport him? No. Is this suspicious? Yes.

U.S. revokes Sheikh Rahman’s visa on 11/17/90

Actually, the government started off on the right foot. “State Department officials revoked the sheik’s visa on Nov. 17 after the F.B.I. told them of the sheik’s presence…”

Sheikh Rahman gets a green card / enters U.S. again in 8/91

After revoking his tourist visa, instead of deporting him… “…the Immigration and Naturalization Service office in Newark mistakenly granted Sheik Rahman permanent resident status, or a green card, in April 1991…” At some point after that in 1991, Rahman left America to go overseas. When he returned in August, instead of refusing him entry, the U.S. allowed him in.

Sheikh Rahman travels to Canada & back in 1992

Subsequently, U.S. immigration revoked his green card. And then he went to Canada towards the end of 1992. And then when he tried to come back to America…you guessed it. Immigration let him back him. “If he went to Canada they could have excluded him coming back in,” said Charles Schumer. “Here they spent all this time trying to get him out. He goes to Canada and gives them the perfect reason to exclude him and they don’t.”

U.S. shouldn’t have allowed Sheikh Rahman in from Canada & Canada should have refused entry

Overlay: From “Sheik Slipped Into Canada, Witnesses Say” New York Times 4/24/93 “It would certainly be illegal for him to come back in,” said William R. Tillman, an immigration official. “To depart the United States is in effect to abandon the application for admission.” Incidentally, Canada shouldn’t have allowed him in either.

NYT says Sheikh Rahman is easily identifiable

The New York Times mocked immigration for allow Rahman to enter and leave the country at will. “With one eyeball missing entirely, and the other disfigured, the sheik is hardly difficult to recognize,” said the Times. After looking at the way immigration handled Sheikh Rahman, there is only one reasonable conclusion. The government intentionally allowed him to enter and leave the country whenever he wanted. No other explanation makes sense. Remember, this is the guy who was involved in the assassination of Sadat. This is the guy who is telling his followers to blow things up in Egypt.

Egypt wants America to deal with Sheikh Rahman Egypt provides detailed warnings

Overlay: From “Egypt Warned U.S. of Terror, Mubarak Says” New York Times 4/5/93 The fact that our government had allowed Sheikh Rahman to live in Brooklyn had not gone unnoticed in Egypt. Remember that Egypt had warned us that members of the Al Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn would bomb the World Trade Center. And they were happy to point out that Sheikh Rahman led that group. About a month after the attack on the World Trade Center, the New York Times printed this story. “…senior Egyptian officials said that several months ago, they had given the Americans detailed warnings about the activities and inflammatory oratory of Mr. Abdel Rahman and his operation in New Jersey, and about mosques in Brooklyn, through diplomatic and intelligence channels.”

Egypt wants America to crackdown on terrorists

In an interview with the New York Times, President Mubarak called on the Clinton administration to crack down on Omar Abdel Rahman and the Islamic Group. “Mr. Mubarak called on the new Administration to take a more active role in stemming international terrorism, particularly activities inspired by Islamic fundamentalist groups.” President Mubarak “blamed the current violence in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East in part on Iran and in part on veterans who fought with Afghan guerrillas as part of the American-backed war against the Soviet-backed Communist Government in Kabul.” His remarks imply that America was taking a lackadaisical attitude toward Islamic terrorism. Now why would that be? The most logical reason is that America controlled those groups and was using them for our own purposes, just like we did in Afghanistan.

Egypt says Sheikh Rahman leads the Islamic Group from Brooklyn

The Egyptian government was fairly explicit in its allegations about what Sheikh Rahman was doing in New York. “Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman uses New York as a base,” said Mamdouh Beltagui, the director of the Egyptian state information service. “He raises funds and sends money back to Egypt with couriers. He passes on messages to his followers, giving orders about what they should do next and who they should target. We do not understand why the U.S. authorities have allowed him to enter the country.” I’m sure this guy knew exactly why America allowed Sheikh Rahman to orchestrate those attacks from Brooklyn. He just didn’t want to state the obvious: that America wanted the Islamic Group to destabilize the Egyptian government. Had he directly accused America of trying to overthrow his government, I’m sure that America would have retaliated. Presumably, we would have told the Islamic Group to increase the frequency and severity of their attacks.

Mubarak wants us to keep Sheikh Rahman

Not only did Egypt want America to reign in Sheikh Rahman, they also wanted us to keep him. “Oh, keep him in your country!" exclaimed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. “We don’t need Abdel Rahman. You accepted him in your country, keep him!” So obviously after having Sheikh Rahman for decades, Egypt didn’t want him back. They wanted us to deal with him. And now that Sheikh Rahman had his followers bomb the World Trade Center, we had the perfect excuse to jail him, which is what Egypt wanted. But would we take it?

Egypt accuses U.S. of raising the Sheikh’s profile

As time wore on, the Egyptian government became more explicit in its accusations against America. In July, they accused the U.S. government of providing publicity for Sheikh Rahman in order to increase his power. “The high profile that the Clinton Administration and the American press have given to the sheik and to the arrest of his followers is seen by many Egyptian officials as an effort to enhance the stature of Egypt’s Islamic militant movement.” “The mass media has turned out to be a propaganda tool for the terrorists, especially when through ignorance, the terrorist crimes are overestimated, and the terrorists capabilities magnified,” said Al Ahram, an Egyptian newspaper.

U.S. ignores warning / Egypt calls Sheikh Rahman a creation of U.S.

According to the New York Times, “relations between the United States and Egypt, once the linchpin of American policy in the Arab world, have sharply deteriorated…” “Egyptian officials” condemned Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman “as a ‘creation’ of Washington.” “…senior Egyptian officials, including President Mubarak, contend that the American Government repeatedly ignored their warnings about the danger posed by Mr. Abdel Rahman.”

Egypt detains 3 Americans

At one point in 1993, the Egyptian government retaliated against America. They detained three Americans in Egypt and they charged them with trying to convert Muslims into Christians. Presumably, Egypt did this in an effort to pressure us into reigning in Sheikh Rahman.

America sides with Sheikh Rahman America sanguine about Sheikh Rahman

Don’t believe me that the U.S. government sided with Sheikh Rahman against the Egyptian government? Listen to this. According to the New York Times, “Despite the repeated warnings from Egypt, American law enforcement and intelligence officials have taken a somewhat sanguine view about the threat posed by Mr. Abdel Rahman and his followers.” So while Egypt is terrified of Sheikh Rahman and his Islamic Group, American intelligence is “somewhat sanguine.” Might it be that America is sanguine because America controls the Islamic Group and is using it to attack Egypt?

The New York Times sides with the Islamic Group NYT belittles Mubarak’s terrorism advice

Not only did the U.S. government side with the Islamic Group, the U.S. media also sided with the Islamic Group. This is what the New York Times wrote in response to Mubarak’s pleas for help. “…on the subject of combating international terrorism, his prescriptions ought to be taken with a large grain of desert sand.”

NYT calls Mubarak names

Overlay: From “President Mubarak's Flawed Advice” New York Times 4/7/93 But wait! It gets better. This is what the New York Times said was the cause of the recent wave of violence in Egypt. “Mr. Mubarak’s inbred, bureaucratic and unresponsive regime has lost touch with the needs and feelings of large numbers of ordinary Egyptians. The Islamic insurgency, fueled by the fiery rhetoric of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and others, has survived repression and grown as much through Government incompetence as through fundamentalist fanaticism.” This is truly extraordinary. The New York Times admits that Sheikh Rahman has “fueled” the insurgency in Egypt. But instead of urging the U.S. government to make Sheikh Rahman stop, the Times calls the Egyptian government “inbred” and blames them. In case you were wondering why, after publishing all these articles which showed the connection between Islamic extremism and the U.S. government, why didn’t the New York Times realize that these terrorists were controlled by our government? Of course the answer is that the New York Times knew damn well that our government controlled these terrorists and they supported it. While the CIA was using the Islamic Group to destroy the Egyptian economy, in an effort to further increase the pressure on the Egyptian government, the New York Times used its editorial page to attack the Egyptian government and blame it for the terrorism inflicted by our proxies.

U.S. meets with Islamic Group members in Egypt Meetings about human rights violations since 1991

Still don’t believe me that America had the Islamic Group attack Egypt? Then how do you explain the fact that U.S. diplomats met with the leaders of the Islamic Group on multiple occasions? According to the New York Times, “Officials from the United States Embassy have had meetings since 1991 with militant leaders of the Islamic Group…” The “meetings had been held at the embassy’s request and centered on allegations of human rights abuses committed by the Egyptian Government.”

U.S. walking a fine line in meeting the Islamic Group

“Western diplomats who were aware of the contacts said United States officials were walking a fine line between seeking to understand the goals and nature of the opposition group and refraining from any official relationship with a known terrorist organization.” There are two ways of looking at these meetings. The U.S. government could have used these meetings to coordinate the attacks against the Egyptian government, though the Times article does not present any evidence of this. On the other hand, you can take the article at face value and say the American government only wanted to talk to these militants about human rights abuses of the Egyptian government. But even in that case, the U.S. government would still be encouraging those militants to attack their government. The U.S. government was sending a message that they were concerned about human rights violations against members of the Islamic Group. So the meetings were a way of saying, “We sympathize with what you are going through.” At a minimum, this should have encouraged the Islamic Group to go after the government and it should have scared the Egyptian government as the meeting should have made both sides believe that the U.S. government was backing the militants.

Islamic Group says Mubarak is weak & America is starting to realize that

“The Mubarak regime is weak,” one of the militant leaders asserted, “and it is our impression that the Americans are beginning to realize this.” U.S. diplomats had a reason for giving the Islamic Group the impression that the Egyptian government was weak. They wanted to embolden the Islamic Group to challenge the regime. If they didn’t want the Islamic Group to attack the Egyptian government, they would have told the Islamic Group that the Egyptian government was strong and that the Islamic Group would not be able to defeat them.

Western diplomat agrees that Egypt is corrupt

“The militants say the Government is corrupt and repressive,” said a Western diplomat, “and as long as the Government ignores these charges, which are largely true, they will fail to garner much support. Not many people care if policemen get shot.” Gee, I wonder which side he is on?

America says Egypt helped in the extradition of Abouhalima

Overlay: From “Behind Deal for Custody, Fears of Islamic Wrath” New York Times 3/25/93 And we did other things to coax the Islamic Group into attacking Egypt. Remember that after Mahmud Abouhalima bombed the World Trade Center, he fled to Egypt where he was arrested. Egypt agreed to extradite Abouhalima to America. But they had one condition. The Egyptian government did not want the public to know that they extradited Abouhalima to America. For if the public knew, the Islamic Group would know that the Egyptian government had extradited one of their members and they would retaliate. So the Egyptian government demanded that the U.S. government hide their involvement in the Abouhalima extradition. But did the U.S. government live up to their end of the bargain? Hell no. After Egypt extradited Abouhalima, the U.S. government told the New York Times that “Egypt remained so concerned about retaliation by Islamic fundamentalists aligned with Mr. Abouhalima’s mentor, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, that it had extracted a pledge of secrecy from American officials about the full extent of its cooperation.” Of course, the mere fact that the New

York Times printed that sentence meant that the U.S. government was violating their secrecy agreement. Presumably, they violated the secrecy agreement because they wanted to make the Islamic Group angry. They wanted the Islamic Group to blow something up in Egypt.

America did not use the WTC bombing to crack down on Sheikh Rahman U.S. says Abouhalima statements due to torture

Overlay: From “Mubarak Says a Suspect In Blast Revealed Details” New York Times 4/3/93 So in the end, did we use the World Trade Center bombing to crack down on Sheikh Rahman? No. But we had the perfect opportunity to. When Egypt had Mahmud Abouhalima in custody, they interrogated him. According to Egypt, during that interrogation, Abouhalima implicated the Islamic Group in the attack against the World Trade Center. And with that confession America had the perfect excuse to crack down on Sheikh Rahman and his cohorts. But did we? No. According to the New York Times, U.S. officials said the statements provided by Abouhalima during his stay in Egypt “were most likely given under duress if not torture…” As such, we ignored the statement he made during his stay in Egypt. Keep in mind, at this point, the negotiations between Israel and Palestine were still ongoing. America would not crack down on Sheikh Rahman until the negotiations ended. We needed to keep the pressure on.

Released the tape to threaten entrapment Remember those tapes of the conversations between Emad Salem and his FBI handler, the tapes in which Salem warned the FBI of the impending attack against the World Trade Center? Presumably, the government released these tapes because they wanted to imply that the attack was orchestrated by the U.S. government (which it was). As such, Sheikh Rahman and his followers should not be blamed because they were only doing what the U.S. government told them to do. In effect, the tapes were a way of showing the Egyptian government that America would not crack down on Sheikh Rahman, at least not at this point.

Osama bin Laden, Sudan, and the Islamic Group Egypt blames Iran / Egypt accuses Iran of creating terrorist camps in Sudan

In addition to blaming America, the Egyptian government also blamed Iran. According to the New York Times, “Mr. Mubarak had raised specific concerns about Iran’s role in promoting Islamic violence against Egypt’s secular Government and elsewhere in the region.” President Mubarak talked to us about “Iran’s role in establishing terrorist training camps in the Sudan that Cairo believes are being used as bases for attacks against officials, tourists and other targets in Egypt…”

U.S. says Iran helped train terrorists in Sudan and Lebanon

Overlay: From “Egypt Warns C.I.A. Chief on Iran-Backed Terror” New York Times 4/18/93 “United States Government officials have said there is evidence that Iran has helped train members of those groups, both at the Sudanese camps and at others in Lebanon.” In the final analysis, these groups were controlled by America. But if they have links to Iran, doesn’t that imply that America has links to Iran. This just shows you that relations between America and Iran are not as adversarial as they seem. And there’s one other thing. This article was published in the spring of 1993. Osama bin Laden moved to Sudan in 1992. It seems likely that the terrorist camps in Sudan that Egypt is referring to are the terrorist camps set up by Osama bin Laden.

Osama funds Islamic Group Osama funds Islamic Group (cover)

And according to this CIA document…

Osama funds Islamic Group while living in Sudan

“Wealthy Khartoum-based Saudi oppositionist ‘Usama ((bin Ladin)) is a regular supporter of and contributor to the Egyptian Gama’at al-Islamiyya.” Gama’at al-Islamiyya is Arabic for Islamic Group. So you have a situation where Iran, the U.S. government, and Osama bin Laden seem to be working together to pressure the Egyptian government.

Sheikh Rahman’s sons mentor Osama

Overlay: From page 136 of “Taliban” by Ahmed Rashid Osama bin Laden has other ties to the Islamic Group and Sheikh Rahman. According to Ahmed Rashid, the two sons of Sheikh Rahman acted as mentors for Osama bin Laden.

Egypt blames Europe and Saudi Arabia

In addition to blaming America, in addition to blaming Iran, the Egyptians also blamed the Europeans and the Saudis. Egypt claimed that the Islamic Group received funding from “Iranian businesses and expatriates in Europe, Islamic institutions in Saudi Arabia and the German offices of the Muslim Brotherhood.” It seems like everyone was ganging up on Egypt at this point…

Radicalization Torture Egypt tortured Abouhalima

Overlay: From “Core Group in Bombing Plot Identified, Authorities Report” New York Times 3/26/93 You may be wondering, how does a person like Mahmud Abouhalima become radicalized? In a word, torture. In Abouhalima’s case, the Egyptian government tortured him brutally. This is what his lawyer said… “He tells me he has cigarette burns around his genitalia, bruises on his legs.” “He said to me he was kept naked in a cold room about 10 days, blindfolded the whole time, beaten with wooden sticks, metal bars, hung horizontally from a metal beam, as he said, like a shish kebab.” “He was threatened they would kill him.”

Egypt tortured Sheikh Rahman

Overlay: From “Islamic Sheik Says Mubarak Lies and Spies on Americans” New York Times 4/7/93 Of course, Abouhalima wasn’t the only person Egypt tortured. They also tortured Sheikh Rahman. According to him, Egypt subjected him to “12 kinds of torture.” And that explains his hatred towards Hosni Mubarak. You may be asking yourself the following question. If torture turns people into terrorists, why do it? What was Egypt thinking? Presumably, whoever was doing the torturing was controlled by the West. Presumably, the West wanted to create a group of terrorists who wanted to overthrow the government so they could have some leverage over Egypt. Presumably, those traitors who were responsible for the torture of all those Egyptians were in the military and the intelligence agencies.

Israel radicalizes Ahmed Ajaj

Another one of the World Trade Center bombers, Ahmed Ajaj, was radicalized by the Israeli government. While in Palestine, he “was imprisoned repeatedly and tortured” for leading “anti-Israel demonstrations on the occupied West Bank…”

Drugs used to radicalize In addition to using torture, western governments also use drugs to turn people into murderers. The government has a wide variety of drugs which they illegally administer to unsuspecting victims. Some of these drugs make you very angry. I know because the U.S. government has at times administered these types of drugs to me. These drugs have a wide range of effects. In fact, in my experience, the effects are similar if not identical to the effects that anabolic steroids have. Actually, I have never used anabolic steroids so I can’t be sure that the effects are identical. But while having these drugs administered to me, in addition to becoming fairly angry, I do notice a substantial increase in my ability to exercise, my voice deepens, and my balls do seem to shrink. These are all symptoms of anabolic steroids. (Crazy Drugged Woman.wmv) If you want to see what it looks like to be on these drugs, take a look at this woman. I don’t have any proof that this woman was drugged, but the government has been administering these drugs to me and that’s kind of what it looks like when you’re on these drugs.

Ideology Mohammad al-Asi (Mohammad al-Asi.wmv) You would be surprised to learn the identity of some of the people who are trying to convince Muslims to hate Jews and Christians. Emerson claims that this man, Mohammed al-Asi, is a radical preacher like Sheikh Rahman. Mohammed al-Asi: “If the Americans are placing their forces in the Persian Gulf, we should be creating another war front for the Americans in the Muslim world and specifically where American interests are concentrated: in Egypt, in Turkey, in the Indian subcontinent, just to mention a few. Strike against American interests there.” The important thing here is that al-Asi told his followers to attack in Egypt, Turkey, or South Asia. Despite his admonition to “strike American interests,” if his followers were to take his advice, you can be sure that Egyptians, Turks, or South Asians would suffer the most. Presumably, the CIA told al-Asi to tell his followers to attack Egypt, Turkey, and India because the CIA wanted to put pressure on the governments of those countries. Mohammed al-Asi: “In the past eleven years, we’ve been coming here and we cannot go into the masjid. Is this freedom? Is this what is included in the Bill of Rights?” I would bet just about anything that al-Asi is Jewish. Look at him. Listen to his voice. His emotion sounds completely artificial and fake. To simulate emotion, he talks loud. He sounds much less like a radical and much more like a dork. Seriously, doesn’t he look and sound like the Comic Book Guy? Mohammed al-Asi: “I would say that the Jews have inproportionate control over the instruments of government. I would say Capitol Hill is Zionist occupied territory. I would say the executive building, the White House, is also under a cloud of Zionist umbrella. And so could be said about the State Department, the Pentagon, etc.” In fact, when you listen to al-Asi speak it appears that he often has to restraining himself from bursting out into laughter. Apparently, he thinks what he is doing is funny. Presumably, he is laughing at his Muslim followers for buying into his silly con job. Mohammed al-Asi: “We’re not picking on the United States. We’re not picking on anyone. We’re just dealing with the people who are coming and causing all these problems. Why is the United States placing itself in the middle of all of these problems? If it extricates itself from all of this it will not force us to do what we are forced to do. But if it stirs a hornet’s nest, the hornets are not going to respond in a lackadaisical manner.” Steven Emerson: “Do you believe then in the use of violence, even as a last resort?”

Mohammed al-Asi: “Yes. I believe in the use of violence. Well, uh…wait a minute. Don’t, you know, take this issue or put words in the mouth of the interlocutor. Violence is not the word. The use of arms I think would be the word, the more accurate word to use here. And um, the Koran teaches us that sometimes the use of arms is inevitable in order for justice to be done. This is the only recourse we have.” Steven Emerson: “What about Egyptian leaders like Mubarak or Israeli leaders who come to the United States? Since they are running their government’s policies, are they legitimate targets?” Mohammed al-Asi: “No, unless the United States becomes a war front they’re not legitimate targets.” Steven Emerson: “Unless the United States becomes a war front?” Mohammed al-Asi: “Unless the United States becomes a war front.” Steven Emerson: “At what time would it become a war front?” Mohammed al-Asi: “When do places become war fronts? When you have a war.” Steven Emerson: “Is there emerging a war front condition at this point?” Mohammed al-Asi: “No, I don’t think there’s a war front here in the United States at this point. I think if the whole scenario continues the way it has, inevitably the United States will be reaching a type of war front. Yeah, but not right now.” Steven Emerson: “How much longer do we have?” Mohammed al-Asi: “That’s very hard to predict. If I knew the answer to that I’d probably be somewhere else.” Muhammad Salah You may be wondering, if al-Asi is Jewish, then why is he telling his followers to attack Israel? Furthermore, why is America supporting terrorists who attack Israel if Israel is our ally? (Muhammad Salah.wmv) Steven Emerson: “Muhammad Salah, a Palestinian American, who was arrested in Israel in early 1993 for financing the purchase of weapons that were used to murder four people. He had attended secret workshops on terrorist warfare at another conference held in the Midwest in 1990.” Here’s what you need to know. Israel plans on seizing all of Palestine. And they use Palestinian terrorism as an excuse to do it. When a terrorist attacks them, they use that as an excuse to seize more land. And they also use terrorism as an excuse to avoid negotiating with the Palestinians.

America finally cracks down on Sheikh Rahman and his followers Attack On UN Thwarted Terrorists arrested before attack on UN and other targets

Overlay: From “Specter of Terror” New York Times 6/25/93 We didn’t crackdown on the Brooklyn terrorist network until a few months after the bombing of the World Trade Center. At that point, those terrorists “were planning to detonate powerful car bombs at the United Nations headquarters in New York; the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels … 26 Federal Plaza, an office building in lower Manhattan that houses the Federal Bureau of Investigation…and other strategic targets.” The terrorists also wanted to conduct a series of assassinations. “Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali of the United Nations and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt were on the group’s hit list … [as were] Senator Alfonse M. D’Amato and Assemblyman Dov Hikind…”

Terrorists came from Sudan / listened to Sheikh Rahman

In this case, many of the terrorists who were going to participate in the attack came from Sudan (where Osama bin Laden was living). “Five of the suspects were born in the Sudan…” “…six of them worshiped at the mosque of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman…” “The Sudan has … emerged as a principal transit point for Egyptian and Algerian veterans of the war with Afghanistan who want to return home to join domestic Islamic fundamentalist movements. It was through Sudan, too, that Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman made his way to the United States in 1990, granted a visa in the American Embassy in Khartoum.

Siddig interpreted for Sheikh Rahman

The “ringleader” of the group, Siddig Ibrahim Siddig Ali was the “personal interpreter of Mr. Abdel Rahman.”

Siddig claims entrapment by Salem

Overlay: From “Bomb Informer Active in 1991, Authorities Say” New York Times 7/15/93 “…Siddig Ali, said in an interview that he was entrapped by Mr. Salem.” Remember, Emad Salem was the FBI informer who had infiltrated the group. Siddig Ali may be right. After creating all these terrorists for the war in Afghanistan, the CIA may have wanted to dispose of them. Having them try to blow up the UN and arresting them before they could carry out the attack would definitely do the trick.

Oslo & the End of Sheikh Rahman America arrests Sheikh Rahman

Finally, on July 2, about a week after the government arrested the terrorists involved in the latest plot, Janet Reno ordered the arrest of Sheikh Rahman. But America would not indict him until over a month later.

U.S. threatens to release Sheikh Rahman

Overlay: From “U.S.-Egypt Ties Are Strained In Detention of Islamic Cleric” New York Times 7/7/93 In fact, after detaining Sheikh Rahman, we immediately threatened to release him unless the Egyptian government offered to take custody of him. “State Department officials said that under American law, Mr. Abdel Rahman, who is appealing an expulsion order, could leave and seek refuge in a third country that would support his militant goals, including the overthrow of the Egyptian Government.” Rahman had the option of leaving the country “because the American authorities detained him on immigration charges instead of charging him with a crime.” “The only way to counter such a departure, American officials said, was a formal extradition request by the Egyptian Government…” This, of course, made Egypt angry. They wanted America to deal with Sheikh Rahman. They had Sheikh Rahman once before and that didn’t turn out so well. They were hoping that we would dispose of the Sheikh ourselves.

U.S. indicts Sheikh Rahman

And about two months later, we finally did. “Two months after she turned down recommendations to charge Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman as a terrorist, Attorney General Janet Reno reversed herself and approved an indictment…” The U.S. government charged Sheikh Rahman “with complicity in a conspiracy beginning with the shooting death of Rabbi Meir Kahane in 1989 and continuing through the World Trade Center bombing in February and the bombing and assassination plot uncovered in June.”

U.S. decides to indict Sheikh Rahman on Monday

“The decision to indict him was made on Monday in a closed-door meeting of the Justice Department’s top brass.” As you can see, this story was published on August 26.

August 1993 Calendar

So if the Justice Department decided to indict Sheikh Rahman on Monday, that means they made their decision on August 23. Notice that the Justice Department indicted Rahman for the death of Meir Kahane, which means that they should have indicted him three years ago, in 1990. But they waited until August 23, 1993. Why did they do that?

Negotiation for Oslo Accords completed on 8/20/93

Israel and Palestine completed the negotiation for the Oslo Accords on August 20, 1993. America decided to indict Sheikh Rahman only three days later. This is not a coincidence. Disposing of Sheikh Rahman was America’s way of rewarding Egypt for its role in the negotiations. So after Egypt helped create the Oslo Accords, America had to uphold its end of the bargain and get rid of Sheikh Rahman. Of course, the Oslo Accords were meaningless. None of the key issues were decided in the agreement (the key issues are: defining the borders of Palestine, defining the status of Jerusalem, and dealing with the Palestinian refugees). The reason why the agreement solved none of those key issues is because America and Europe have always wanted the Middle East to be at war with itself. Resolving those key issues would do much to end that war. To prevent that from happening, America had the Islamic Group blow things up in Egypt to make sure that Egypt would offer its consent to an agreement that resolved none of the key issues. Of course, the other reason why there is no peace agreement is because Israel wants to seize the rest of Palestine. By not resolving the borders issue, that allows Israel to continue to seize Palestinian territory. This will not stand.

What if Mubarak tells the truth? Bill O’Reilly On February 6, 2011, before the Super Bowl, Bill O'Reilly interviewed Obama. At the start of the interview, the two talked about the revolution in Egypt. O’Reilly seemed to be worried that if America took a hard line against President Mubarak that bad things could happen. “And the other problem is Mubarak knows a lot of bad things about the United States,” said O’Reilly. “I’m sure you're aware of that.” “So I'm just worried that he might go off the reservation...” O’Reilly seemed to be worried that Mubarak might tell the world the truth about Al Qaeda, depending on how America approached the situation in Egypt. The amazing thing is that O’Reilly seems to know about all the bad things America has done in Egypt but yet he is willing to keep this information secret. That makes him an accomplice and a criminal. And neither he, nor Obama, nor his staff, nor the military, nor the CIA, nor academia, nor the rest of the media will escape unpunished. History ends here.

Mubarak blames America

Overlay: From “Egyptian Paper Says It Misquoted Mubarak on Sheik and the C.I.A.” New York Times 5/31/93 O’Reilly had good reason to fear that Mubarak might “go off the reservation.” In fact, he’s done it before, sort of. After the World Trade Center bombing, during an interview with an Egyptian newspaper, he said the following about Omar Abdel Rahman. “The sheik has been an agent of the American intelligence apparatus since the days of Afghanistan. He went to Peshawar and spoke about holy war. He gets a continuing salary and the visa which he obtained was not issued by mistake; it was because he had performed specific services.” Presumably, Mubarak said these things to pressure America. Mubarak must have gotten whatever he wanted because a few days later the newspaper printed a retraction, saying that Mubarak did not say those things. Of course, in reality, I bet you anything Mubarak did say those things and that he said those things to pressure America. Furthermore, I bet you he anticipated America would cave in to his demands and he would have the newspaper issue a retraction in a few days.

Mubarak sick

So how did America prevent Mubarak from spilling the beans after his arrest? Apparently our intelligence agencies have ways of disposing of people who know too much. After losing power, Mubarak developed a mysterious illness which made him bedridden. Egypt had to put him in a bed in a cage at the courtroom in order for him to attend his trial. So now he’s probably one of two things. He’s either too scared to tell the truth or too drugged to remember what the truth is. This will not stand.