Omar Saeed Sheikh Disinfo Goose Chase?

Someone presented the video below as a "good video". Maybe we need to actually watch it. It's riddled with inconstancies and apparent disinfo.

This video seems to me to be soooo entirely full of inconsistencies and contradictions.

1. What is the damn guys name? Look at the papers they flash...I saw this many names presented...

a. Omar Saeed Sheikh
b. Sheikh Saeed
c. Shaykh Said
d. Shaykh Saiid
e. Sheikh Said
f. omar saeed sheikh
g. (hard to make out) la times: Sheii aka Shaykh Saiid
h. ahmad umar sayed sheikh

2. Evidence of ISI Connection (or lack of)

a. main evidence "because saiid said so" to the arresting policeman in india that he was ISI member

b. some un-named Indian looking lady says he got assistance and protection by ISI after he was released and went back to Pakistan (again, because she said so)

c. two days after afgahnastan invasion....times of india says 'senior government officials' confirm that Indian secret services contributed to confirming the link between the two

d. William pepper: "you have to understand...Mahmood Amed was a key player"

(william pepper, the lawyer for the MLK family after the assassination of MLK)

e. "though the evidence was NEVER PUBLIC ALLY DISCLOSED...The Indian Intelligence claimed that the FBI PRIVATELY confirmed the story" (but i thought India was the source of the story?

So in the end we have NILL.

It seems more likely this is a fabricated story because it was released in OCT 01, just after the invasion of Afgahn. and the admin needed the alquieda proof!

Research always helps

1. What is the damn guys name? Look at the papers they flash...I saw this many names presented...

a. Omar Saeed Sheikh
b. Sheikh Saeed
c. Shaykh Said
d. Shaykh Saiid
e. Sheikh Said
f. omar saeed sheikh
g. (hard to make out) la times: Sheii aka Shaykh Saiid
h. ahmad umar sayed sheikh

The various names and spellings are obviously aimed at throwing people off the trail, not getting people hooked on disinformation as you're suggesting.

Omar Sheikh, who was skilled in the arts of disguise and manipulation (he had good training), used several pseudonyms and variations of his name to set up banks accounts and conduct other business.

Do some research and you'll discover that Omar Sheikh was indeed a real person, who was born in Britain, where he attended private school and then went on to attend the London School of Economics where he was eventually recruited by Western intelligence during the 1990s to fight in Bosnia.

2. Evidence of ISI Connection (or lack of)

a. main evidence "because saiid said so" to the arresting policeman in india that he was ISI member

b. some un-named Indian looking lady says he got assistance and protection by ISI after he was released and went back to Pakistan (again, because she said so)

c. two days after afgahnastan invasion....times of india says 'senior government officials' confirm that Indian secret services contributed to confirming the link between the two

d. William pepper: "you have to understand...Mahmood Amed was a key player"

(william pepper, the lawyer for the MLK family after the assassination of MLK)

Again, this is where a little research could go a long way. Omar Sheikh's history and affiliations to the ISI have been documented by several sources.

During the 1990s, after leaving the LSE, he traveled to Pakistan and Afghanistan for training, where he joined up with the HUM, an ISI-CIA sponsored jihadist organization. As I noted in this article, Omar Sheikh was...

...arrested by Indian authorities in late 1994, but freed in December of 1999 in exchange for the safe release of the passengers of Indian Airlines Flight 814, which had been hijacked by HUM militants. The ransom operation, according to Indian authorities, was “masterminded” by the ISI.15

Immediately following his release, according to Vanity Fair, Omar “stayed at a Kandahar guesthouse for several days, conferring with Taliban leader Mullah Muhammad Omar and — reports had it — Osama bin Laden, who was said to refer to him as ‘my special son.’”

When Omar Sheikh “crossed the Pakistan frontier in early January 2000, an ISI colonel was waiting to conduct him to a safe house in Islamabad. From there he proceeded to London, where he reunited with family,” Vanity Fair reported.16

Despite Omar’s affiliations to terrorism, the British government did not prosecute him or even dispute his presence in the country. On the contrary, Omar was welcomed with open arms.

“It is quite possible that Mr Sheikh will come back to this country where his family is. … And as a full British national he has every right to return,” a spokesman for Britain’s Foreign Office was quoted by BBC News as saying at the time. “[I]f he was to contact us, and asked us for passport facilities,” the spokesman added, “we would issue him with a passport.”17

Omar’s time in the UK was brief, however, and he soon returned to Pakistan to continue his work as a terrorist operative. But of course, Omar was not the typical fundamentalist.

As Newsweek reported, Omar began living “openly-and opulently-in a wealthy Lahore neighborhood. U.S. sources say he did little to hide his connections to terrorist organizations, and even attended swanky parties attended by senior Pakistani government officials.”18

Not only does Omar Sheikh have connections to the ISI, he was offered a passport by the British government just after he was freed in a ransom hijacking operation apparently masterminded by the ISI!

e. "though the evidence was NEVER PUBLIC ALLY DISCLOSED...The Indian Intelligence claimed that the FBI PRIVATELY confirmed the story" (but i thought India was the source of the story?

So in the end we have NILL.

From "Britain now faces its own blowback"...

 

"...this is the same Omar Sheikh who, at the behest of General Mahmood Ahmed, head of the ISI, wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, the leading 9/11 hijacker, before the New York attacks, as confirmed by Dennis Lormel, director of FBI's financial crimes unit."

 

Don't you find it amazing..

That all these connections and terrorist groups change names, change affiliations, are all connected to ISI, CIA, MI6, and then this guy has like 10 names?

How can one possibly verify any of this stuff?

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Disinfo? I wish.

Yes I do find it amazing.

But this is not based on a single source or a few bits of erroneous information. The CIA's covert support for 'al-Qaeda' has been exposed and extensively documented by numerous reputable sources spanning well over a decade.

Was the conflict in Bosnia just a disinfo campaign? What about Kosovo? Chechnya?

What about the 1993 WTC bombing? Were all those CIA links disinfo too?

The CIA-ISI nexus didn't just pop up after 9/11. It goes all the way back to the 1980s. Just like BCCI. Just like BMI. Just like Yasin al-Qadi. Just like Abu Sayyaf. Etc...

Disinfo? I wish.

I'm not saying the CIA hasn't helped al quieda (mujhadeen)...

I'm saying the sources that Said Sheik = Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad = the name used to wire money to atta is flim flam flimsy!

This is a very important topic because the US Gov. uses Said Sheik as the 'smoking gun' that Al QUieda did 9/11.

so....

"Was the conflict in Bosnia just a disinfo campaign? What about Kosovo? Chechnya?"

You seem to be trying to say that my view is that Saide Sheik does not exist. This is not what I think.

What about the 1993 WTC bombing? Were all those CIA links disinfo too?

Not sure I haven't looked into that.

"The CIA-ISI nexus didn't just pop up after 9/11. It goes all the way back to the 1980s. Just like BCCI. Just like BMI. Just like Yasin al-Qadi. Just like Abu Sayyaf. Etc..."

I'm not saying the ISI and CIA are not swapping spittle. Never said that.

You say that I'm calling sources disinfo and that I can do that to any source over and over....but that is garbage. Give me a source that is named, verifiable, and not some un-named Indian intelligence official.

When I read an article that says "the source said" or "government agents said" i tend to take it with a grain of salt and look for something to back it up.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Then what ARE you saying?

So if you admit that Omar Sheikh did indeed exist, then what is your beef with the various aliases?

Are you trying to say that the U.S. and Indian officials were referring to somebody else? This clearly wasn't the case because we know this was "the same Omar Sheikh who, at the behest of General Mahmood Ahmed, head of the ISI, wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, the leading 9/11 hijacker, before the New York attacks, as confirmed by Dennis Lormel, director of the FBI's financial crimes unit."

I posted a link to the above article in my first post, so I do not understand why you responded by saying...

"You say that I'm calling sources disinfo and that I can do that to any source over and over....but that is garbage. Give me a source that is named, verifiable, and not some un-named Indian intelligence official."

As I mentioned, I did give you a name, Dennis Lormel, director of the FBI's financial crimes unit, but you just responded, "how can one use the FBI (dennis Lormel) as a trustworthy source and then on the other hand we admit that various names are being tossed around by authorities to confuse people?"

When I read an article that says "the source said" or "government agents said" i tend to take it with a grain of salt and look for something to back it up.

As you should.

But you certainly shouldn't dismiss it and automatically label it as disinformation when you have done limited research.

Fairly detailed descriptions of the financial transactions and how they were discovered were provided by several sources within both the U.S. and India, including a named individual at the FBI.

Furthermore, the mere fact that the money tracks back to a documented covert network utilized by the CIA, specifically to a man who was in Washington no less, discredits any theory that this is disinformation aimed at establishing link between al-Qaeda and 9/11.

Sweet, Dennis go the...

Central Intelligence Agency's George H.W. Bush Award for Excellence in Counterterrorism

http://www.acluprocon.org/BiosInd/Lormel.html

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Logic test...

That is quite a leap, friend. Here is a logic test...

Which statement has more credibility...

1. It is likely that Omar Sheikh wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta because government officials from both India and the U.S., including the director of the FBI financial crimes unit, Dennis Lormel, said the money transfer occurred and described the specifics to several press agencies.

Or...

2. It is likely that Dennis Lormel is a participant in a massive US-sponsored disinformation campaign aimed at establishing a connection between al-Qaeda and 9/11 because he received an award named after George H.W. Bush.

I Wasn't trying to say that but...

Since you bring it up...

I think it is reasonable to be skeptical of a source that is the head of a group tasked with linking Al quieda to 9/11 financially...considering that 9/11 has been a massive cover-up from the beginning.

Not to mention that fact that not one single person has been reprimanded for the massive failures that lead to the attacks on 9/11.

I wonder what this guy was doing before 9/11...

1974-2003 - FBI:
- Chief, Terrorist Financing Operations Section, Counterterrorism Division

Hmmm...guess he missed the fuckin ball on 9/11 huh?

Not to mention this guy has commended American Companies for giving the FBI unfettered access to their records and called it "patriotic" and also embraces the Patriot Act as the golden egg of the fbi.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

also...i would like your source that Dennis Lormel Confirmed Thi

Is there a quote or anything stating exactly what mr. dennis lormel has apparently confirmed?

It is hard to tell if the article is saying that he confirmed 100K transfer or that he confirmed both the transfer and the source.

Did Lormel confirm the transaction, the source, or both?

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

I think that...

Meacher is not saying that he confirmed the source of the $100K transfer but that the transfer too place. The quote is misleading I think. Is there any other source for this information? I am fairly certain that it came from testimony to the 9/11 commission and that si where meacher is getting it but I really think it is just confirmation of the transaction, the amount, but not the source.

That would severely affect your case.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Since we are talking about Dennis Lormel

I wonder what he thinks about 9/11 related insider trading? He would be one of the guys looking at that right?

According to him it's just rumors. There weren't any red flags or fishy stuff going on.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Unfounded

1 or 2?

Well lets...see...

1. we've proven that the Sheikh Saiid story is not based on hard facts.

2. Dennis Lormel did not confirm that Sheih Saiid wired the money. An alias was used for one. The statement in Michael Meecher's article is misleading in that it is not clear what exactly Dennis Lormel confirmed.

I'm not sure that Dennis Lormel would be able to confirm the true identity of the person (using an alias) who wired the money.

3. "Is it likely that Dennis Lormel is a participant in a massive US-sponsored..."

Well, yes of course it is likely. I'm leaning this way. Given that we had just invaded Afghanistan 2 days prior to this ground breaking claim, I think it is likely that the Bush admin is engaged in a massive disinformation campaign.

I certainly don't find this hard to believe and I'm not sure anyone does.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Also, what about the source articles

Sept. 11's Smoking Gun: The Many Faces of Saeed
Sheikhhttp://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essaysaeed
By Paul Thompson

I have read this essay and it is interesting that at least 50% of the source articles are "page cannot be found".

The Wild Disinfo Goose Chase Continues

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Paul Thompson is disinfo WHY?

Are you actually suggesting that because Paul Thompson's website has broken links he is a disinfo agent who fabricated hundreds of sources?

Give me a break.

no i'm not

I'm suggesting that his sources are broken and therefor it's hard for me to confirm his allegations.

Also, about your comment "paul has done more research then you"

well, then why the fuck is "9/11's smoking gun" so riddle with "page can not be found"?

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Probably because he is

Probably because he is trying to maintain a massive and complex website with limited funds and little help, not because he is a poor researcher.

Get real

The guy has written an essay titled "9/11's Smoking Gun: The many faces of Said Sheikh"

lol

I am a web developer. It's not hard to keep links working. Especially if the links show the "smoking gun" of 9/11 !

Please don't try to make the website into some rocket science scenario because I deal with web sites daily.

And yes, I am leaning towards...this...

It seems to me the shoddy information is trying to merge more then one persona into an al quieda, isi, 9/11 connection and use it as evidence that the US Gov. was justified in invading Afghanistan because of al quieda.

You must always remember...

This guy is supposedly the 'smoking gun' that links bin laden to 9/11.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Utter Bullshit

"I am a web developer."

Doubtful, from the rest of what you say.

"It's not hard to keep links working."

When you link to a site outside of your control it is, moron! Everywhere you link to has complete control over the content on their own site. Your answer is utter bollocks.

"Especially if the links show the "smoking gun" of 9/11 !"

Completely irrelevent to the issues of web development.

JPass is not a serious customer, or a serious thinker, whatsoever.

"Please don't try to make the website into some rocket science scenario because I deal with web sites daily."

Keeping a personal profile somewhere is not comparable in the least.

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

All information is vetted for accuracy. If you have a factual challenge to any of the information, email: johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

don't get defensive and read my comments

Not sure why you are getting all defensive and making this a personal issue. The truth is:

1. Most if not all the links that are missing are links to material on the CooperativeResearch.org web site. If you would actually go to the page and click many of the links you will note that 'page not found' is an error page on the CooperativeResearch server. The link is to a page hosted on their site. If it wasn't then it would have a Fox News "page not found" error. Look at the links address. They are hosted on Coop...org.

Obviously.

The vast majority of missing links don't go to websites on other servers. The ratio of broken to non-broken links when the link goes outside of the CooperativeResearch.org server is actually far better (in favor of working links) then the ones that are supposedly hosted on Cooperatives server which have a ugly non-broke / broke ratio.

I didn't count but I think almost every single one that is hosted on COOP..org is broken (for the article in question).

If you can tell that I'm 'not' a web developer just by reading this thread then your mind powers are beyond my own. Actually that is not true because your assumptions are entirely off base. I've been developing web sites and web applications for the last 4 years.

Many have used the "The FBI confirmed it" and linked to a statement made by Michael Meecher's article. If you read the quote used as proof, it is not clear if the FBI guy (dennis L.) confirms WHO wired the money and my hunch is that he is merely confirming that the money was wired.

Evidence does not exist beyond mentions of it in various publications, most using the same source article (Michael Meecher) and one using an executive order by G.W Bush. Many use Inida Times and times of india which I don't totally discount. But when one considers the relationship between India and Pakistan...well...grain of salt. You have to consider that these articles themselves don't constitute proof of anything.

I will regroup and reanalyze this thread tonight. I spent much time on it and I have yet to be convinced that this guy is the same guy that wired money to Atta. After reading all the info it seems more like a merger of two persons in an attempt to create 'evidence' that would allow us to invade Afghanistan.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Additionally....

Moron? I'm concerned how posters make this into a personal battle of sorts. I'm not here to tap egos together. I'm here to figure out wtf happened on 9/11.

Secondly, you call me a moron and yet you are not evening representing what I said correctly. The links I'm referring to are hosted on the COop.org web site. Look at the link addresses.

I made a point about the article being the "9/11s smoking gun" and you missed my point entirely.

My point was, if I wrote an article with this title, it would not have any broken links, period. Meaning, it's an important article (the title would suggest) so why not keep it working, and up to date?.

"Keeping a personal profile somewhere is not comparable in the least."

You kidding me? Your personal attacks are ridiculous. I've created web sites and applications for 4 years now. I've worked as a team that managed, hosted, created, designed, programmed, and maintained hundreds of web sites. I've created applications that are currently used by over 50,000 people to pay their electric bills online.

Again, I don't see what I did to rub you the wrong way. It seems that you disagree with my conclusions, therefor I'm a moron in your eyes.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Your own blog iterates my intentions here...

Your most recent entry,

Tales of 9/11 Truthiness iterates my intentions with this thread pretty well. People make assumptions based on 'who said it' instead of actually reading the information and checking it for accuracy yourself.

That is what I've done here and, if you ask me, I've done a pretty damn good job.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

"...you'll discover that

"...you'll discover that Omar Sheikh was indeed a real person, who was born in Britain, where he attended private school and then went on to attend the London School of Economics..."

First, is this the same school that Daniel Pearle's father teachers at? Just another strange coincedence.

Second, how can one use the FBI (dennis Lormel) as a trustworthy source and then on the other hand we admit that various names are being tossed around by authorities to confuse people?

Doing 'a little research' yields no answers, just more questions and tons of "page not found" errors. To suggest that confirming this stuff just requires 'a little research' is just a tad bit of an understatement.

This is rediculous
Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

But, but, but what about....

You seem to think that the government functions as a single entity and every employee is an evil conspirator, which simply isn't the case. Things aren't that simple.

There is no group or person with the ability to control every aspect of the government and every piece of information.

Those who knew about the $100,000 wire transfer surely weren't expecting it to go public.

The Indian authorities worked with the FBI to trace the money, as originally confirmed by investigators from both governments.

After the link was exposed, however, damage control went into full effect, which is why the issue virtually disappeared from the press.

Let me ask you this: if this whole $100,000-ISI-Omar Sheikh story was just disinformation cooked up by the U.S. to establish an al-Qaeda link to 9/11, then why on earth did the money connect back to covert U.S. channels and a man that was in Washington DC on 9/11!? If the U.S. was writing the script, then why didn't the money link back to Iraq instead of the ISI-CIA nexus that had been used by the U.S. for nearly two decades?

"You seem to think that the

"You seem to think that the government functions as a single entity and every employee is an evil conspirator"

You are mistaken, I don't think this. I'm trying to establish a link between 9/11 and Al quieda. The link is Said Sheikh or whatever name you choose to call him. The link is not very strong as of now.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Why?

You say "I don't think this" but you have implied that numerous US and Indian officials, including the director of the FBI's financial crimes unit, are involved in a massive disinformation campaign.

Why did you ignore the rest of my post?

Prove That Saiid sent money to Al quieda

How is it that this guy has found the smoking gun of 9/11, as the title of his essay suggest, but the sources of his information take me hours to track down and in some cases, some very important cases (like the section below) I can't find sources at all?

"In late July 2001, a wealthy Indian shoe manufacturer was kidnapped in Calcutta, India. In early August, his ransom was paid to Ansari’s group, and the victim was let go. Ansari gave about $100,000 of the approximately $830,000 in ransom money to Saeed, who sent it to hijacker Mohamed Atta. [Los Angeles Times, 1/23/02, Independent, 1/24/02: ] A series of recovered e-mails shows the money was sent just after August 11, 2001. [India Today, 2/14/02, Times of India, 2/14/02]"

sources in order they appear above:

LA Times - file not found
http://ktla.trb.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-012302india,0,883098.story

Independend 1/24/02: error 500 - no article
http://www.independent.co.uk/c/?ec=500

India Today 2/14/02 - File not found
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/indiatoday021402.html

Times Of India 2/14/02 - File Not Found
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/timesofindia021402.html

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

I have yet to find one

I have yet to find one single CooperativeResearch source article that works on this so-called "9/11s smoking gun" essay.

As for the archived links...(thanks by the way)...I've included the breif passages from each the mention what we are trying to prove, that Saiid wired money to Atta.

1. "The alleged connection between kidnappers in Calcutta and the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history may be difficult to prove. The man who claimed the link, accused kidnapping ringleader Asif Raza Khan, was shot dead by police Dec. 7. They said he was trying to escape."

2. File not found (goes to homepage)

So we are left with this:

The arrested leader of the kidnapping ring that Saiid worked for (and recieved 100K from) made the claim that Saiid wired the cash to Atta. This guy was then killed.

That is what we have?

I can't believe so many people have swallowed this stuff hook line and sinker. And whoever said "a little research..." would clear things up...well....

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

jpass: "Sources don't exist. If they do, they are all disinfo."

"A man suspected of playing a key role in bankrolling the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States was released from prison in India less than two years ago after hijackers of an Indian Airlines flight demanded his freedom, a senior-level U.S. government source told CNN.

This source said U.S. investigators now believe Sheik Syed, using the alias Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad, sent more than $100,000 from Pakistan to Mohammed Atta, the suspected hijacking ringleader who piloted one of the jetliners into the World Trade Center." [Source]

"The FBI’s examination of the hard disk of the cellphone company Omar Sheikh had subscribed to led to the discovery of the "link" between him and the deposed chief of the Pakistani ISI, Gen. Mehmood Ahmed. And as the FBI investigators delved deep, sensational information surfaced with regard to the transfer of 100,000 dollars to Mohammed Atta, one of the Kamikaze pilots who flew his Boeing into the World Trade Centre. Gen. Mehmood Ahmed, the FBI investigators found, fully knew about the transfer of money to Atta." [Source]

"...this is the same Omar Sheikh who, at the behest of General Mahmood Ahmed, head of the ISI, wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, the leading 9/11 hijacker, before the New York attacks, as confirmed by Dennis Lormel, director of FBI's financial crimes unit." [Source]

There is an infinite amount of information to be learned about any given situation, so of course anybody can question sources and say 'what about this' and 'what about that'.

The bottom line is that these connections have been documented by several sources and they deserve to be addressed.

Trying to discredit 9/11 Press For Truth by labeling Paul Thompson (who has certainly done more research on Omar Sheikh than you) as a disinfo agent is divisive and counterproductive.

What exactly do you expect to gain from this post?

Your accusations, which are quite serious, are based on pure speculation, and you have yet to provide a single piece of evidence to support your claims, all while accusing others of doing the same thing.

"Trying to discredit 9/11

"Trying to discredit 9/11 Press For Truth by labeling Paul Thompson (who has certainly done more research on Omar Sheikh than you) as a disinfo agent is divisive and counterproductive"

I'm not trying to do this. I'm scruitizing the so called "9/11's smoking gun".

Why you would percieve that as an attack on 9/11 Press for truth (9/11 victims families?) and Paul Thompson is beyond me.

Maybe I use the term disinfo too many times...but so far that is what I see.

You say there are many documented sources but there aren't. There are many news papers quoting elusive and flim flam sources..but essentially alls saying the same thing.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Why you would percieve that

"Why you would percieve that as an attack on 9/11 Press for truth (9/11 victims families?) and Paul Thompson is beyond me."

The video clip you posted and said was "soooo entirely full of inconsistencies and contradictions," is a major segment of 9/11 Press For Truth, based on Paul Thompson's research, which you have also specifically criticized and labeled as disinformation.

"You say there are many documented sources but there aren't. There are many news papers quoting elusive and flim flam sources..but essentially alls saying the same thing."

Why do you keep repeating this rhetoric even after I have provided a specific name of someone from the FBI, who is not an "elusive and flim flam" source?

You are mistaken. 1. The

You are mistaken.

1. The sources are not well established. "some indian intel. officials' does not constitute a well established source unless there is some sort of backing.

2. Considering the relationship between Pakistan and India, I would EXPECT India to blame Pakistan for being a terrorist supporting country. Not that I disagree, just that a grain of salt needs to be applied.

3. All of you guys fail to mention a very important aspect of this entire scenario. 9/11 Press For Truth fails to mention it.

There is ANOTHER Sheikh Saiid who is a KNOWN Al Quieda operative who was born in Sudan.

You have all mis quoted sources that refer to this man and claimed it referred to the man from Britian.
You are mistaken.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Another point that has not been proven....

Sheikh Saiid = Mustafa Ahmed (name used to wire 100K to Atta

We have no proof of this. There for we have yet to find a single piece of evidence that Sheikh Saiid is connected to 9/11.

Therefor, the Wild Disinfo Goose Chase continues. Around and Around we go.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Source Missing on this also...

FROM: 9/11's Smoking Gun- http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essaysaeed

Saeed’s 9/11 Role is First Revealed
"...it was reported that the 9/11 “paymaster” had been found, using the alias “Mustafa Ahmed.” [Newsweek, 9/24/01] On October 1, 2001, the Guardian reported, “The man at the center of the financial web is believed to be Sheikh Saeed, also known as Mustafa Mohamed Ahmad,” but it wasn’t immediately clear who this person was. [Guardian, 10/1/01] On October 6, CNN revealed that “US investigators now believe Sheik Syed, using the alias Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad, sent more than $100,000 from Pakistan to Mohamed Atta.” More importantly, CNN confirmed that this was in fact the same Saeed Sheikh who had been released from an Indian prison in 1999. [CNN, 10/6/01]"

Sources In Order:

1. NewsWeek 9/24/2001 - file not found
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3069716/

2. London Times - Page not found: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/londontimes092301.html

3. CNN (oo oo new spelling "syed" and the article exists!)
a senior-level U.S. government source told CNN.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/10/05/inv.terror.investigation/

"This source said U.S. investigators now believe Sheik Syed, using the alias Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad, sent more than $100,000 from Pakistan to Mohammed Atta, the suspected hijacking ringleader who piloted one of the jetliners into the World Trade Center."

So we have 'this source' aka 'a senior-level U.S. government source' which is used as proof that Sheikh Saiid and Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad are the same person?

Thats it? What court would this stuff hold up in? I bet Pakistan has a court that would use this stuff as evidence.

So lets recap...I've spent all day checking the sources and facts and I'm still...

Chasing the wild disinfo goose chase!

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

What a waste of time

As I have shown above, this is not the only source. But just FYI, people are convicted on government testimony all the time.

Here is a question...

Is there more evidence connecting Omar Sheikh to 9/11 than there is evidence implicating Paul Thompson as a disinfo agent?

You have implied as much, so I would think you could provide something a little more substantial than a few broken links on his website. Otherwise, your arguments seem a tad hypocritical, don't you think?

"I would think you could

"I would think you could provide something a little more substantial than a few broken links on his website"

A few? I'm not here to argue with you but you continually try to downplay things.

It's not a few, it's every single link that is hosted on Cooperative Research. We are talking about "THE SMOKING GUN" and all sources lead to a page that cannot be found.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

There are various spellings

There are various spellings of the name Osama bin Laden (Usama bin Laden) too, but they all refer to the same guy. I'm guessing the various spellings have to do with translating an Arab name into the Latin alphabet.

It was also to obfuscate.

Following the Paul Thompson premise that various news outlets were trying to AVOID having to connect any dots, they had a clear motivation to AVOID designating one clear transliteration of the name. That is, we have the Osama/Usama variation, and al Qaeda/al-Qaida split and they don't make the story harder to follow, because each was chosen (and in the style manual) and is consistently used within news organizations.

I don't buy it...

When quoting government sources one does not make up their own spellings. The reporter would likely ask the spelling.

Secondly, we are on one hand persuaded to accept the FBI's information...but when it doesn't fit the scenario that is being presented we are to then told the sources are purposely deceiving us?

Doesn't make sense.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

jpass, I tend to come down more on your side of this

debate, but the fact is, these names are transliterated from Arabic, and there is quite a bit of variability in just how that's done. That's why news organizations will ultimately pick a spelling and stick with it by putting it in their style manuals.

It makes this particular thread of evidence that much harder to check out. Does that work to someone's advantage? i don't know.

True...

Indeed, if you simply search the internet for a few minutes, you'll quickly find about a half dozen variations of 'Saeed' and 'Sheikh', referring of course to people who have no relation to this story, completely nullifying jpass's first point.

There is only one Omar Sheikh, however, with the specific background of attending private Forest School in Snaresbrook, the London School of Economics, and later working for the ISI out of Lahore as a go between for meetings with the Taliban and the 'al-Qaeda' network.

Also, Omar Sheikh reportedly used several pseudonyms and variations of his name to set up different bank accounts. This is a classic tactic of criminals and money launderers who wish to throw people off the money trail. It is not a tactic of disinformation agents.

To be effective, disinformation must be simple and easy to understand, otherwise people won't be able to follow it, so why would the U.S. government be trying to throw people off of trail they want them to follow?

Jpass's argument is ridiculous on its face.

hey p-devley -

"To be effective, disinformation must be simple and easy to understand, otherwise people won't be able to follow it,..."
this doesn't make sense; please elaborate. i'm just a sheepherder on the great plains trying to make a dime. thanks!
oh yeah, i've got llamas, too. they make warm blankies.

Well crafted.

All I was saying is that pseudonyms are used to confuse people and throw them off the trail, which works against the disinformation theory put forth by jpass.

I agree with you but...

You must consider the fact that the US Government uses Said Sheikh as it's 'smoking gun' that Al quieda is connected to 9/11.

I would imagine there would be some consistency any, at least narrowed down to 3 or 4 names. Instead we have flimsy links and about 9 names.

I am just less inclined to believe a government that would coverup the 9/11 attacks when they tell me, via unamed 'senior government officials, that Said Sheikh is the 9/11 connection/financier adivser to bin laden.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Why this blog does not have a higher vote average is beyond me

I've single handedly shown that the 'smoking gun' the US Government uses to link Al Quieda to 9/11 is nothing but shoddy sources, unnamed government agents, and Page Not Found Errors.

What alarms me more is that others from this site have not already disected this information in the last few years that it has been perpetuated by all forms of media, alternative or not.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Well I gave your a blog a...

10, with all your efforts investigating etc.

I am suprised that no one has dived in with evidential support for the ISI connection / 100k Atta etc.

I can only speak for myself regarding "what alarms you" but I spend most of my time looking at the WTC controlled demolition evidence and more of the visual / physical stuff.

I have never really spent much time on the Al-CIAda stuff.

Best wishes and good luck

You Know...

I felt bad for saying 'single handedly' because you hooked it up. I didn't even think of checking archive dot org.

"I have never really spent much time on the Al-CIAda stuff"

Oddly, i think this may be the case across the board. It was for me until recently. Think about it, this 'movement' has not taken the time to corroborate the so called 'smoking gun' that links Al quieda to 9/11.

Also, it is telling that both the US Government AND Paul Thompson consider Said Sheikh a smoking gun of 9/11.

So, is there credible evidence linking al qieda to 9/11? not that i can find.

Thanks for the 10.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

of course not

because al-queda doesn't exist. even bbc admits this in their 'power of nightmares' doc on video.google
look, it isn't the nwo, illuminati, or space lizards. it's pnac, intelligence agencies, int'l banks, and the media.
btw, i gave you a 10 as well.

C'mon JPass, you KNOW why...

Because this is a popular site for discussion of 9/11, and as such it is infiltrated. And I don't mean by folks with DISINFO stamped on their foreheads for easy ID like Nico, Fetzer and Wood.

There are cliques on the site who back each other up and present disinfo like this as if it were gospel. I for one have routinely raised the question of what a transfer of money to Atta even means if true, since no one can place Atta on any flight on 9/11, and that since the evidence supposedly doing so is so obviously planted (his parked car with Koran AND flight manuals which he no doubt brought along to bone up on the way to the airport--and his magical fire/bomb proof passport).

You have gone the extra mile by actually dissecting the issue and by truly OWNING P-devil in comments. The best find I think is the guy who won the GHWBush award--yes, he sure seems to have dropped the ball on 9/11, AND gotten rewarded. Hmmmmm.

But anyway, back to the downrating. You have been given, by my calculations, a total of 6 tens and 5 ones. Total 65 divided by 11 votes=5.9 What does that show you? That there are 6 people who agree with you and 5 people who want this buried. I could probably name those five people for you, but at this point in the game I think it's a better tactic to just alert people to the shenanigans that go on on Blogger without naming names, since naming names just starts ad hominem arguments. Instead, reasonable people can simply follow certain posters' posts and see how they consistently make certain arguments that support certain premises, and that process will help people understand the nature of the "hidden" disinfo around here.

Anyway, Jpass, I feel like the cavalry has arrived when I read your posts... THANK YOU!!

RT

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

RT, TY for your kind words.

I knew what was going on as soon as the guy said "A little Research would help". And the other "This is a waste of time"

as if to suggest I have a mental block on 'what is really going on'. These are the indicators.

What I was most surprised at is that he was the only one to come out and play with me on this issue.

I've heard it used many many times throughout the 9/11 truth movement as the 'smoking gun'. Oh well, made my life easier.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

A few dumb questions...

1. What should we think about the source of Bill Doyle's that said part of the 28 redacted pages within the Joint Congressional Inquiry talked about the United States sending money to Pakistan?

2. Did the 9/11 Commission cover this or try to refute it? Keep in mind it was on the list of questions submitted by the family members.

3. What about all of this?


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

You have provided...

Jon,
I think if an article suggest bribing took place you have to show the proof.

Two articles you provide (the second actually uses the first as it's source) claim that members of the commission were bribed.

Which members? Who got the money? Lobbiest in DC are not uncommon. Again, I'm concerned with the sources of these articles. They are un-verifiable and provide no evidence besides "they said so".

If they were so sure of bribing then why no names and amounts of money provide?

Was 9/11 Comm. Bribed?
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8907

Pakistan Bribed The 9/11 Comm.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1653318,0035.htm

Thousands of dollars spent by Pak to get 9/11 findings dropped
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9043

These are heavy allegations but all three of the first articles you present on this topic provide not one single shred of evidence. If it is obvious Pakistan bribed the commission then provide me with the proof that any of the members received money from Pakistan and show me where this special meeting between commission members and pakistani lobbiest took place and I will look at it.

But seriously Jon, the first three articles are very weak. Actually, we can call them all one article because the second uses the first as it's source and the third is actually the same as the first article.
Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

That's an awful...

Lot of wasted writing considering there is also this article, which includes two extra sources.

"Pakistan Did Not Influence 9/11 Probe"

I guess I'm as dumb as "investigative reporters, including a couple from a major American TV network" for showing an interest in that story.

Personally, I think it's worth looking into. Are you against that?

What about questions #1 and #2?

Here's another question. Considering the ISI's "relationship" to terrorism, and their history of involvement with it, why does it make more sense to doubt the story about Omar Sheikh than not to?


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Jon, don't make it personal

#1 - Bill Doyle -

I have no idea what to think. I have not investigated the issue much.

#2 - Did the 9/11 Commission cover this or try to refute it?

I'm not sure.

These issues are far more important then any personal feelings you have about being dumb. I'm not calling anyone dumb. I think interjecting that sort of rhetoric into this debate is entirely a waste of both of our time.

I have nor the time or energy to develop personal and argumentative relationships with people regarding these issues.

"Personally, I think it's worth looking into. Are you against that?"

Obviously not as I've been diving into these issues for oh...well...just read the thread again.

"why does it make more sense to doubt the story about Omar Sheikh than not to?"

Because the evidence is not there. Dennis Lormel may have confirmed that $100K was wired from UAE to the US but, as far as I can tell, he confirmed the transfer and the transfer only. The quote used as a source is misleading because it makes it seem like he confirmed the transaction, the amount,and the source.

Let me ask you to provide me with something....

1. Your single hardest evidence that Sheik = Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad

2. Your single hardest evidence that Sheik wired the money to Atta?
Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

You're not sure?

Have you even read the 9/11 Report? No, they did not bother to cover it or refute it. Which is another indication that there is more to the story.

My single hardest evidence... where is your evidence that the story is not true. So far all you've done is question every source posted about it. Yet, it is accepted by the family members that fought for the creation of the Commission, as well as the majority of the movement.


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

And that is what alarms me the most

"it is accepted by the family members that fought for the creation of the Commission, as well as the majority of the movement"

And that is what alarms me the most. Also, I don't base my conclusions on what others (no matter their status or their 'name recognition' value) have concluded.

I look for the evidence myself. You are asking me to prove that the information is false. What information? I have argued my case that the 'evidence' is unsubstantiated. Since when do we prove negatives?

I'm not saying that the information is false. I'm saying that the evidence people use to support these assumptions does not add up to a hill of beans.

Time and time again the sources of the information are vague, weak, and unsubstantiated.

I've made my case and I've done it well. I think many would agree that we should all be questioning the veracity of these claims discussed on this blog (but that goes for all the information).

Would you...

Like me to post every article referencing Omar Sheikh's connection to 9/11? A lot of stupid people fell for this vague, weak, and unsubstantiated story.


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Good luck.

You could post the actual bank records and it wouldn't make a difference. As far as jpass is concerned, we are all just sheep following disinformation.

That would be a start

"You could post the actual bank records and it wouldn't make a difference. "

Then prove their authenticity. Then prove they mean what you think - Pakistan financed 9/11.

"Investigative reporters,

"Investigative reporters, including a couple from a major American TV network, are trying to dig up details of a claim made by a senior Foreign Office official in Islamabad that Pakistan spent thousands of dollars through its lobbyists on members of the 9/11 Commission to drop some of the report’s negative findings about Pakistan."

So how about a follow up? Investigative reporters investigate claims everyday. That is there job. The fact that you have merely a reference to 'investigative reporters' and 'a cuople from major American TV Networks" tells me that maybe these people investigated the claims and produced no results.

So, who are they, where is their report? The evidence is flim flam flimsy. Unless you can provide sufficient sources I not going to miraculously change my mind on these issues.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

We must also always keep THIS in our minds...

This Omar Sheikh issue is considered "the smoking gun" by the US Government that Al Quieda = 9/11 and also by Paul Thompson's Timeline that ISI = 9/11.

The fact that these claims are entirely based on flim flam evidence (I feel dirty even calling it evidence) should tell us that the gun is not as smokey as we've been led to believe.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

And it seems to me...

That the "flim flam evidence" that you're referring to was good enough for MULTIPLE news organizations to report on, as well as a former member of Parliament.

And if Omar Sheikh is considered "the smoking gun" to tie Al-Qaeda to 9/11, and Omar Sheikh is actually a possible triple agent (MI6/CIA/ISI), and the 9/11 Report failed to mention any aspect of Omar Sheikh, "the smoking gun" to tie Al-Qaeda to 9/11, then it seems to me that again, it is something worth looking into.

I wonder why President Musharraf thought enough of him to tell us about his MI6 affiliations.

Is your name Jesse from the PA 9/11 Visibility Group?


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

I'm sorry but...

If you consider a vague reference in a pakistani paper that says:

"investigative reporters, including a couple from a major American TV network"

If you consider these two references '2 other sources' I have to question your investigative judgment. I mean no offense by that, but it is truely how I feel.

These, are not, by any stretch of the imagination, reliable 'sources'. They are not even sources, they are words, references with no follow ups.

Ask yourself this: Why did the author not tell us the names of the "major American TV network"? Seems to me that would have injected a little credibility into the article.

Do you know which investigative reporters or which "major American TV network' he is referring to? If so, what where their findings?

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

They are not even sources?

There are three different news outlets covering Pakistan's denial behind the allegations, yet you're saying they're not sources?

I have no idea which investigative reporters or American TV network tried to look into the story. If I did, it most assuredly would be posted in that thread. Also, if I did, I would most likely try to contact them to see what they found. Instead, like many other stories related to 9/11, we have another dead end.


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Dead End

"Instead, like many other stories related to 9/11, we have another dead end"

I agree Jon, this is a dead end. The entire Sheik Saiid scenario leads no where and has no evidence to back it up.

Same goes for the 'allegations' that Pakistan bribed the 9/11 Commission.

The three sources refer to one article. That one article refers to two unnamed and un-verifiable references.

Therefor we have no evidence that is hard enough to lead us to anything remotely close to a smoking gun.

Yes I am Jesse from PA/911.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

Ok Jesse...

The bribery story was already denied, so I don't know why you're still pushing that story as if I didn't post the denial.

What are you referring to as the "smoking gun?" Pakistan's possible involvement through Omar Sheikh and Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad, Pakistan's possible bribing of 9/11 Commissioner's, the Pakistani ISI's allegiance to the Taliban, Pakistan's link to the CIA, Pakistan's link to "terrorism"? Richard Armitage's links to Pakistan? What are you questioning?

You say the article refers to two unnamed and un-verifiable references, yet the first story posted about the bribery allegations clearly identifies "FO official, Sadiq" as being the source of the story. Unless I'm reading it wrong, which I don't think that I am.


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Three basic points

I abandoned this thread because I got sick of jpass repeatedly skipping over my most important points, but here are the basics...

1. As I have repeated several times now, the money trail leads back to underground networks historically used by the CIA to funnel cash to Islamic militants, so the suggestion that it is a fabrication of the U.S. government is absurd on its face. If the U.S. was really writing the script, then why did they make the CIA and ISI look more guilty than al-Qaeda? General Mahmud was in Washington exchanging gifts with Porter Goss as the attacks were occurring!

2. The money trail has never, as jpass is suggesting, been played up as the government's definitive 'smoking gun' link between al-Qaeda and 9/11. On the contrary, the story was quickly buried following the original reports. The 9/11 Commission never mentioned it and U.S. officials won't touch it with a ten-foot pole.

3. Several government sources from India and the U.S. originally confirmed the story, meaning they were either all part of a massive disinformation campaign or they were simply telling the truth. The burden of proof lies with jpass, who has offered nothing but illogical speculation and innuendo.

Did you see...

That Executive Order 13224 mentioned, Shaykh Sai'id (aka, Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad)?


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Good find.

Indeed, the pseudonym has been confirmed by several sources, but I don't think anything will satisfy jpass.

Devlin...

Ever see this staff statement?

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/911_TerrFin_Monograph.pdf

pg. 144
"Senior al Qaeda detainee Abu Zubaydeh has commented on the source of the funding; he said that KSM received funds for the 9/11 operation directly from UBL, bypassing al Qaeda Finance Chief, Shayk Said, and suggested that some of the funds came from money that Zubaydeh had provided UBL for use in an operation against Israel. Zubaydeh, however, apparently did not participate in the 9/11 planning, and his statements lack any foundation."


"We've been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass."

— George W. Bush - State Of The Union Address - January 29th, 2002

Very interesting...

I am very familiar with this staff statement, but I never noticed the footnote mentioning "Shayk Said" as al-Qaeda's finance chief.

Another excellent find, Jon!

As far as I know, this is the only mention of "Shayk Said" in this document, although it has been reported that Mustafa Ahmed al-Hasawi may be another alias. What do you think? The 9/11 Commission refers to this person as "Mustafa al Hawsawi". 

Too bad the money trail was of "little practical significance" to the Commission, eh? There is much to be learned.

I am currently working on a project with 9/11Truth.org to delve into this issue. Feel free share any other tidbits that you may come across. (PDevlinBuckley@TheAmericanMonitor.com)

You guys are merging two known different people into one

You all need to check your information. The executive order and the 9/11 commission report are referring to another person.

The KNOWN and CONFIRMED Al Quieda finance chief is who you guys are talking about and you are using as proof of some ISI connection.

The British Saiid is a different person all together.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

ABSOLUTELY GREAT CLIP.

Your criticism is short-sighted.

1. the guy's name

Arabic and Urdu names don't have an exact translation to English. The characters are nothing like English letters, which should be common knowledge by now. Thus, many different spellings can describe the same name. It's phoenetic.

This is highly problematic, and confuses the hell out of Americans. That is one reason they are able to so thoroughly manipulate the public.

2. "lack of evidence"

The Indian intelligence service and the Times of India put their reputations on the line to bring us this evidence. Also, the Indian intelligence exposed their methods and means (bugging the ISI chief's cell phone), and thereby lost future use of that information channel, just to show the world what it had found. Thus there was a cost associated with making this claim. That gives credibility. Other evidence shows that the ISI chief was in Washington DC from Sept. 4 to 13 making deals with high level Bushies like Tenet and Armitage.

Since ISI CREATED "Al Qaeda" in the first place, there is a certain confidence we can start with. The evidence is not limited to this video clip, as you suggest, and has more corroboration. Your dismissal is out of ignorance, not superior knowledge of the facts.

3. The theme is "Muslims did it"

That is a simplistic and inaccurate reading of the facts. There were "Al Qaeda" / ISI operatives in the US. They must be accounted for one way or another.

The blanket denials by US officials (Rice) and their attempt to cover up even questions about the existence of the ISI chief (deleting his name from White House transcripts) reveal guilt.

This evidence further damages the US government's claims about 9-11 in several ways. They had used Omar Sheikh as their own "smoking gun" to prove Al Qaeda infolvement in 9-11. When it came out that this was actually under the control of ISI, the story changed, morphed, and no further explanations of the money trail were forthcoming.

The government and the 9-11 commission have gone to great lengths to pretend that the money trail doesn't matter, whicih is incredible, beyond belief, absurd ad infinitum. THAT is why we know we are onto something. They are going to ridiculous lengths to cover it up, to this day.

4. None of this relies on Randy Glass, who was probably telling the truth. He was in contact with Bob Graham (head of Senate Intelligence Committee) warning him about attacks on the WTC in July of 2001. Graham confirmed this.

If you don't think this needs intense investigation -- then you are just not thinking.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NEW REVELATIONS ON 9-11

Was it an "intelligence failure" to give red carpet treatment to the "money man" behind the 9-11 terrorists, or was it simply "routine"?

On the morning of September 11, Pakistan's Chief Spy General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" behind the 9-11 hijackers, was at a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill hosted by Senator Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairmen of the Senate and House Intelligence committees.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

(Porter Goss would of course become head of CIA.)

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

All information is vetted for accuracy. If you have a factual challenge to any of the information, email: johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

100% ON POINT!

Well said, John.

Has the BBC retracted this story?

Bin Laden's 'cash link' to hijackers

Source: news.bbc.co.uk

10/1/2001

There are reports that US investigators have uncovered evidence of financial transfers linking Osama Bin Laden to the 11 September attacks on America.

According to FBI sources, Mustafa Mohamed Ahmad, a suspected Bin Laden financial operative, transferred money to Mohamed Atta, one of the hijackers, in the days running up to the attacks

Furthermore Atta and two of the other hijackers transferred some $15,000 back to an account under the same name just two days before the attacks.

Mr Ahmad, also known as Sheikh Saeed, is one of 27 individuals or groups with a known link to Bin Laden who have had their assets in America frozen.

He worked as a financial manager for Bin Laden when he was based in Sudan and is believed to be a financial operative for the al-Qaeda organisation.

Operations fund
Cash transfers were made to Atta via a money service in Florida on 8 and 9 September from an account in Dubai, under the name of Mustafa Ahmad.

Atta is believed to have been the ringleader of the 19 hijackers.

Atta and two other hijackers - Waleed al-Shehri and Marwan al-Shehi - then each sent $5,000 from the US to an account in Dubai, also under the name of Mustafa Ahmad, two days before the attacks.

The money is believed to have been unused surplus from the fund for the attacks, which investigators say may have amounted to about $500,000.

Moved to Pakistan
The man who collected the funds in the UAE then travelled to Karachi in Pakistan on the day of the attacks using a Saudi passport, according to Sheikh Abdullah, the son of UAE President Sheikh Zaid bin Sultan al-Nahayan.

Records also show that the man had arrived in the UAE at the end of June from Qatar.

Meanwhile, US Attorney General John Ashcroft said that almost 500 people have been arrested or detained by US authorities investigating the attacks.

None of them are being held on charges directly related to the attacks - instead, they are being detained on alleged violations of immigration law, state law or because they are considered "material witnesses".

In London, a 36-year-old man travelling to the United States was arrested at Gatwick airport, anti-terrorist police said on Sunday.

Extradition sought
US authorities are also seeking the extradition from Britain of Algerian pilot, Lofti Raissi, who is suspected of having instructed four of the hijackers in flying.

Mr Raissi denies any involvement with the attackers.

More FBI agents have been sent to Germany in recent days where a cell from the al-Qaeda organisation is believed to have operated in Hamburg.

Informant
In Paris Jamel Beghal, an Islamic militant suspected of trying to organise terrorist attacks against American interests in France, has arrived after being extradited from the UAE.

Information supplied by Beghal led to a series of arrests in France, Belgium and the Netherlands in the days following the attacks.

In Bosnia Nato-led peacekeepers have reportedly arrested two Bosnian and two Saudi citizens with suspected links to Islamic terrorists.

And Turkish police have detained a man they believe is Osama Bin Laden's brother and are now questioning him for possible links to the suspect in the US terror attacks.

Abdullah bin Laden, a 23-year-old student in Cyprus, was detained as he was changing planes in Istanbul on a trip from Saudi Arabia to Cyprus.


"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

You are both confused, and it seems the BBC is also

The executive order and the BBC story are referring to a known Bin Laden financial manager. He is known, confirmed al quieda bad guy.

You guys are mix mashing the two guys into one guy. There are two, and you have not mentioned this KNOWN Sheikh the entire time this thread has been going.

Why doesn't Paul Thompson mention the OTHER Sheikh?

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever