Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed
FOR UPDATES, SEE COMMENTS BELOW
On Wednesday night, I was at the Village Synagogue in Manhattan showing Ahmad Jamal and Ramesh Sharma’s HBO’s film The Journalist and Jihadi about the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl. The film, which I worked on as a contributing producer/consultant, concludes by linking al Qaeda’s #3 operative Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to Pearl’s shocking videotaped slaughter by beheading a man he called “The American Jew.”
On Thursday, the US government released portions of the transcript of an interview with “enemy combatant” Mohammed (or is it really Muhammad?) in which he admitted, for the first time, to killing Pearl.
In a grisly disclosure, a man who is now being described as “one of history’s most infamous terrorists” claimed, according to Agence France Press, “to have beheaded US journalist Daniel Pearl… with my blessed right hand,” according to a transcript released by the Pentagon.
This act alone enables him to supersede the infamy of Carlos “the Jackal.”
Interestingly, he said, Pearl’s murder was not an Al Qaeda operation, a distinction that may be lost on American readers who were mesmerized by his frightening admissions.
In overseas media his Pearl connection is being associated with the Islamacist campaign in Kashmir, not Pakistan or Afghanistan. A British-born citizen, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, who is profiled in the film, was sentenced to death by a Pakistani court for Pearl’s murder in June 2002, but has appealed the verdict.
What do we make of this public disclosure of Mohammad’s “confession?” It comes at a time when a growing scandal in the Justice Department and setbacks in Iraq and Afghanistan has the Bush Administration reeling. The claims that this larger than life, almost comic-book-like “super terrorist” have made certainly adds weight to the War on Terror and Bush’s campaign to hunt down and kill those responsible for 9/11.
Getting the “mastermind” was a big “get” when it happened and his revelations certainly have positioned him to joining world’s worst list. (It was the Pakistanis who got him, not the super sleuths of the CIA.) The Guardian reported that his long list of terror operations—most of which failed—were greeted “with shock and skepticism in almost equal measure.” The NY Times downplayed their concerns near the end of their story, on page A23, saying matter of factly, “It is not clear how many of Mr. Mohammed’s expansive claims were legitimate.” Note the word “expansive.” The AP reports that an “official”–not named–believes that his claims are exaggerated.
An American editor wrote to me:
“I am deeply troubled by the reports of Mohammed’s confession. It strikes me that it is a tidy resolution to a much larger problem. How convenient that we have all the questions answered in one somewhat disheveled package. Considering that the confession was obtained through torture, and the number of studies that have shown that information obtained in that matter is unreliable (although politically expedient), what have we really learned? Is it overly cynical to think that this administration so desperately needs a win that this is being trotted out?
And what of the nefarious Osama Bin Laden? Does this mean that he wasn’t involved, if Mohammed was the “mastermind” and orchestrated everything from “A to Z.” (By the way, interesting use of the American vernacular — I wonder who the translator is?).”
Mark Denbeaux, a Seton Hall University law professor who represented two Tunisians held at Guantánamo Bay, said, “The government has finally brought someone into Gitmo who apparently admits to being someone who could be called an enemy combatant. None of the others rise to this level. The government has now got one.” He says he may be the only one!
But what have they got? The Guardian Reports:
“Critics of both the interrogation methods used at the camp and the exclusion of independent observers from the hearings today dismissed the confessions.
[Note: The Press was also excluded, which is suspicious as well. See Kyle Hence’s comment below]
Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, questioned the legality of both the hearing and the confession, and said the suspect’s claims could be tainted by torture.
‘We won’t know that unless there is an independent hearing,’ Mr Roth said. ‘We need to know if this purported confession would be enough to convict him at a fair trial or would it have to be suppressed as the fruit of torture?’”
Khalid has been a secretive mystery man, and at the same time, a publicity hound which raises some issues about who this terrible terrorist really is.
According to a 2003 Guardian report, “He was reported to have been killed in Karachi in a bloody shootout with Pakistani security forces on September 11, 2002. There is even doubt over his nationality. Some say he is Pakistani, others that he is a Kuwaiti. Certainly, though, he does appear to be of Pakistani origin, probably Baloch, and raised in Kuwait. He is thought to have been in Pakistan for about two-and-a-half years, well before September 11, 2001.”
How did they find him? Great police work? Bombing them “back to the stone age?” Nope. They saw him on TV.
“Pakistani and US intelligence officials were alerted to his presence in the country when he gave an interview to the Qatar-based al-Jazeera television station shortly before the first anniversary of September 11. On the strength of intercepted communications through ordinary mobile phones as well as satellite telephones, the net closed on Khalid.”
Wait, there’s more about this larger than life part-killer and amateur historian who compares himself to George Washington for American consumption!
Writes Dr. Rohan Gunaratna, author of Inside al-Qaida: Global Network of Terror:
“Although Mohammed insists that he is a believer, he is not a strict Muslim, and while the September hijackers lived in cheap lodgings, he stayed in plush hotels. In contrast to the spartan lifestyle of Osama bin Laden and his followers, he was flamboyant, spent lavishly, and is known to joke with colleagues to ease the pressure on him and on them.
In the Philippines he was a frequent visitor to Manila’s red light district, including its karaoke bars and mirrored go-go clubs, where he introduced himself to women as a wealthy businessman from Qatar. Mohammed’s womanizing included phoning a dentist and telling her: ‘Look out of the window and look up.’
What she saw was Mohammed and his nephew and protege Ramzi Ahmed Yousef waving from a helicopter hovering above her clinic and displaying a banner saying ‘I love you.’”
Is this for real or a segment on “24?” Is there a private joke here we are not getting? (Bear in mind that Ramzi and KSM’s “Bojinka” plans to blow up planes preceded 9/11 and were downplayed by the intelligence geniuses here.
He seems ostentatious and self-promotional enough to rate a movie of his own, and no doubt several are now in development. Hollywood can’t pass up a character like him, an authentic “bad guy” who is said to “think big,” and conceptualize grand designs and blueprints. Who knows, he may get his own show. Can you imagine his “exclusive” interview with Diane Sawyer or Bill O’Reilly?
KSM knew how to play his role as mastermind extraordinaire, says a terror expert: “A master of disguise, he often tinted his hair, using wigs, sporting beards and moustache, and wearing glasses. He wore Asian or western clothes, spoke very good English and moved about frequently.” If this description of his English is accurate, what do we make of the convoluted language in his alleged “confession?” He did go to college in North Carolina.
If there isn’t a screenwriter behind this now, there might as well be or soon will.
It’s been five years since 9/11, four from the start of the Iraq war. We are being told that Al Qaeda has been totally rebuilt, that Afghanistan is on a new boil, and that the surge is not surging.
So what can we believe? Do we trust the Pentagon and its intelligence through water-boarding program? Will KSM’s well-publicized “confession” really dampen all the 911 rumors? Will it win back the Administration’s credibility? Will it really damage Al Qaeda’s capacity to cause more damage with its reported cells in 98 countries?
Unfortunately, it won’t bring Danny Pearl back.
Is this whole show just more “show and tell”? ( I was surprised when he didn’t confess to JFK’s assassination too!) How many Hail Mary’s will his confession be granted?
Will his eventual execution make our world any safer?
– Danny Schechter is “blogger in chief” at MediaChannel.org. His film WMD (Weapons of Mass Deception) deals in part with the Pentagon’s information warfare practices. Comments to Dissector@mediachannel.org
ALSO CHECK OUT:
Time Magazine–CAN KSM BE BELIEVED?
CONSERVATIVE VIEW–John Podhoretz in the NY POST on “Being Fair” to Khalid
Popularity: 3% [?]
Just a quick update: l. AP is quoting an unamed official who says KSM’s claims are “exagggerated” 2. There is no prosecution of him undereay. 3. Read this piece from Malaysia for many details missed in most western media accounts:
http://story.malaysiasun.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/b8de8e630faf3631/id/234317/cs/1/
See comments: we may even be misspelling his name.
Sorry to come back so soon but I asked Ramesh Sharma, co-director of the Journalist and Jihadi about Danny Pearl for comments. His response:
Are the transcripts published the complete testimony of Kahlid Sheik Mohamad? Was there any cross examination? Will there be further supplements of these transcripts? Because I am perturbed why the US lawyers did not ask him about some of the following- how did he come to know about the Pearl kidnapping? What was his relationship with Omar Sheikh? Why did they zero into Daniel Pearl as a victim? How did they carry out the kidnapping? When did they decide to slaughter him? Why did they choose to muder Pearl? Why did he choose to physically and personally carry out the brutal muder?
Too many questions that need answer and KSM is perhaps the only one who has most of the answers!
Karl Hence of 911 Citizens Watch has some questions:
For a number of reasons I am just not buying this so-called confession by KSM? Why can’t we hear the audio of the so-called confessions? And why is it no one in the media or general public, not a single person, has a seen but two photos of this man and not a single clip of video? Think about it. It’s been three years since his capture and we have only two photos of the man whose story was at the core of the 9/11 Commission Report. Why are there no cameras, even military ones, in the tribunal courtroom? Were there no photographers, even military photographers, on the flight that transferred him to Guantanamo? What national security concerns could possibly nix cameras or digital audio recorders from documenting the professed ‘mastermind’ of the worst terrorist attack in history? Perhaps you could put in a request for a updated photo or some video from the proceedings. Is that too much to ask?
One More Beaut; KSM complained that he was misquoted by Al Jazeera. “You know how the media is” he said.
You can’t make this stuff up.
More skepticism on the Prison Planet Website by Paul Joseph Watson. See The Full Story.
“Skepticism about the legitimacy of KSM’s confession has gushed forth from all quarters, leaving the credibility of the Pentagon and the
process of military tribunals in ruins and provoking additional questions about why the alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind admitted to involvement in such a vast range of plots.
After media commentators across the spectrum, from Time Magazine to Matt Lauer and even Rosie O’Donnell were openly cynical of the accuracy of
KSM’s testimony, officials speaking on condition of anonymity admitted that the claims were exaggerated, but still insist KSM’s responsibility
for 9/11, “from A to Z” is genuine.
Former CIA field officer Robert Baer also expressed his doubts , questioning “What the Pentagon’s objective really is in releasing the transcript of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s confession.”
“On the face of it, KSM, as he is known inside the government, comes across as boasting, at times mentally unstable. It’s also clear he is making things up. I’m told by people involved in the investigation that KSM was present during Wall Street Journal correspondent Danny Pearl’s
execution but was in fact not the person who killed him. There exists videotape footage of the execution that minimizes KSM’s role. And if KSM
did indeed exaggerate his role in the Pearl murder, it raises the question of just what else he has exaggerated, or outright fabricated,” writes Baer.
The facet of the Pearl murder and why the establishment would want to shut the lid on the whole affair by pinning the blame on KSM is interesting in the context that in September 2006, Pakistan President
General Pervez Musharraf fingered Omar Sheikh as Pearl’s assassin, adding that he was an MI6 agent working for British Intelligence . In the transcript of his alleged confession, KSM cryptically discusses CIA and Mossad involvement in the Pearl execution but the text is heavily redacted.
FROM OPINION JOURNAL (WSJ
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009797
Ya Missed Him, KSM!
Reader George Simpson tells us that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessed to at least one killing that did not take place:
Concerning the posting on March 15, 2007, about the transcript of one K.S. Mohammad and his confession No. 5 on the list, I am one of the two “dead soldiers” he references. Unfortunately for him, I am still alive and ticking.
The attack was on Oct. 8, 2002, on Failaka Island, Kuwait. It was committed by two Canadian-affiliated Kuwaitis who did certainly make an effort to kill U.S. Marines on the beach. One of our unit was killed that morning, Cpl. Antonio Sledd of Tampa, Fla. I was wounded in the arm, the only other injury, save the quick and efficient killing, by the Marines of L Company 3/1, of the two perpetrators.
Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that a so-called human-rights group is rushing to KSM’s defense and spinning conspiracy theories about the government:
John Sifton, a senior researcher at Human Rights Watch, said he questioned whether the statement read for Mr. Mohammed by his representative authentically reflected his views.
“The grammar of it alone, when juxtaposed with his version of English, suggests it was prepared for him,” Mr. Sifton said. “It looked to me like it was printed out of whitehouse.gov.”
But Mr. Mohammed in places amended and then expressly adopted the statement, telling tribunal officials that he was not under any pressure or duress as he did so. He later freely discussed aspects of his terrorism activities in an extended monologue to the tribunal.
Mr. Schecter,
I was headed for the door when I heard Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confess to killing Christ. That got me back to my seat, taking notes. Whatever they tortured him with, they must have mixed methedrine into it, because the guy was copping to crimes like a firehose with a broken shut-off valve. He was the Zodiak killer, he fixed the brakes on Princess Di’s limo, he’d had sex with Margaret Trudeau. I tried to get it all down, but I was starting to feel like a priest hearing confession at a convent school after they’d spiked the water supply with LSD — culpatory overload. After he admitted to being the mastermind behind the Bermuda Triangle, I passed out. Sorry,
Gerald Carpenter
How frequently do people not under duress state that their confessions are not made under duress? Is this is a standard part of statements in the U.S. court system or military?
Hi Danny, i was glad to come upon your article, as it makes some very good points regarding KSM’s “confessions” which are reminiscent of the Stalinistic trials. The US government seems to be using his confessions to cover their a** as it becomes more “naked” by the day.
I read a very cleverly written article today that you might find interesting. Since you wrote Weapons of Mass Deception, you might find the whole news site worthy of note: http://tinyurl.com/2sbxzt
http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/
By Danny Schechter
As millions of homes are foreclosed upon, as unemployment grows and inflation mounts, it is time to understand the origins of the crisis and the need to fight for economic justice.
Written by veteran media critic and Emmy winner Rory O'Connor, Shock Jocks features unsparing profiles of the ten worst conservative radio talkers in America, including Michael Savage, Bill O' Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Don Imus and the rest.