I watched the usual abysmal American media coverage of the Bhutto assassination -- shallow, lacking context, and immediately applying all events to the presidential race [both absurd and grotesque].
And just like Iraq, one of the few sources of decent coverage was McClatchy [formerly Knight-Ridder], they have an excellent on-the-scene piece on the Bhutto assassination and set the context for how it occurred:
I was standing near the rally stage, about 30 to 40 yards away from the scene of the shooting. There was pandemonium. On hearing the shots, I started running toward the scene. Then came the explosion. I ran back a bit. I didn't see the killer, and by the time I got to the gates, Bhutto's SUV was driving to a Rawalpindi hospital. She didn't have a chance.
The assassination occurred in this garrison city housing the headquarters of the Pakistan army, an institution that has always seemed opposed to Bhutto. A couple of miles away across Rawalpindi, a previous military regime had executed her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan's first democratically elected prime minister, in 1979, when she was 26.
Police officers had frisked the 3,000 to 4,000 people attending Thursday's rally when they entered the park, but as the speakers from Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party droned on, the police abandoned many of their posts. As she drove out through the gate, her main protection appeared to be her own bodyguards, who wore their usual white T-shirts inscribed: "Willing to die for Benazir."
Ghulam Mustafa, a witness at the scene, said he saw bodies with missing heads and limbs.
"This happens only in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan. Why not America?" he said.
Bhutto's party had complained repeatedly that the government provided her with inadequate security. She'd narrowly escaped another assassination attempt, at her homecoming parade Oct. 18 in Karachi, which left 140 dead.
At Rawalpindi General Hospital, hundreds of Bhutto supporters pushed their way in, filling the corridors, weeping and shouting. They chanted "Musharraf is a dog" and "Musharraf murderer," referring to President Pervez Musharraf.
"They killed her father. They killed her two brothers. It is a national tragedy," said Safraz Khan, a near-hysterical supporter. "She was the force to unite Pakistan." (emphasis added)
When people just dismiss the anger of Pakistanis at Musharraf and the military regime in Pakistan over Bhutto's death, the lack of context is staggering. Not only because Benazir Bhutto's close relations were killed at the hands of the military; but because even if her death was not directly caused by the regime, it set in place the forces that probably did.
What became the Taliban and Al Qaeda had its birth in the late 1970s and its matron was the Pakistani military (and it's money came from the U.S. and Saudi Arabia). Short-term solutions with long-term negative consequences. Soon the common wisdom of our pundit driven media will move on to the next disaster demanding their flatulence and we'll not here much of it, but Bhutto's death will likely have the Pakistan's military regime's name on it in some fashion. The regime we have coddled always in the name of some short-term gain, stability or some game of international chess.
(photo from Khalid Bin Ismail)
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Good morning, Attaturk.
Good post. It’s times like these I’m glad that I 1) don’t have TV, let alone cable, and 2) DO have the front-pagers here at the Lake.
Why do you think McClatchy has managed to keep their journalistic standards so much higher than the rest of the US press?
minor corrections in the last paragraph and partial paragraph
OK…bedtime for me here on the Left Coast.
‘night.
FunnyDiva
wow - on MSNBC (5 AM EST) they’re actually speculating that perhaps US attempts in the region have overlooked sect and tribal loyalty - and that came as a question from the anchor not the guest commentator…
sorry don’t usu. watch them and didn’t catch the name.
Woohoo!
Sorry about the errors, I hit publish by mistake before I had finished the post or proofread. It is better now.
yup, CNN is running live footage of the cortege too.
the anchor did make some comment about how other countries deal with political differences this way and all I could think was - umm Dealey Plaza, Ford Theater, the Hinckley Hilton, et al, are all within the US.
The anchor is Mika Brzezinski, her pop is. like, famous.
that’s Zbig’s daughter?
ok.
“Democracy is not about elections”
I love your work Attaturk but can you somehow imagine that US Presidential candidates would not be asked about this situation? It sorta seems like we are involved with that country and whoever gets elected is going to have to DO something.
Yeah. I was offended by the immediate, shallow, who does this help crap. However, I remembered it was candidtate Bush in 2000 who didn’t know who Musharraf was in one of the debates. That might have told the electorate, who didn’t already know, what a lazy, uninformed candidate he was.
Who cares about the proofreading. Your points are understood.
The two plausible scenarios are the ones I have not heard about on the news.
A) Musharraf regime kills Bhutto.
B) Musharraf regime ignores pending threat… …that kills Bhutto.
Who else benefits?
Raven: that could explain her comment on how doing some research on complex situations in other cultures might be a wise idea.
there’s still perspective to be filtered, I was just surprised that she and her producers had seemed to have some understanding that it is indeed a complex situation w/o a simple answer.
One of the points that the heads on MSNBC are making is that most people in the “West” have no idea what the hell is going on anywhere in the Middle East.
Musharraf: He maitains power while the legitimate SJC of Pakistan is culled.
The White House: Danger… Danger….. Will Robinson
She is generally thoughtful and it’s a real treat to have her on without that moron Joe.
Actually, Al Qaeda and islamic fundamentalists benefit from any instability. Most of the initial reaction, here and there, appears to automatically place guilt on Musharraf and/or the military and increase opposition. It also helps Sharif. I just think it’s too early and too complex to accurately figure out. Surely in Pakistan, there are at least as many cooks and screwballs as there are in the U.S., who don’t have to have a rational motive.
B.
Pervez doesn’t gain by A.
always let someone else do your dirty work.
sins of omission are usu. considered less than those of comission.
Some small measure of sense on the part of MSNBC using Mika for this segment….about the only non-airhead female they’ve got. :-(
Tho’ I would like to see her jam a verbal fist down scarmouth’s throat more often.
yes sir…………..
swift kick in the “nut” also!
I think it’s just a matter of circumstance, shit head is down in Florida.
sorry Musharraf - need to preview, only here out of insomnia.
My first thought were his forces too, but it’s just too dicey to do something like that in any sort of direct way. Plus it’s easier if fingers can be pointed (easily) to the outside.
JamesJoyce @ 22 -
I got called on the carpet once by the mods for a few untoward comments (”lessons learned”)….glad you went there. *g*
Raven @ 23 -
Praise dog for small favors; wish he’d stay there permanently!
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin Thursday citing an alleged claim of responsibility by al Qaeda for former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, a DHS official told CNN.
An Italian news agency says al Qaeda No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri began planning Bhutto’s killing in October.
Click to view previous image
1 of 4
Click to view next image
more photos »
more photos »
But such a claim has not appeared on radical Islamist Web sites that regularly post such messages from al Qaeda and other militant groups.
The source of the claim was apparently Italian news agency, Adnkronos International (AKI), which said that al Qaeda Afghanistan commander and spokesman Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid had telephoned the agency to make the claim.
“We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat [the] mujahadeen,” AKI quoted Al-Yazid as saying.
According to AKI, al Qaeda No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri set the wheels in motion for the assassination in October.
One Islamist Web site repeated the claim, but that Web site is not considered a reliable source for
I thought SH was in texas.
You are not a real Firepup if you don’t get slapped around now and then!
Snarkarooo
I didn’t mean to sound cranky.
and in response to your CNN blurb, well of course it was al-Q. isn’t everything anymore? what was the name of the perpetual enemy of all 3 states in Orwell’s 1984?
honestly, I don’t wear a tin-foil hat.
nawaz sharif. although there was an attack on him yesterday too (he survived, 4 others killed).
“Rhonda” someone on with Mika seems to have been in the Bush admin and she is making great points about how fucking terrible our intel in the ME is. Wonder if jack Jacobs connects the dots back to our swell intel in the Nam?
I thought youR comment was great!
Good morning firepups. Good eye-opener this morning, Attaturk. I really appreciate your early morning efforts.
Juan Cole is also talking about press coverage of the Bhutto assassination and its aftermath this morning. It’s worth a read. Excerpt:
arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgH, Joe is back!
thanks,
oops, there’s your friend Joe now…
Good thread, Ataturk.
And, Musharraf and the ISI have a track record of selectively permitting the violence and assassination attempts that they favor, and almost certainly creating a few of their own.
All of the events in Pakistan are right down the “I have to postpone the election now” pathway, while george bush clucks sympathetically.
Which, if I’m not being too paranoid, has a certain relevance to what is supposed to take place here, next November.
Bush has created this VERY quick global-warming for terrrism, in which the GOP, with a largely quiescent democratic party, can just keep on eroding our rights, as they institutionalize the corporate Reich they’ve ginned up.
Yesterday, the Kurdish Regional Government parliament postponed the referendum for control of Kirkuk for 6 months. Since they’ve funnelled a lot of Kurds into and around Kirkuk, they already have the numbers, but they know as well as anyone, that “greater Iraq” is a house of cards, and they don’t want to pull THEIR card out, just yet.
The implications for that referendum being held, are, of course, huge, given those divisions that the Turks have parked on their southeastern border with the Kurdish provinces.
Juan Cole is all over this, and he points out that if there is ANOTHER postponement after this one, it will put the referendum that will surely give the Kurds control of Kirkuk and those extensive reserves, right into the democrats laps.
Of course, that 6 month date down the road may be just about the time when the entire clusterfuck implodes. Sadr and ISCI, the Badr’s, could get tired of watching bush shower money and arms on the Sunni insurgents, and join hands, say, in Basra, and just shut down the oil taps and invite CentCom to come down and try to turn them on again; the brits will be mostly gone; the Aussies WILL be gone, and a lot of the Poles will be, too.
And, Musharraf is now under all kinds of pressure in Pakistan. How to prop him up, considering all of the Pakis who would joyfully dice him up for dog food?
The democrats have to be looking at all of this, and thinking:
“We are SOOOOO fucked. Do we HAVE to nominate a candidate?”
I think the 800 pound Sabertooth kitty is about to get out of the bag, and once he gets, there aint gonna be no puttin’ him back in.
Ride ‘em, cowboy bush! Can you hang on until the buzzer, 10 months from now? Because the “dismount” is going to be pure hell for SOMEBODY.
Fasten your seatbelts, folks.
Mika has been covering that.
Anyone know who this Rhonda (sp?) person is (and her background) doing analysis on MSNBC right now? Maybe a bushie but doesn’t seem to be pulling any punches wrt to lack of infor/expertise on the part of US in the ME.
Raven @ 32 -
You channelin’ my mind, bro’?
Oh, gak….scar just came on.
Great minds run along the same paths, so do sewers!
Musharraf is done. The people of Pakistan will hold him accountable, unlike our Congress holding the President accountable
Yea, and they will die in the streets by the thousands.
dangit JJ! we don’t walk away from compromised regimes!
call me crazy (i know you will *g*) but musharraf is the last person i suspect of being responsible for the killing bhutto. other than bhutto, he’s the one who as the most to lose - especially with the attack on sharif yesterday. he’s just bound to be suspected, and maybe removed from office (either by the people or by the military).
is musharraf that stupid? hard to imagine.
not when oil is concerned that is certain!!!
couldn’t stay where he is as long if he was stupid.
but will this give Burma (sorry Myanmar - shouldn’t legitimize them) the nerve to act against Aung Suu Kyi?
Joe coming to his senses?
I’ve gotta try to sleep. I lurk here a lot, and given current spare time may very well post again.
later.
oh jeez, Joe just sounded like he was complaining about the banality of riot footage…
G’Morning all, morning Selise.
stupidity in a leader hard to imagine, in our times? Selise you are kidding us!
Lesson in imagination: Texas, all eyes are upon you. In a leaders, lack of intellectual curiosity and narrow horizons counts as stupidity.
Gotta go Pups. Early AM departure. See you later.
sleep well……..
Like selise, I would be surprised if Musharraf turned out being directly responsible for this. A BBC analyst was saying yesterday that he thought the ISI or fundamentalist religionists were the most likely suspects. Given Bhutto secularism, the latter may be most likely, but who knows? Think I’ve read that the ISI has fundamentalist components too. Juan Cole points out that the majority of Pakistan’s population is quite moderate and in no way support al-Q or the other fundamentalists. But, if they see Musharraf and those in power as being in the back pocket of the US, the outcome will not be pretty.
isn’t myanmar the name that the current regime adopted? (not sure i’m right about that, but if it’s so, myanmar is hardly a legitimate name either, imo).
Raven @28!
Best laugh of the week! Grazie! :o) :o) :o)
(When you send the new keyboard, “neutral beige” will do nicely. :o) )
morning BlueStateRedHead - haha, no comment on our own leaders… but cynical ability to read the political landscape in support of one’s own ambition is not the kind of intelligence i think you were referring to.
ok last post - the current regime refers to itself as Myanmar, so I feel Burma (maybe historically inaccurate) or what may be adopted ought be reserved until they are democratic.
night.
I have a question:
As I’ve been saying for a while now, at this point, all Bush and the petro-borgs are doing, is trying to hold on long enough to get out of town and hang the turd-lei around the democrats necks.
I’m wondering how long it will be before one or more of the democratic candidates will begin speaking that little factoid.
Or, if they will, at all.
(It’s so obviously true, that I think it will play in Peoria; not to mention Keene, New Hampshire, and maybe, Columbia, South Carolina, too. :o) )
Wikipedia talks about Burma’s name and interestingly their article on the country is still designated “Burma”.
That was a question!?
Great post, Attaturk.
I’ve always wondered why Reagan & Bush Sr. didn’t go after Osama & al-Qaida during the years they were president. I always found it interesting that an attack on our nation would occur 30 days after Clinton took office even though our government for years knew al-Qaida was around. Is there a connection? Now we have another Bush in charge would ignored all the warnings that an attack was coming to our nation and this same man is allowing “one of our key allies” to harbor Osama in Pakistan, while at the same time doesn’t appear shocked that Bhutto has been assassinated.
Am I missing something? What’s that smell? A rotting fish head? LOL
Just an observation…
sorta like Beijing and Peking?
“I’ve always wondered why Reagan & Bush Sr. didn’t go after Osama & al-Qaida during the years they were president.”
They were being “used” to defeat the Soviet Union and Communism in Afghanistan……..
Charlie Wison’s War!
Only this:
Reagan’s Osama Connection
How he turned a jihadist into a terrorist kingpin.
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 7:34 PM ET
Earlier this week, I cited recently declassified documents to show that Ronald Reagan did indeed play a major role in ending the Cold War. Now it’s time to note that a similar set of documents shows that Reagan also played a major role in bringing on the terrorist war that followed—specifically, in abetting the rise of Osama Bin Laden.
oh great (in the NOT sense). pakistan in the news again…. from WHO:
note: looks like a case of H2H2H spread. more from niman
Raven@58; it was.
I’m just tired of hearing the democrats yap, about Social Security and Health Care, while george bush is setting fire to the future of our kids and our grandkids. First things first; and the fallout from bush’s foreign policy wizardry, is going to be the gift that keeps on giving.
It would be nice if some democrat would broach the subject. Especially, since it appears that they are going to inherit all of the benefits, AND the credit, for bush’s good works in Iraq and Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Maybe we, the USA via our politcal leaders are not “honorable?” Ask the native Americans and the broken deals, stolen land, murdered squaws and childern in the name of Manifest Destiny??
night luddite!
James Joyce & Raven, oh boy. I’ve always called al-Qaida the Bush family’s personal death squad and it appears I wasn’t too far off! Gawd.
AQ was an ally - right up until the we attacked iraq when bush 41 was potus.
Maybe?
This explains why Bush Sr. cries all the time in public. He knows that some Americans have figured out their little scheme!
It’s so infuriating to me.
lol. i think raven had an extra helping of sarcasm-berries for breakfast this morning. *g*
Ask the people of New Orleans. Not maybe, definately!
My wife and my dog are gone for 3 days!
The correspondant for Adnkronos International in Karachi is a fairly respected journalist, Syed Saleem Shahzad, who has, in the past, been a recipient of other Al Qaida tapes and announcements. That doesn’t mean he could have been the recipient of bogus information…but the source attributed it to be a statement from the actual current leader of Al Qaida in Afghanistan. So that might mean that it’s coming from someone who isn’t obviously trying to “Jimmy” this up by making it statement of Osama bin Laden or al-Zawahiri (although it attributes it to be the result of planning from the latter).
To me the sharing of credit by rank, the knowledge of several individuals in the chain of command, as well as the poetic verbiage lends additional authenticity to the announcement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syed_Saleem_Shahzad
Bhutto herself was quite concerned with the assignment of Brig. Gen. Ejaz Shah of the ISI (Pakistan Intelligence) as the man detailed by Musharaff to protect her. She pointed out that Shah had a long history of links with al Qaida and the Taliban, dating back to when he was the ISI’s “handler” of bin Laden and Mullah Omar when they were mujahideen. Shah was the man that the Omar Sheik, kidnapper of Dan Pearl, returned himself in to…just as the FBI and Pakistan police were about to capture him. Omar called an Uncle, a retired judge and friend of Shah, who told Shah that the General was an Islamist and wouldn’t allow the government to mistreat him or turn him over to the Americans.
Ejaz Shah, as erstwhile head of Intelligence, has been involved in the funding and formation of extremist Taliban support groups in Pakistan, creating student groups in the Universities, and even building up several of the Islamist Parties that demand Shari’a law.
While he was the top general involved in Counter-Narcotics Enforcement he actually blocked prosecutions ` and many suspect he did so because he was, himself, benefitting from the heroin trade. The whole turmoil with the Judiciary appears to be a Ejaz Shah gambit, as he had frequently sparred with the Chief Justice.
To that end, many suspect that one who would certainly gain advantage by eliminating Bhutto AND who had the power to “allow” it by simply having men step aside at the critical moment…was Ejaz. Bhutto was certainly going to strip him of his power base, and had already made statements to the effect that she was going to eliminate the ISI’s linkage with Islamic extremists. In addition, any part of a coalition between Bhutto and Musharaff would have required a weakening of his support/protection for the extremists. That support was mainly coming via the ISI.
Ejaz may even see this as an opening for his own counter-coup to expel Musharaff and establish himself or a crony as a replacement. In fact, he may have been trying to do this for years.
ah, that explains it!
I guess. Honestly, I hadn’t been aware of the controversy surrounding Burma’s name. The things you learn here at the Lake!
“Beijing” is the standard Pinyin romanization for the two Chinese characters that make up the name. Literally, they mean “Northern Capital”. Peking is a rendering of the same characters, but derives from an earlier system of romanization (Yóuzhèngshì Pīnyīn).
“1933 Business Plot” Failed…………..
“2002 Iraqi Oil Plot” pending…………
Ok, I may be naive but did anyone think she was NOT going to be offed? Christ, she had been back in Pakistan how long before the first attempt?
This last little bit of talkies on MSNBC about the prez candidates and how quickly things can change with the way voters view them is definitely fustrating. Yes, perceptions change based on current events; yesterday is different from today; is different from last year; is different from…….it just seems like more of the “they can’t walk and chew gum at the same time.” For the love of dog, whoever gets this odious job is gonna need to juggle a thousand balls at the same time and these stoopid talking-heads act like we should choose a prez based on some one single moment crystalized in time.
The above probably came out about as clear as mud; I wish I had a few of cinnamonape’s brains. *g*
And the phrase Pigin English came from the pronunciation of “business” in Hawaii where the language of business was a melange of languages.
Rudy thinks lots of comments about what to do in Pakistan is not helpful and then he made lots of comments about what to do in Pakistan.
The more details I learn, the more this hit has the smell of a somewhat-inside job. Bhutto stood up, sticking her upper body out of her “bulletproof” car, just as she approached her assassin. Who or what induced her to do so at that particular moment?
Maybe she committed suicide by terrist.
Good morning pups. Today we have Bobo and Paul Krugman in the NYT. Bobo offers up Part 2 of his discussion of his Sidney Awards. Today he celebrates more polemical essays from 2007, including a meditation on an American soldier’s death in Iraq and a clarification on the issue of immigration. Mr. Krugman writes about the trouble with trade. He says for the sake of the world as a whole, he hopes that we respond to the trouble with trade not by shutting trade down, but by doing things like strengthening the social safety net.
http://mgpaquin.wordpress.com/
The coffee, tea and hot chocolate are ready, and the toasted Thomas’ English muffins are hot out of the toaster. What a dreadful way to end the year — 2008 has to be better…
i expect there is (and is going to be even more) black propaganda on this… so i don’t really trust any of the reports about details of what happened. maybe someday the truth will come out, but maybe not.
for now, i take everything with a truckload of salt.
I guess that would be the epitome of an “inside job.” ;-)
i think krugman is too late.
should have listenened to the global justice advocates protesting the wto - “fix it or nix it“
the ptb didn’t fix it, i doubt that anyone now trust them to fix it. very sad.
The Scar asks Ghouli whether the pakistani elections should happen as planned on January 8th.
Ghouli - “Depends on what (our) intelligence and (our) military have to say”. IOW, the election goes forward if the U.S. is satisfied with the idea of the election going forward.
Between Ghouli’s shit-eatin’ grin throughout the entire interview, and The Scar’s right out-front, and proud-of-it pimping of the Ghoul, my day’s off to a lovely start.
George Bush had the same look yesterday at his presser on the morning of 9/11/01 when the attacks on our nation were happening, you know, the look of, “I knew this was going to happen but I have to appear like I didn’t know”. He always appears amazed at the intensity of the criminal activity of his Regime, however.
I just can’t understand why the hate us. /s
as per usual, bernhard has an excellent take on the situation in pakistan.
kudo’s to MSNBC for moving The Scar out from behind Olbermann, where he had to at least pretend to be reasonable in order to hang on to some portion of his audience, to a slot where Scar can go full-goose-Gonzo red-neck, with no apparent consequences. /s
‘mornin
here’s the lineup for Washington Journal
Matthew Lee of Associated Press & Jon Ward of the Washington Times look at the reaction to Benazir Bhutto’s assassination in Pakistan. Then Leo Hindery describes Democratic candidate John Edwards economic plans. And Stewart Verdery looks at fmr. NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s (R) immigration strategy.
ON WASHINGTON JOURNAL
Friday, December 28
7am - Declan Walsh, The Guardian, Pakistan Correspondent
7:30am - Matthew Lee, Associated Press, State Depart. Corres., & Jon Ward, Washington Times, White House Corres.
8:30am - Leo Hindery, Edwards for President, Economic Adviser
9am - Stewart Verdery, Giuliani for President, Immigration Adviser
GREAT post. I can’t wait to see the faces of Tweety, pumpkinhead,Skankborough et al, when these horrific acts change NOTHING in the primaries. I have hope that the voters are on to this garbage, I may be dreaming, but I think many of the voters get more info from the internets these days and will block out all the “village” noise and nonsense, well ……maybe the fundies will listen to the MSM
Scar is such a total piece of SHIT! “America has not been attacked since 9/11.” yak, yak, yak…the show actually had some decent content ’til someone dragged *him* out of bed. :-(
Off with the idjit box for the day!
When the ever-fluctuating polls make their next shift, they have this explanation ready to go.
Greetings from Dulles
Greetings from Dulles
Where you off to, eg?
midwest today, visit mom and sibs
The chattering class do okay when they merely have to read the news, but when they veer off into providing analysis and opinion their callowness is exposed.
They might be telegenic, but they aren’t intelligent. It’s the ascendancy of the Ted Knight school of television journalism.
There were rumors that Rachel Maddow might be getting her own show on MSNBC, e.g., possibly replacing the Tucker. Any substance to them?
Al Qaeda wasn’t really an “organization” at the time that Reagan was President. The elements that became Al Qaida were mujahideen operating with the support of the ISI to weaken the USSR’s strength/influence in Central Asia. Of course, the ISI was supported by the CIA, MI6, the Saudi’s and Gulf States. Bin Laden used a lot of his wealth and engineering expertise in creating the tunnel networks and training camps in the southeast.
Al Qaeda formed after the war to support former mujahideen who had been injured or who needed financial help re-integrating back into their former countries (similar to the welfare activities of Hezbollah and Hamas). The fact that many of the former fighters were zealous extremists affiliated with groups like the Muslim Brotherhood rather than Afghan nationalists led them back to join with groups like the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Al-Zawahiri’s organization). It was the latter that supported both the assassination of Sadat. The Blind Sheik went into exile as a result of his likely involvement as the spiritual mentor of many associated with that attack. The US had started efforts to extradict the Blind Sheik back to Egypt. The first attack on the WTC was reputedly an act by supporters of the Blind Sheikh.
But several of those involved had trained years before in Afghanistan in bin Laden managed camps and may have received some money from al Qaida as a result. But it’s unlikely that they were being orchestrated from bin Laden. Soon after the WTC attack there was a merger of Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaida as Zawahiri and bin Laden viewed that a Pan-Islamic movement would be more in line with Muslim Brotherhood-like political objectives. And those that were involved in the first WTC bombing , but not captured, were able to merge into the al Qaida-supported network of mujahideen veterans. This wasn’t until the mid-1990’s. Until then al-Qaida really wasn’t on the radar when fighters supported and trained in this war of greater cross-border Jihad began to involve themselves in conflicts elsewhere. Some became mercenaries in the war against Christians in Southern Sudan, and many wandered off to fight in Bosnia and Chechnya, or even SEAsia.
It wasn’t that many intelligence agencies (and others) observing the Afghan war didn’t realize the threat posed by training Islamic fundamentalists to fight the USSR, however. But most thought that the real threat was going to be back in the countries of origin of these foreign fighters, not against the US. Largely these words of warning were ignored, in any case. In fact, some of these fighters were actually brought into the military establishments as a result of their knowledge of practical warfare, guerilla conflict and Intelligence gathering. Some trained the Taliban while in Pakistan and continued to support them in the subsequent civil war in Afghanistan. And although AQ gave cover for many involved in the original WTC attacks there was no hard evidence that they were doing anything against the US until well into the latter part of Clinton’s term.