Post Silent on Gul’s 9/11 Views

Today’s Washington Post has an article taking up most of two columns on page A8 about the former head of Pakistan’s Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), Hamid Gul.  It is not complimentary:

Current and former U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, variously described him as "very dirty" and a man with a "horrible reputation."

"There's no doubt where his sympathies lie," a U.S. official said, echoing the views of many Pakistani defense analysts. "Even though Gul may not be a card-carrying member of a terrorist group, he stays in touch with militants, offering his insights and advice on their activities."

The Post also speaks of Gul’s views about “vast American scheming” in the world.  The single example it provides, though, is Gul’s opinion that the U.S. government is actually behind the recent huge leak of secret military documents, one of the purposes of which was to expose Pakistani double dealing. 

It is truly amazing, though hardly surprising, that The Post could talk about Gul’s charges of vast American scheming and not manage to mention his most important charge, that is that 9/11 was an inside job involving American and Israeli Zionists. One can be sure that the folks at The Post know quite well what Gul has had to say about 9/11, and that that is the sort of thing that they would want to keep away from the tender eyes and ears of the American public.  The unforgivable journalistic lapse, then, was thoroughly intentional, keeping The Post’s record intact of writing great long articles that still manage to leave out the most important things, particularly if they have anything to do with doubts about the official 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Fortunately, we no longer need rely on fading government propaganda organs like The Washington Post for our news.  We may turn to a fresher, newer propaganda organ like CNN (whose biggest star is CIA pretty boy, Anderson Cooper).  Even in its edited interview of Gul, complete with gratuitous editorial comments at the end, it manages to impart a lot more essential truth about Gul’s views than one is ever going to see in The Post (Don’t hold your breath waiting for Lally Weymouth to give him one of her long, sympathetic interviews.).

Through the wonders of the Internet, one can also read the transcript of a much longer interview of Gul in which he elaborates upon his views about 9/11.  (Though clearly well-informed, he shows that he needs some work on U.S. geography when he confuses Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, Virginia, with the site of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, some 150 miles to the north as the crow flies.) 

These two interviews represent only a mere beginning of the Internet research one might do.  Try using the terms “Hamid Gul 9/11” and see what comes up.  One interesting thing that emerges is that among the large number of hits, hits on “mainstream” press sites are virtually non-existent.  The Post’s journalistic partners in crime obviously don’t want us to hear Gul’s message, either.

These hits may be contrasted with the ones you get when you search “Hamid Gul” alone.  One of the most telling hits is one that never appeared in The Post’s print edition.  Apparently for readers who need a stronger dose of propaganda, Jeff Stein really takes off the gloves in his SpyTalk column with “The Audacity of Hamid Gul.”  In so doing, he manages inadvertently to give a great deal of credence to Gul’s allegations concerning the hidden purpose of the heavily publicized military leaks.  It’s a hit job on the Pakistanis, and particularly on the dangerous Gul.

David Martin

July 28, 2010

Home Page    Columns Column 5 Archive  Contact