Archives: Articles

The Osama bin Laden I knew

Hamid Mir

Tuesday, May 03, 2011

“I am son of a rich father, I could have spent my life in luxury in Europe and America, like many other wealthy Saudis. Instead I took up arms and headed for the mountains of Afghanistan. Was it personal interest that drove me to spend each moment of my life in the shadow of death? No! I was merely discharging a religious obligation by waging Jihad against those who attacked Muslims. It does not matter if I die in the course of fulfilling this responsibility; my death and the death of others like me will one day awaken millions of Muslims from apathy”.

These were the words of Osama bin Laden, which he spoke to me one morning during March 1997, in the cave of Tora Bora mountains of eastern Afghanistan. I was the first Pakistani journalist to interview Osama bin Laden. In May 1998, I encountered him for the second time in a hideout near the Kandahar Airport for many hours. He mentioned his possible death again and again to me in that long conversation and said: “Yes, I know that my enemy is very powerful but let me assure you, they can kill me but they cannot arrest me alive”. I received his messenger within a few hours after the 9/11 attacks and he praised all those who conducted these attacks but he never accepted the responsibility of the 9/11 attacks. It confused me. I tried to meet him again. I took the risk of entering Afghanistan in November 2001 when American warplanes were targeting Al Qaeda and Taliban from Jalalabad to Kabul.

I was lucky to meet him for the third time on the morning of November 8, 2001. I was the first and the last journalist to interview him after 9/11. Intense bombing was going on inside and outside the city of Kabul. He welcomed me with a smile on his face and said: “I told you last time that the enemy can kill me but they cannot capture me alive, I am still alive”. After the interview, he again said: “Mark my words, Hamid Mir, they can kill me anytime but they cannot capture me alive; they can claim victory only if they get me alive but if they will just capture my dead body, it will be a defeat, the war against Americans will not be over even after my death, I will fight till the last bullet in my gun, martyrdom is my biggest dream and my martyrdom will create more Osama bin Ladens”.

Osama fulfilled his promise. He never surrendered. US President Barack Obama finally announced the death of Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011. His death is the biggest news of 2011 for Americans but his sympathisers are satisfied that Osama bin Laden was not captured alive otherwise the Americans would have humiliated him like Saddam Hussain. For me, it was a great surprise that the world’s most wanted person was hiding in a Pakistani city, Abbotabad, home to Pakistan Military Academy (PMA). This is the same area where Pakistani intelligence agency ISI conducted a search operation to arrest Aby Faraj al Libbi in 2004 but the son-in-law of Osama escaped to Mardan where he was captured by ISI after few weeks.

It was learnt that the Americans conducted the operation without informing their Pakistani counterparts. Two American Chinook helicopters entered the Pakistani airspace from eastern Afghanistan. The government sources say: “We were unaware because the Americans jammed our radar system.” On the other hand, highly-placed responsible sources in the government confirmed that Pakistan shared very important information regarding Osama bin Laden in May 2010 with CIA. Pakistan security forces intercepted a phone call made by an Arab from the area between Taxila and Abbotabad. The CIA was informed in August 2010 about the possible presence of an important Al Qaeda leader in the area between Taxila and Abbotabad. Probably, this phone call was made by Osama bin Laden and that was a blunder. According to my knowledge, he escaped death at least four times after 9/11.At times, he dodged the world’s most sophisticated satellite systems and dangerous missiles by his own cleverness, and at others, it was his sheer luck that saved him from enemy strikes with only minutes to spare. The US air strikes started against the Taliban and Al Qaeda on October 7, 2001 and Osama bin Laden was spotted along with Dr.Ayman al Zawahiri on November 8, 2001 in Kabul. They had come to Kabul from Jalalabad to attend an al Qaeda meeting, and also to pay tribute to their Uzbek comrade, Jummah Khan Namangani, who lost his life in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan, on November 6.

It was the same day that I was granted an interview by the world’s most wanted man in Kabul. I was not allowed to use my camera to take photographs of bin Laden. One of his sons, Abdul Rehman, took my picture with his father and with Dr. Ayman al Zawahri. Abdul Rehman used his own camera and gave me the film. Despite all these security measures, a female spy was able to notice the unusual movement of many important Arabs in Kabul.

I remember an incident that happened when I was having tea with bin Laden and Dr. Zawahiri after the interview. Bin Laden reminded me that this was the third interview I had with him. He informed me that I made some errors in translation of the article published after my first interview in 1997, but said he had found no evidence of any misrepresentation. He was hopeful, he said, that I would not misrepresent him in this interview. More than 20 al-Qaeda leaders were also present in the small room where they were taking tea. Conversation on that day proved that most of them were of the view that the US-backed Northern Alliance was moving close to Kabul due to the support of General Pervaiz Musharraf, who was providing air bases to the Americans in Pakistan.

Suddenly, an Arab al-Qaeda fighter entered the room and informed his leaders that they had arrested a woman in a blue burqa just a few meters from the place where we were meeting. She had been spying under the cover of posing as a beggar. She begged money — even from some al-Qaeda security guards posted outside of the place where I was interviewing bin Laden. But after a few minutes, one guard noticed that she seemed more interested in watching him than begging.

So the al-Qaeda fighter started observing her movements. He soon caught her red-handed when she was overheard talking to someone about “Sheikh” on a Thoraya satellite telephone. This news was broken to the meeting in Arabic, but I also understood the gist. Bin Laden immediately ordered one of his close associates that his “guest” must not be harmed. The associate, whose name was Muhammad, told me that he would be taking me to Jalalabad.

In the ensuing rush, I said goodbye to Osama bin Laden and left with Muhammad in a private car. We were arrested by some Taliban guards outside Kabul because I was without a beard and I also had a camera in my possession, which had not been used in the interview. Muhammad never informed the Taliban that he was from al Qaeda. He told them instead that he worked for Interior Minister Mullah Abdul Raze Ached. The Taliban verified this information from the interior minister and released us after three hours.

It was late in the evening when we reached Jalalabad. Muhammad dropped me at a big house and disappeared. He came back after two hours with some startling news. He claimed that the place in Kabul where I met his “Sheikh” had been bombed just 15 minutes after our departure, but luckily “Sheikh” and others had left the place immediately after us and nobody was harmed. Muhammad told me: “Brother, you missed martyrdom with us”. I was unaware of the exact location of the earlier interview. Muhammad told me that it was in the Weir Akbar Khan area of Kabul.

I spent that night in Jalalabad, surviving intense US bombing on my right and left. Next morning, in Jalalabad Muhammad said goodbye to me and I left for Pakistan by road. We were to meet again in 2004 in Kunar when I was covering presidential elections in Afghanistan. It was then that he told me the whole story of how he and his “Sheikh” had survived the carpet-bombing of the US Air Force for many days running through the Tora Bora mountains of eastern Afghanistan.

It wasn’t until the third week of December 2001 when bin Laden and his fighters broke the circle created by Americans with the help of Haji Zahir, Haji Zaman and Hazrat Ali. The strategy of al Qaeda sometimes resembles that of the hunted in American western movies. A huge number of al Qaeda fighters entered into the Kurram tribal area of Pakistan from Tora Bora — but Osama bin Laden headed off in a different direction with a small group. Eyewitness Muhammad was also part of that group. Some Chechen and Saudi fighters provided them a cover of gunfire and they walked the whole night towards the safety of Paktia.

A top Afghan security official, Lutfullah Mashal, confirmed to me later that Osama bin Laden escaped to Paktia from Tora Bora in December 2001. Mashal followed him secretly. He claimed that Osama bin Laden entered North Wazirastan from Paktia. He spent some time there in Shawal area and then moved to the mountains of eastern Afghanistan in the province of Khost. Mashal is now working with President Hamid Karzai and he is sure that the Americans missed the capture of bin Laden in Tora Bora because they were not ready to deploy their own forces on the ground. Americans depended more on a Northern Alliance commander, Hazrat Ali — but this man betrayed them. According to highly reliable Afghan sources, Hazrat Ali provided safe passage to al-Qaeda after getting lots of money from them.

Osama bin Laden remained underground throughout the entire year of 2002. He and his colleagues were always on the run. They kept changing their hideouts again and again. They were determined to save their lives, and because of that, during this chapter they were not fighting.

It was in April of 2003 that the world’s most wanted man was to surface again in Afghanistan, after the US invasion of Iraq. He called a meeting in the Pech Valley of Kunar province and delivered a hard-hitting speech, in which he announced his plans to resist America in Iraq. He said: “Get Americans in Iraq before they get us in Afghanistan”. He declared that Saiful Adil would be in-charge of organising resistance in Iraq, and advised him to contact Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, who was hiding in Iran at the time. Bin Laden started addressing small gatherings of his comrades in Kunar as well as Paktia. One of his daughters-in-law died during childbirth in the Kunar mountains.

There was a big gathering at the funeral of his daughter-in-law. Local Afghans came to know about the death and started visiting the homes of some al-Qaeda fighters, who had married in Kunar. The news of these events reached the Americans. They launched an operation in Kunar, but once again Osama bin Laden escaped towards the south before the bombing started in Pech Valley.

It was late in 2004 when bin Laden found himself surrounded by British troops in the southern Afghan province of Helmand. Bin Laden had been hiding in a mountain area with three defence lines. Highly placed diplomatic sources revealed to this writer recently in Kabul that the British forces were very close to taking Osama bin Laden, dead or alive. He was besieged for more than 24 hours but he managed to dodge one of the world’s best equipped armies. According to details gathered from some Taliban sources in Helmand, the British forces broke two defence lines of al-Qaeda in an area of five kilometres.

One-to-one fighting was about to start, but as the day ended the darkness of night provided some welcome relief to al-Qaeda. Osama bin Laden wanted to fight on the frontline, but his colleagues stopped him. Heated arguments were exchanged. Bin Laden was angry, but Abu Hamza Al Jazeeri convinced him to escape. They placed many rockets with timers, aimed at two different directions, as a deception. They decided to break the enemy encirclement, heading in the third direction with a group of foot fighters. That group was providing cover to bin Laden. Most of the fighters lost their lives, but the plan succeeded.

Osama bin Laden slipped from the British hands along with Abu Hamza Al Jazeeri and some other fighters. These sources denied some reports that bin Laden had ordered his guards to shoot him if he was about to be arrested. The al-Qaeda sources claimed that he does not believe in suicide, it is easier for him to sacrifice his life in the battle against the enemy till the last bullet and the last drop of his blood. After that escape, he was very careful. He stopped moving inside Afghanistan and chose Pakistani tribal areas for an underground life. His big family was scattered after 9/11. Some of his children lived in Iran and one of his sons reportedly spent time in Karachi for a brief period but nobody thought that Osama would be captured in Abbottabad. He was hiding in Abbottabad with one of his wives, a son and a daughter. When Americans attacked his hideout, he immediately started fighting. His wife got bullet injury in her foot. According to his injured wife, Osama rushed to the rooftop and joined his guards who were resisting the attack. His 10-year-old daughter Safia watched American commandos entering the house, who took away the dead body of her father. She confirmed later: “The Americans dragged the dead body of my father through the stairs”.

Osama bin Laden is dead but al-Qaeda and its allies are not. Osama always exploited the flaws in American policies. His real strength was hatred against America; Islam was never his real strength. Physical elimination of Osama bin Laden is big news for the Americans but many outside America want elimination of the policies that produce bin Ladens. America came into Afghanistan in search of Osama bin Laden. No doubt that he was responsible for the killing of many innocent people but Americans cannot justify the killing of innocent people through drone attacks just because Osama killed some innocent Americans. Both Osama bin Laden and Americans violated the sovereignty of Pakistan. It must be stopped now. Osama is dead. If America does not leave Afghanistan after the death of Osama bin Laden, then this war will not end soon and the world will remain an unsafe place.

(Hamid Mir works for Geo TV. He interviewed Osama bin Laden three times. He was the last journalist to interview OBL after 9/11. He is also writing the biography of OBL)

Bahrain: People’s Revolution Heralds New History By Bahrain Freedom Movement

22 February, 2011 Countercurrents.org

Within a week of the launching of the people’s revolution in Bahrain, the number of martyrs has reached eight, all murdered in cold blood by the riot police and soldiers. Since the first peaceful demonstration at sunrise on Monday 14th February (Bahrain’s Day of Rage) led by Abdul Wahab Hussain was mercilessly crushed by the riot police, the situation has escalated and the first martyr fell. Ali Abdul Hadi Mushaime was killed after being hit with shotguns. That killing broke the fear barrier and thousands of Bahrainis participated in his funeral the following day. Once again the arrogant Al Khalifa junta reacted with stupidity (according to Richard Beeston of The Times newspaper) by shooting on the funeral procession and killing the second martyr; Fadhel Matrook . His procession the following day started a new phase in the protest. First came the dictator, Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa live on air to give his condolences to the martyrs families and form an inquiry led by one of the regime’s cronies, Jawad Al Urayyedh. The people were so furious that they decided to march to “Pearl Square” in Central Manama to turn it into the revolution’s hotbed. Within few hours their numbers swelled to more than 50 000.

The Al Khalifa regime committed its ultimate crime when it attacked the demonstrators while they were asleep. At around 3 am on Thursday morning the riot police launched their bloodiest attack on Pearl Square, killing and maiming hundreds of people, many of them women and children. More people were martyred: Ali Khudhayyer, Ali Al Mo’men and Mahmood Abu Taki. The people were terrified but many were composed despite the bloody attack. They rushed to the Salmaniyah Hospital where some of the injured and dead were taken. It was a day that would never be forgotten. The ruling family issued orders to the hospital staff not to treat the injured who were already in hospital or ferry those whose bodies were scattered at the Square and on the roads. Instead of heeding these inhumane orders, Bahraini doctors and nurses went on protest against the Health Minister, Faisal Al Hamar who has now become one of the hated figures of the regime for his continued refusal to treat the victims. T hey also made their own makeshift clinic to treat the injured. The Al Khalifa committed further crimes. They attacked the clinic, beat up the specialist doctor, Sadiq Al Ekri to unconsciousness. More atrocities were committed that day. Those attending the casualties were shot. Mr Abdul Hassan was shot with a teargas gun at blank range blowing off his head. He died instantly . A policeman was heard shouting at the killer policeman, Don’t kill him Thawwadi, Don’t kill him Thawwadi. The family of Thawwadi is a known pro-Al Khalifa family. Now the exact identity of the killer is being sought so that he is pursued for war crimes.

On Friday, the people attempted to march back to the Pearl Square at the end of the funeral of the first martyr. Despite their peaceful nature they were viciously attacked by the army whose tanks and armoured carriers had been deployed along the streets of the capital. They were not deterred by the live ammunition round fired on them by the soldiers. It was yet another turning point in the struggle for freedom. The live images shown of the attack forced some western governments to announce their indignation of the behavior of the embattled Al Khalifa. Both France and Britain announced the suspension of export of lethal and crowd control weapons to Bahrain. It was yet another international sanction against the brutal regime.

Now the scene is set for more bloodshed by an increasingly isolated regime as the people become more emboldened to continue their demand that was raised from the beginning of the revolution; the downfall of the Al Khalifa hereditary dictatorship. They have not been deterred by the threats coming from the Saudi dictators whose fate hangs in the balance after decades of dictatorship and suppression. These developments have now hardened the resolve of Bahrainis. The Al Wefaq society announced their withdrawal from the Al Khalifa shura council and calls are being made to try the ruler and his clique for genocide and war crimes. It is a history which is now unfolding in Bahrain. The time for real change has come and the days of the Al Khalifa are numbered.

Bahrain Freedom Movement

19th February 2011

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan on the Blasphemy Controversy

Excerpts from his book Translated by Yoginder Sikand, NewAgeIslam.com

Rushdie’s Story

On 17th February 1989, Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for the death of Salman Rushdie for having insulted the Prophet in his novel Satanic Verses. The ‘Islamic’ Government of Iran announced a reward of 2.6 million dollars for Rushdie’s would-be assassin if he were an Iranian, the sum being reduced to 1 million dollars if he were of some other nationality. Two days later, Rushdie issued an apology, saying, ‘Living in a world of many faiths, the experience has served to remind us that we must all be conscious of the sensibilities of others.’ Khomeini did not accept his apology, however, and, as quoted in the Times of India, insisted, ‘Even if Salman Rusdhie repents and becomes the most pious man, it is incumbent on every Muslim to employ everything he’s got, his life and wealth, to send him to hell.’

Soon after this, a number of Sunni ulema, too, came out in full support of Khomeini’s fatwa. They declared that Rushdie had engaged in the most extreme form of blasphemy, and that, therefore, he deserved nothing less than the death penalty.

Sullying the Image of Islam

Khomeini’s fatwa angered vast numbers of non-Muslims across the world. They protested against the fatwa, challenging the right of a citizen of one country to order the death of a person living in, and a citizen of, another country. They felt that the fatwa and the agitation that it spurred were a dangerous form of intimidation, a menacing danger to free speech. In short, they began to feel that the very presence of Islam in their societies was a threat to their lives and that Muslims were simply uncivilized people. It is ironical how, when Islam, properly understood, is a religion of peace, and when the Prophet Muhammad is referred to in the Quran as a mercy for all the worlds, the image of this religion has been made such that many non-Muslims feel it to be a threat to their lives.

Ridiculous Reaction

Undoubtedly, Rushdie’s novel was absurd and scandalous, but the reaction of Shia and Sunni ulema and other Muslim leaders to it was certainly even more absurd. If Salman Rushdie had insulted the Prophet, it is also the case that Ayatollah Khomeini and his supporters among the Muslim ulema were guilty of insulting Islam. This is because their reaction, and the violent agitations that it triggered off, helped create an image of Islam as a barbaric and uncivilized religion. Rushdie wrote his novel in the name of secularism, while the Shia and Sunni ulema reacted to it in the name of Islam. If Rushdie gave a bad name to secularism, the Shia and Sunni ulema gave Islam a bad name throughout the world.

The Proper Way to React

The Quran advises the believers that if an iniquitous person approaches them with bad news, they must first investigate the matter carefully, lest they should unwittingly hurt others and later repent for their actions (49:6). Often, however, people react violently and aggressively as soon as they hear something provocative and rush into violent agitation. Such a response is not properly Islamic at all. The proper Islamic way to respond in such situations is, first, to seriously understand the matter and, then, to carefully think of how to react to it rather than responding emotionally. The more serious the matter is, the more seriously one must ponder on it before responding. This is explained in a hadith report, according to which the Prophet explained that not acting in a hurry is a sign of divine guidance, while hurriedly acting comes from the devil.

With the grace of God, I have always sought to react in this Islamically appropriate way to events that I have been confronted with. And so, when I read the news about Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses, the first thing I did was to procure a copy of the book. Then, I read the entire book, which is 546 pages long. After that, I studied the issue in the light of shariah rules. Only after this did I begin writing my views on the controversy.

In contrast, the immediate reaction of Muslim leaders to the book, and the faulty manner in which they reacted to it, suggested that they did not read the book themselves, but, instead, and relying only on hearsay, they launched a massive agitation against it. Also, I do not think that any of them bothered to properly examine the shariah rules with regard to the case.

It appears to me that by not reacting in the manner that the Quran teaches us to (as explained above), these Muslim leaders clearly violated the divine commandments. Millions of Muslims around the world began angrily protesting against Rushdie. Their agitation proved that Muslims seem so eager to ‘dispatch others to hell’ that they have quite forgotten that they should first think of how they themselves can be made fit ‘to enter heaven’. They should remember that not a single person in this world is guaranteed a reserved place in paradise.

In accordance with the Quranic verse that I referred to above, it was incumbent on Muslim leaders to first seriously study the issue at hand, and then, keeping in mind all its numerous aspects, decide on an appropriate course of action. Instead, in an extremely irresponsible way, they reacted impulsively, and began issuing inflammatory statements without giving the matter any thought. This only worked to the advantage of Salman Rushdie, and the only ones to be damaged were Islam and the Muslims themselves. Had the Muslim leaders seriously studied the issue, they would have realised that while Rusdhie’s book was indeed scurrilous, it was also entirely unreadable. Even from the literary point of view, it was a total failure. Someone very rightly described it as a work ‘on a third rate theme, by a second rate author, on first rate paper.’

The fact of the matter is that had not Muslims reacted so angrily all over the world to it, the book would have died a natural death. It was only the mindless agitation the Muslims launched that gave it life, and which made vast numbers of people, who may otherwise have not cared to read it, purchase the book, although I doubt many of them would have been able to stand reading it from cover to cover.

Writing in the Time magazine, Margareta du Rietz very rightly pointed out, ‘Very few took note of the novel. Now, thanks to Khomeini, it is world famous.’ It was Khomeini’s fatwa calling for the death of Rushdie and the violent reaction of Muslims the world over calling for Rushdie’s murder that made this thoroughly unreadable book the number one bestseller in America. The publisher of the book even thanked Khomeini for being ‘its biggest salesman’. In a letter to the Times of India, a certain W.M.Shaikh rightly pointed out that while Rushdie’s novel was indeed insulting, Muslims should ignore the book and let it die a natural death, rather than violently agitate against it and its author, because this would only give it added publicity.

The fuqaha or Muslim jurisprudents have prescribed various rules with regard to blaspheming the Prophet, but this certainly does not mean that anytime any person feels that someone has insulted the Prophet, he can pick up a gun and shoot that person dead. In Islam, crimes are to be punished in accordance with the law, and only by the officially recognized courts. That is to say, the accused must be presented in court, and, after the legal proceedings are over, and if he is proven guilty, he must face the punishment that the court prescribes. If people begin to take the law into their own hands, by-passing the courts, this would be tantamount to disobedience of Islamic rules.

Further, it must be clearly understood that the issue of punishment for insulting the Prophet is not one that is so clear-cut and unconditional. It certainly does not mean that when a person is guilty of insulting the Prophet, he must necessarily be killed, and that a reward be given to his assassin. Such a thing has never happened in the whole of Muslim history.  It is only the so-called Muslim leaders of today who have begun making such claims, because of which they are making a laughing stock of Islam throughout the world. In reality, this sort of response is disobedience of Islam, and not, as they claim, acting in accordance with it.

A regular columnist for NewAgeIslam.com, Yoginder Sikand works with the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion at the National Law School, Bangalore.