Atlantis Online
August 04, 2020, 06:13:07 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

FBI says, “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”

Pages: [1]   Go Down
Author Topic: FBI says, “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”  (Read 45 times)
Rage Against the Machine
Hero Member
Posts: 146

« on: December 28, 2007, 02:14:18 am »

FBI says, “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”

June 6, 2006 – This past weekend, a thought provoking e-mail circulated through Internet news groups, and was sent to the Muckraker Report by Mr. Paul V. Sheridan (Winner of the 2005 Civil Justice Foundation Award), bringing attention to the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist web page for Usama Bin Laden.[1]  (See bottom of this web page for Most Wanted page)  In the e-mail, the question is asked, “Why doesn’t Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster make any direct connection with the events of September 11, 2001?”  The FBI says on its Bin Laden web page that Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya.  According to the FBI, these attacks killed over 200 people.  The FBI concludes its reason for “wanting” Bin Laden by saying, “In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorists attacks throughout the world.” 


On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11.  The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI.  When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” 


Surprised by the ease in which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How this was possible?”  Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.”  I asked, “How does that work?”  Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence.  Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice.  The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury.  In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, Bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury.  He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11.”


It shouldn’t take long before the full meaning of these FBI statements start to prick your brain and raise your blood pressure.  If you think the way I think, in quick order you will be wrestling with a barrage of very powerful questions that must be answered.  First and foremost, if the U.S. government does not have enough hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11, how is it possible that it had enough evidence to invade Afghanistan to “smoke him out of his cave?”  The federal government claims to have invaded Afghanistan to “root out” Bin Laden and the Taliban.  Through the talking heads in the mainstream media, the Bush Administration told the American people that Usama Bin Laden was Public Enemy Number One and responsible for the deaths of nearly 3000 people on September 11, 2001.  Yet nearly five years later, the FBI says that it has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11. 


Next is the Bin Laden “confession” video that was released by the U.S. government on December 13, 2001.  Most Americans remember this video.  It was the video showing Bin Laden with a few of his comrades recounting with delight the September 11 terrorist attacks against the United States.  The Department of Defense issued a press release to accompany this video in which Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said, “There was no doubt of bin Laden’s responsibility for the September 11 attacks before the tape was discovered.”[2]  What Rumsfeld implied by his statement was that Bin Laden was the known mastermind behind 9/11 even before the “confession video” and that the video simply served to confirm what the U.S. government already knew; that Bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. 


In a BBC News article[3] reporting on the “9/11 confession video” release, President Bush is said to have been hesitant to release the tape because he knew it would be a vivid reminder to many people of their loss.  But, he also knew it would be “a devastating declaration” of Bin Laden’s guilt.  “Were going to get him,” said President Bush.  “Dead or alive, it doesn’t matter to me.” 


In a CNN article[4] regarding the Bin Laden tape, then New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said that “the tape removes any doubt that the U.S. military campaign targeting bin Laden and his associates is more than justified.”  Senator Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, “The tape’s release is central to informing people in the outside world who don’t believe bin Laden was involved in the September 11 attacks.”  Shelby went on to say “I don’t know how they can be in denial after they see this tape.”  Well Senator Shelby, apparently the Federal Bureau of Investigation isn’t convinced by the taped confession, so why are you? 


The Muckraker Report attempted to secure a reference to the U.S. government authenticating the Bin Laden “confession video”, to no avail.  However, it is conclusive that the Bush Administration and U.S. Congress, along with the dead stream media, played the video as if it was authentic.  So why doesn’t the FBI view the “confession video” as hard evidence?  After all, if the FBI is investigating a crime such as drug trafficking, and it discovers a video of members of a drug cartel openly talking about a successful distribution operation in the United States, that video would be presented to a federal grand jury.  The identified participants of the video would be indicted, and if captured, the video alone would serve as sufficient evidence to net a conviction in a federal court.  So why is the Bin Laden “confession video” not carrying the same weight with the FBI? 


Remember, on June 5, 2006, FBI spokesman, Chief of Investigative Publicity Rex Tomb said, “The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Usama Bin Laden to 9/11.”  This should be headline news worldwide.  The challenge to the reader is to find out why it is not.  Why has the U.S. media blindly read the government-provided 9/11 scripts, rather than investigate without passion, prejudice, or bias, the events of September 11, 2001?  Why has the U.S. media blacklisted any guest that might speak of a government sponsored 9/11 cover-up, rather than seeking out those people who have something to say about 9/11 that is contrary to the government’s account?  And on those few rare occasions when a 9/11 dissenter has made it upon the airways, why has the mainstream media ridiculed the guest as a conspiracy nut, rather than listen to the evidence that clearly raises valid questions about the government’s 9/11 account?  Why is the Big Media Conglomeration blindly content with the government’s 9/11 story when so much verifiable information to the contrary is available with a few clicks of a computer mouse? 


Who is it that is controlling the media message, and how is it that the U.S. media has indicted Usama Bin Laden for the events of September 11, 2001, but the U.S. government has not?  How is it that the FBI has no “hard evidence” connecting Usama Bin Laden to the events of September 11, 2001, while the U.S. media has played the Bin Laden - 9/11 connection story for five years now as if it has conclusive evidence that Bin Laden is responsible for the collapse of the twin towers, the Pentagon attack, and the demise of United Flight 93?   


…No hard evidence connecting Usama Bin Laden to 9/11… Think about it. 


[1] Federal Bureau of Investigation, Most Wanted Terrorists, Usama Bin Laden,, [Accessed May 31, 2006]

[2] United States Department of Defense, News Release, U.S. Releases Videotape of Osama bin Laden, December 13, 2001,, [Accessed June 5, 2006] 

[3] BBC News, Bin Laden video angers New Yorkers, December 14, 2001, Peter Gould,, [Accessed June 5, 2006]

[4] CNN, Bin Laden on tape: Attacks ‘benefited Islam greatly”, December 14, 2001,, [Accessed June 5, 2006]
Report Spam   Logged

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Ares, God of War
Superhero Member
Posts: 2152

« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2007, 05:14:28 pm »

Of course there isn't, didn't Bush do it?
Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 11110

« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2007, 04:36:54 pm »

NWO, with the 757 Jumbo Jets @ the WTC in NYC.

It was all in the PNAC documents.
Report Spam   Logged
Hero Member
Posts: 117

« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2008, 03:25:45 pm »

Moussaoui's defence argued that the FBI knew more of 9/11 than he did.

Moussaoui has said "I am al-Qaeda"Prosecutors in the sentencing trial of Zacarias Moussaoui's say he conformed to al-Qaeda training by not revealing details of the 11 September plot. On the second day of Moussaoui's trial, government lawyers sought to prove that he deliberately kept silent and is responsible for nearly 3,000 deaths.

Moussaoui's defence argued that the FBI knew more of the attacks than he did.

Moussaoui, arrested shortly before the 9/11 attacks, is the only person directly charged over them. The self-confessed member of al-Qaeda pleaded guilty in April to six charges of conspiracy. At the time, he said he was not meant to be part of the 9/11 attacks, but was part of a

broader conspiracy to use airplanes to strike the White House.

Judge Leonie Brinkema told the jury on Monday that the prosecution must prove that Moussaoui's actions directly contributed to deaths on 11 September. If the jury decides they did, it will be asked to consider the death penalty. 'Trained to lie' In the courtroom on Tuesday, Moussaoui's mother, Aicha el Wafi, sat three rows behind her son but he ignored her except for a glance, the Associated Press news agency reported.  Al-Qaeda expert and FBI special agent Michael Anticev took to the witness stand for a second day on Tuesday, where prosecutors asked him to read from one of the group's training manuals.  One passage said operatives were trained to lie if they were captured, in order to shield co-conspirators and allow planned attacks to go ahead.  Asked about warning signals before 9/11, Mr Anticev said he didn't "think anybody was looking at using aircraft as weapons", but later said that

the FBI had been aware of al-Qaeda plans to fly airliners into the Eiffel Tower in France.

Another FBI agent to testify, James Fitzgerald, said Moussaoui had links to some of the people that had been in touch with the 19 hijackers responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington. The defendant, a 37-year-old Frenchman of Moroccan origin, was arrested in Minnesota a month before the attacks after arousing suspicion at a flying school. He initially told federal agents he was training as a pilot only for personal enjoyment. If he is spared the death sentence, Moussaoui will spend the rest of his life in prison. The trial, being held in Virginia, could last for as long as three months.
Report Spam   Logged
Hero Member
Posts: 117

« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2008, 03:28:12 pm »

BBC news less than 10 hours after 9/11.The seeds have already been planted.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy