It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 12:28 PM
link   
All of a sudden FBI is making a question mark to the possible connection of Bin Laden with 9/11 terrorist act. This "missing hard evidence" appeared in the FBI's website for the most wanted terrorists ine the world.
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.
 



libertypost.org
This past weekend, a thought provoking e-mail circulated through Internet news groups, 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.”


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Wasn't Bin Laden the one who deliberately admited that he was the mastermind behind 9/11 attack?
When the terrorists who commandeered the four airplanes in the Sept. 11 attacks were identified, their faces appeared in news publications all over the world.

President Bush has said he has evidence that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks, so it would seem obvious that the FBI would include him and other suspects on its 10 most wanted fugitives Web page.
Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA officer who was deputy director of the U.S. State Department Office of Counterterrorism from 1989 to 1993, said in a Sept. 12 interview conducted by Frontline that there is no concrete proof that bin Laden is responsible for the USS Cole and the 1993 WTC attacks, but bin Laden celebrates those attacks and associates himself with people who are responsible for it.

Personally I don't understand this behavior from the part of FBI. The way I see it is that Bush is under "attack" by his own institutions.

Related News Links:
www.teamliberty.net
journals.aol.com
www.shoutwire.com


[edit on 8-6-2006 by Telos]



J_3

posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Yeah I remember him "claiming" responsibility for it too.

But what does that mean?

There were probably plenty of anti-american organizations (terrorist groups) throughout the world that would have been happy to have claimed responsibility for such a devastating attack. It would make them the most popular terrorist in the world.

And imagine if you had the ability to claim responsibility and never face the consequences directly. Osama sure lucked out that way.



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Yep, in the video of him "claiming responsibility" he is all of the sudden right handed (in other videos he is left), he is wearing a gold band on his hand, which is forbiden by Muslims, and he is about 50 lbs. heaver than he is in any of his other videos. Not to mention the low video quality compared to the rest of his "transmissions".



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   
That too makes sense but still... Why would FBI after 5 years exclude Bin Laden from the accusations? I cannot see a point in this story. Too weird.



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Could it be in retaliation of Bin Laden suppossedly discounting Moussaouwi (sp?) from the plot? I mean, we've already sentenced the man to hard time, we can't just now let him go. Any connection?



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I believe that it is, what it is...
the FBI is finally following the truth... and admitting that OBL was "the guy" just like Iraq was "The guy" and just like saddam was "the guy"
they are tired of stating unknowns as facts to protect an administration that doesn't protect them... (I think the Valerie Plame affair hit below the belt, on many agents)

and much as we are seeing CIA insiders coming forward, we are seeing a true "revolt" within the administration...

And I have always said that OBL only finally admitted being involved with 9-11 recently (after several years) due to giving up to the flow of the river.

he in fact denied it for months afterward



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
I believe that it is, what it is...
the FBI is finally following the truth... and admitting that OBL was "the guy" just like Iraq was "The guy" and just like saddam was "the guy"
they are tired of stating unknowns as facts to protect an administration that doesn't protect them... (I think the Valerie Plame affair hit below the belt, on many agents)

and much as we are seeing CIA insiders coming forward, we are seeing a true "revolt" within the administration...

And I have always said that OBL only finally admitted being involved with 9-11 recently (after several years) due to giving up to the flow of the river.

he in fact denied it for months afterward



I have to agree with lazarus the long...the bush administration has rode rough shod over both the CIA and FBI (and our constituation, and our rights and....) for so long now that some agents are just not going to cover for him any longer. Yes Bush has claimed he has "proof" Bin Laden was involved but that is kinda like McCarthy's list of names if he refuses to share that info. Right after 9/11 Gen. Powell said that the government would be releasing a white paper outlinging their case against Bin Laden....well I am still waiting. Personally I don't think the Bushies have the imagination to have created and executed 9/11 PLUS the more people involved in a conspirecy, the more likely it will be exposed and for the government to have carried out 9/11 would have required more people than an already secretive terrorist organization....personally the only government conspirecises related to 9/11 are (1) the effort to cover up their inepitude in failing to prevent it or (1a) or their allowing it to happen for political gain (most likely of the two I think) and (2) their using it as the (implied) excuse for the invasion of iraq and every political boondoggle they needed it for since. In those famous words....'Sir, Have you no shame?"



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wgatenson
Yep, in the video of him "claiming responsibility" he is all of the sudden right handed (in other videos he is left), he is wearing a gold band on his hand, which is forbiden by Muslims, and he is about 50 lbs. heaver than he is in any of his other videos. Not to mention the low video quality compared to the rest of his "transmissions".


That is only one of the videos where he claims responsibility. Wearing a gold band is not forbidden by muslims. There are other videos that show him wearing a gold band.

www.911myths.com...

He also claimed responsibility in the 2004 video.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   
wow thats crazy, because 3-4 months ago I was looking at the top 10 wondering why 9/11 wasn't listed under Usama, but just forgot to post a thread about it on here till i saw this and remembered.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Telos
That too makes sense but still... Why would FBI after 5 years exclude Bin Laden from the accusations? I cannot see a point in this story. Too weird.


its actually always been like that, hes never actually been listed for the 9/11 attacks in the top 10 wanted list, mainly because they never actually had evidence to prove it. i know i remember looking at the site and wondering why he wasnt included.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by J_3
Yeah I remember him "claiming" responsibility for it too.

And imagine if you had the ability to claim responsibility and never face the consequences directly. Osama sure lucked out that way.


Unless you are being purposefully sarcastic--which I totally missed if you are--I think Osama has faced lots of consequences. His organization has been hounded & hunted to the point where it is all but dismantled; his proxy government (the Taliban) have been thrown out and most of its leadership killed or arrested; most of his top aids & lieutenants have been killed and he personally is in daily fear for his life. Hardly what I would call never facing the consequences directly.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Telos
That too makes sense but still... Why would FBI after 5 years exclude Bin Laden from the accusations? I cannot see a point in this story. Too weird.


Actually this is nothing 'new' as such as the FBI pretty much admitted ( in my opinion at least) they had nothing on him since early 2002.


While here, the hijackers did all they could to stay below our radar. They contacted no known terrorist sympathizers. They committed no egregious crimes. They dressed and acted like Americans, shopping and eating at places like Wal-Mart and Pizza Hut, blending into the woodwork all the while. When four got speeding tickets in the days leading up to September 11th, they remained calm and aroused no suspicion. Since none were known terrorists, law enforcement had no reason to question or detain them.

The hijackers also left no paper trail. In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper – either here in the U.S. or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere – that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot. The hijackers had no computers, no laptops, no storage media of any kind. They used hundreds of different pay phones and cell phones, often with prepaid calling cards that are extremely difficult to trace. And they made sure that all the money sent to them to fund their attacks was wired in small amounts to avoid detection.

In short, the terrorists had managed to exploit loopholes and vulnerabilities in our systems, to stay out of sight, and to not let anyone know what they were up to beyond a very closed circle.

www.fbi.gov...


The first crime in history with no paper trail or are they simply on the wrong trail?

Stellar



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Then why did we 'invade' Afghanistan? The whole mobilization of troops after 9/11 if I remember correctly was to go after OBL. Why were we bombing the hell out of those mountainsides and caves?
The whole 9/11 thing is just falling apart...

[edit on 9-6-2006 by mecheng]



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Lol mecheng, that's what I'm trying to say. What is the point of doing that now after the occupation of Afganistan and Iraq.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 03:12 PM
link   
I don't know about the rest of you, but I've had it with this administration. This all goes back to the early days after 9/11... the way they had names of the suspects so soon... within hours if I remember. And then instead conducting a true investigation, they let OBL's relatives fly back to SA, quickly clean up all the evidence, and soon thereafter send our troops to Afghanastan to 'find' OBL.

And now they aren't sure if it was OBL??? Are you F'N KIDDING ME? Either this administration is behind this whole plot or they are simply a bunch of imbiciles. Either way they should be gone, or worse.

There is so much evidence now contrary to the official version of the events of 9/11 that we need and should demand a new investigation by an independent panel of scientists, engineers and investigators.

... Although if there were one, I'm sure they would be bogged down, not given access, ridiculed, etc. etc. etc...

Great find by the way. I'm printing it and showing it to my brainwashed friends and relatives.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join