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.

 

bin Laden's involvement=

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
In light of recent events I was wondering about bin Laden's involvement in the 0/11 attacks. It occurred to me that I could not recall any information pertaining to reasons for believing that bin Laden was responsible, or involved in any way. I am pretty good at searching the Net so I took a shot at finding the info I was looking for. Well, I didn't come up with much but did find the following information on the topic.

Contrary to what one might expect from a terrorist having recently pulled off a coup de gras, bin Laden denied any responsibility for the attacks immediately after the event.
articles.cnn.com...:US

The FBI's most wanted poster for bin Laden makes no mention of the 9/11 attacks for his wanted crimes.
www.fbi.gov...

Furthermore, the FBI is on record as saying "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has also stated publicly that the White House "has never made the case that bin Laden was involved with 9/11".
www.youtube.com...

What substantiated reasons are there to believe that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?




posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   
CBC News World Friday, October 29th, 2004 reporting on OBL claiming responsibility.


Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared in a new message aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the United States.
\

Direct Link



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Here's some more information from wikipedia:


The primary responsibility falls upon the hijackers. As the media covered the 9/11 attacks unfolding, many quickly speculated that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks.[20] On the day of the attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted communications that pointed to Osama bin Laden,[21] as did German intelligence agencies.[22] This helped rule out other immediate suspects, such as Croatian nationalists, who had bombed Grand Central Terminal on September 11, 1976.[23] Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and electronic bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a key figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. Intercepts were also obtained that revealed conversations that took place days before September 11 between bin Laden and an associate in Pakistan. In those conversations, the two referred to "an incident that would take place in America on, or around, September 11" and they discussed potential repercussions. In another conversation with an associate in Afghanistan, bin Laden discussed the "scale and effects of a forthcoming operation." These conversations did not specifically mention the World Trade Center or Pentagon, or other specifics.[24] The investigators were quickly able to link the 19 men to the terrorist organization al-Qaeda, also by accessing material in their intelligence agency files. The New York Times reported on September 12 that: "Authorities said they had also identified accomplices in several cities who had helped plan and execute Tuesday’s attacks. Officials said they knew who these people were and important biographical details about many of them. They prepared biographies of each identified member of the hijack teams, and began tracing the recent movements of the men." FBI agents in Florida investigating the hijackers quickly "descended on flight schools, neighborhoods and restaurants in pursuit of leads." At one flight school, "students said investigators were there within hours of Tuesday’s attacks."[25] The Washington Post later reported that "In the hours after Tuesday’s bombings, investigators searched their files on [Satam] al-Suqami and [Ahmed] al-Ghamdi, noted the pair’s ties to [Nabil] al-Marabh and launched a hunt for him."[26] Based on the evidence, authorities in the United States quickly asserted that Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization were solely responsible for the attacks, and other suspects were ruled out. The Government of the United Kingdom reached the same conclusion.[27] Although he denied the attacks at first, Osama bin Laden has since claimed full responsibility.


Direct Link



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by TSearchX
CBC News World Friday, October 29th, 2004 reporting on OBL claiming responsibility.


Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared in a new message aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the United States.
\

Direct Link


The CIA video you are referring to has been labeled as fake by many experts.
cutdc.com...

That is not convincing evidence by any means and fails to explain the other facts in my original post.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by TSearchX
 

It is claimed that Bin Laden was responsible, but as the OP is asking, in which way?

He obviously did not participate directly in the operation, or he would have gone down with the plane, so did he book the flights? That would make him an accomplice, and maybe a travel agent, but not give him any responsibility.

Is there indication that he was the mastermind? Therefore in constant communication with the actual perpetrators? Was this done by cell-phone, twitter, or e-mail? (Mind you he was said to have been in a cave somewhere in Tora-Bora.)

I am also looking forward to seeing any replies that link Bin Laden to 9/11, as it appears that the only links come from video (sometimes questionable) of admission that he "supported" the mission.

the Billmeister



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by TSearchX
Here's some more information from wikipedia:


The primary responsibility falls upon the hijackers. As the media covered the 9/11 attacks unfolding, many quickly speculated that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks.[20] On the day of the attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted communications that pointed to Osama bin Laden,[21] as did German intelligence agencies.[22] This helped rule out other immediate suspects, such as Croatian nationalists, who had bombed Grand Central Terminal on September 11, 1976.[23] Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and electronic bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a key figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. Intercepts were also obtained that revealed conversations that took place days before September 11 between bin Laden and an associate in Pakistan. In those conversations, the two referred to "an incident that would take place in America on, or around, September 11" and they discussed potential repercussions. In another conversation with an associate in Afghanistan, bin Laden discussed the "scale and effects of a forthcoming operation." These conversations did not specifically mention the World Trade Center or Pentagon, or other specifics.[24] The investigators were quickly able to link the 19 men to the terrorist organization al-Qaeda, also by accessing material in their intelligence agency files. The New York Times reported on September 12 that: "Authorities said they had also identified accomplices in several cities who had helped plan and execute Tuesday’s attacks. Officials said they knew who these people were and important biographical details about many of them. They prepared biographies of each identified member of the hijack teams, and began tracing the recent movements of the men." FBI agents in Florida investigating the hijackers quickly "descended on flight schools, neighborhoods and restaurants in pursuit of leads." At one flight school, "students said investigators were there within hours of Tuesday’s attacks."[25] The Washington Post later reported that "In the hours after Tuesday’s bombings, investigators searched their files on [Satam] al-Suqami and [Ahmed] al-Ghamdi, noted the pair’s ties to [Nabil] al-Marabh and launched a hunt for him."[26] Based on the evidence, authorities in the United States quickly asserted that Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization were solely responsible for the attacks, and other suspects were ruled out. The Government of the United Kingdom reached the same conclusion.[27] Although he denied the attacks at first, Osama bin Laden has since claimed full responsibility.


Direct Link


The page you cite starts out referring to FBI information but fails to point out the FBI statement I made in my original post.

Here are some key words and phrases to focus on when reading the material you cite:
"speculated", "pointed to" [pretty vague], "These conversations did not specifically mention the World Trade Center or Pentagon", "asserted".

The page goes on to cite the disputed video "confession" as further evidence. There is nothing here to contradict the FBI's statement that they have "no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11".



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
He posed as the face of alqaeda. That makes him as involved and as guilty in this charade as Adam pearlman.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   
I do not agree with the "expert" that you have provided via the link posted. A quick search of Professor Bruce Lawrence provided the following information:


"Prof publishes bin Laden’s words," from the Duke University Chronicle, with thanks to Ruth King:
Bruce Lawrence, professor of religion, is publishing a book of Osama bin Laden’s speeches and writings. Only days after the fourth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, a Duke professor is trying to explain the motivations of the tragedy’s organizer—jihadist Osama bin Laden.
Bruce Lawrence, professor of religion, edited and wrote the forward to the book Messages to the World—The Statements of Osama bin Laden. The text, which goes into print today and will arrive in bookstores in the fall, is the first to include the translations of the Arabic writings of bin Laden.
The book features a collection of 22 speeches and interviews given by the leader of the terrorist organization al Qaeda between 1994 and 2004....
“If you read him in his own words, he sounds like somebody who would be a very high-minded and welcome voice in global politics,” Lawrence said.
After analyzing his writings, Lawrence said he concluded bin Laden does not have an ultimate goal that he wants to achieve in his jihad but that he does have a specific target.


It sounds more like this professor has books on the fact that he believes that OBL is not a bad guy at all and probably has a vested interest in making headlines by talking about how the tape was a fake. I would be interested to see other sources for that claim though.

Direct Link
edit on 8-5-2011 by TSearchX because: Removed questions about other post - OP posted info before my question was posted




posted on May, 8 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Here's another interesting read including a quote from the FBI spokesman:


Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is a longtime and prominent member of the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted" list, which notes his role as the suspected mastermind of the deadly U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa on Aug. 7, 1998. But another more infamous date -- Sept. 11, 2001 -- is nowhere to be found on the same FBI notice. The curious omission underscores the Justice Department's decision, so far, to not seek formal criminal charges against bin Laden for approving al-Qaeda's most notorious and successful terrorist attack. The notice says bin Laden is "a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world" but does not provide details. The absence has also provided fodder for conspiracy theorists who think the U.S. government or another power was behind the Sept. 11 hijackings. From this point of view, the lack of a Sept. 11 reference suggests that the connection to al-Qaeda is uncertain. Exhaustive government and independent investigations have concluded otherwise, of course, and bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders have proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings. FBI officials say the wanted poster merely reflects the government's long-standing practice of relying on actual criminal charges in the notices. "There's no mystery here," said FBI spokesman Rex Tomb. "They could add 9/11 on there, but they have not because they don't need to at this point. . . . There is a logic to it." David N. Kelley, the former U.S. attorney in New York who oversaw terrorism cases when bin Laden was indicted for the embassy bombings there in 1998, said he is not at all surprised by the lack of a reference to Sept. 11 on the official wanted poster. Kelley said the issue is a matter of legal restrictions and the need to be fair to any defendant. "It might seem a little strange from the outside, but it makes sense from a legal point of view," said Kelley, now in private practice. "If I were in government, I'd be troubled if I were asked to put up a wanted picture where no formal charges had been filed, no matter who it was." Bin Laden was placed on the Ten Most Wanted list in June 1999 after being indicted for murder, conspiracy and other charges in connection with the embassy bombings, and a $5 million reward was put on his head at that time. The listing was updated after Sept. 11, 2001, to include a higher reward of $25 million, but no mention of the attacks was added. Others on the list include Colombian drug cartel leader Diego Leon Montoya Sanchez and fugitive Boston crime boss James "Whitey" Bulger, charged with a role in "numerous murders" in the 1970s and 1980s. The FBI maintains a separate "Most Wanted Terrorists" list, which includes bin Laden and 25 others who have been indicted in U.S. federal courts in connection with terror plots. But this second bin Laden listing also makes no mention of Sept. 11. "The indictments currently listed on the posters allow them to be arrested and brought to justice," the FBI says in a note accompanying the terrorist list on its Web site. "Future indictments may be handed down as various investigations proceed in connection to other terrorist incidents, for example, the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001."


Direct Link

I can see both sides represented in this article, but at least it provides a glimpse of why there would be no mention of 9/11.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by TSearchX
Here's another interesting read including a quote from the FBI spokesman:


Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is a longtime and prominent member of the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted" list, which notes his role as the suspected mastermind of the deadly U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa on Aug. 7, 1998. But another more infamous date -- Sept. 11, 2001 -- is nowhere to be found on the same FBI notice. The curious omission underscores the Justice Department's decision, so far, to not seek formal criminal charges against bin Laden for approving al-Qaeda's most notorious and successful terrorist attack. The notice says bin Laden is "a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world" but does not provide details. The absence has also provided fodder for conspiracy theorists who think the U.S. government or another power was behind the Sept. 11 hijackings. From this point of view, the lack of a Sept. 11 reference suggests that the connection to al-Qaeda is uncertain. Exhaustive government and independent investigations have concluded otherwise, of course, and bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders have proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings. FBI officials say the wanted poster merely reflects the government's long-standing practice of relying on actual criminal charges in the notices. "There's no mystery here," said FBI spokesman Rex Tomb. "They could add 9/11 on there, but they have not because they don't need to at this point. . . . There is a logic to it." David N. Kelley, the former U.S. attorney in New York who oversaw terrorism cases when bin Laden was indicted for the embassy bombings there in 1998, said he is not at all surprised by the lack of a reference to Sept. 11 on the official wanted poster. Kelley said the issue is a matter of legal restrictions and the need to be fair to any defendant. "It might seem a little strange from the outside, but it makes sense from a legal point of view," said Kelley, now in private practice. "If I were in government, I'd be troubled if I were asked to put up a wanted picture where no formal charges had been filed, no matter who it was." Bin Laden was placed on the Ten Most Wanted list in June 1999 after being indicted for murder, conspiracy and other charges in connection with the embassy bombings, and a $5 million reward was put on his head at that time. The listing was updated after Sept. 11, 2001, to include a higher reward of $25 million, but no mention of the attacks was added. Others on the list include Colombian drug cartel leader Diego Leon Montoya Sanchez and fugitive Boston crime boss James "Whitey" Bulger, charged with a role in "numerous murders" in the 1970s and 1980s. The FBI maintains a separate "Most Wanted Terrorists" list, which includes bin Laden and 25 others who have been indicted in U.S. federal courts in connection with terror plots. But this second bin Laden listing also makes no mention of Sept. 11. "The indictments currently listed on the posters allow them to be arrested and brought to justice," the FBI says in a note accompanying the terrorist list on its Web site. "Future indictments may be handed down as various investigations proceed in connection to other terrorist incidents, for example, the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001."


Direct Link

I can see both sides represented in this article, but at least it provides a glimpse of why there would be no mention of 9/11.


Here is another relevant quote from the FBI spokesman you cited, Rex Tomb:


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.”


Direct Link

Once again he goes back to confirm the point I made in my original post.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Interesting read!

Here's my only thought on the two quotes. Your quote was from 2006, mine was recent. This DOES NOT take any validity away from you quote. The reason I bring this up would be the change in stance taken by the FBI spokesman between 2006 and now.

Either they have more evidence linking OBL, leading him to make the statement that they could add 9/11 to the list of charges, or he is trying to tie it into the mix now that OBL is dead.

I definitely don't want you to think I'm directly attacking here. I am enjoying our discussion and am interested in your thoughts.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TSearchX
I do not agree with the "expert" that you have provided via the link posted. A quick search of Professor Bruce Lawrence provided the following information:


"Prof publishes bin Laden’s words," from the Duke University Chronicle, with thanks to Ruth King:
Bruce Lawrence, professor of religion, is publishing a book of Osama bin Laden’s speeches and writings. Only days after the fourth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, a Duke professor is trying to explain the motivations of the tragedy’s organizer—jihadist Osama bin Laden.
Bruce Lawrence, professor of religion, edited and wrote the forward to the book Messages to the World—The Statements of Osama bin Laden. The text, which goes into print today and will arrive in bookstores in the fall, is the first to include the translations of the Arabic writings of bin Laden.
The book features a collection of 22 speeches and interviews given by the leader of the terrorist organization al Qaeda between 1994 and 2004....
“If you read him in his own words, he sounds like somebody who would be a very high-minded and welcome voice in global politics,” Lawrence said.
After analyzing his writings, Lawrence said he concluded bin Laden does not have an ultimate goal that he wants to achieve in his jihad but that he does have a specific target.


It sounds more like this professor has books on the fact that he believes that OBL is not a bad guy at all and probably has a vested interest in making headlines by talking about how the tape was a fake. I would be interested to see other sources for that claim though.

Direct Link
edit on 8-5-2011 by TSearchX because: Removed questions about other post - OP posted info before my question was posted



There are plenty of people in addition to Professor Lawrence who agree that the video is fake as can be seen here.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by TSearchX
I definitely don't want you to think I'm directly attacking here. I am enjoying our discussion and am interested in your thoughts.


Well it's good to see you are open minded. I am as well. I have found that many times the waters are clouded intentionally in circumstances such as these in order to make the truth more difficult to find... I like to believe that a thorough exploration will find it though.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by TheFlash
 


If you are "open-minded" why did you include Dick Cheney's slip of the tongue ? The clip you linked to was a silly attempt to con viewers.

Are you seriously saying, given the context, that he intended to refer to OBL ?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by TheFlash
 


If you are "open-minded" why did you include Dick Cheney's slip of the tongue ? The clip you linked to was a silly attempt to con viewers.

Are you seriously saying, given the context, that he intended to refer to OBL ?


Perhaps you could be so kind as to point out what causes you to believe that any of the relevant part(s) of Cheney's words were a "slip of the tongue'?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheFlash
What substantiated reasons are there to believe that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?


Yeah, we gave our classified intelligence showing it was an Al Qaida attack to our NATO allies, and after comparing it with what their own intelligence agencies were finding, they found it credible enough to invoke articke V in the first time in NATO's history. Even the Romanians and Poles sent troops into Afghanistan, and they used to be Soviet client states.

Every time I mention this, all the conspiracy theorists can offer as an excuse is that everyone is a secret gov't disinformation agent. Right.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheFlash
The CIA video you are referring to has been labeled as fake by many experts.
That is not convincing evidence by any means and fails to explain the other facts in my original post.


The guy you're quoting is by no means any expert. He's the head of Duke University's religious studies, not a professional video analyst, and he's being quoted by Infowars, and Alex Jones is such a fringe crackpot he even things the gov't is slipping people mind control chemicals to make them into homosexuals.

If you want to entertain these conspiracy theories, that's one thing, but going to Alex Jones on anything only detracts from your credibility, not ours. You might as well be quoting Stalin on how great Communism is.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
There is no reason why Bin Ladin would avoid making video tapes for 10 years. The audio tapes are fakes. Al Qaeda video tapes are also manufactured by someone trying to decieve us. It all adds up to a frame up of Bin Ladin.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by TheFlash
What substantiated reasons are there to believe that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?


Yeah, we gave our classified intelligence showing it was an Al Qaida attack to our NATO allies, and after comparing it with what their own intelligence agencies were finding, they found it credible enough to invoke articke V in the first time in NATO's history. Even the Romanians and Poles sent troops into Afghanistan, and they used to be Soviet client states.

Every time I mention this, all the conspiracy theorists can offer as an excuse is that everyone is a secret gov't disinformation agent. Right.


We agree that retaliatory action was taken, which involved a military campaign (still ongoing mind you) by NATO in Afghanistan.
My question is more toward the precise implication of Bin Laden to 9/11.
Did he plan the whole attack to the finest detail?
Did he bank roll the operation?
Was he an operational field commander following the actions from abroad?

What indictable offense did he commit?

If, as you state, the evidence of Bin Laden's involvement is all classified then perhaps we will discover it in 50 years or so.

the Billmeister

p.s.
Let it be noted that I am by no means a sympathizer of Bin Laden or his cause, and that he was wanted for other charges which warranted extradition, I am specifically curious as to his personal connection to the events of 9/11.

After all, the attempt to capture him did lead to the invasion of a sovereign country, ongoing military operations within it, trillions of dollars of taxpayer money, and countless lives... not insignificant.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by TheFlash
The CIA video you are referring to has been labeled as fake by many experts.
That is not convincing evidence by any means and fails to explain the other facts in my original post.


The guy you're quoting is by no means any expert. He's the head of Duke University's religious studies, not a professional video analyst, and he's being quoted by Infowars, and Alex Jones is such a fringe crackpot he even things the gov't is slipping people mind control chemicals to make them into homosexuals.

If you want to entertain these conspiracy theories, that's one thing, but going to Alex Jones on anything only detracts from your credibility, not ours. You might as well be quoting Stalin on how great Communism is.


Apparently you neglected to read my 7:39 PM 8-5-2011 reply to this issue.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join