Thursday, June 01, 2006

The FBI "Has No Evidence"

When I first read the article by Ed Haas claiming that the FBI admits it has no hard evidence connecting Osama Bin Laden to 9/11, I took it with a grain of salt. It frankly seemed incredible that one of the FBI's lead spokesmen, the Chief of Investigative Publicity, would say “The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Usama Bin Laden to 9/11.”

But then I found this article from Wired magazine dated September 27, 2001:
"There's going to be a considerable amount of time before anyone associated with the attacks is actually charged," said Rex Tomb, who is head of the FBI's chief fugitive publicity unit and helps decide which fugitives appear on the list. "To be charged with a crime, this means we have found evidence to confirm our suspicions, and a prosecutor has said we will pursue this case in court."

. . .

President Bush promises to reveal evidence linking bin Laden to the suicide hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Bin Laden has applauded the attacks but denies direct involvement.

Because the list is used to attract the public's attention to a fugitive, careful consideration must take place before a decision is made, Tomb said. The FBI evaluates if publicity will help or hinder the search for a suspect."
Because the same spokesman said essentially the same thing back in 2001, Ed Haas' claim is sounding more credible.

And everyone in the world knows who Bin Laden is and what he looks like, so there wouldn't be any concern that publicity would hinder the search for Bin Laden.

So the question is: If there's no hard evidence linking Bin Laden and 9/11 four and a half years after the attack, why is the government still blaming Bin Laden for 9/11?

This is an especially good question given that European scholars stated that the Americans mistranslated Bin Laden's "confession tape" (Google translation is here). And one of the world's leading experts on Bin Laden stated that the videos showing Bin Laden confessing to 9/11 are fake; the physical features of the man in the videos also appear to be different from the real Bin Laden.

Add to that the fact that many of the alleged 9/11 hijackers appear to still be alive (see also this article), but the FBI apparently continues to this day to stick to its list of 19 hijackers (and some of the alleged hijackers don't fit their official FBI profiles very well). It is also interesting that other evidence surrounding the hijackers appears to have been faked.

Were these people framed? If so, why?


Blogger Damian Mann said...

Google this: 9/11 hijackers still alive

11:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the below April 19, 2002 speech by Robert S. Mueller III, then-Director of the FBI, to the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco, he stated that the suspected 9/11 hijackers (many of whom have turned up alive and well) left not a single trace of evidence linking them to any larger September 11th plot (i.e., such as involving al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden):

Robert S. Mueller, III, Director, FBI, Commonwealth Club of California, San Francisco, CA, April 19, 2002:

Below is an excerpt from the above transcript of Robert S. Mueller III's above-mentioned speech:

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.

8:10 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home