portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

9.11 investigation | imperialism & war

FBI "has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11"

Why does the FBI's "Most Wanted" poster for Osama/Usama Bin Laden NOT mention 9/11? According to the FBI, it's because "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11." Might this explain why General Myers said "the goal has never been to get Bin Laden" and why Bush doesn't "spend that much time on him." No hard evidence--yet thousands of lives and hundreds of billions can be spent on "war"?
- - - - - - - - - -

On June 6, 2006, the Muckraker Report (www.teamliberty.net; see excerpts below) reported that the FBI's "Most Wanted" poster for Usama Bin Laden "did not indicate that Usama was...wanted in connection with 9/11."

Why might this be?

The Muckraker Report got a straightforward answer from the FBI's Chief of Investigative Publicity: "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."

The Muckraker Report goes on to say "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?"

If you agree this should be headline news, please read the article and spread the word.

Here are five more items which may be of use:

1. On April 5, 2002, the Associated Press quoted General Richard Myers, then-Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as saying (in regards to the war on Afghanistan) "the goal has never been to get Bin Laden."

[This quote has appeared in excellent books, including Webster Tarpley's "9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA" and David Ray Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor." The quote is also widely available online; here's one example: www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/myersadmission.htm]

2. In March, 2002, George W. Bush said of Bin Laden: "I just don't spend that much time on him...I truly am not that concerned about him."

[As quoted in Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor," page 107, and as frequently played in audio form on Air America Radio's "The Randi Rhodes Show."]

3. On September 28, 2001, the Karachi, Pakistan newspaper "Ummat" published what was claimed to be an interview with Bin Laden, in which Bin Laden denied having any role in 9/11, saying: "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States."

[As quoted in Tarpley's "9/11 Synthetic Terror," page 136.]

4. As Tarpley notes, "There is no evidence to support the authenticity of any of Bin Laden's tapes."

[Check out www.whatreallyhappened.com/binladen_9-11_truth.html]

5. Writing in the July 8, 2005 Guardian (UK), Robin Cook--a former Blair cabinet minister who resigned as the Labour Party's parliamentary chief in protest over the invasion of Iraq--revealed that:

"Al-Qaida, literally 'the database,' was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."

Cook also noted that "Bin Laden was...throughout the 80s...armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan."

[Cook's article, "The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means," is at www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1523838,00.html. Additional commentary is at  http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index.php?showtopic=64329, which references www.911truth.org]

Please read the Muckraker Report article. Please think about the implications. And please spread the news.


- - - - - - - - - -
Excerpt from the June 6, 2006 Muckraker Report article
- - - - - - - - - -

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

(The full article is at www.teamliberty.net/id267.html)

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."

...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 [sic] media, played the video as if it was authentic.

...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?