Sunday, 20 July 2008

Questions Over Bin Laden?

I love a good conspiracy theory whether it be about the moon landings or who shot Kennedy. The usual process is to listen to them and then dismiss them as fantasy but the conspiracy theories behind the attacks on the World Trade Centre in 2001 keep bubbling up.
During a conversation with a friend it was mentioned that there is actually no evidence to connect Bin Laden to the events on September 11th. I scoffed until shown his FBI 10 most wanted poster printed from the Internet where his crimes are named as 'MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; CONSPIRACY TO MURDER U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING
IN DEATH'. See it for yourself here
His poster for Most Wanted Terrorist states the same crimes. See that one here
Interesting how he is wanted for events such as the 1998 US Embassy bombings and USS Cole but there is no mention of his involvement in the 2001 attacks.
Further digging has revealed that amazingly the reason the FBI haven't included his role as mastermind behind the attacks is because the FBI haves no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.
The obvious question is why was there enough evidence to invade Afghanistan but not enough evidence for the FBI to connect him to the September 11th attacks?
The US released a videotape that it said provided compelling evidence that Osama Bin Laden was behind the attacks. President Bush said of it that: "For those who see this tape, they'll realise that not only is he guilty of incredible murder, he has no conscience and no soul, that he represents the worst of civilisation," and the British Foreign Secretary at the time Jack Straw said: "By boasting about his involvement in the evil attacks, Bin Laden confirms his guilt."
Obviously the top man at the FBI is not as sure of who was responsible as his President who, if memory serves, was also certain that Saddam had WMD's and is pushing for armed conflict with Iran over its secret nuclear weapons programme.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Lucy,

Data/facts and evidence are not the same things. In the U.S. (and I expect Great Britain) a lot of facts cannot be used as evidence. Evidence, facts that are admissible in court, must be lawfully obtained, cannot be hearsay, etc.

Secondly, Bin Laden is sought after for heading Al Quieda. Does anybody doubt that he is/was the leader?

Q

Lucy said...

I thought that it was an open and shut case, Bin Laden was behind it so they must have evidence that he was behind the other attacks but not behind the 9/11 ones which i found quite amazing considering what happened afterwards.

Cheezy said...

"The obvious question is why was there enough evidence to invade Afghanistan but not enough evidence for the FBI to connect him to the September 11th attacks?"

Maybe they're still trying to leave the option open that it was really Saddam Hussein? ;-)

Nah... I reckon it was OBL alright. He's admitted it on videotape, hasn't he? Some have speculated that it was at least partly done in retaliation for the US bombing of that pharmaceuticals factory in the Sudan in 1998... an action which is thought to have led to the deaths of tens of thousands of Sudanese civilians. Oh, and because "they hate our freedoms" of course...