Usama did it?

[mrgerbik]

It's probably been posted before but its interesting to note that the FBI, on it's own wanted list, won't acknowledge Osama as the main perpetrator of 9/11 due to lack of hard evidence.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

[Twist_U_Up]

1. makes sense...

I bet if they investigate the nazis in the White House they might have a few new suspects.

[Nitty-Gritty]

2. I think the latest line is that he was only a "minor" player.

I'm not saying I believe that, because I don't. Do you?

[greyl]

3. What kind of evidence would you expect to see

if he was involved in encouraging and planning the attacks on 9/11?

The lack of hard evidence, as courts identify it, may not mean what you think it means.

[Zynx]

4. Exactly. We have some video tapes of him claiming it, but it would

be hard to otherwise link him *personally* to it.

[John Q. Citizen]

5. We also have his earliest interview after 9/11

where he denies involvement. The tape we have of him implicating himself is suspect, both in it's acquisition as well as in what the tape depicts.

After the Cole and the Embassy bombings, Osama took immediate and full responsibility for the attacks. He delivered a high quality video tape and announced his responsibility and there was lots of independent evidence to enable indictments to be handed down.

Why do you hypothesize that (according to you) he changed his MO in the 9/11 attacks?

Was attacking our war ship in harbor and bombing our embassies just small stuff, and then after 9/11 he really got worried?

Your Official Conspiracy Theory has a lot of factual and logical short comings.



edit for spelling.

[Zynx]

6. First of all, we are dealing with a fundamentally dishonest person.

Secondly, in videos after shortly after the 9/11 attacks Al-Zawahiri has appeared with pictures of Mohammed Attah and other 9/11 hijackers behind him. Also, in 2004, Bin-Laden did claim responsibility in the tape just before the election. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Osama_bin_Laden_video

You ask why did he change his MO? Possibly because he knew that after 9/11, our response would be much greater than before.

[John Q. Citizen]

9. Are you talking about

george bush here? "First of all, we are dealing with a fundamentally dishonest person."- Zynx

What leads you to believe the audio tape that appeared before the 2004 election is authentic and wasn't another cynical attempt by buschco at scaring Americans into supporting our illegitimate "dear leader?"

Since Osama was allowed to escape at Tora Bora and Osama's reletives were flown out of the country after 9/11 when all other civilian air traffic was grounded, and bush said he " really doesn't think about Osama much, why would bin Laden assume he had anything to worry about?

Where's the hard evidence that Osama was involved?

There isn't any. So to jump to the conclusion he is involved is premature.

In fact the complete lack of any US air defense on 9/11 suggests that someone in the US with a lot of pull would be a more likely suspect. Or do you believe Osama could pull that off from a cave in Afghanistan?

[Zynx]

10. That was a video tape in 2004.

I don't believe for a moment that he was being controlled by the administration.

As far as Osama's relatives, that was done for their own safety. Can you imagine what the average American boob would have done to them if they remained in the country? They have no involvement in Al-Qaeda and as such there really was no point in investigating anything with them.

[Grateful for Hope]

16. The CIA says that OBL is left-handed

but the fake OBL in that tape is right-handed.

Thanks to Sinti for posting this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=125&topic_id=103014#103290

[JackRiddler]

75. And you know this was the original famous Osama?

As opposed to an actor?

Interesting how he practically said, "I don't want you Americans to Vote Vote Vote for Bush Bush Bush!"

Also curious how he directly addressed the issue of missing air intercepts on 9/11... and came up with an excuse (Bush in school too long, like that Michael Moore showed you).

He also endorsed William Blum's books!

What a curious orientation to the US elections.

[wildbilln864]

7. You mean you have faked...

video of him claiming it. Which is a product of the Bush team.

[Zynx]

12. The burden of proof is on you on this one.

Prove it. The apparent fact is that he was on tape claiming it. Prove that these are fakes.

[wildbilln864]

15. I don't have to prove it.

This BS was presented to us! They should have to prove their real!
Every thing so far has been a lie supported only by weak apologists for the administration using only bullshit sophistry, deflection, and outright refusal to accept dissenting opinions or independant investigations.
Proving it to you isn't my priority. People will make up their own minds when they can finally see ALL the related evidence!

Do you believe that it is possible that the OBL tapes could be faked?
Do you believe that the Bushco has lied to the people they're paid to represent?
The only videos I saw were bad quality and definitely could be faked!
They definitely have lied!
Why should I believe them now?
Prove the videos are real or they have little credibility!

[Zynx]

20. No. When something is an apparent fact as Bin Laden claiming

responsibility for the attacks, I do not have to prove that those videos are real. Since when is a conspiracy theory assumed fact that has to be disproven?

[wildbilln864]

21. well perhaps it's an apparent fact to you.

Not to me!
I don't know of any conspiracy theories being assumed to be fact. I try never to assume anything. I don't assume those videos are real either.
Since they're not releasing all the evidence then we all can only theorize conspiratorily.

[mirandapriestly]

8. Those tapes are not authentic

They don't look like him and they don't speak like him. There are web sites which compare the photos and the way he would speak and they are obvious fakes.

[Zynx]

11. Okay. You make an assertion against a visible fact.

The burden of proof is on you to prove they are fakes.

[mirandapriestly]

13. "make an assertion against a visible fact"

that's pretty funny.

[Zynx]

14. Okay. The apparent fact is that there is a tape of Bin Laden claiming

responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. Prove that it's a fake. The burden of proof is not on me.

[mirandapriestly]

18. why?eom

[Zynx]

19. Rather than these snide little statements, why don't you explain how the

burden of proof is not on you?

[Name removed]

24. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mirandapriestly]

35. Using your logic, it's on you.nt

[mirandapriestly]

36. wow, thanks!!!eom

[JackRiddler]

76. I saw images from a BBC film (2006) ...

With footage of Bush being shot by a Syrian!

Can you PROVE it's a fake?! The burden of proof is on YOU, because I said so first!

Ha! Slam dunk! Victory for the Forces of Pure Reason! Ha ha ha ha!

[Andre II]

22. Remember?

Sorry, but the US did go to war against Afghanistan to get him "dead or alive"?
Remember?
Powell promised a paper proving the responsibility of Usama and al Qaeda. Remember?
It was never published.
If you go to war you should have evidence and proof at hand not any wishful thinking.

[mrgerbik]

23. Bullshit.

All the FBI needs to link a Osama to the 9/11 crimes would for him to state his leadership of Al-Quaeda. Just like prosecuting the mafia, even if you didn't pull the trigger, just by being the ringleader, you are involved. Because Al-Queada "did it", he would be "personally" linked as well.

So the question is: Did he ever state his leadership of Al-Quaeda?

[savemefromdumbya]

17. I remember Norman Schwartzkopf said OBL didn't do it

in an interview after 9/11 former military commander of Iraq Stormin Norman sais it wasn't an Osama Bin Ladin job. I guess everyone just assumed it was an Osama job?

[greyl]

25. What kind of evidence would you expect to see

if he was involved in encouraging and planning the attacks on 9/11?

The lack of hard evidence, as courts identify it, may not mean what you think it means.

[mrgerbik]

26. uh

yes we heard ya the first time :D

[greyl]

27. Uh, there isn't one reply to it from whoever you are calling "we". nt

[mrgerbik]

28. #3 n/t

[greyl]

29. uh

#3 is me.

#3 n/t
Posted by mrgerbik

I wouldn't include Zynx (post #4 etc) in the category of who you are calling "we", because you don't agree with her/him.

edit: Why don't you try to answer the question? Damn.

[mrgerbik]

30. I was just trying to point out that youve posted twice n/t

[greyl]

31. Why don't you answer the question? nt

[mrgerbik]

32. See #23 n/t

[greyl]

33. That doesn't answer the question at all.

I asked what evidence you'd expect to see if bin laden was involved with the planning and execution of the attacks.

But anyway, check this and the links out:

No one except a dumb thief plays with the security of others and then makes himself believe he will be secure. Whereas thinking people, when disaster strikes, make it their priority to look for its causes, in order to prevent it happening again.

But I am amazed at you. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th, Bush is still engaged in distortion, deception and hiding from you the real causes. And thus, the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred.

So I shall talk to you about the story behind those events and shall tell you truthfully about the moments in which the decision was taken, for you to consider.

I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind.

The events that affected my soul in a direct way started in 1982 when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them in that. This bombardment began and many were killed and injured and others were terrorised and displaced.
www.debunking911.com/osama.htm

http://ee.1asphost.com/raehatualmisk/19.html

and this:

UNDERSTANDING AMERICA'S ENEMIES

Please note that robert-fisk.com does not endorse any remarks or material linked to or provided below. The purpose of this information is only to provide a true insight to the grievances of those who have become enemies of America.

http://www.robert-fisk.com/understanding_enemy.htm

[mrgerbik]

34. I did answer your question

The only evidence needed to tie him to 9/11 would be his involvement in the orchestration of the event. This would be enough for the FBI to prosecute him.

[Artdyst]

37. I thought "they" changed his status to that of "Inspirational Muse" or

"HELL No, I'm Not Being ANYBODY'S 9/11 Bitch. Call Me The Invisible Hand That Some Of The Brothers Interpreted To Mean Enlightened One Who Can Change The Laws Of Physics If That's What It Takes To Show That Punk Bush What Can Happen If He Shuts Down The Opium Market, Doesn't Call Off The Po-Po Chasing Me Around Caveland, And If He Continues To Refer To Me As Having More Than A Cosmic Responsibility For What Happened In How Do You Say 'Personhattan'(?), The Pentagram Building, And At That Hole In The Ground Out In The Woods Where No Camels Live."

[Spoonerian]

70. Funny!

Can I have your permission to use that in informal conversation?

[Artdyst]

71. Permission granted. I'm glad you liked it. EOM

NT

[Artdyst]

72. Permission granted. I'm glad you liked it. EOM

NT

[greyl]

38. Perhaps you aren't reading carefully. You didn't answer the question.

I asked what evidence you would expect to see if he was involved in planning and executing the attacks.

I did not ask what evidence is needed to tie him to 9/11. Why would I ask that?
He is tied to 9/11, and I've already provided much info with links to that effect in this thread.

"This would be enough for the FBI to prosecute him."

I'm not a prosecutor, but I'm pretty sure that custody of the defendant is necessary for a prosecution .

[mrgerbik]

39. I would "expect"

him to have stated his leadership or his hand in the formation of Al-Queada and it's subsequent motivations to attack the WTC buildings under his control.

That would be the evidence I would expect to see. I don't know how else to answer this.

[greyl]

40. Good lord. See post #33

which includes this quote from osama:

"I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind."

There's your evidence, end of story.

[Artdyst]

41. "There's your evidence"

I don't understand what your point is. Was the statement from a video? How do you know the video is authentic? Is this from the "I did it" video? The alleged tyranny which resulted in what "came to my mind" has been going on for many, many years. Using airplanes in acts of terrorism has a history almost as long as the alleged tyranny of the "American/Israeli coalition". Ever hear of Air Marshalls? Remember the skyjacking episode in which former Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's brother was killed when Israeli special forces surrounded the plane when it was parked on the airport tarmac and charged into the airplane?

The "evidence" you cited is unauthenticated and is most likely manufactured, but even if it was recorded live on "Nightline" or "Al Jeezera TV" would only prove that OBL is ignorant of the very history he allegedly refers to and therefore intellectually so inferior as to cast doubt on his ability to even be a "leader" of a large group of terrorists, much less capable of figuring out how to defeat the entire U.S. military, civilian, and intelligence apparatus with only a small group of young men, even if he is so morally bankrupt in his concern for the predictable consequences of American "justice" or revenge for the dastardly deeds of 9/11 on the very people he supposedly is concerned about. There is no evidence that "his people" have turned against him.

Can you provide any proof that isn't so problematic that one could reasonably cite it as proof that Mr. bin Laden was framed for 9/11 attacks?

[greyl]

42. It meets mrgerbik's stated requirements, end of story.

[Artdyst]

43. Don't blame mrgerbik for not accepting phony evidence.

Your response doesn't speak to any of the points I raised and your "end of story" comment suggests the reason why you didn't speak to the points I raised is because you can't refute them.

[greyl]

44. lol, don't blame me for not answering the question properly.

Also, it's clear from your statement that the evidence I provided is unauthenticated that you didn't look at all the evidence I provided.

Based on mrgerbik's stated requirements, what I provided is sufficient for him.
If mrgerbik would like to move the goal posts, why don't you let him do that himself?

[Artdyst]

48. I assume you did the best you could, given what you had to work with.

I think it's better to be concerned about finding the truth than in being an advocate for a predetermined position that is so weak it must be bolstered with evidence whose authenticiy has been called into question time after time. Worst of all is the spin point that now seeks to downplay Mr. bin Laden's status to a more manageable/easier-to-swallow-by-a-gullible-public position - that of something akin to an iconic figure who had an idea that gradually occurred to him over the course of many years.

If you were an attorney for Mr. bin Laden, then I could more easily understand why you say some of the things you do and take some of the positions you take. Are you an attorney for the gentleman?

[greyl]

50. You didn't address the question. nt

[Artdyst]

53. Yes, you did "respond" to the poster. NOW, will you kindly respond to ME?

Your posts thus far haven't even begun to respond to the many important questions and implications that I (and others) have raised. It looks like your posts are nothing more than some kind of little game to avoid dealing with questions that must be making you uncomfortable. Is that really the impression you want to leave? After all, how do you possibly expect people to believe the story you are here to defend when you fail to respond to fair criticism and reasonable questions that raise boatloads of doubt about the position you want them to believe?

[greyl]

55. You didn't address the question.

Here it is again:
If mrgerbik would like to move the goal posts, why don't you let him do that himself?

[Artdyst]

57. I haven't tried to stop him or anyone else. Can you say the same?

If you don't feel competent to address the questions I raised, ask someone else to help you.

P.S. I am NOT implying that if you feel incompetent to address them that that must mean you are a member of the (allegedly) incompetent Bush administration.

[greyl]

59. Fine. I prefer to proceed in a logical fashion and

note when the dialogue begins to go off track.

[John Q. Citizen]

45. Your "end of story" comment is typical of one with a closed mind

and a predetermined out come.

Osama was indicted for the USS Cole and for the African Embassy bombings.

Besides Osama's video taped and delivered declaration of responsibility for those actions, there was substantial documentation, other witnesses, and what would be considered by a court of law, evidence to indict him for those crimes.

The reason Osama is not listed on the FBI's most wanted list in connection with 9/11 is because there is no hard evidence that could be used to indict him.

This after millions of pages of seized records in Afghanistan.

Your insistence that there is evidence is reminiscent of the right wing kooks who insists that there is evidence of WMD in Iraq and that there is evidence that Iraq was involved with 9/11 and Al Quida.

I'm sure that you very badly want Osama to be guilty for 9/11. However, until there is hard evidence to connect him to that action, you might reconsider using jingoistic terminology like "end of story."

[mirandapriestly]

46. well said, JQC.eom

[Grateful for Hope]

47. I definitely agree with you

and your post was very well stated.

[greyl]

49. That's a lot of red herring.

If one comprehends the "conversation" between mrgerbik and I, it is clear that I wanted to know what evidence he would expect to see if osama was involved in planning and executing the attacks.
His eventual non-answer was
"I would "expect" him to have stated his leadership or his hand in the formation of Al-Queada and it's subsequent motivations to attack the WTC buildings under his control.

Now, the links I provided give a wealth of information which meets mrgerbiks requirements. There's so much information in fact, it would take several hours to look at it all. Based on the content of your latest posts in this thread, you haven't taken the time to look at the evidence I've given.

Productive speculation about why the FBI says they don't have hard evidence against osama for 9/11 requires one to consider more than one possibility. It's obvious that the CTers only want to see their foregone conclusions. In contrast, I could list more than one possible explanation for the FBI's osama page.

The reason Osama is not listed on the FBI's most wanted list in connection with 9/11 is because there is no hard evidence that could be used to indict him.

What evidence would you expect to see if osama were involved in planning and executing the attacks on 9/11? The lack of hard evidence, as courts identify it, may not mean what you think it means.

(this whole conversation is especially hilarious considering the lack of hard evidence for various CTs)

[John Q. Citizen]

51. At last count, there may be 148, 739,075 alternative

theories to the Official Conspiracy Theory put forth by the people who brought you Judith Miller, The people who swift boated Joe Wilson, the people who swift boated Scott Ridder, and the same people who launched the US into a needless war in Iraq for false reasons.

I am in no position to, or would I want to, defend those possibly 148, 739,075 alternative theories to the Official Conspiracy Theory.

I believe it is up to the people who claim to defend the Governments Official Conspiracy Theory to prove their case.

Since the Government is unable or unwilling to indict Osama bin Laden for the 9/11 events, I can only assume they lack the evidence, or the will, to do so.

For me to speculate on what evidence might or might not be sufficient to indict Bin Laden for the crimes of 9/11 is not my job, nor my area of expertise. That is the job of government prosecutors.

If they have the evidence to do that, then I suggest they indict him. If they don't have the evidence, then the speculation of his guilt, or innocence, is just that, speculation.

My personal opinion is that we invaded Afghanistan to secure an oil pipeline from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean, and not because of evidence that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11.

[greyl]

52. The topic of this thread is the FBI and bin laden

The OP gives this link www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm at which you can find this statement:

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. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

There is a wealth of reason and evidence behind his being a suspect.
The legality or wisdom behind the US government's invasion of the Middle East isn't directly related to osama's guilt or innocence. In fact, you're obfuscating the point that even if we had multiple video that documented every second of every action of the planning and execution of the attacks, the way we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq was not justified. www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles2/Cowan_Iraq-13Myths.htm

Suppose there's an office at the Pentagon that is charged with disseminating disinfo in order to distract from their real crimes. According to many CTs, the only kind of disinfo the Pentagon may be involved in is that which disagrees with their pet theory. Is it possible the vagueness of the FBI fugitive page is designed to foster wildly distracting speculation?

Now, regarding the evidence of osama's involvement: In your opinion, what evidence is missing that would suggest to you that osama was involved with planning and executing the attacks?
Please, read that question carefully and offer a direct answer.

edit: forgot the question mark.

[Artdyst]

54. Your question is unfair. You believe OBL was involved and your question

implies that we should agree with you. I don't. If you want to know if I believe there is ANY credible evidence linking OBL to 9/11, the answer is no. Obviously, the FBI agrees with that position. Why don't you? What do you know that you haven't told the FBI that would change their opinion about whether OBL was involved in 9/11?

[greyl]

56. Your post is ridiculous.

I can't fathom how asking for an opinion is unfair.
Here's the question again:
In your opinion, what evidence is missing that would suggest to you that osama was involved with planning and executing the attacks?

[Artdyst]

58. What's missing is evidence that wasn't manufactured to frame him.

nt

[greyl]

61. That answer doesn't cut it. (Are you talking about saddam?)

What evidence would you expect to see?

[mrgerbik]

63. Evidence

A Terrorist training manual and the Quran.

[Artdyst]

65. I'd expect to see evidence that wasn't manufactured to frame OBL if he

had anything to do with 9/11, but since he didn't, I only expect more sophomoric debate tactics from partisan advocates who would probably willingly advocate for OUR side, under other circumstances.

[John Q. Citizen]

60. greyl says;

"There is a wealth of reason and evidence behind his being a suspect."

Perhaps you would care to list the evidence, greyl? And remember, " bush said so!" isn't evidence.

greyl also wrote: "Suppose there's an office at the Pentagon that is charged with disseminating disinfo in order to distract from their real crimes."

Suppose that pigs had wings. That would mean what in this discussion?

greyl also elucidates: "Now, regarding the evidence of osama's involvement: In your opinion, what evidence is missing that would suggest to you that osama was involved with planning and executing the attacks?

I haven't seen any evidence that Osama was involved with the planning or execution of the attacks. I also haven't seen any missing evidence.

I have seen an extremely poor quality video tape of a right handed (the FBI says Osama is left handed) gold ring wearing (against the rules of Islam) guy who looks nothing like Osama bin Laden that bush and The New York Times et al tried to foist on the American public to bolster their unsubstantiated claims of Oasama bin Laden's involvement.

I suggest, if the government has "a wealth of evidence" as you state, that the government present that evidence to a grand jury and indict Osama bin Laden for the crime.

It is incumbent on the government to show they have a case. Absent that, I'm not going to accept the word of bush, The New York Times, et al or the postings of some guy named greyl on the DU 9/11 board that they do.

If you are interested in what constitutes evidence in a grand jury setting, I suggest you read up on it.

www.abanet.org/media/faqjury.html
www.udayton.edu/~grandjur/fedj/fedj.htm
www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm

Happy reading :)

[greyl]

62. While lengthy, your post is still pathetic.

Your first question is asked as though you haven't read this thread or the links within it.
I lost interest at that point.

[mrgerbik]

64. The point is

my good friend, is that if the governments own investigtaion department can't connect the dots, why the hell would we believe B*?

[Artdyst]

66. I think we lost the greyl person. Couldn't handle the heat. EOM

nt

[Grateful for Hope]

67. As usual

well stated.

[John Q. Citizen]

68. Thank you so much, Hope. It make me feel good. :) n/t

[Grateful for Hope]

69. You are welcome

You deserve the compliment!!

[Grateful for Hope]

73. The thread that is #1 on the greatest page right now

is very, very important to read. Apparently DU'er's are in agreement.

Thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1859957

Excerpt:

We all witness Afghanistan, even today there is no evidence presented of OBL guilt. Even the US FBI has no evidence of such. Now the reason becomes the evil Taliban. While such spin is good for American it is not how the middle east people or the people of the muslim world see it.

Then, this AM, this same poster (Oversea Visitor) has more to say:

Whereas one can see the news here and the branding of muslim as terrorist. And it seems to be fashionable. One better not deny that on the others side the hate meter has now overflow. You preach a reality you preach it long enough it comes true.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1870756#1870807

In other words, "You reap what you sow".

[dweller]

74. Oversea Visitor is gone ...

:cry:

went looking for a post from him since he's been so quiet lately...

dp

[Ezlivin]

77. FBI says "No hard evidence that Osama did 911"

http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html