Posts Tagged ‘911’
Muslims did not attack the U.S.A on 9/11
dedicated to all 911 Victims of USA and Afghanistan
Since September 11, 2001, the United States has initiated a number of wars in Muslim countries.
These wars, which would be more correctly called massacres, have resulted in the deaths of countless innocent Muslims.
In some cases, attempts have been made to present these aggressions in the guise of humanitarian efforts to promote democracy. But the limited public support for U.S. military action around the world goes back to the U.S. government claim that Muslims were responsible for 9/11. This claim is untrue and it is past time for people to recognize that fact.
There are many ways to see that Muslims were not responsible for 9/11.
Author David Ray Griffin has previously made arguments in this regard. As time goes on, however, more facts lead people to realize that claims of Muslim responsibility for terrorism in the U.S. should be highly suspect. These facts include that the October 2001 anthrax attacks were blamed on Muslims only to be later traced to a U.S. military facility and to non-Muslim, U.S. scientists. Moreover, a number of FBI-planned acts of terrorism since 2001 have been falsely attributed to young Muslims who were victims of appalling acts of entrapment by the FBI.
According to the official account of 9/11, nineteen young Arab Muslims were responsible for the entirety of the mass murder that day. The FBI accused these young men within 72 hours of the attacks and, although the list changed slightly at first, it has remained the same since shortly after the attacks. To support the accusations, U.S. authorities pointed to passports that were found under implausible circumstances, luggage containing unbelievably convenient documents, and other dubious evidence.
In October 2001, reporter Seymour Hersh wrote –
“Many of the investigators believe that some of the initial clues that were uncovered about the terrorists’ identities and preparations, such as flight manuals, were meant to be found. A former high-level intelligence official told me, ‘Whatever trail was left was left deliberately—for the F.B.I. to chase.’”
the 9/11 Commission Report (911CR) was written by a professional myth-maker, Phillip Zelikow, who was also a Bush Administration insider. Oddly enough, the outline for the report was written by Zelikow and his colleague Ernest May even before the investigation began.
It is now widely accepted that the 9/11 Commission and the FBI did very poorly in terms of investigating most aspects of the attacks. In just one example, the FBI never even interviewed the people suspected of engaging in 9/11 insider trading.
Despite the poor quality of the investigation, the 911CR used inflammatory language which focused on Muslims as “the enemy.” The Commission told us that “the enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world by demanding redress of political grievances, but its hostility toward us and our values is limitless.”
The Commission was being false and misleading when it made these statements, however, as the evidence shows that 9/11 was not a Muslim crime.
Muslims do not murder innocent people
The most obvious reason that the Commission was off-track is that Muslims do not murder innocent people. Some people find this statement outrageous. Of course Muslims murder innocent people, they say, that’s what al Qaeda does.
The problem is that, as a society, many of us have been trained to accept religion as a noncommittal affiliation or label. For example, many of the current U.S. leaders have engaged in mass murder around the world over the last ten years yet they still call themselves Christians. Anyone can see that they are not. Those who truly believe in God live by the laws of the religion they proclaim and Christians do not engage in wars of aggression or the torture and killing of other human beings.
The word “Muslim” is Arabic and literally means “one who submits (to God).” But Webster’s Dictionary defines a “Muslim” as an adherent to Islam. Being an adherent of Islam means to follow the teachings of the Holy Qu’ran. And according to the Qur’an, one of the greatest sins is to kill a human being who has committed no fault:
If someone kills another person – unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the earth – it is as if he had murdered all mankind. (Surat al-Ma’ida: 32)
Defenders of the official myth might say that the 9/11 attacks can be seen as retaliation for the corruption in U.S. financial (WTC) and military (Pentagon) activities. Problems with that argument include the fact that it doesn’t absolve the 9/11 terrorists from having killed many innocent people, including children and dozens of Muslims. It also doesn’t explain how many of the financial leaders in the WTC, and all of the top military leaders at the Pentagon, escaped with their lives.
Furthermore, polls in countries with large Muslim populations indicate that Muslims oppose the killing of civilians in warfare significantly more than non-Muslims do. People in Muslim countries “roundly reject attacks on civilians. Asked about politically-motivated attacks on civilians, such as bombings or assassinations, majorities in all countries–usually overwhelming majorities–take the strongest position offered by saying such violence cannot be justified at all.”
To avoid this direct problem, some say that the alleged 9/11 hijackers were nominally Muslims. In other words, they were people who called themselves Muslims but who just didn’t follow this one requirement of the Qu’ran.
This article doesn’t delve into the carefully cultivated phenomenon called “radical Islam,” but the evidence we have indicates that the men accused of hijacking planes on 9/11 were either not involved at all, or were not even close to being adherents of Islam.
The men accused of hijacking the planes were either not involved or were not Muslims
In the weeks after 9/11, many mainstream news sources reported that the accused hijackers were still alive. These claims were reported by major media sources like The Independent, the London Telegraph and the British Broadcasting Corporation. Although BBC attempted to retract the claims later, the Telegraph reported that it had interviewed some of these men, who the newspaper said had the same names, same dates of birth, same places of birth, and same occupations as the accused.
No other media sources have successfully explained the discrepancies around the reports of the alleged hijackers still being alive. One particularly weak attempt, cited as the primary source at Wikipedia, was an absurd hand-waving piece in Der Spiegel that used “U.S. Historian Daniel Pipes” as the authority. Not mentioned is the fact that Pipes, a second-generation neocon and Project for the New American Century signatory, is arguably the world’s leading Islamophobe.
Most importantly, the “hijackers alive” reports were not investigated by the FBI or the 9/11 Commission. In fact, the Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, publicly expressed doubts about the identity of the hijackers. Yet to this day there has been no official response to these contradictions despite their high relevance to the overall investigation.
However, we can imagine that these cases were probably the result of stolen identities and some follow-up media statements suggested just that. With the likelihood of stolen identities, and without an official investigation to clarify, we are left with the conclusion that some of the accused men were not involved. It could be that there may have been other people involved who have never been identified, but without facts to go on we cannot say.
The men who appear to have been falsely accused include the brothers Wail and Waleed al Shehri, and Abdulaziz al Omari. The language in the 911CR suggests that al Omari was the most devout of the accused men, in that he “often served as an imam at his mosque in Saudi Arabia.” But since his identity was stolen and he was therefore not involved, we must look to the other accused men for Muslim connections.
Others who appear to be victims of identity theft include Mohand al Shehri, Salem al Hazmi, Saeed al Ghamdi, and Ahmed al Nami. Although the Commission’s report states that al Ghamdi “attended prayer services regularly,” he was also reported to have trained at the Lackland Air Force Base’s Defense Language Institute, which is a fact that does not support his being a religious fanatic with limitless hostility toward the United States. The report also says of al Hazmi that he was “unconcerned with religion.” In any case, these four must be excluded from the oxymoronic label of “Muslim terrorist” because it appears they were falsely accused.
Another of the accused men who the Commission says was “unconcerned with religion” was Satam al Suqami. This description appears to be correct because, according to The Boston Globe, al Saqami liked to sleep with prostitutes, which is a decidedly non-Muslim activity. In Islam, prostitution and other forms of sexual deviancy are forbidden. Therefore, although al Suqami was not reported to be still alive, he was not a Muslim.
In the months and days leading up to 9/11, the alleged hijackers were reported to have drank alcohol heavily in bars, purchased pornographic materials, watched strippers, and paid for lap dances. Needless to say, people who follow the teachings of the Qu’ran (Muslims) do not do any of those things.
As Temple University professor of Islamic Studies, Mahmoud Mustafa Ayoub, said in relation to the alleged 9/11 hijackers – “Islam does not condone killing innocent people in the name of God. Nor can a devout Muslim drink booze or party at a strip club and expect to reach heaven.”
Two of the men were being watched by the CIA for at least twenty months prior to 9/11. These were Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar, and they did not follow the Qu’ran either. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, these two were often seen at Cheetah’s, a nude bar in San Diego.
The most glaring examples of non-Muslim behavior, however, were exhibited by the alleged hijacker pilots of American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175. According to the 911CR, Mohammed Atta and Marwan al Shehhi piloted these airliners and crashed them into the WTC towers. Public knowledge about them indicates that they might have been trained at U.S. military facilities, but it is clear that they did not even try to follow the Qu’ran.
Frankly, Phillip Zelikow is more of a Muslim than they were.
For one thing, Atta and al Shehhi were known to dress in gaudy jewelry and clothes. Because of this, people thought they were mafia characters. As author Daniel Hopsicker wrote, they wore “Gold jewelry, expensive watches, and silk shirts” and were
“Not exactly a description of Islamic fundamentalists.”
Additionally, their activities in Florida, in the years prior to 9/11, were closely aligned with those of gunrunners and drug smugglers, which also indicates that they were anything but Muslims.
Atta’s stripper girlfriend, Amanda Keller, said that Atta and al Shehhi “had massive supplies of cocaine” which they restocked whenever needed at one of the flight schools run by Dutch nationals in Florida. Keller said that during the time she dated him, she saw Atta do cocaine himself on multiple occasions. And, of course, Muslims don’t do cocaine or other illicit drugs.
Witnesses saw Al Shehhi and Atta drunk at a Hollywood, Florida sports bar. On another occasion in Palm Beach, Atta and Alshehhi were seen spending $1,000 on champagne in only 45 minutes. During the latter escapade, Atta was with a tall busty brunette and Alshehhi was with a short blonde woman. Both women were known locally as high-priced escorts.
A stripper in Las Vegas, Nevada recalled that Marwan al Shehhi was “cheap,” because he paid only $20 for a lap dance. In the summer of 2001, Al Shehhi was apparently also seen in a nude bar in Pompado Beach, Florida. Six exotic dancers who worked there testified to seeing him. At the same time, both al Shehhi and Hamza Alghamdi were witnessed purchasing pornographic video and sex toys from a Florida store. The Wall Street Journal reported that Alghamdi watched a porn video in his hotel room, and others witnessed alleged hijacker Majed Moqed visiting a porn shop on several occasions in the months before 9/11.
This same categorically non-Muslim behavior was also true for Ziad jarrah, the alleged hijacker pilot of Flight 93, which was destroyed in a field in Pennsylvania. Seven months before the attacks, it was noticed that Jarrah “frequented” a strip club in Jacksonville, Florida.
The 911CR says that six of the alleged hijackers lived in Paterson, NJ for up to six months. This included Hani Hanjour, Nawaf al Hazmi, Khalid al Mihdhar, the man mis-identified as Abdulaziz al Omari, and others. Reports put Ziad Jarrah in Paterson as well. The mayor of Paterson, Marty Barnes, certainly noticed them and he made the point of how non-Muslim they were, saying –“Nobody ever saw them at mosques, but they liked the go-go clubs.” 
Given that Atta and friends were so far from being Muslims, it actually makes sense that the U.S. government would try, in the days after 9/11, to bolster the political story by adding actual Muslims to their quickly drawn-up list. The real al Omari, for example, was obviously not involved. But the discrepancy between his being an imam and a go-go club aficionado who never went to the mosques would quickly be lost in the post-9/11 clamor for revenge. And the public’s most banal and prejudiced tendencies could be better exploited with hints of Muslim connections, no matter how weak, just as they have been with the anthrax attacks and the ongoing FBI-planned terrorism.
In any case because the alleged hijacker pilots were clearly not Muslims, the deaths caused by the destruction of those planes cannot be attributed to Muslims. This includes the deaths of the airplane passengers and the people in the impact zones of the WTC.
The alleged hijackers were not responsible for most of the deaths on 9/11, if any
The 911CR says that Hani Hanjour, the accused hijacker pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, was the terrorist operation’s most experienced pilot. The official account tells us that he slammed the aircraft into the Pentagon at the first-floor level going over 500 mph. But all the evidence indicates that he was a very poor pilot at best. He repeatedly failed his training courses on single engine aircraft and according to representatives of his flight training schools he had no fundamental pilot skills. Due to these facts, we know that Hanjour could not have flown the plane as alleged. So it doesn’t matter if he was a Muslim.
It is possible that all the planes were commandeered by way of existing remote control technology, which would explain a number of the unanswered questions. Remote piloting could explain why the planes did not squawk the hijack code, why the auto-pilot stayed on during the hijacking process, and how these planes were flown with extreme precision at very high speeds regardless of the poor skills of the alleged pilots. It would also explain how those who planned the attacks could have remained confident of their success, despite having employed unreliable, cocaine-snorting, alcoholic perverts as “hijackers.”
Regardless of who actually flew the planes, we know that most of the deaths on 9/11 were the result of actions which could not have been accomplished by the accused men. Of course, the initial hijackings could be blamed on the alleged, non-Muslim hijackers and one might argue that some passengers and crew members were said to be killed during the hijackings. But so little is known about how the hijackings occurred that it is difficult to know what really happened. The 9/11 Commission could not even say how the alleged hijackers entered the cockpits of any of the four planes, or why the hijack code was not squawked for any of them.
If we examine what was needed to facilitate the attacks, we see that most of the deaths on 9/11 were the result of many things that should not have happened. And none of it could have been accomplished without the involvement of U.S. authorities.
Pre-9/11 investigations that would have caught the accused men were shut down.
All the levels of hijacking prevention failed four separate times.
For several hours, our leaders did nothing to protect the nation.
The planes should have been intercepted but they were not.
The planes were flown like guided missiles.
Three WTC skyscrapers were completely destroyed, and all of them fell through what should have been the path of most resistance.
Evidence for explosives at the Pentagon was discovered and not explained.
The debris damage in Pennsylvania indicates that Flight 93 was shot down.
An extensive examination of the people who had access to the WTC towers shows that the accused men were not among those who could have placed explosives in those highly-secure buildings, nor were any Muslims in such a position. Therefore, there is no evidence whatsoever that the accused non-Muslims, or any unspecified Muslims, caused the deaths of the nearly 2,600 people who were killed in the destruction of the Twin Towers.
It is reasonable to say, without an extensive inquiry, that Muslims could not have shut down the pre-9/11 investigations. Similarly, they could not have caused the repeated failure of a hijacking prevention system that had been successful for over 20 years. Muslims certainly could not have stopped U.S. leaders from doing their jobs on 9/11, nor could they have disabled the U.S. air defenses or shot down Flight 93.
Additionally, there is no doubt that Muslims were not to blame for delaying and obstructing the investigation into 9/11, during which time the U.S. and its allies had already initiated massacres in the Middle East. The official accounts that were finally generated, that ignored most of the important evidence and are transparently false, are not the work of Muslims either. The murder of millions of people has been falsely justified by way of those official accounts.
Muslims could not have done any of these things. Not even the drug-abusing drunk called Mohammed Atta, who dated strippers, dressed like a gangster and hung out with drug runners, could have done those things.
Moving beyond Islamophobia
We do have clues about who might have been involved though. For example, Florida Governor Jeb Bush showed up at Rudi Dekkers’ flight school in Venice, Florida where Atta and several of the other accused men had trained, within 24-hours after the attacks, to confiscate all the school’s records. Curiously, Jeb and his brother, the President of the United States, had three relatives working for companies within the impact zones of the WTC towers (Craig Stapleton, Jim Pierce, and Prescott Bush Jr).
Dekkers was a pervert just like the accused, non-Muslim men and he was brought up on charges for sexual harassment. Another of the many weird facts about Dekkers was that he claimed to be a New York City cop, and had a plaque on his wall with words to that effect. This might remind us that Bernard Kerik, the “9/11 hero” who led the New York City Police department when it was credited with providing some of the dubious evidence against the accused, not only dressed like a gangster, he was known to have associated with mafia characters. Coincidentally, the same things were said about FBI agent and lead al Qaeda investigator, John O’Neill.
Kerik spent years working in Saudi Arabia, first for the Saudi royal family and then for one of the companies that later was located near the impact zone in the south tower. Interestingly, Kerik was the first person to tell us that explosives were not involved in the destruction of the WTC. Unfortunately, we can’t get follow-up comments from him because he’s now in prison.
There remain many avenues for further investigation into the accused hijackers and who they really were. Could there be a connection between the porn shops and strip clubs that the accused men liked to visit, and covert activities or organized crime? Could those connections lead from places like Las Vegas and Florida to New York City, and shed light on why so many mafia-linked companies were hired to clean-up the WTC site?
Could the links between Atta, Dekkers’ financier Wally Hilliard, and international drug-running have anything to do with creating a pretext for war in Afghanistan, the country that now leads the world in opium production? That certainly would make sense given that the southwest Florida area near Venice, where Dekkers, Atta and the alleged hijackers spent so much time, was home to a long history of CIA and drug trafficking operations.
Two long-time law enforcement officers interviewed by Daniel Hopsicker said they had “witnessed a 40-year long history of CIA-connected covert operations in their area.” They were describing Atta’s home port in early 2001, the Charlotte County Airport. They added that “they believed that the CIA was somehow involved, if not responsible for, the World Trade Center attacks.”
Forty years is not quite right, however, as the history of covert drug operations in that area went back at least 60 years. The tiny Venice Airport, where most of the alleged hijackers trained, originated as the Venice Army Airfield and was the home of the operatives who worked for General Claire Chennault. Civil Air Transport, the successor to Chennault’s Flying Tigers and the world’s largest heroin-trafficking operation at the time, transported the drugs that funded the early covert operations of the CIA, and those airmen worked closely with organized crime while doing so.
For the 12 years prior to 9/11, drug trafficking and terrorist training in the Venice, Florida area was overlooked by the region’s congressional representative, former CIA operative Porter Goss, and its Senator, Bob Graham. It might not be surprising then, to notice that Goss and Graham led the first official inquiry into the 9/11 attacks. They didn’t find much.
Unfortunately, these leads are not being investigated due to continued support for the false claim that the alleged hijackers were adherents of Islam. Such support for the official conspiracy theory also promotes the ongoing Muslim genocide. We don’t know where all this falsehood will lead in the future, but people who seek the truth about 9/11 should move beyond blaming Muslims and get back to useful investigative work.
 David Ray Griffin, Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?, information Clearing House, September 8, 2008, http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20722.htm
 Glenn Greenwald, The FBI again thwarts its own Terror plot, Salon, Sep 29, 2011, http://www.salon.com/2011/09/29/fbi_terror/
 Seymour M. Hersh, What Went Wrong, The New Yorker, October 8, 2001, http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2001/10/08/011008fa_FACT
 Kevin R. Ryan, Evidence for Informed Trading on the Attacks of September 11, Foreign Policy Journal, http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/11/18/evidence-for-informed-tra…
 Huda, Muslim Victims of 9/11 Attack: Several dozen Muslims were among the innocent victims, About.com, http://islam.about.com/od/terrorism/a/Muslim-Victims-Of-9-11-Attack.htm
 Program on International Policy Attitudes, Muslims Believe US Seeks to Undermine Islam, April 24, 2007, http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/34…
 David Harrison, Revealed: the men with stolen identities, The Telegraph, 23 Sep 2001, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/saudiarabia/1341391…
 Der Spiegel, Panoply of the Absurd, September8, 2003, http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160,00.html
 Hillary Smith, The Main Purveyors of Islamophobia: Daniel Pipes, The Council for the National Interest, 18 January 2012, http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/promoting-islamophobia/the-…
 911Research.wtc7.com, Resurrected Hijackers: Suicide Hijackers Identified by the FBI Proclaim Their Innocence, http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/identities.html
 Shelley Murphy and Douglas Belkin, Hijackers Said to Seek Prostitutes, The Boston Globe, October 10, 2001, http://s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2001/bostonglobe101001.html
 Jody A. Benjamin, Suspects’ actions don’t add up, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, September 16 2001, http://web.archive.org/web/20010916150533/http://www.sun-sentinel.com/ne…
 Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland: Mohamed Atta & the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida, Trine Day; 2004
 Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland
 History Commons Complete 9/11 Timeline, Context of ‘Before September 11, 2001: 9/11 Hijackers Drink Alcohol and Watch Strip Shows, Especially towards Eve of Attacks, http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a091101beforepinkpony
 Jackelyn Barnard, Exclusive: 9/11 Hijacker Stayed at Jacksonville Hotel, First Coast News, Aug 25, 2004, http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=23296
 Evan Thomas, Cracking the Terror Code, Newsweek, October 15, 2001, http://www.wanttoknow.info/011015newsweek
 911Research.wtc7.net, Clueless Super-Pilot, http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/badpilots.html
 Aidan Monaghan, Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems, Journal of 9/11 Studies, October 2008, http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/AutopilotSystemsMonaghan.pdf
 Paul Thompson, The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11, History Commons, http://www.historycommons.org/essay.jsp?article=essayairdefense
 Frank Legge, Controlled Demolition at the WTC: a Historical Examination of the Case, Journal of 9/11 Studies, May, 2009, http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/LeggeCDatWTC.pdf
 Kevin R. Ryan, Demolition Access to the WTC Towers, found at 911Review.com, http://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_DonPaul.html
 Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland
 Kevin R. Ryan, Demolition Access to the WTC Towers
 Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland
 Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland
 Daniel Hopsicker, The Utimate Hedge?: Venice Airport has a 60-Year History of Drug Trafficking, Mad Cow News, March 8, 2010, http://www.madcowprod.com/03082010.htm
 Kevin R. Ryan, Review of American War Machine, by Peter Dale Scott, 911Blogger.com, February 12, 2011, http://911blogger.com/news/2011-02-12/review-american-war-machine-peter-…
Stay Connected With Free Updates
If you cannot visit this site everyday and would like to receive our articles everyday via email, please click here and enter your email address in the new window.
PLEASE CHK YOUR EMAIL AFTER SUBMITTING EMAIL,YOU MUST CONFIRM SUBSCRIPTION !
listing all 911 articles on this website
Stay Connected With Free Updates
If you cannot visit this site everyday and would like to receive our articles everyday via email, please click here and enter your email address in the new window.
PLEASE CHK YOUR EMAIL AFTER SUBMITTING EMAIL,YOU MUST CONFIRM SUBSCRIPTION !
Two former CIA officials have admitted to creating a fake video in which intelligence officers dressed up as Osama Bin Laden and his cronies in an effort to defame the terrorist leader throughout the middle east
The details are outlined in a Washington Post article by investigative reporter and former Army Intelligence case officer Jeff Stein.
Stein’s sources told him that during planning for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the CIA’s Iraq Operations Group considered creating a fake video of Saddam Hussein engaged in sexual acts with a teenage boy, then flooding Iraq with copies of the tape.
That idea, along with faking Iraqi news bulletins, never came to fruition according to the former CIA officials, because agreement on the projects could not be reached between the Iraq Group and CIA’s Office of Technical Services.
However, the two sources reveal that the agency did previously concoct at least one fake Bin Laden video:
The agency actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys, one of the former CIA officers recalled, chuckling at the memory. The actors were drawn from “some of us darker-skinned employees,” he said.
The former officials told Stein that the project was taken over by the military after it ground to a halt:
The reality, the former officials said, was that the agency really didn’t have enough money and expertise to carry out the projects.
“The military took them over,” said one. “They had assets in psy-war down at Ft. Bragg,” at the army’s special warfare center.
This latest revelation bolsters evidence that the intelligence agencies, and perhaps more significantly, the military have been engaged in creating fake Bin Laden videos in the past.
As we have exhaustively documented, Intelcenter, the U.S. monitoring group that routinely releases Bin Laden video and audio, much of which have been proven to be either rehashed old footage or outright fakes, is an offshoot of IDEFENSE, a web security company that monitors intelligence from the middle east.
IDEFENSE is heavily populated by long serving ex military intelligence officials, such as senior military psy-op intelligence officer Jim Melnick, who served 16 years in the US army and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in psychological operations. Melnick has also worked directly for former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
New Bin Laden “Confession” Tape: Bin Laden Admits his involvement in 911 !
Osama flip flops and admits he was solely responsible for 9/11
In a “new” audio tape broadcast today on Al-Jazeera television, Osama Bin Laden confesses that he was solely responsible for the attacks on 9/11 and that it was unjust for the United States to have invaded Afghanistan.
However, given that every single tape and video of Bin Laden released since 2002 has been in some way highly suspect, the question that will automatically be on everyone’s lips is “Is this tape another fake?”
Al Jazeera aired a few seconds of the tape in which the speaker is reported to say
“The events of Manhattan were retaliation against the American-Israeli alliance’s aggression against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, and I am the only one responsible for it. The Afghan people and government knew nothing about it. America knows that.”
The tape, which Reuters describes as having been recorded by “a speaker who sounded like bin Laden” once again contains no reference to current events that would indicate when it was recorded.
The last time Bin Laden specifically “confessed” to having planned the 9/11 attacks was in a video that was later declared to be a total fake.
The December 2001 “Fat nosed” Bin Laden video, was magically found in a house in Jalalabad after anti-Taliban forces moved in. It featured a fat Osama laughing and joking about how he’d carried out 9/11. The video was also mistranslated in order to manipulate viewer opinion and featured “Bin Laden” praising two of the hijackers, only he got their names wrong.
This Osama also used the wrong hand to write with and wore gold rings, a practice totally in opposition to the Muslim faith.
Despite the fact that the man in the video looks nothing like Bin Laden, the CIA stood by it and declared it to be the “9/11 confession video”.
Shortly after the 9/11, Bin Laden had denied any involvement in the attacks on at least two separate occasions. Furthermore, the London Independent reported a claim attributed to a friend of one of the six men accused of plotting to detonate bombs on London’s underground tube system on July 21 2005, that suggested that Osama bin Laden personally told hook handed radical cleric Abu Hamza that Al-Qaeda was not behind the attacks of September 11, 2001.
This isn’t like a kid caught thieving in a sweet shop – terrorists always claim responsibility for attacks they have perpetrated otherwise why bother killing people to send a political message? One must therefore ask why has Bin Laden flip flopped around on the issue of 9/11?
Even more intriguing is the fact that there has still been no formal indictment of Bin Laden six years on, when it only took three months to charge him with the 1998 embassy bombings.
Every analysis of a newly released Al Qaeda or Bin Laden tape has revealed inconsistencies, flaws and suspicions.
Just a couple of months ago a “9/11 anniversary” video was released by Osama which was quickly deemed to be an iron clad forgery, and not even a good one at that. All references to current events made by the figure said to be Bin Laden occurred at a point in the video where the picture was frozen and only audio was present. Bin Laden also presented a pre recorded martyrdom video of one of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, Waleed al Shehri, who was reported by the BBC as still alive and well in Saudi Arabia.
Analysts were also baffled by the wholly fake beard Bin Laden seemed to have donned. A computer expert later provided evidence that suggested the video was old footage re-released and manipulated. Other analysts came to the same conclusion. It was also revealed that Adam Pearlman, a suspected Mossad double agent, who once wrote stinging essays condemning Muslims as “bloodthirsty terrorists,” was the scriptwriter of the video.
In another previous groundbreaking investigation, we exposed IntelCenter, the middleman between “Al-Qaeda’s media arm” and the press, and the organization that routinely obtains the tapes, as little more than a Pentagon front group staffed by individuals with close connections to Donald Rumsfeld and the U.S. war machine.
Computer analyst Neal Krawetz discovered that the As-Sahab logo (the alleged media arm of Al-Qaeda) and the IntelCenter logo were both added to the Al-Qaeda videos at the same time. Though Krawetz re-affirmed his conclusion in an interview with Wired News, after the fact became public, he mysteriously recanted.
Krawetz original analysis, before he was obviously pressured to withdraw it, clearly suggests that IntelCenter is directly manufacturing the tapes and that “As-Sahab” is a contrived hoax to promulgate the myth that the tapes are coming from Al-Qaeda.
IntelCenter’s later denial of of this whole episode was taken with a pinch of salt, for it was the same company that knowingly re-released 6 year old footage of Bin Laden that many quarters of the media treated as new. IntelCenter itself had released the same footage in October 2003 and it still appears dated as such on their own website.
The organization was also behind the so-called “laughing hijackers” tape, which was passed off as originating from Al-Qaeda’s media arm, but was later exposed as being secret surveillance footage filmed by U.S. intelligence in 2000.
In previous articles, we have also outlined how almost every so-called “Al-Qaeda” tape has been released at the most politically opportune time for the Bush administration and the Neo-Cons, including a Bin Laden video right before the 2004 election and a tape in which he ludicrously declared himself in league with Saddam Hussein in the weeks before the invasion of Iraq.
There are simply too many instances of dodgy Osama tapes to cover in one article. Multiple other tapes have been confirmed as rehashed material, others have been confirmed as fakes by voice analysis institutes and Experts on Bin Laden who often attribute them to western controlled intelligence agencies.
They are about as genuine as a used car salesman convention, and have been proven fraudulent on countless occasions. They are nothing more than crude propaganda unleashed in a desperate move to put the genie of what really happened on 9/11 back in the bottle.
The latest recording comes on the back of revelations that a man who claims to have trained six of the 9/11 hijackers is a paid CIA informant according to Turkish intelligence specialists.
Louai al-Sakka’s claims conveniently rewrote aspects of the official 9/11 story, providing a plug for inconsistencies that researchers have long drawn on to encourage a new independent investigation into the attacks.
The continued perpetuation of this myth has reached the point of farce now. There can be no doubt anymore that these crudely edited and forged propaganda tapes that are being foisted upon the American people represent nothing more than a contrived hoax to reinforce the moribund official version of 9/11 and the desperately flagging legitimacy of the so-called war on terror.
No Poll in News
Osama Bin Laden Never Charged for 911 attacks :: Inside Job likely
The whole world was remembering the situation of happened 10 years before on 9-11-2001 .When Osama Bin Laden’s died his death was being celebrated by Americans and Islam haters .
Everyone seems to repeat there beleif about that he was indeed the mastermind behind the terror attacks of 9/11.
But The Facts are Very Different.
But that was never proven, and there is not even evidence hinting at such a connection according to the FBI. It is very well possible that completely different organizations than al-Qaeda were responsible for the planning and execution of 9/11, and that the latter was merely one of the involved parties.
Osama Bin Laden was never formally charged, because the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation didn’t deliver the necessary evidence to the Department of Justice, which would be the required path in this matter. Another explanation for the lack of criminal charges was brought forward by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld at the time, who said that the 911 attack was an act of war and not a law enforcement matter. But this mere redefining of the attack doesn’t explain why no evidence would be needed to proof who was behind the attacks, and how it was accomplished. Just for comparison, the airplanes that attacked Pearl Harbor were clearly Japanese, and they didn’t come from nowhere, but were launched from aircraft carriers within range.
If anyone is surprised by this fact, which one could be excused for as it is very rarely mentioned by your friendly television pundit,
read for yourself what Rex Tom,FBI Director of Investigative Publicity, stated in 2006 about the FBI’s position:
“The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then 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 connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
Now, in a constitutional state in which the exercise of governmental power is constrained by the rule of law – which usually assumes the innocence of an individual if not proven otherwise by a formal trial before appropriate courts – this lack of evidence to even bring forward charges and start a trial could have been a hindrance.
The U.S. government saw it differently and bombed Afghanistan just weeks after September 9, 2001, as usual without a formal declaration of war, with one of the top priorities “to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden”. It doesn’t even need mentioning that the waterboarding in Guantanamo Bay of various detainees rounded up without charges is beyond anything that a constitutional government could ever do. From the moment of ordering unconstitutional torture and wars, any government simply ceases to be constitutional.
And there is quite apparently continuity of the U.S. government in acting in these ways, unbound by the rule of law. The current U.S. President Barack Obama gave a live speech shortly after the death of Osama Bin Laden was announced, boasting about the success that he said was his personal priority order. Right at the beginning of the speech (Full-text), he repeated the unfounded myth, which can thus also be called a lie, that Bin Laden would be responsible for the 9/11 terror attacks. That may be former president Bush’s and Obamas personal opinion – but it just goes against the clear assessment of the responsible government authority.
Obama goes on to say: “And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.”
What justice does Obama refer to, exactly? Osama Bin Laden was certainly responsible for many crimes, and maybe even 911 – but as there seems to be no formal evidence for the latter, it is wrong to make this the official reason for his execution. Now, probably few care about the death of Usama, who was a terrorist after all. But how about the 5 women and 4 children that were killed one week ago, on April 22 as reported by BBC, by a U.S. military drone in Pakistan, when missiles hit not just a building with suspected militants, but also a family house?
And this is not a single incident at all. In Obama’s “war on al-Qaeda”, as he proudly called it in his speech, over 700 innocent civilians were massacred by drones in Pakistan alone, so far. In March, 40 innocent people were killed in an attack on a tribal meeting, in February, 9 children, as young as 8 years old, were killed by U.S. helicopters, and so on.
The connection between Bin Laden and the 9/11 attacks was made by the Bush-Cheney administration, at the morning of the attacks, before the first tower even collapsed. Nearly ten years later, after intensive investigation, a government commission, two wars and the interrogation under torture of some 750 people detained in Guantanamo Bay without charges, no hard evidence could be found that would confirm the initial allegation.
But something else is much more worrying than the missing link to Bin Laden – there are still many open questions of what really happened at the fateful day of 9/11/2001. The families of victims, and thousands of engineers, architects, politicians, professors and other citizens, demand a real investigation of the events and the responsible parties.
According to their judgement, the official explanations, including blaming Bin Laden and Al Qaeda for everything, without proper evidence, are insufficient.
To just highlight the most obvious and easy to see discrepancy:
At the World Trade Center site, three towers collapsed, but only two were hit by an airplane. The third tower, WTC7, was at a significant distance of the other two towers, more far from them then several other skyscrapers, with no other tower significantly damaged. WTC7 collapsed suddenly, very fast and evenly. The official explanation is that a fire in a few floors would have caused this. But no skyscraper ever collapsed due to a fire before 9/11, and none did after. The open question in this case is: was WTC7 the only tower in history that collapsed because of burning furniture – or are the engineers right who insist that the only realistic explanation is a controlled demolition with explosive charges expertly planted at the foundations of the tower?
Click here to read How WTC7 was fallen down in another blog
None the less, the same unfounded 11 am allegation of the Bush-Cheney administration is repeated by countless people, in media and government, even today and it is still used to continue unconstitutional and ruinous wars, which claim the life’s of hundreds of thousands of innocent people .
[where ever you post,please add source link.either in website or even in facebook NOTE…please….spread the link of site..]