Bin Laden’s key 9/11 role revealed

[ForestsBeatBushes]

THE two main planners of the September 11 terrorist attacks have revealed details of Osama Bin Laden’s close involvement in organising the atrocity, according to leaked transcripts of their interrogations.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh, who were captured in Pakistan and are in American custody, have disclosed that Bin Laden chose the pilots who flew the doomed jets and headed a committee that debated details of the attacks.

The pair have filled in many of the gaps in knowledge about how the attacks were planned and have named previously unknown co-conspirators and other fellow Al-Qaeda members, according to the transcripts obtained by a German magazine.


and continue at:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,1-876831,00.html

[htuttle]

1. I'd still like to see the original evidence

When the Bush Administration invaded Afghanistan, they promised the world they had solid proof that Al Queda and Bin Laden were behind the 9/11 attacks. They stated they would present this proof to the world.

While it's all well and good that they've gotten two people to confess to the crimes while being interrogated (and tortured, no doubt), but what about the original dossier?

Where IS that 'solid proof' that the administration had in Nov 2001 that they promised to provide?

Does it exist? During the run up to the invasion of Afghanistan, the Taliban offered to turn Bin Laden over, if they could be convinced of his guilt in the 9/11 attacks. The Administration refused, of course, and bin Laden is free to this day.

The last few years would have been a whole hell of a lot easier had the Bush administration followed up on that offer -- but maybe they didn't actually have any proof? (and obtaining forced confessions several years after the fact from people under interrogation isn't very convincing).

[Media_Lies_Daily]

2. How many strong electric shocks...

....applied to sensitive areas of your body will cause you to say anything your captors want to hear?

"Asked whether torture was being used, J Cofer Black, the State Department co-ordinator for counterterrorism, has said: 'All I can say to that is that there is a before and an after September 11.' He added: 'We have taken off our kid gloves.'"

Once upon a time in America torture was considered extremely unreliable for obtaining information from uncooperative captives. However, torture is very good if you want your captive to verify the details of a story you want told. Most people will say anything to make pain go away.

[Octafish]

3. Who else was on this "Planning Committee"? Louis Freeh?

After all the FBI knew what was going on in flight schools in Minnesota, California, Arizona and Florida, yet didn't lift a wiretap to stop it.

George Tenet? The CIA knew enough to keep tabs on everybody, yet didn't lift a mole to stop it.

Condi Rice? The national security advisor wasn't worried about terrorism, and didn't miss a single date with a married man to stop it.

Donald Rumsfeld? Terror isn't a threat as long as he gets his Star Wars, so he didn't need to worry about it.

George Bush? No way was this going to interfere with cutting brush on the pig farm, so he didn't lift a finger off his chain saw to stop it.

Yes. It would be interesting to know who told bin Laden what on that "Planning Committee."

After all, it may've been Saudi money, but the US encouraged the invasion of Afghanistan, according to Zbigniew Brzezinski. Just as bad, the US trained bin Laden.

[gWbush is Mabus]

4. details please....

Condi Rice? The national security advisor wasn't worried about terrorism, and didn't miss a single date with a married man to stop it.

[htuttle]

5. Out of all that was in his post..

...you latch on the one sex-related item?

:eyes:

I think it is a football player. Supposedly she's still seeing him. He's married, but separated, IIRC..

But who cares, really? I'm more worried about her job (non-)performance.

[pansypoo53219]

6. but but but

george said it was Sadaam.

[Dancing_Dave]

7. Newspapers don't realize how much credibility they've lost

By uncritically printing this propaganda BS. And they're not going to get it back any time soon...certainly not just by a calling a few Bush lies on much less spectacular matters.
:puke:

The one bright side is how many people now realize they have to resort to other information sources to figure out what's really going on.

[LARED]

8. ABOBL

Why not bin Laden?

The (A)nyone (B)ut (O)sama (B)in (L)aden crowd will believe that the:

The CIA,
Bushco,
Cheney,
Rumsfield,
Mosssad,
NSA,
The Jews,
The Zionists,
Lizard men,
Military Defense
add your own goofy party

did it, but not the organization who claims responsibility and states without reservations that they would be pleased to kill more Americas.

I wonder if when Bush is tossed out in 2004 or 2008 and America is still not under Military rule will the ABOBL crowd slink off into the sunset?

[ForestsBeatBushes]

10. Great post!

I'm pretty sure that no matter what happens in either 2004 or 2008, the Mossad, the Jews and the Zionists will still be blamed.

Don't mind me...I was just @ the I/P forum :eyes: !

[RH]

11. the organization who claims responsibility ?

:wow:

In his 'Uhmat' interview, 2001, OBL expressly denied responsibility

http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=2392&TagID=2

How then do you explain that?

[LARED]

12. Did you read the link up top?

Leaders in the organization claim responsibility.

Also an interesting link on Al-Qaeda history.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/etc/cron.html

[drfemoe]

9. Sure OBL

was involved. The better story is who was paying him. This article is a big AHHA moment imo >>
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/index.html

TURNING A BLIND EYE
A third view, explored by the fifth estate, suggests something different altogether: that the evidence pointing to a pending attack was not pursued vigorously (consciously or unconsciously) simply because much of it led back to Saudi Arabia. And that Saudi Arabia holds a special place in the U.S. political, business and intelligence milieu. It's a country that is not held to the same standards of accountability as are other nations. The reason, of course, is America’s enormous dependence on Saudi Arabia for oil. Remember: 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens.
--snip--
THE MISSING PAGES
Most of the attention has been focused on 28 pages that have been ordered classified and blacked-out to the public.

People familiar with the missing pages claim that they deal with the Saudi government's relationship with the 9/11 hijackers.

In an interview with the fifth estate, Eleanor Hill, chief investigator for the Committee, would only confirm that those files dealt with sources of foreign support for the hijackers.

"Because they're classified I can't tell you what's in those pages. I can tell you that the chapter deals with some information that our committee found in the FBI and CIA files that was very disturbing. It had to do with sources of foreign support for the hijackers."

This summer, U.S. Senators held a hearing on the financial support of terrorism.

The Bush Administration had refused to place Saudi several charities and individuals on the terror watch list. The senators asked the U.S. government to release the names of Saudi charities and individuals who were being investigated for funding Al-Qaeda.

By the next day, the names were classified by the Bush Adminstration and could not be made public.

--snipped-- much more at above link

This also begs the question .. why Iraq? Someone suggested that since we can't outright attack SA, we stomped our foot right on their doorstep. But .. Saddam H is no friend of SA, so why do we take out our 'enemy's' enemy? Putting an end to terrorism is a much bigger fish than stopping suicide killers.

[RH]

13. A broader view of it

comes from Der Spiegel:

http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/english/0,1518,271523,00.html

N.B.

"The prisoner no longer recalls precisely when he heard these words and in which of the many hideouts in the mountains bordering Afghanistan and Pakistan."

In view of the peculiar failure of OBL to claim the credit in 2001, which has yet to be explained, I would not think it safe to convict, with no cross examination, on the strength of little more than the hearsay of such a remarkably fine, upstanding citizen as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

[Darranar]

14. I'm not one to believe conspiracy theories...

but this proves nothing. We don't know what's happening in the military prisons where these people were held. Torture could convince them to say who knows what.