Lawyer Says Bin Laden Did Not Orchestrate 9/11 During Terror Trial

Skepticism towards the 9/11 official story reached the Australian Supreme Court this week after a lawyer asserted that the attacks were not orchestrated by Osama bin Laden during the trial of an alleged terror group in Melbourne.

"To say that this was all orchestrated by Osama bin Laden is a silly thing to do. He's never claimed responsibility for it," Remy van de Wiel QC told the Australian jury.



Unless you accept the credibility of a dodgy videotape of a fat Bin Laden doppelganger "miraculously discovered" in a house in Jalalabad by U.S. troops and pushed as authentic by the ever-honest U.S. government, then van de Wiel has a point.

Indeed, Bin Laden's first public statement following the 9/11 attacks was to deny any responsibility for carrying them out.

"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle," Bin Laden told the Pakistani-based Ummat newspaper.

Despite the fact that it only took three months to charge him with the 1998 embassy bombings, there has been no formal indictment of bin Laden over six years after 9/11 and the FBI's wanted poster makes no reference of Bin Laden's involvement in 9/11.

When asked by reporters why no reference was made, FBI agent Rex Tomb was forced to admit that "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11."

Read more here please . Video included in link
SOURCE STORY AND VIDEO - Click here

The case mirrors almost every other example we have studied in Britain, Canada and America , where a group of Muslims are infiltrated by security agents, radicalized and provocateured into saying something which could be perceived as advocating violence, and then arrested. Despite the complete lack of hard evidence of intent or capability to carry out attacks, the trials provide fodder for propagandists to cite in order to hoax the public into thinking terrorists are everywhere, thus convincing them to hand over more liberty in the name of security.

As we reported last week, four prosecutors In the Guantánamo Bay case assert that the trials are rigged and that convictions are already assured despite the fact that there is scant evidence to link Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his cohorts with 9/11, proving that the official story is a fable and the real perpetrators are being protected.

prisonplanet.com...

How can you tell when a Lawyer is lying?

He's talking.

Sorry, but the assertions of a lawyer mean absolutely nothing. Just my opinion.

No offense to lawyers... They are trying to do their best to defend their clients.

Originally posted by Wildbob77
How can you tell when a Lawyer is lying?

He's talking.

Sorry, but the assertions of a lawyer mean absolutely nothing. Just my opinion.

No offense to lawyers... They are trying to do their best to defend their clients.

You obviously didnt read anything. Your attempts to debunk the truth has failed.

Read the article before commenting.

dble post


[edit on 28-2-2008 by IvanZana]

Originally posted by Wildbob77
How can you tell when a Lawyer is lying?

He's talking.

Sorry, but the assertions of a lawyer mean absolutely nothing. Just my opinion.

No offense to lawyers... They are trying to do their best to defend their clients.

ALso, was it not the C.I.A's, FBI's, and governent LAWYERS were "trying to do their best to defend their clients" by blaiming bin laden?

Are you aware that the FBI admitted there is not enough evidence to link Bin laden to 9/11?

SO i agree with you, THe U.S lawyers"They are trying to do their best to defend their clients." and we all know lawyers lie and cheat.