Noam Chomsky: No Evidence that Al-Qaeda Carried Out the 9/11 Attacks

Leading liberal intellectual Noam Chomsky just told Press TV:

"The explicit and declared motive of the [Afghanistan] war was to compel the Taliban to turn over to the United States, the people who they accused of having been involved in World Trade Center and Pentagon terrorist acts. The Taliban…they requested evidence…and the Bush administration refused to provide any," the 81-year-old senior academic made the remarks on Press TV's program a Simple Question.

"We later discovered one of the reasons why they did not bring evidence: they did not have any."

The political analyst also said that nonexistence of such evidence was confirmed by FBI eight months later.

"The head of FBI, after the most intense international investigation in history, informed the press that the FBI believed that the plot may have been hatched in Afghanistan, but was probably implemented in the United Arab Emirates and Germany."

Chomsky added that three weeks into the war, "a British officer announced that the US and Britain would continue bombing, until the people of Afghanistan overthrew the Taliban... That was later turned into the official justification for the war."

"All of this was totally illegal. It was more, criminal," Chomsky said.

Source: www.presstv.ir...

As Wired wrote on September 27, 2001:

President Bush has said he has evidence that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks, so it would seem obvious that the FBI would include him and other suspects on its 10 most wanted fugitives Web page.

Think again.

Bin Laden is listed, but only for the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. There is no mention of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing or the attacks on the USS Cole in October 2000, both of which he is widely believed to have orchestrated. And forget about Sept. 11.

The reason? Fugitives on the list must be formally charged with a crime, and bin Laden is still only a suspect in the recent attacks in New York City and Washington.

"There's going to be a considerable amount of time before anyone associated with the attacks is actually charged," said Rex Tomb, who is head of the FBI's chief fugitive publicity unit and helps decide which fugitives appear on the list. "To be charged with a crime, this means we have found evidence to confirm our suspicions, and a prosecutor has said we will pursue this case in court."

Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA officer who was deputy director of the U.S. State Department Office of Counterterrorism from 1989 to 1993, said in a Sept. 12 interview conducted by Frontline that there is no concrete proof that bin Laden is responsible for the USS Cole and the 1993 WTC attacks, but bin Laden celebrates those attacks and associates himself with people who are responsible for it.

President Bush promises to reveal evidence linking bin Laden to the suicide hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Bin Laden has applauded the attacks but denies direct involvement.

Source: www.wired.com...

Read more here

Of course they don't have proof, otherwise they would have produced it. The government or better yet, the Bush administration capitalized on the emotions of a public under attack to point the finger at their political or business enemy.

When we were threatening the Taliban to hand Bin Laden over, the Taliban wasn't outright refusing. Instead, they were simply demanding proof, just what any other country would do before handing someone over. In fact, many countries wouldn't hand him over to the US in the first place, as many countries don't extradite people to countries where they can or will face the death penalty. The Taliban, at least from what I remember and from what is being reported here, only insisted that the US provide any kind of proof that it was Bin Laden who committed those attacks. Bin Laden himself was denying that he had anything to do with the attacks, an unprecedented move in "terror history", if in fact he is/was guilty. Besides, the Taliban couldn't hand Bin Laden in if they wanted to, as they didn't have the power or strength to do so.

Whatever the case, it appears as if the government never really had evidence of Al Qaeda's involvement in the attacks, though most of the public would think otherwise, due to the media's role, as well as the government itself. Al Qaeda's guilt was basically burned into our psychy from the first week, as our government and their media wing relied on our emotions to instill that notion in us.

The government basically asked us to "trust them", without providing any proof or evidence. Yes, the same government who has repeatedly lied since, with everything from the bailouts, Iraq War, anthrax, the climate, our economy, warrantless wiretapping and the so-called "health care reform". They have repeatedly lied to us before 9/11 as well, with everything from the Gulf of Tonking, USS Liberty and Watergate (just to name a few). Can we honestly say that we can trust this government, or elements within it?

As the years went on, mysterious evidence was found in caves, WTC rubble or the government's word of mouth from captives that the people are not given access to. Need I really mention that all of this evidence is dubious at best and basically all of it pretty much relies on us to trust them again? This is not even mentioning the evidence that the government has seemingly kept from us, such as raw-video (Pentagon), witness testimony (Sibel Edmonds and others), the flight recorders and the mountain of evidence that was shipped off-shore following the attacks.

So, what we have here, is that the government has not provided adequate proof that Al Qaeda is responsible and the little evidence that they have provided, is dubious at best. Any evidence that could be solid evidence, has been kept from the American people and the people of the world. It all boils down to whether you can trust what government is telling you or not, and even a lot of what they are asking us to trust them on would require us to ignore common since or evidence that has actually leaked out. Instead, they played primarily on the people's emotions directly after the attack to ensure that guilt is pinned on who they want it to be pinned on.

Just this in of itself is evidence that the government has something to hide and if they have something to hide, one has to ask, "why?"



--airspoon

I think it is just easy to blame somebody thousands of miles away that have pretty much a polar opposite outlook on life when it comes to culture, religion etc. Who knows what the truth really is anymore? Interpretation of things that are presented to you will mold peoples opinions on a subject. Spam the news with middle easterners carrying rpg's with masks, show people burning the US flag etc and the only opinion most lemmings will form will be what they read and see in the news and on TV.

Existing thread here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion.
Thank you







-thread closed-



for future reference:
Search ATS