This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
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 "All of this was totally illegal. It was more, criminal," Chomsky said.
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."
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.
The Bush administration never provided such evidence.
As I wrote last December:
President Obama said Tuesday night as justification for the surge in troops in Afghanistan:
We
did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked
four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people.
Al Qaeda’s base of operations was in Afghanistan, where they were harbored by the Taliban”, who refused to turn over Osama bin Laden.
Is that true?
On
October 14, 2001, the Taliban offered to hand over Osama bin Laden to a
neutral country if the US halted bombing if the Taliban were given
evidence of Bin Laden's involvement in 9/11.Specifically, as the Guardian writes:
Returning
to the White House after a weekend at Camp David, the president said
the bombing would not stop, unless the ruling Taliban "turn [bin Laden]
over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over." He
added, "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's
guilty" ...
Afghanistan's deputy prime minister, Haji Abdul Kabir,
told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden
was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US.
"If the
Taliban is given evidence that Osama bin Laden is involved" and the
bombing campaign stopped, "we would be ready to hand him over to a third
country", Mr Kabir added.However, as the Guardian subsequently points out:
A
senior Taliban minister has offered a last-minute deal to hand over
Osama bin Laden during a secret visit to Islamabad, senior sources in
Pakistan told the Guardian last night.
For the first time, the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden for trial in a country other than the US without asking to see evidence first in return for a halt to the bombing, a source close to Pakistan's military leadership said.
And yet ... the U.S. turned down the offer and instead prosecuted war.
And in 2006, FBI agent Rex Tomb told reporter Ed Haas that the FBI still did not have enough evidence:
The
reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page
is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.
In fact, many leading liberals have expressed doubts about 9/11,
including Daniel Ellsberg, Ray McGovern, William Blum, Dennis Kucinich,
Mike Gravel, Lewis Lapham, Dan Hamburg, Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan,
Amy Goodman, Thom Hartmann, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Marc Crispin Miller,
Howard Zinn, Robert McChesney, Gore Vidal, Chris Floyd, Robert Fisk,
Medea Benjamin, Doris "Granny D" Haddock, Paul Hawken, David Cobb,
Randy Hayes, Ernest Callenbach, Dennis Bernstein, Paul H. Ray, Michael
Franti, Janeane Garafalo and Ed Asner.
As have many prominent old-fashioned conservatives. And the 9/11 Commissioners themselves. See this.
»
- advertisements -
That should read “your”, Col. (False) Flagg. Someday, you might also want to learn to distinguish between “ its” and “it’s”. Odd that your English lessons are never directed at your “Truther” pal, the illiterate fraud calling himself “geopol”.
Pissy pedantic pants.
Post half as many comments as CogD has with nary a typo (for 'typo' I assure you it was) to besmirch your pretentious moniker and I will give you a paper FRN star, crayoned gold, for bravery.
PS
Because it means so much to me coming from the likes of you: Did I dot all my t's and cross all my i's just right enough? Comma insertions all ok? Did my rhetoric strike you as Socrates, or was it all Phadreus? I await your glorious insight with baited breath on the edge of my seat while shaking in my space boots...
PPS
CogD: Heh, Oh Snap! You so got Burned!
Sunflower is totally right though...
I have just one important question, see if you can guess which one it is:
(a) who killed JFK?
(b) who shot down TWA 800?
(c) what really happened before and on 9/11?
(d) what does Obama's birth certificate say?
(e) what happened to W's Air National Guard service records?
(f) where is the BP oil plume?
(g) what does the FED really do?
(h) why is it so just so plain fucking hard to provide everyone with the facts so we can each draw our own intelligent conclusions?
Yes, it's similar to the experience you will have if you leave a comment on any YouTube WTC7 video which questions the official 911 story . A bunch of shills with different names will immediately attack you, using similar language. They will respond to all conspiracy theorists with repetitive anti-conspiracy factoids about gravity, the melting point of steel, the structural design of the building, etc. They will ask you where you got your engineering degree, how long have you been a demolitions expert. If you bother to play out the give and take, their final missive is always "FUCKING LIES!". I kid you not.
Read up on Cass Sunstein and 9/11. The state is on it.
Ha. Sunstein. Of course.
I appreciate your making note of such circumstances, indeed the post seems rather shilly.
Just this week I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist for simply stating I did not believe the official story regarding the pentagon on 9/11. I never said I knew what hit it, I never said I knew who hit it, I merely highlighted the discrepancy between the shape of the hole in the pentagon, and the cross-sectional area of the alleged incident vehicle.
I was amazed by the vehemence with which my scientific skepticism was attacked. The sad irony is these people are all engineers. In school I learned a good scientist is a healthy skeptic, I guess they missed that class.
He actually seems quite rational.
Being rational isn't good enough for those who only see things in black and white.
I've read far and wide, and I have not found a more reasonable and well intentioned writer/thinker than Noam Chomsky. He's painted as a liberal to discredit him. In reality (like most of the people on this site I guess), he is anti-authoritarian believing wealth and power have irretrievably corrupted the US government. His criticism is by no means limited to the US either. The world would be a better place if Chomsky were required reading in school. Sadly, he is rarely even given a chance, because the media has done such a good job of pidgeonholing him as a liberal.
Chomsky is an intentional manipulator. Don't waste your time on him.
To be a manipulator you have to have the power to manipulate, and Chomsky doesn't.
Yeah, he is one cunning linguist. /sarc off
That's because a lot of 'shit', needs say'in.
Read, "Manufacturing Consent," then STFU. We obviously don't need to hear what you have to say.
Noam is the leading proponent for East Timor! BooYaa! Go Noam!
(sorry - couldn't help myself)
+911... I wouldn't give a squirt of piss for what he has to say..
People who know don't care, people who care don't know(or don't want to know), absent some spectaculr Leak 9/11 will remain a 'conspiracy theory' confined to the history books only
The funny part of it all is that there is 100x more evidence of direct government involvement than any AlQueda/Taliban etc. involvement, the whole thing floats only on peoples unwillingness to see the truth before them
You think the Rulers would have 2nd thoughts on lying to the public about the economy, foreign policy, fuding all statistics, well after 9/11 they know they can get away with anything not because they are soo smart but because the sheep will not revolt even when your slaughtering them in broad daylight
Well, as far as official comment is concerned, at least in this country, the case has been closed on 9/11; the trial has been done (in the media, and elsewhere), the suspects partially arraigned and detained (Guantanamo, Congress, and other centers), and in some cases (those more easily adjudicated), sentenced, and often detained, or released.
Many of these, if not all, of course, were guilty of, at the very least, terrorism and conspiracy, so they immediately fell under the famous and not so recently used RICO laws, even if acquitted by US Courts on the original charges. No federal jurisdiction to date has done so.
I point this out to all of us who harbor possible (HAHAHA) thoughts that 9/11 was engineered. Despite all the evidence, NOBODY is willing to go there. There are multiple reasons for this.
The primary reason is that no agency will ever, EVER, admit wrongdoing. This is because those agencies capable of wreaking any kind of havoc like this have already had themselves exempted, by Act of Congress, of any requirement to disclose their actions via the Freedom of Information Act, exemption b3, and/or J1; all others rely on the various exemptions of b1, in terms of National Security. There are other FOIA exemptions that are not related to national security per se. (Disclosure: I am currently a FOIA/PA Case Officer.)
The Executive Office is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act. Any Executive Order can, at least theoretically, immunize documents from disclosure, but Executive Orders are not necessary for any document issued as classified from the Executive Office.
We are still processing requests from researchers interested in documents from the Kennedy Library, as well as some referred from the FBI that are even older. Most of these have exemption from current automatic declassification limits for most documents; some have no declassification limits.
The SEC's attempt at becoming exempt from the FOIA, BTW, had a bigtime FAIL. You can go for those bastards NOW. They tried to hide it in one of the multiple 2,000pg+ thingies (I cannot call them laws) that went through Congress this year, and it got killed! And go for it!
Chompsky don't know shit - This is the real dope - must see video of the conspiracy to bring down the west...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0
What I love is how camera shy Bin Laden has been since 9/11. Shouldn't he be emboldened by his success, and look to cash in on his notoriety?
And instead all we get is lookalikes and pretend Bin Ladens and radio messages deemed to be Bin Laden... And then, best of all, when terror attacks fail, like the supposed assassination attempt on Cheney in Afghanistan, he takes credit!!
Who is Bin Laden's PR man, oh wait, I have just heard, its the CIA! Bin Laden is dead, people. Do a simple Google search. Thats the only way to have a really effective boogey man, is ensure he is dead, you can put out endless fabricated statements and say they are from him, and they will never be refuted!
http://psychonews.site90.net
Read our latest PsychoNews stories:
Misconceptions:Quantitative Easing & The Fed
Misconceptions: Hyperinflation & The Oligarchy