FBI: No evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11 (!)

For those who wish to criticise the 9/11 truth movement & key peace campaigners

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

FBI: No evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11 (!)

Post by DeFecToR »

http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

Very interesting that a high ranking FBI official would make the statement that they have no evidence connecting Bin Laden to the WTC attacks.

If you guys are so sure of the validity of the offical CT then you might want to give them a call maybe.
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
Arkan_Wolfshade
Minor Poster
Minor Poster
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:48 pm

Re: FBI - "No evidence linking BL to 911"

Post by Arkan_Wolfshade »

DeFecToR wrote:http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

Very interesting that a high ranking FBI official would make the statement that they have no evidence connecting Bin Laden to the WTC attacks.

If you guys are so sure of the validity of the offical CT then you might want to give them a call maybe.
In order for the DOJ (the FBI only investigates) to file an indictment against him for 9/11 they would need a paper trail showing he gave the order, not just that his organization performed the act. That said
Usama bin Laden[5] is the leader of Al Qaeda, and is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States embassies in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. Usama and Al-Qaeda are also responsible for the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen, which killed 17. Although bin Laden also later appeared on the first publicly released FBI Most Wanted Terrorists list on October 10, 2001, he was listed there for the 1998 embassy attack, and not for his alleged role in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000, because the most wanted lists name fugitives charged with a crime by a prosecutor or under indictment by a grand jury. Bin Laden was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in, for instance, the federal indictment against convicted terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui, but has not been formally indicted for his role in the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Bin Laden is the subject of a $25 million reward through the State Department's Rewards for Justice program targeting international fugitives, especially terrorists, plus $2 million through a program developed and funded by the Air Line Pilots Association and the Air Transport Association.[6][7][5]
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_Ten_Mo ... _Fugitives
IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.
source: http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

Additionally, pre-9/11 terrorist acts were treated by the gov't as criminal acts and investigated/prosecuted as such. Post-9/11 the shift has been, obviously, to treat terrorist acts as acts of war, which is handled in a completely different manner. Also, having insufficient evidence for the DOJ to file an indictment does not equate to having no evidence.
brian
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 612
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:40 pm
Location: Scotland

Post by brian »

Far cry from the pre Afghanistan attack when Bin Laden was guilty no matter what.

From - We dont need no stinking evidence - to - Osama is entitled to the same protection as any good law abiding US citizen

FBI PROTECTS OSAMA BIN LADEN’S “RIGHT TO PRIVACY” IN DOCUMENT RELEASE

--In a September 24, 2003 declassified “Secret” FBI report obtained by Judicial Watch, the FBI invoked Exemption 6 under FOIA law on behalf of bin Laden, which permits the government to withhold all information about U.S. persons in “personnel and medical files and similar files” when the disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” (5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) (2000)) -

http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_5286.shtml
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Re: FBI - "No evidence linking BL to 911"

Post by DeFecToR »

Arkan_Wolfshade wrote: In order for the DOJ (the FBI only investigates) to file an indictment against him for 9/11 they would need a paper trail showing he gave the order, not just that his organization performed the act.
Precisely. THERE IS NO PAPER TRAIL. Besides, the article states that there is no hard evidence, paper trail or otherwise.
Arkan_Wolfshade wrote: Usama bin Laden[5] is the leader of Al Qaeda, and is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States embassies in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. Usama and Al-Qaeda are also responsible for the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen, which killed 17. Although bin Laden also later appeared on the first publicly released FBI Most Wanted Terrorists list on October 10, 2001, he was listed there for the 1998 embassy attack, and not for his alleged role in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000, because the most wanted lists name fugitives charged with a crime by a prosecutor or under indictment by a grand jury. Bin Laden was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in, for instance, the federal indictment against convicted terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui, but has not been formally indicted for his role in the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Bin Laden is the subject of a $25 million reward through the State Department's Rewards for Justice program targeting international fugitives, especially terrorists, plus $2 million through a program developed and funded by the Air Line Pilots Association and the Air Transport Association.[6][7][5]
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_Ten_Mo ... _Fugitives


IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

source: http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
LOL. Good to see you quoting Wikipedia over the FBI.
Arkan_Wolfshade wrote: Additionally, pre-9/11 terrorist acts were treated by the gov't as criminal acts and investigated/prosecuted as such. Post-9/11 the shift has been, obviously, to treat terrorist acts as acts of war, which is handled in a completely different manner. Also, having insufficient evidence for the DOJ to file an indictment does not equate to having no evidence.
Okay. So not enough evidence to file an indictment, but enough to go to war.
Yet again, pathetic.
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
MR_SNIPER
Minor Poster
Minor Poster
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:12 am
Location: OPERATION AREA

rtrt

Post by MR_SNIPER »

hmmmmmmm.......
Image
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 491
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:54 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Post by TimmyG »

Okay. So not enough evidence to file an indictment, but enough to go to war.
Yet again, pathetic.
exactly.

complete madness. the fbi have publically said there is no hard evidence. yet us and uk troops have killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people based on a made up story.

if you claim to be a critical thinker and you believe osama was behind it, you really have no right to say that our opinions complete conjecture
Last edited by TimmyG on Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

TimmyG wrote:
if you claim to be a critical thinker and you believe osama was behind it, you really have no right to say that our opinions complete conjecture
Here here. I find it to be a symptom of our collective madness that the FBI THEMSELVES say they have no evidence linking BL to 911, yet WE are the wackos for questioning the official story.
Nonsense.
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
Jay Ref
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:04 pm

Post by Jay Ref »

DeFecToR wrote:
TimmyG wrote:
if you claim to be a critical thinker and you believe osama was behind it, you really have no right to say that our opinions complete conjecture
Here here. I find it to be a symptom of our collective madness that the FBI THEMSELVES say they have no evidence linking BL to 911, yet WE are the wackos for questioning the official story.
Nonsense.
Arkan already addressed the FBI question. Now that it's been answered you guys can either close the thread, or endlessly carp about your critics...but not a damned one of you is going to be able to assail the logic or veracity of what Arkan told you.

And you wonder why everyone not a CTer thinks you nuts are nut... :roll:

-z
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense
freddie
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:32 am
Location: London
Contact:

Post by freddie »

Jef Ray said:
Arkan already addressed the FBI question.
Arkan wrote:
having insufficient evidence for the DOJ to file an indictment does not equate to having no evidence.
So what is the evidence then? - The videos?
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

Jay Ref wrote:
Arkan already addressed the FBI question. Now that it's been answered you guys can either close the thread, or endlessly carp about your critics...but not a damned one of you is going to be able to assail the logic or veracity of what Arkan told you.

And you wonder why everyone not a CTer thinks you nuts are nut... :roll:

-z
"LA LA LA. I CANT HEAR YOU. LA LA LA. MUSLIMS DID IT. LA LA LA. MUST INVADE PARAGUAY. LA LA LA"

:lol:

Come on man. Seriously. I know we're not about to change the minds of you guys, but come on now. You must at least be able to see why we believe what we believe?

Or ar we just fick in der hed? Nuts an wotevr.
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

Jay Ref wrote:
Arkan already addressed the FBI question.
BTW, Arkan did a REALLY great job of solving that issue. TOTALLY convincing.
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 1844
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: Currently Andover
Contact:

Post by scubadiver »

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

So where is it on there that he is wanted in connection with 9/11?

:lol:
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

Maybe there is another FBI website for official CTer's.
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 491
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:54 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Post by TimmyG »

Arkan already addressed the FBI question. Now that it's been answered you guys can either close the thread, or endlessly carp about your critics...
oh i see. arkan is god is he?
his word is final clearly

i don't really see how arkan has disproved what we are saying!

no hard evidence. the fbi. NO HARD EVIDENCE. yet the whitehouse has named osama and attacked afganistan.

what don't you understand?
sorry if i sound sarcastic here. but it isn't that complicated.
the public have been led to believe that osama is behind the 9/11 attacks. yet the fbi blatently admits there is no hard evidence to back up this claim.

you are telling us we are nut jobs for not believing osama bin laden is responsible for the attacks of 9/11?!
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

Oooh, its fun in here isnt it? :D

Come on guys. FBI says NO HARD EVIDENCE.

Theres gotta be some way of spinning out the truth.

Maybe they actually do have some hard evidence, but havent told Rex Tomb about it. No?
Chief of Investigative Publicity? Sounds made up? Maybe the story is a fake, no?

COME ON GUYS. Theres got to be some explanation. ANY explanation other than 'Bin Laden didnt do it'.

Be inventive. You're good at it. I mean, if you can look at this image;



Image


and say that its being caused by a 'pressure wave', then surely you can figure aliens or a quantum theory in to the FBI's list.
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

Apologies all round. It would seem i missed the testimony of an important witness.
I'll do better next time.

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~kumii/batman.swf

:lol:
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
User avatar
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:06 pm

Post by chipmunk stew »

TimmyG wrote: the public have been led to believe that osama is behind the 9/11 attacks. yet the fbi blatently admits there is no hard evidence to back up this claim.

you are telling us we are nut jobs for not believing osama bin laden is responsible for the attacks of 9/11?!
The 19 hijackers had clear links to al-Qaeda. There's even a money trail. The US treated the attacks as an act of war perpetrated by al-Qaeda. As the leader of al-Qaeda, OBL was considered a primary target.

There's no evidence of direct involvement by OBL. But he clearly was at least aware of the plan and condoned it.

The attack would not have happened without al-Qaeda, and al-Qaeda would not have existed without Bin Laden. He's responsible.
User avatar
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:06 pm

Post by chipmunk stew »

DeFecToR wrote:Apologies all round. It would seem i missed the testimony of an important witness.
I'll do better next time.

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~kumii/batman.swf

:lol:
Holy conniption fit, Batman! That's it!
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/epilepsyr.shtml
User avatar
GEFBASS
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 3:11 pm

Post by GEFBASS »

DeFecToR.................

Brilliant that`s the best laugh I`ve had for ages ( and yes I do get out ).



chipmunk stew stated...

"The 19 hijackers had clear links to al-Qaeda. There's even a money trail. The US treated the attacks as an act of war perpetrated by al-Qaeda. As the leader of al-Qaeda, OBL was considered a primary target. "

My questions to you are,

1, have YOU followed the money trail ( where money came from.. ) ?
( And no I don`t believe the planes were hijacked in any way ). IMO.

2, If OBL was considered sooo primary, WHY did GWB illude to the fact that they were not that interested in finding OBL ?

( will try to find the speech he said this at, to quote him properly ).

Geoff.


P.S.

To be honest I do respect skepticism, (is that right I haven`t got a dictionary to hand, anyway ), but I have to ask at what point do total skeptics change their views ?

And yes you could argue that total CT people are the same extreme.

My guess, to the above points is, Never.

I`m about 80/20 myself.
Only by doing a neutral research of all sides do you then come to any sort of conclusion.


Here`s something I wrote earlier.

Who gains....

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewt ... highlight=

1 plane 1 missile...

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewt ... highlight=


ISN`T THIS REASON WHY THERE SHOULD BE AN INDEPENDANT INQUIRY ?

So ALL the evidence can be viewed.
TRUTH IS NOT A FOUR LETTER WORD.
Dstevo
Minor Poster
Minor Poster
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 10:00 am
Location: España

Post by Dstevo »

But he clearly was at least aware of the plan and condoned it.
Erm, no he wasn't and didn't.

http://911review.com/articles/usamah/khilafah.html
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.
There is no squabbling so violent as that between people who accepted an idea yesterday and those who will accept the same idea tomorrow.
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 491
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:54 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Post by TimmyG »

But he clearly was at least aware of the plan and condoned it.
where's the evidence?

why did the us gov see the need to produce a fake video, and broadcast it with the implication that it is a video of obl admitting to organising the attacks?

the alleged hijackers may well have links to alkaeda. its strange how they weren't on the passenger lists, aparrently hijacked the planes with box cutters, and whilst they were planning their attacks the able danger unit (who were watching them) delibrately kept quiet about it. why the need to plant passports and such if its a simple act of terrorism?

if the us were really interested in catching osama they wouldn't have told john o'neil to stop investigating him shortly before he was killed. Bush wouldn't be saying things like 'ya know . i don't where he is and i don't really care. i don't spend that much time thinking about it'.

They aren't interested in pulling this terrorist network apart. they are interested in invading countries to help expand their empire.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
User avatar
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:06 pm

Post by chipmunk stew »

A couple videos you all may be interested in:

The Usual Suspects
The Paladin of Jihad
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 491
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:54 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Post by TimmyG »

i watched about half of the 1st video. i'll watch more later but i have to get back to work.

i don't think anyone is disputing that obl and alkaeda were glad 9/11 happened. ofcourse they wanted it to happen.

point is they couldn't. not on their own. and even if the alleged hijackers were on the planes, there is much evidence to suggest they were helped by people on the inside.

i'm still not convinced that the guy in the famous confession tape is obl. his nose is different. the ring thing loose change got wrong. isn't important
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
User avatar
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:06 pm

Post by chipmunk stew »

TimmyG wrote:i watched about half of the 1st video. i'll watch more later but i have to get back to work.

i don't think anyone is disputing that obl and alkaeda were glad 9/11 happened. ofcourse they wanted it to happen.

point is they couldn't. not on their own. and even if the alleged hijackers were on the planes, there is much evidence to suggest they were helped by people on the inside.

i'm still not convinced that the guy in the famous confession tape is obl. his nose is different. the ring thing loose change got wrong. isn't important
Regarding the "fake Osama" thing:

The infamous "fat Osama" image that is floating around the internet is the single worst still plucked from that video. If you watch the original video, you'll see that the aspect ratio is distorted (it's squashed to make room for the subtitles), that this distortion combined with lighting effects makes his nose look different in that still, and that throughout most of the rest of the video the man in the video is clearly Bin Laden.

In fact, there was a thread on the Loose Change forum started on April 1, in which someone posted two images of OBL, the "fat Osama" picture and another very different-looking picture, and challenged people to pick out the "real" Osama. Unanimously, people picked the other picture and claimed the "fat Osama" was a fake.

Turns out, they were both stills from the same video...April Fool's!
User avatar
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:06 pm

Post by chipmunk stew »

TimmyG wrote:point is they couldn't. not on their own. and even if the alleged hijackers were on the planes, there is much evidence to suggest they were helped by people on the inside.
I believe the evidence is overwhelming that the hijackings occurred essentially the way the official version tells it.

I believe the evidence suggests a LIHBA (let it happen by accident) version of events pre-9/11. But the public evidence in this area is hazier, and I believe it's worthy of further investigation.
Jason
New Poster
New Poster
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:44 am
Location: Up North
Contact:

Post by Jason »

chipmunk stew wrote:
TimmyG wrote:point is they couldn't. not on their own. and even if the alleged hijackers were on the planes, there is much evidence to suggest they were helped by people on the inside.
I believe the evidence is overwhelming that the hijackings occurred essentially the way the official version tells it.

I believe the evidence suggests a LIHBA (let it happen by accident) version of events pre-9/11. But the public evidence in this area is hazier, and I believe it's worthy of further investigation.
The evidence is overwhelming eh? not from where I'm sitting.
A few grainy photographs and the words of the powers that be that they were hi-jacked doesn't seem like overwhelming evidence to me.

There is tons of evidence to the contrary and for the official version to be found to be untrue only 1 of those pieces of evidence needs to be accurate. I did think about pissing off but decided to stay..

Try again :roll:
Read about me and becks www.beckhamcoverup.com
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

chipmunk stew wrote: The 19 hijackers had clear links to al-Qaeda. There's even a money trail.
No, there is not money trail. Jesus, even Noam igetmyfundingfromthe NSA Chomsky admitted that.
chipmunk stew wrote: Regarding the "fake Osama" thing:

The infamous "fat Osama" image that is floating around the internet is the single worst still plucked from that video. If you watch the original video, you'll see that the aspect ratio is distorted (it's squashed to make room for the subtitles), that this distortion combined with lighting effects makes his nose look different in that still, and that throughout most of the rest of the video the man in the video is clearly Bin Laden.

In fact, there was a thread on the Loose Change forum started on April 1, in which someone posted two images of OBL, the "fat Osama" picture and another very different-looking picture, and challenged people to pick out the "real" Osama. Unanimously, people picked the other picture and claimed the "fat Osama" was a fake.

Turns out, they were both stills from the same video...April Fool's!
Then why have there been a boat load of military and Middle-eastern analysts who have come out and said its definately a fake? And if it is real, why havent the FBI used it as evidence against him?
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
User avatar
chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:06 pm

Post by chipmunk stew »

DeFecToR wrote:
chipmunk stew wrote: The 19 hijackers had clear links to al-Qaeda. There's even a money trail.
No, there is not money trail. Jesus, even Noam igetmyfundingfromthe NSA Chomsky admitted that.
chipmunk stew wrote: Regarding the "fake Osama" thing:

The infamous "fat Osama" image that is floating around the internet is the single worst still plucked from that video. If you watch the original video, you'll see that the aspect ratio is distorted (it's squashed to make room for the subtitles), that this distortion combined with lighting effects makes his nose look different in that still, and that throughout most of the rest of the video the man in the video is clearly Bin Laden.

In fact, there was a thread on the Loose Change forum started on April 1, in which someone posted two images of OBL, the "fat Osama" picture and another very different-looking picture, and challenged people to pick out the "real" Osama. Unanimously, people picked the other picture and claimed the "fat Osama" was a fake.

Turns out, they were both stills from the same video...April Fool's!
Then why have there been a boat load of military and Middle-eastern analysts who have come out and said its definately a fake? And if it is real, why havent the FBI used it as evidence against him?
Source? Names?
User avatar
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:51 am

Post by DeFecToR »

OKAY OKAY jesus christ. I'm already digging out stuff for something else. Give me a while and i'll get them.
Actually, whats the point? Isnt it moot anyway? You're on your fence, i'm on mine?
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 491
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:54 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Post by TimmyG »

I have watched the unedited confession vid pretty much all the way thru. and i'm still not quite convinced its him. the way he walks in the room (quite spritely) when he's meant to be quite weak aswell as his face somehow doesn't match other videos of him. i will look into it further and take some screen grabs.

And if it is real, why havent the FBI used it as evidence against him?
good point. if the video has been confirmed 100% real. why isn't this hard evidence?
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
Post Reply