I know he admitted it or something in one of his earlier videos, but aside from that, do we have any actual solid evidence he ordered the September 11 attacks?

Like if he hadn't of admitted it, and he was captured instead of killed, would we really have had any evidence to convict him in a (fair) court of law?

  • 12
    Why isn't his confession enough? – Sklivvz May 8 '11 at 12:26
  • 18
    @Sklivvz : It could well be but I think the political atmosphere at the time was also quite complex. Could his confession be trusted? Maybe he just took credit for it because it allowed him to gain more fame and support amongst fundamentalists? – Samuelson May 8 '11 at 13:12
  • 1
    As I recall, Bin Laden originally denied being involved. However, a tape surfaced of him and other Al Qaeda members discussing details of the attack and he discussing how his engineering background led him to believe certain things would happen as a result... This seems rather conclusive. – M. Werner May 8 '11 at 13:42
  • 3
    Should the question not use 'was' instead of 'is'? – apoorv020 May 8 '11 at 18:38
  • 1
    @Sklivvz - Pick one of two possible reasons. (1) Islamist terrorist groups have been known to falsely claim responsibility for attacks not done by them (source: Stratfor); (2) Personal admission, like any other anecdotal evidence, is weak even by the standards of US courts, never mind skeptics.SE. – user5341 May 9 '11 at 20:52

This is a US Government translated transcript of a video recording of a conversation, apparently made with bin Laden's knowledge. It includes:

UBL: ... Muhammad ((Atta)) from the Egyptian family (meaning the Al Qa’ida Egyptian group), was in charge of the group.

and then later

UBL: (...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all. (...Inaudible...) due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and all the floors above it only. This is all that we had hoped for.

  • 1
    Possible Coercion? – ripper234 Jan 5 '12 at 2:27
  • @ripper: anything is possible, but if you take it at face value as a recording obtined by the US after a meeting between bin Laden and some supporters then it is difficult to see who might be have been coercing who. – Henry Jan 5 '12 at 7:25
  • The tape has been known to be a fake for years, it was clear on the day it was released, the guy is right handed, and doesn't even look like Osama very much. – Ron Maimon Sep 10 '13 at 2:32
  • 2
    @Ron - that is not the commonly accepted position, though it is one put forward by James H. Fetzer and "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" in June 2006 shortly before that organisation collapsed when other truthers felt unable to trust his work. A better criticism, made on German public television, might be that the US made errors in translation, such as the words "in advance" in the quote above. – Henry Sep 10 '13 at 6:49

Here is some quotes from Rolling Stone's interview with Omar bin Laden, one of Osama's sons, he confirms that his father organized that attack. It is not definitive proof but still a strong argument.

Interviewer writes:

One day, around the time that bin Laden was plotting the attacks of 9/11, he tacked a piece of paper to the wall of the mosque to recruit men willing to be suicide bombers.

Omar confirms:

It is true my father put the paper up in the mosque and everyone wanted to put their name on it.

  • 3
    He might have put the paper up, and interviewer might have written the sentence, but you are inferring that he planned the attack from the juxtaposition of two unrelated things. – Ron Maimon Sep 10 '13 at 2:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .