More Proof That Osama Bin Laden Was Never A Legitimate Focus Of The Bush Administration In Its Military Attacks On Afghanistan And Iraq

“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.”

-- Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI

So why did the Bush Administration attack Afghanistan claiming to go after Bin Laden and later go into Iraq stating that he was hiding there, when the FBI itself claimed to have no hard evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with these attacks?

This makes no absolutely no sense at all.

Especially since Bin Laden was visited by CIA operatives just months earlier while undergoing kidney dialysis in a US hospital in Dubai? (And while Bin Laden was wanted as an international fugitive and on the FBI's 10 most wanted list.) In knowing that the FBI was looking for Bin Laden, why did these CIA agents not arrest him? Don't the FBI and CIA exchange information?

They would have us believe that before 9-11 they did not, simply to justify why Bin Laden was not arrested when the CIA had the chance to. However, are we to believe that the CIA had no idea that Bin Laden was not wanted by the FBI as an international terrorist, when their agents visited with him during the Summer of 2001?

It's far more likely that the FBI had posted Bin Laden as one of their ten most wanted so that he could later be used as the plausible excuse for an attack on Iraq, once 9-11 had taken place. This would also explain why Bin Laden was never arrested by the CIA in June of 2001. If he'd been arrested and in the custody of the US Federal Government, how could he have been blamed for orchestrating the attacks on 9-11?

And why has the FBI never mentioned that since 1979, Bin Ladin has been a CIA asset, recruited by this agency during the Soviet Afghan War? The US Media has never once mentioned this, nor the CIA's 2001 visit with Bin Ladin in Dubai.

Furthermore, since when does the United States attack countries without hard evidence in which to justify such an attack, as it did in both the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq? Osama Bin Laden was used as nothing more than a lightening rod for the Bush Administration, in order to allow it a plausible reason to attack Afghanistan and Iraq, in what has always been a premeditated effort to steal Iraqi oil, and construct a pipeline in the Capsian sea in which to route this oil.

Something which has likely been planned since the 1970's when the price of oil rose significantly, and the reality that with the remarkable amounts of oil which the United States uses each year, it would eventually be forced to find other means of obtaining it.

By 1998 the oil issue had also been a primary focus of the "think tank" which goes by the name of the Project For A New American Century (PNAC), which managed to convince the Bush Administration that a plausible false flag operation (or as they put it "another Pearl Harbor") had to be initiated against Iraq, in order for the United States to attack this country and obtain its oil reserves -- which it is now in the process of doing. And of course, given his family's interests in the oil business, this is a situation which will only serve to greatly benefit the criminal dynasty of the Bush clan in the future.

Meanwhile, over the past few years the price of oil has skyrocketed as is evidenced by the more than three dollar a gallon price for regular octane gasoline. And in certain parts of this country premium fuel is selling for nearly four dollars a gallon, with no indication of dropping significantly anytime in the near future.

Again, the US oil industry is experiencing a financial bonanza at the expense of the American people. The following article expands on the Bush Administration's false flag operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

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

Gasbuddy.com -- an interesting Website which helps you to locate the cheapest gas prices in your state:

http://www.gasbuddy.com/