GORDON DUFF: WHEN WILL THE CRIMES OF 9/11 END?

GORDON DUFF: WHEN WILL THE CRIMES OF 9/11 END?

October 16, 2010 posted by Gordon Duff 

DISINFORMATION, SPYING, INTIMIDATION, THE BIGGEST COVER-UP IN AMERICAN HISTORY

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

9 years after 9/11, American drug production in Afghanistan has gone from zero to 92% of world output.  Calling the drug business there anything but “American” is a lie.  We don’t just “turn way,” we are in it up to our necks, maybe deeper.  Last week we learned that USAID, part of the Department of State, was supplying fertilizer for opium production.  Testimony that implicates every level of the American government in drug dealing, corruption and even complicity in terrorism has been ignored or suppressed for years.  The American government, in concert with the powerful Israel lobby, is working to silence citizen dissent, suppress “open source” information and control, not just the media but every form of human communication beyond the guarded whisper.

No police state in history is guilty of more.

In particular, I recently read the most recent additions to Dimitri  Khalezov’s book on 9/11.  Khalezov was a Russian “special weapons” officer.  This led his examination to look at applications of advanced technologies tied to the application of particle physics, fission and fusion weapons and “Star Wars” technology which he has a unique understanding of.  What was enjoyable was his non-dogmatic approach.  There are so many theories around regarding 9/11, with government paid “shills” coming up with a new and crazier version almost weekly.  For every pronouncement about Al Qaeda and hijackers the government makes overtly, they make ten pronouncements about space aliens and cosmic death rays on the internet.

We know they do it, they have been caught repeatedly.  These are the actions of a police state.

I am not ready to comprehensively discuss all the reasons that 9/11 is such a disgusting subject.  Suffice it to say that the naked lies the government has foisted on the public for so long are both irrational and patently insane.  This is where Khalezov shines.  He has a way of cutting through the manure.

It is funny to read a Russian discuss 9/11.  One area that we can deal with today and, perhaps, put one minor thing to rest is how the World Trade Center was built and why an aircraft, why 500 aircraft could never hurt it.  Oh, you say, the plane flew right through the building, passing through the thin glass windows and out the other side.

Yup, that’s how it seemed.

How Khalezov describes the outer walls of the WTC is though comparison with a World War II T-34 Russian Tank.  His point is that each of the beams that made up the outside of the building, spaced 3 feet apart, had four sides, each not only harder but thicker than the armor on a tank.  The analogies used by Khalezov were compelling.

His first point, of course, is that anti-tank rounds are never made of aluminum.  You don’t use aluminum knives. 

 Aluminum can’t cut steel.

We could go further:  Crashing a Boeing 767 into 20 massive 4 sided hardened steel girders, highly supported and interlaced, cutting through them and eventually bringing down the largest building in the world would be the equivalent of throwing a beer can at a garbage truck.

Want more?  Cutting a steel knife with a piece of cheese?

Derailing a freight train with a thrown marshmallow?  OK, that one is a bit much, but you get the picture.  Aircraft are made of lightweight and very thin aluminum.  The WTC had a massive outer wall of heavy steel, thick enough to armor a tank, a similar center structure around the core and a second wall for a plane to pass through.  No possible amount of aluminum in any shape or configuration at 400 miles per hour or 2000 miles per hour could pass through one steel beam much less dozens.

Pages are spent describing this point nobody has discussed other than Khalezov.  It is clear that Khalezov and David Ray Griffin don’t see “eye to eye” on the methods used to bring the building down.  In many ways, it is a shame that there is a more powerful need to deal with the science before we deal with the criminal intent, especially finding those responsible.  I respect both men for the work they have done and their disagreement is an honest one.  That both manage to disagree with each other and still humiliate the government’s fabrication is both curious and compelling.

On this point all are in agreement.  Khalezov is emphatic that the wildest possible conspiracy theory involves box cutters, hijackers and  a massive building “pancaking” to the ground in total free fall while enough steel to build a naval fleet turns into dust. No idiot could believe that, a “hare brained” lie that has proven to be assembled from planted witnesses, misquotes and total fabrications.

If even one of these things were a factor, it would be evidence of a criminal conspiracy.  That all are present, that and the massive government spy operation directed against those seeking the truth, an operation that takes up an entire department header by Cass Sonnenstein, with a title that unavoidably sounds like “Reichs Minister of Propaganda,” we can say “case closed.”  We can also say with some certainty, “No Muslims were harmed in the making of this picture.”

I don’t plan on going there but something haunts me.  Nobody has seen or heard from Osama bin Laden since 2001.  Benazir Bhutto says he was killed then.  Intelligence officials from several countries confirm this privately.  Yet we have a hundred thousand people looking for him, nearly 5,000 have died hunting him after his death was confirmed, as reliable sources tell us.

On the other hand, the “suicide hijackers” we claim were on the planes on 9/11 seem to be, not only alive, but are thinking of suing the networks for being refused entry into the country to go on talk shows.  How can we have dead hijackers kept out of the country because they are on terrorist watch lists?  Doesn’t that stop when you die?

What kind of place are we running here?

But, we are here to talk dissolving steel, magically plummeting buildings and government misconduct.  When the NIST stated that the WTC “pancaked” they misrepresented the amount of concrete in the upper stories.  There was nothing to collapse, only vertical steel, no huge concrete walls, no pillars made of concrete and only thin concrete floors.  They lied.

Almost all the concrete in the buildings is in the foundation, there is little in the upper floors.  They are steel.  It would be like dissolving several aircraft carriers and seeing them blow away with the wind, except this is exactly what we saw.  However, we have seen one other steel building, the Windsor Building, in Madrid, burn for 24 hours.  This building was nowhere as strong and burned, not one hour but for at least a day.

The “government’ runs a website at www.america.gov meant to “debunk” 9/11.  They refer to an article from Popular Science and a study done by the National Institute of Standards.  Few scientists will stand by any of this anymore, they are all either onboard with “9/11 Truth” or protecting their careers with silence.

When we talk about steel no plane could ever penetrate, the NIST does supply a nice photo, though.

My recommendation is to read the book, not because I agree with it or everything it says.  Simply read it because it provides many relevant points, and some clear warnings about how serious government interference has been in the process of finding the truth.

Every lie, every infiltrated group, every bit of ridiculous pseudo-science proves one thing.  

9/11 was an inside job and those responsible are still pulling the strings in America.
--------------------------------
About Gordon Duff: Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, and Senior Editor at Veterans Today. His career has included extensive experience in international banking along with such diverse areas as consulting on counter insurgency, defense technologies or acting as diplomatic officer of UN humanitarian groups. Gordon Duff's articles are published around the world and translated into a number of languages. He is regularly on TV and radio, a popular and sometimes controversial guest.

####

David Ray Griffin v. Cass Sunstein: A New Book Dealing with Tough Truths

David Ray Griffin v. Cass Sunstein

by Stephen Lendman

 http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/

Griffin is Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, Emeritus, Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA where he's still co-director of the Center for Process Studies.

He's authored and/or edited three dozen books, mainly in his field, but notably and heroically on 9/11 truth, Osama bin Laden, and his newest titled, Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee's Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory.  More on it below.

Cass Sunstein is a well-known University of Chicago and Harvard Law School Professor before being appointed Obama's Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, in charge of "overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs," among other duties.

Distinguished Law Professor, activist, and international law and human rights expert Francis Boyle said this about both law schools and the University of Chicago's political science department, steeped in neo-con Straussianism:

"Do not send your children to the University of Chicago where they will grow up to become warmongers like (Paul) Wolfowitz and (John) Ashcroft. The University of Chicago is an intellectual and moral cesspool," referring to its political science department and law school. Its extremist economics department is much the same, indoctrinating students with predatory capitalist ideology.

Boyle's "Harvard's Gitmo Kangaroo Law School: The School for Torturers" article advised: 

"Do not send your children or students to Harvard Law School where they will grow up to become racist war criminals! Harvard Law School is a Neo-Con cesspool."

"Harvard is to Law School as Torture is to Law."

Commenting on Sunstein when he was mentioned as a possible Supreme Court nominee, Boyle, calling him a "Neo-Con," said he'd be a "lethal" choice.

Professor Emeritus James Fetzer, Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, took sharp issue with Sunstein's attempt to discredit its proponents, saying his "Conspiracy Theories" report (discussed below) is a "corrosive approach" and "massive blunder" to believe they're "obviously false!" In fact, "No one can know which theories are true or false without investigating them." That a Harvard Law professor would suggest it "is simply stunning," yet unsurprising given the source. 

Fetzer's article can be accessed through the following link:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Birds-of-a-Feather-Subver-by-Jim-Fetzer-100121-980.html 

Sunstein is a notorious neo-con, abhorrent of First Amendment and other democratic freedoms, believing the rule of law is best served by subverting it.

Glen Greenwald's "The Horrible Prospect of Supreme Court Justice Cass Sunstein" article said:

"From the beginning of the War on Terror, Cass Sunstein turned himself into the most reliable Democratic cheerleader for Bush/Cheney radicalism and their assault on the Constitution and the rule of law." He also supports military commissions, illegal surveillance, and "mock(ed) the notion that Bush had committed crimes while in office." 

One of his former students added: "I think (he's) an extremely ambitious man (who'd) run over his grandmother for a seat on the Supreme Court."

Apparently over the country as well, trashing it and the public interest for power, clearly the aim of his "Cognitive Infiltration" proposal.

...In January 2008, he and Adrian Vermeule published a controversial report titled, "Conspiracy Theories," they define as "an attempt to explain an event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role."

"Many millions of people hold (them); they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event."

Citing 9/11 truth, the reason for their report, they say believers "may create serious risks, including risks of violence....rais(ing) significant challenges for policy and law....The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government's antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be."

His solution - debunk and undermine them by "cognitive infiltration of extremist groups," his modern-day version of COINTELPRO, the FBI's infamous 1960s and 1970s counterintelligence program to neutralize political dissidents, including the American Indian Movement, Black Panthers, and communists, as well as anti-war, human and civil rights activists, among others.

Rebranded, COINTELPRO flourishes more than ever against new targets, including Muslims and others in the "war on terror;" environmental and animal rights activists, and supporters of democratic freedoms over despotism and imperial wars, among others.

Sunstein wants conspiracy advocates neutralized, using "independent groups to supply rebuttals, and by cognitive infiltration designed to break up the crippled epistemology of conspiracy-minded groups and informationally isolated social networks." In other words, destroy them by conspiring against them from within, using illegal and extralegal tactics.

"Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."

In June 2009, Sunstein and Vermeule updated their scheme in The Journal of Political Philosophy titled, "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures." The cause - psychological conditions. The cure - elimination by cognitive infiltration, including with "independent experts with information and perhaps prod(ding) from behind the scenes....(but not) too close (to avoid being) self-defeating" if exposed.

In fact, what Sunstein proposed is illegal under statutes prohibiting internal government propaganda, aimed at the public, though legal technicalities have never before been a deterrent.

Nonetheless, according to a March 21, 2005 Congressional Research Service report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) defines "publicity or propaganda" as either official self-aggrandizing, partisan activity, or "covert propaganda," the latter government-originated, disguised to appear otherwise, including by enlisted journalists, corrupting their profession by accepting cash to cooperate, a practice used by the Bush and earlier administrations as well as the CIA and perhaps FBI.

Griffin's New Book - A Powerful Truth Antidote

His new book is an invaluable analysis of Sunstein's proposal to undermine democratic freedoms, airbrush truth, impose censorship, and criminalize individuals who challenge official versions of patent lies, specifically 9/11, the seminal one of our time.

Critics agree, including Professor Peter Phillips, President of the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored saying:

Griffin's book should be "entitled 'the Courage of David Ray Griffin' (for) His continuing efforts to speak truth to power regarding issues" as vital as 9/11. Project Censored strongly recommends it at a time our democratic freedoms are at risk, including dissent, what Howard Zinn called "the highest form of patriotism."

Professor Emeritus Peter Dale Scott called Griffin our "preeminent (9/11) expert....his research....consistently careful, thorough, and objective." His new book provides "a patient, point-by-point and much needed refutation" of Sunstein's dangerous proposal. "He relentlessly shows how (he's) guilty of the very mentality he warns against: close-mindedness and refusal to debate. Those who seek to prevent 2010 from becoming 1984" must read this invaluable book.

Professor Emeritus Richard Falk said Griffin wrote "a devastating critique, (using) his formidable philosophical and theological skills."

Cyril H. Wecht, past President, American Academy of Forensic Sciences and the American College of Legal Medicine called the book "brilliantly written....a scholarly dissection of (Sunstein's) sociopolitical proposal....," one essential to expose and oppose.

Discussing Sunstein's 10 theses, Griffin deconstructs their flaws, contradictions, and dangers to a free society.  He also explains the legitimacy of 9/11 truth, and Sunstein's inability to refute it by disinformation, lies, suppression of facts, stifling debate, and attacking proponents.

What Obama did on September 23, calling Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's 9/11 truth comments to UN General Assembly:

"hateful (and) inexcusable, particularly for him to make the statement here in Manhattan, just a little north of Ground Zero, where families lost their loved ones, people of all faiths, all ethnicities who see this as the seminal tragedy of this generation...."

Others attacked the comments as "abhorrent and delusional," no matter that millions around the world share them (including Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth), calling the event a crime, debunking the official account as deceitful, untrue, and destructive to democratic freedoms.

Ahmadinejad, in fact, suggested "three (possible) viewpoints:"

1. "That a very powerful and complex terrorist group" successfully circumvented US intelligence, Washington's position.

2. "That some segments within the US government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order to save the Zionist regime."

He said most Americans "as well as other nations and politicians agree with this view." European polls suggest it. US polls vary and have largely ducked the issue by not asking precise questions.

3. "It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported and took advantage of the situation."

Ahmadinejad "proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group...." He also criticized Washington for using the attack as a pretext for war against Iraq and Afghanistan. These views are verboten in the West, those expressing them pilloried as unpatriotic or worse.

Griffin is the preeminent 9/11 truth proponent and consummate scholar. Using his masterful skills, he demolishes Sunstein's arguments, ones based on disinformation, deceit, and bad analysis, not up to the standards of an accomplished liar, and no match for Griffin.

Thomas Fletcher summed it up saying:

Griffin's book "is a lucid and compelling exposure of the contempt held by the official (9/11 myth) defenders for dissenters who have seen through their Big Lie." They also fear truth that reveals their ugly agenda. "These officials expect that no one will be able to penetrate the murk of Sunstein's latest defense of the pretext for the US wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq, now covertly expanding" globally. Truth is a powerful disinfectant, what government conspiracists most fear.

Some Final Comments

On September 12, Professor Denis Rancourt titled an article, "Why we love to hate conspiracy theories: 911 Truth as threat to the intelligentsia," saying:

Many on the left share guilt with the right by "vehemently attack(ing) and ridicul(ing) 'conspiracy theories' such as the present 911 Truth movement."

Why, he asks? "Is that not the modus operandi of power? Is it so difficult to believe that (the 911 attack) was not orchestrated by....religious zealot(s)? Or that those who measurably benefitted" had everything to gain? "What ever happened to 'war is a racket' and 'follow the money?' "

At issue is that "power owns the media, (and) more importantly....our jobs" and lives in other respects. Even more important than truth is how it's used - to "rebel, actually rebel and individually take back power over (our) lives." Instead, too many of "the intelligentsia" protect themselves and "the system" by being "a visceral opponent of 911 Truth....in order for power to save face."

Let others fight the good fight they may feel, but unless enough do, putting a lot on the line, wrong will prevail over right and squeeze harder for even more of what they want.

Perhaps the next "9/11" will be a mushroom-shaped cloud or other comparable state-sponsored "disaster," again blamed on foreign adversaries as a pretext for more war. Why not, given America's permanent war agenda, a topic addressed in an earlier article, accessed through the following link:

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2010/03/americas-permanent-war-agenda.html

                            ####

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.

Even Your Best Friends Won't Tell You: Ahmadinejad's UN General Assembly Speech

Jerry Mazza, an independent journalist in New York, has written another brilliant piece about the truth of 9/11 in relation to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's observations that an international investigation should be conducted to determine who was responsible for 9/11.  President  Barack Obama promply called Iranian President Ahmadinejad's remarks at the United Nations yesterday "offensive" and "hateful." According to NEWSMAX, "In his first comments on the Iranian leader's statement that the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks may have been orchestrated to bolster the U.S. economy and "save the Zionist regime," Obama told BBC Persian that "for him to make a statement like that was inexcusable." But Ahmadinejad was simply saying what American politicians are afraid to say.

 What is truly "inexcusable" is that a President of the United States should be so massively ignorant of what the rest of the world already  knows, which is that 9/11 was the joint product of American Neo-Cons (and possibly even European Neo-Cons) working together with the Mossad to bring about consequences that would be beneficial to Israel, not to the USA. We have gained nothing by these reckless wars in violation of international law, the UN  Charter, and even the US Constitution.  When Obama announced that he was going to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan because that was  the region from which we were attacked and that we were still searching for Osama bin Laden, I knew we were in trouble. Osama died on or about 15 December 2001 and al Qaeda had nothing to do with it.He must think he is presiding over a nation of saps.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Even your best friends won’t tell you

by Jerry Mazza

As I remember, that has been a headline for everything from bad breath to dandruff sufferers to those suffering from body odors. The headline was ideal shame-making for manufacturers of mouthwashes, dandruff shampoos, deodorants and antiperspirants. And now it applies to our purported worst enemy, the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. That is, he’s telling us what none of our “best friends” in our government are saying, “that the American government may have been behind the 9/11 attack.” 

After being greeted by a round of applause as he entered the U.N. General Assembly recently, on September 23, Ahmedinejad was applauded again after his remarks. During his U.N. General assembly address he called for a “U.N. fact finding group to investigate 9/11.” I hope their findings (if a group should ever come about) won’t be treated like the fact-finding results of Hans Blitz, head of the UN’s United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission. His claims of no WMD in Hussein’s Iraq were ignored. As were the claims of orthodox Jewish Justice Richard Goldstone’s report on Zionist overkill in Gaza. 

How about a fact-finding group of U.S. 911 Scholars, academics, scientists, architects, engineers, journalists, even celebrities who know? After all, it is about our country. 

Meanwhile, Ahmedinejad went on to say what our “best friends” would never say, that “the majority of the American people as well as most nations and politicians around the world” believe that “some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining of the American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order to save the Zionist regime” (read Israel). Sounds on the money to me and to 1200-plus architects and engineers for AE911ruth.org, Pilots, retired military officers, and journalists for 911 Truth.

Certainly, any mention of this will draw AIPAC out with fangs and claws in striking media positions to further discredit the truth-telling Ahmedinejad and ask for Zionist Israel’s right to bomb Iran back into the stone-age. That is so the Zionists can become the scourge of the entire Mid East, not just Iraq (whom they prompted the U.S. and George Bush to attack), and as they have engulfed and are devouring Palestine, that is, the fragments of what is left of the nation that now is Israel, and, as they tell us, “our best friends.”

As I remember, the Five Dancing Israelis, who were celebrating the 9/11 attack by dancing on a white van and cam-cording it in a park directly across the Hudson River, with the smoking, crumbling Towers in the background, and dressed as Arabs, one flicking his cigarette lighter to the havoc behind him just for laughs. Yes, he/they said words to the police that had been called by onlookers to the effect of why are you arresting us, we’re your friends. Now you know what it’s like.

After being arrested and held by the FBI for 72 days, ironically “our friends,” who probably were involved with the remote control flying of whatever crafts or drones those “airliners” were on that day, went on television in Israel to say they were just there to “document” the event. How would they know there was going to be an event if they weren’t involved in its planning and execution? But then, despite the traces of explosives sniffing k-9’s found in the first white van (then two others), they found a goodly amount of cash, maps of our subways, bridges and tunnels.

The second van was found in an off-ramp of the George Washington Bridge with similar evidence of explosives, some cash, maps of subways, bridges and tunnels. And the third van was found parked on King Street between Sixth Avenue and Varick, which leads in only minutes down to the Lincoln Tunnel. Only this van had a realistic picture painted on its panel of an airliner crashing into the Towers, and two more idiots dressed like Arabs sitting inside. They tussled with the NYPD, who arrested them as the others. Yet all of “our best friends” were released once they returned to Israel.But then our “best friends” on whom we’ve showered hundreds of billions of dollars for defense, including free “surplus” jet fighters and other military hardware, unsecured loans, etc., since Israel’s inception in 1948, wouldn’t say a word about 9/11, only to point fingers at their Muslim enemies, as ex P.M. Ehud Barak did on national TV only minutes after the Towers were hit. He said that it was Osama bin Laden that did it. How did he know that so quickly? And if he did, why didn’t he and his government warn us in advance in a convincing manner, like best friends should?

So is it any wonder that everybody knows what our national media helps them not to know, that 9/11 was an Inside Job, but few like Ahmedinejad will tell us. The last one was the former president of Italy, who had grown up in Italy’s intelligence agencies. His announcement blew through our media like the proverbial fart in the breeze. Ahmadinejad’s missive is going from Fox News Applause for Ahmedinejad to US Fury At Ahmadinejad's 9/11 Speech, and more in line with setting a wildfire of fear and anger.

The latter was referenced by our State Department spokesman, P.J. Crowley who said “a short distance from here, nine years ago, three-thousand people were killed in an attack perpetrated by nineteen people, and an attack that was orchestrated by Al Qaeda. We know exactly who did it, they’ve admitted it, the facts are not in dispute. So for the President of Iran to come here and make the suggestion somehow this was an American plot, is simply outrageous.”

 First of all, Mr. Crowley, the death toll was 2,752 victims who died in the attacks on the World Trade Center, which included 343 firefighters and 60 police officers from New York City and the Port Authority. 184 people were killed in the attacks on the Pentagon. The overwhelming majority of casualties were civilians, including nationals of over 70 countries. Also 900 first responders have also died since that day from fatal diseases caused by their exposure to the chemical and thermite infected dust of Ground Zero. Their deaths were due to wearing (or not wearing) paper face masks given to them instead of real respirators. Plus, tens of thousands more who worked “on the pile” at Ground Zero and off are sick unto dying. So the facts are disputed, and widely.

 Then, too, Osama bin Laden has been taken off the FBI’s Most Wanted List* for the crime of 9/11.  The 19 Muslim purported perpetrators and their pictures were pulled from an FBI file pell-mell and days later convicted in the press. Subsequently FBI Chief Robert Mueller said words to the effect that we could not be sure these were the men. So those facts are in dispute too, including that seven or eight of the men have been living in Mid East countries during the attacks, and were victims of identity thefts.ue to lack of evidence. dditionally 15 of the purported attackers were said to be Saudis. Yet we never attacked Saudi, Arabia, but we did attack Afghanistan, have not found Osama bin Laden (our stated purpose, who is said to be dead by the dean of 9/11 Scholars David Raye Griffin in his book Osama bin Laden – Dead or Alive), having passed in late December of 2001 and been buried, with notices in Pakistan newspapers, in an unmarked grave (in Muslim tradition) somewhere in Pakistan. Perhaps he makes a better poster boy than corpse.

In August of 2001, Bin Laden had been in the American Hospital where he met his CIA handler (from his Mujahadeen days), but then he was in the hospital for dialysis for a serious kidney disease. Purportedly he ran the 9/11 op from a cave on the Pak/Afghan border from a laptop. Whether or not his aides trotted his dialysis machine to the cave is in doubt.

In fact, when the U.S. Army had him cornered him in Tora Bora, they were unable to catch him and, fleet-footed, he slipped away into the eternal night of no real facts and the cloud of the government conspiracy, in question by intelligent human beings all over the planet. So, making the statements you did, Mr. Crowley, signifies you don’t read or perhaps are simply an idiot born to high places, and not a friend at all. And lastly, Osama’s so-called confession was admitted to be a fake by no less than the CIA recently, thanks to voice-morphing technology, and the simple facts that the man in the video had a fuller face, flatter nose, and wore a gold ring and chain, a no-no for an orthodox Muslim.

As to the other confessions you may be referring to, Khalid Sheik Mohammed’s for instance, it was obtained in 2003 when he was tortured by water-boarding some 183 times. President Bush subsequently asked for a non-torture confession and, surprise, got it. As for Zacharias Moussaoui, a wanna-be top-gun, his testimony was given to the court as he wore a stun belt under his robes. Originally, the FBI refused to pick him up based on his laptop evidence gathered by FBI woman Colene Rowley’s group in Minnesota. Her whistle-blowing efforts eventually lead to her resignation for FBI inaction. She has subsequently become an activist for 9/11 Truth.

Osama Bin Laden is still on the FBI "Most Wanted List" as a terrorist, with a $25 million dollar bounty on his head, as of Sept. 25, 2010, but prior references to 911 are now missing. 

####