A better look at the "fake" bin laden video:

One thing 911myths.com missed is that the clearly altered fat bin laden picture starts with a pic of bin laden smiling/laughing broadly. Put your hand on your face and smile real big. Notice what happens to your cheek bone area. It got "fatter", right?

-The cheeks look bigger because he's smiling.
-The altered dis-info version only increases the difference between the somber/thin and laughing/heavier bin laden.
-When the video is seen in its entirety, it becomes clear that whoever spreads the common dis-info comparison image is being intellectually dishonest, hasn't seen the video, or hasn't seen other frames of the video.

that this ends the "Fat vs skinny" bin laden idea. but it probably wont
i know the bushco regime is incompetant and corrupt, but some have such a hatred of them that they are blinded to the possibilty that we were actually attacked by terrorists.

Notice how they don't do any more side by side comparisons.

Check this out:


look at the distance between the tip of the nose and the upper lip.
Look how much larger the Fake Osama's (on the left) upper lip is. Then look at the distance from the nostrils to
the eyes.

then check this out:


A line drawn between the same two points (nostril to bottom of ear opening) on the two separate photos
shows the cheek bones to be in different positions. The line intersects the fake Osama's cheek. The real Osama's
cheek bones fall above the line. This is because the fake Osama's nose is almost an inch shorter. Also notice how much more distance lies between the line and the eye on the real
Osama. Notice how beak-like the real Osama's nose is. This angle proves again that the fake Osama has a smaller nose.

The following pictures show the same thing. Notice the smaller nose, the shorter distance between the nostril and the eye and the larger upper lip in the pic on the left from the confession video.

All other comparisons bear the same things out - smaller nose, larger and lower cheek bones,
more distance between the tip of the nose and the upper lip.
The confession Osama is absolutely a bad double.

Smiling and stretching my cheeks first one way then another. You know, no matter how much I smile my nose stays pretty much like it is. Is doesn't get any shorter or longer. Nor does it get thinner or fatter. My nose stays just like it is.

There is no shortage of individuals that will go to unheard of lengths to try to make a dog turd into a pile of gold. I think it's a form of insanity called cognitive dissonance. You can see it when a cherished belief is threatened by the reality of a situation. What some people will do is deny reality in favor of what the want to believe.

Those guys in the photos, are not the same person.

Edit: The next thing we will hear is how OBL was spotted in Hollywood, looking for a cosmetic surgeon to 'fix' his nose. And this explains why the 2 pictures are different.

To get through it people often literally have to break down and cry.
It's an emotional/mental thing.

I also find that no amount of smiling causes me to change from left to right-handed nor does it cause gold jewelry to miraculously appear on my fingers.

Guess not. It's just like those hijackers going to a titty bar the night before 9/11. If a guy is gonna kill himself the next day because of a religious based idea, and he has a fervent belief in Allah (call him God), I'd think he would spend the night before praying and not be out boozing, smoking and diddling the ladies. It doesn't seem to fit the characters these guys are supposed to be.

Like OBL wearing jewelry, it just doesn't fit. Makes me think, that whomever it was that did 9/11, wasn't really Islamic. Or not, what's a better word, devout, yes that's it. A devout Islamic, like a devout Catholic, same thing. A real believer.

Edit: Hell, the next think we will hear is they went to Applebee's and had BabyBack Ribs before going to the 'Gentlemans club'.

is many things but a devout muslim he aint. he USES radical islam to get support for his causes, but he isnt a learned man by islamic standards.

just the facts. he isnt a mullah or religious leader. he was an engineer at one time. but never a devout/learned muslim. simply uses it for his own gains. if he thought dancing around in a prairie dress would help him gain world power he would do it. the how of gaining that power is meaningless.

And if you believe he did do 9/11, do you figure Pakistani ISA (CIA) is also part of it? Just trying to get a feel for what your ideas are on 9/11. Do you believe the 'official' version?

Edit: BTW, do you also believe Bu$h is a christian, or is he, like most politicians just using it to further his agenda? As such, just like Osama uses Islam to further his agenda.

Further edit: I am a man, but please, no "sirs", somebody will think I am an officer and try to shoot me.

bush is about as much as a christian as i am (i am a jew with pagan leanings :P) he uses religion to further a political agenda

i think that osama was behind 911 may have had help from foreign governments. the biggest problem i have with the 'offical' version is that it says nothing about the incompetance in the * regime that allowed this disaster to take place. i think the current regime is the most incompetant and corrupt we have seen here in the US. whatever they do they manage to screw up.


the reason i dont believe in MIHOP is that would assume that the current regime has a level of competance to do so, which they dont.

Right on. Most peculiar is that many of the same who assume that the admin was competent enough for the incredibly huge undertaking of MIHOP also start with the assumption that a small group of motivated Arabs are not competent enough to hijack some planes and fly them into huge buildings.

Talk about dissonance. ;)

Like you have any idea what's in his head. You've crawled right in there and can report his innermost desires.

Just go back and re-read Orwell's "1984".
If Osama is not a completely synthetic character, crafted out of a cheap Hollywood plot-line ... then he is certainly the best enemy that money can buy.

I certainly don't need to remind anyone of the long personal and business relationship between the Bush and bin Laden families (crime syndicates).

Salem bn Laden loaned the current President the seed-money investment for his very first business venture (via James Bath) in the oil business... which promptly went belly-up.... back in the 70s.
The ties go back a long, long time.

The Bin Ladens and the Bushs continue to be close partners through their mutual membership on the board of the Carlyle Group (along with George Soros).

All of this is well known.
Why does it bear repeating ?

Their motivation is not really religion. Sure, in the cartoon version of Freepers, it might be. But in the slightly more sophisticated version of the 9/11 commission, or those few OCT supporters with brains, the motivation of the 19 is to strike a blow against the leviathan that occupies Palestine, bombs Iraq, and impoverishes the Muslim world. They don't really have to believe in the 72 virgins or any of that crap. They are getting revenge, not necessarily holiness. I find it very believable that suicide killers would spend the night before looking for pussy, no matter how devout they are. It's such a fundamental thing, knowing you're going to die, of course you want to get some sex in before you go.

Don't misunderstand, I do not believe the OCT, since it requires many miracles: Atta in two places at the same time, Hani doing aerobatic maneuvers on his first 757 flight and then holding it an inch off the ground, the hijackers magically turning off the country's air defenses and beaming non-existent blips into the radar system, flying straight into the radar gaps, scheduling wargames that mirrored the scenario "by coincidence," making third skyscrapers implode into their footprints, etc.

But hearsay about them drinking or lap dancing isn't an effective criticism of the OCT.

Btw, the FBI said bin laden was left handed. Why trust what they say in this instance?
If you don't at least consider the possibility that the FBI was wrong or lying or that bin laden's left side was injured, you're doing a disservice to yourself.

Especially the analysis using the lines between the ear and nose.
It's totally obvious that the heads are at two different angles, so there is foreshortening.
Not to mention the careless placement of the lines.

do you have Photoshop?
You place them on those photos on those corresponding points. Be my guest. A millimeter one way or the other will still
give the same result because the noses are very different lengths.

Tell me how the placement of the lines is different?

You're telling me you really can't see the difference in the upper lips? Or the distance from the nostrils to the eye?

It's the same type of analysis any sculptor would do. It's just proportions. No big deal, but I'm sorry to say ALL the angles
show the same thing. A shorter nose.

it's useless to measure the span between the ear and nose and compare them. You've also got a big problem because the ear is so obscured in the one photo.

"It's the same type of analysis any sculptor would do."

I don't have a problem with the "type" of analysis, it's just that the execution here is poor.

The angles are essentially the same, no significant foreshortening. If the ear that is partially obscured somehow had an opening that went below the area obscured by the shoulder (which it doesn't, that IS the bottom of the opening) it would only make my point more obvious by making the line further below his cheekbone.

A line drawn between two points will intersect the same area of the face no matter what the angle. Again do it yourself if you don't believe me. Draw a line from the top of the nostril to the bottom of the opening of the ear. You could probably fudge it up to a 1/2 inch either direction and see the same thing. You can draw that line on any photo, any angle of the real Osama and see it is in the same relation to the cheekbone.

Not even close.

Give me a day or two to work up a visual comparison of my own.

When talking with the Sheikh, Osama said "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. 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." (Translated) "This is all that we had hoped for."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/july-dec01/video_12-13a.html

With reference to the fact that Osama has a degree in civil engineering (from King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah, 1979) as well as years of experience in construction (for example he is a famous cave builder), how come he doesn't know the WTC was built from steel, not iron?

that could be an issue of translation not what he actually said.

but the tape is supposed to have been translated by the US government (apparently the CIA) and I would hope that they have at least one competent Arab speaker. Maybe Osama misstated or the translator erred when he said "melt" (it should actually be "weakened"), but iron and steel is a harder mistake to make. I'm a translator and if I got iron and steel confused I'd be absolutely horrified.

Have you seen the Terror Timeline entry for this yet?

Let's do lunch soon.
Stop using an altered photo.

Could you at least try to make it challenging for me to present a superior case?

If you can't see that, only an optometrist can help you.

is the proportion of confidence level to reasoning.

soon will. However, this is about FACIAL RECOGNITION, not reasoning.

Sorry to have to break this to you, but you can't reason that fat fuck into Osama Bin Laden anymore than you can reason yourself into Brad Pitt.

see evidence of aliens?
I'm not one of those people. Combining reason with un-filtered observation is a valuable asset in crime investigations.

You can't reason someone out of an opinion that they didn't reason themselves into to begin with.

Because it's closer to him than the fat guy you keep trying to sell us.

It's pretty crappy.

to be crappy!

"Is that your site?"

If you read the OP, you should be able to discover the answer.

"Do these two look like the same person? No."

The intelligent commentary on this site starts and ends right there.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the site sides completely with the official government lie!

Notice how the shills seem to like it?

go figure?

The site doesn't try to discredit any of the certain and verifiable claims that we on the left make about the incompetence of the bush admin. The site does not argue that the entire story we got from our government is true.
It simply highlights some of the more outlandish and/or falsifiable bullshit that has populated the internet.

Including picture comparison:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=fake+bin+laden&events=on&entities=off&articles=off&topics=off&timelines=off&projects=off&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=+Go+&project=911_project

In my opinion, there's very little chance that could be the same nose, no matter how much the guy is squinting or smiling or whatever.

As that 911myths website so often does, it fails to mention important information that runs counter to the arguments being made. For instance, while it briefly mentions the possibility that the tape was not translated accurately, it does not mention the important report Monitor did on this subject. Monitor is a kind of 60 Minutes show for Germany.

Here's the Monitor report:

Bin Laden Video: Faulty Translation as Evidence?

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/monitor122001.html

Further, one thing that very rarely gets mentioned when this video is discussed are the reports that bin Laden had a number of impersonators for security reasons. Anywhere from four to ten guys going around, pretending to be him. My guess is that this is a real video from Afghanistan, but it's of one of his doubles. It makes a lot of sense. If you were the most wanted man in the world and you had millions of dollars and a huge number of followers, wouldn't you want to have doubles and didn't bin Laden have the means to do so? Having doubles is actually fairly standard procedure for people who have the means and are likely assassination targets. Hussein, for instance, was said to have up to ten doubles as well.

Here's one article about it:

‘Bin Laden Has Four Doubles to Confuse Western Intelligence‘

Agence France-Presse
October 7, 2001
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/afp100701.html

And here's another that says he had up to ten look-alikes:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/londontimes111901.html

The 911myths website does make a good point about bin Laden wearing a ring on other occasions. I will edit my timeline entry to take that new info into account.

You link to two "doubles" articles at your website, but there are some others, for example:

"Osama bin Laden uses misdirection, look-alike decoys and fake caravans to foil pursuit."
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/focus/terrorism/archives/1001/w17osama.html

"Before the war in Afghanistan, he used look-alike decoys"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/06/attack/main524495.shtml

Ahmad Wali Masood "The brother of Afghanistan's late opposition commander said in remarks published on Sunday that Osama bin Laden has doubles travelling around Afghanistan to confuse people over his whereabouts."
http://www.iol.co.za/general/newsview.php?art_id=qw1002451140805B543&click_id=3&set_id=1

btw, you already mention the ring in your entry.

for the other articles. I was trying to say about the rings that I need to change what I've got about that in light of the fact that there are other pictures of him wearing a ring around that time.

the tape isn't fake.
Bin Laden using decoys is no way in support of the theory that our government created the tape.

These strawmen just keep getting shakier. Don't they?

What we said is that the fat fuck with the shorter and broader nose ain't Osama. No way. No how.

http://www.awitness.org/

They have a ton of totally fucking insane bullshit at that anti-semitic loonybin site.
Great source for truth, stickdog.

The guy on the tape isn't Osama, but the tape is still real? :rofl:

"The guy on the tape isn't Osama, but the tape is still real?"

In my opinion, yes. I don't see what's funny about it. As I mentioned in the previous posting, I think it's highly likely the tape was not made by the US government. Instead, it is a real tape from Afganistan, but of one of bin Laden's doubles, not bin Laden himself. Maybe whoever was recording it really thought they were recording bin Laden, I don't know. The argument that the US government made the tape is a strawman argument. Yes, some people may argue that. But most people would simply argue that the bin Laden in this tape is not the real bin Laden and not necessarily conclude that that means the US government made the tape.

Furthermore, why do people even care about the tape so much in the first place? Mainly because this is supposed to be the tape where bin Laden first confesses to involvement in the 9/11 attacks. But as the language experts in the Monitor program claim, the tape shows no such thing. So there are a number of important disputes about this tape. To say or imply that if it can be shown the tape was not made by the US government then all the doubters about the tape are wrong is a strawman argument.

It's not really Osama, so in my opinion it could not be said to be "real". "Real" would imply that it is what it purports or is claimed to be - a video of Osama himself, not one of his doubles.

I have never said that the US made the tape. I don't know whether the tape was left there by accident or was a clever bit of disinfo by Al Qaeda. If Zarqawi can get away from the US just because he looks a bit fatter, then maybe Osama can too.

We're just having a misunderstanding of what the word "real" means, then. To me, "real" has nothing to do with whether it contains the true bin Laden or not, its a matter of did someone deliberately fake the tape or not. But I can understand your definition of "real" in this case.

as indicated by the short fat double OBL shown, then the 'confession' made by the fake OBL is as fake as he is.

Therefore, to conclude that OBL did do 9/11 based on this so called 'confession' is worthless. We are back to the question of what proof do we have that says OBL is the mastermind behind 9/11?

The big underlaying question is, if OBL didn't do 9/11, then who did?

Trying to clear away all the strawmen so to speak.

If the person in the tape was a bin laden double used for safety reasons (the purpose of doubles as indicated by the bin laden double links) then the tape isn't "fake" as many people claim, ie faked by our government to falsely incriminate Al Queda because our government orchestrated the attacks.
Since there is plenty of evidence that Al Queda was behind 9/11 beyond this tape, the "fake" bin laden video is ... a strawman.

With reference to the fact you can't make your mind up whether it is bin Laden or not, how would you rate your facial recognition skills?

I have made up my mind, though I admit I can't scientifically prove with 100% certainty that it's bin laden on the tape. I can prove that those who say with 100% certainty that it isn't bin laden, are fooling themselves.

Using your best facial recognition skills, please tell me which of these is bin laden:

What's with your empty accusation?

edit: btw, you didn't answer the question.

specific and cite lets say 5 pieces of evidence for now?

that he has anything to do with 9-11?

Paul's the one who makes the points that matter. Also stickdog. What a surprise.

1) It's not the same guy. As stickdog says, a matter of basic facial recognition skills. Argue away; it doesn't look like the same guy because it's not the same guy. Unless you're having serious cognitive dissonance issues, or you're determined to always pitch the official story, it's obvious that it's not the same guy, and it's been obvious all along. This is the clear "default hypothesis." Only someone who privileges official spin over their own lying eyes can convince themselves otherwise.

2) That being said, the guy could be anyone. The video could have been produced by anyone. The guy could be one of Osama's hired doubles. The video could be a fake produced by the Russians, or the Northern Alliance (who supposedly found it first), or pretty much any agency, or, for that matter, amateurs. It's not like the production values are hard to meet (even in Afghanistan). As an aside, the official story (I hope I'm getting it right) is that the video was made in Kandahar around Nov. 15, though it was found in Jalalabad in early Dec. Both cities were under siege at that time...

3) This video is significant because the USG grabbed it with every tentacle and announced it was significant. Though it's unlikely the CIA produced the video, the USG began committing an act of fraud from the moment it announced the video was genuine and significant.

4) That fraud extended to a fraudulent translation, designed to create the impression of a confession. I've met the TV author Ekkehard Siekker and had the privilege of co-organizing public appearances with him. In his report for Monitor (ARD), he had Arab translators produce a rendering. After 30 hours, they called the State Dept. translators with some questions. And they discovered that the State Dept. translators had been given only 10 hours to produce their work, and that they knew much less about it.

5) The State Dept. version falsely turned third person statements of being happy about the attacks into first-person claims of authorship. In a later transcript, the "Osama" even begins to mention the names of specific alleged hijackers.

So. The question of who made the video is completely irrelevant. It's not Osama. The guy in the video does not directly confess to authorship of the 9/11 attacks. But the US Government has presented this largely inaudible work as proof of Osama's authorship. That is an act of fraud. One of many. And quite indicative - they don't have anything better to go with, do they? Remember, this was the first few months. The period of the promised Powell "white paper" that never materialized. Of the Blair memo that filled in, which didn't actually make a case that al Qaeda was behind the attacks. Of revelation after revelation that the official story was full of holes.

Let's keep that in mind, too: 9/11 skeptics did not arise to "challenge" the official conspiracy theory. In fact, both hypotheses were born simultaneously and have existed and developed alongside each other all along. While one hypothesis keeps accumulating evidence, the other keeps accumulating whoppers of investigative omission a la the 9/11 Commission Report.

It ain't OBL in the video, thus there is no open confession and the translation was false too. Where is the proof OBL was the mastermind? There is no proof except what the USG says and from what we can see, they have no proof it was OBL or they would have trotted it out.

So why is the USG telling us it was OBL.

I'm speculating here, but I think the Pak ISI knows who done it. And certain parts of the USG are trying to keep a lid on implicating Pak in 9/11, because if that happens, then the trail will lead right back to those within the USG that played a part in 9/11. Thus they, whomever they are, need OBL to take the blame for 9/11.

The ones that false translated that second tape, isn't that the same organization in the USG that what's her name, Syble Edmonds or Edwards, something like that, she was ordered to shut-up by Asscraft and a judge right? She whistled about something strange going in the 'translations' operations, thats never fully come-out. Something tells me she's got a handle on the truth of 9/11. Follow the money.

First, read the thread for comprehension before you try to give the impression that you're able to objectively summarize it.
Second, locate at least 5 pictures of bin laden that you "know" are authentic pictures of bin laden and post them or their links here. Using those as a starting point, I'll try to scientifically prove that those who say "the guy could be anyone (but definitely not bin laden)" are committing the fallacy of invincible ignorance.

My reading comprehension is adequate enough to spot your condescension, and to know the pointlessness of taking homework from sophists.

The translation is a fraud. Answer that.

in what you tried to pass off as an objective summary. You were most likely being either intentionally misleading or you just didn't care to address all the specifics in this thread
You are saying "It certainly isn't bin laden" and "It could be anyone".
I'm trying to establish a baseline of agreement of what the authentic bin laden looks like.
Otherwise, it's absolutely ridiculous to reason about it being him or not in the video.

Greyl,
What is your goal in posting here? If it is to try to convince people of your views, then I suggest you check the condescending attitude at the door. Comments like "First, read the thread for comprehension before you try to give the impression that you're able to objectively summarize it" are not going to convince anyone and will only alienate people from listening to you.

Out of curiosity, are you connected with the 9/11myths website? Because unfortunately I see the same kind of condescending attitude there. Personally speaking, I've discovered in life that if you tell someone, "Hey jackass, you're full of BS!" they'll only harden their attitude against whatever you and they are arguing about. But if you say, "I can see you point, however, here's another way to look at it," and you follow up with some good information, you might have a chance of convincing someone.

Just my 2 cents.

You must have missed the condescension that I was replying to. I assume you aren't being intentionally misleading or biased by singling out one of my posts - you must have simply overlooked this for some reason:



Is safe for me to presume that you don't need a personal lesson in what "ad hominem" means? Have you just innocently forgotten to honor proper debate logic and etiquette by arguing entirely against me and not my argument in your reply?

Please, sir, give me a break.

The reason I singled you out is because in recent days I've seen many posts from you and have seen a pattern of condescension but I haven't seen that pattern from JackRiddler.

For instance, look at your post here, where you laugh at this entire thread, the 9/11 forum, and by association all those who post in it:

"Check the main page for more, after you're done laughing."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=247x4572

So I would repeat that in my opinion your style of argument is not going to win people over. This is the last I have to say on the subject as this discussion is a waste of my time. Do whatever you like; I don't care.

You've questioned my motives and bias, so I can safely assume it's fair play for you, right?
I think you're trying to poison the well because you see me as a threat. Just a theory.

Instead of dealing with the substance of what I'm saying, you're condemning my style.

Your link to a thread in a different forum about an obviously satirical 9/11 site doesn't support your accusation. I think you are misrepresenting my quote to suite your needs.

I said (in the skeptics and pseudoscience forum) "Check the main page for more, after you're done laughing". Now, 'unless you're having serious cognitive dissonance issues' you can plainly see that the laughter is directed at a satirical site that has a few spoof conspiracy theories. It's not condescending laughter at this thread as you are implying at all. Are you saying that site isn't funny? Good grief,
anyone with a sense of humor will laugh when they read that site.

"Do whatever you like; I don't care."

Cool, and I don't care that you don't like my style based on your limited evidence.

Sorry,
I did not take the time to look through that page, I thought it was a discussion of fake vs. real bin Laden much like this thread. My apologies on that. Regarding everything else, I think I've said what I wanted to say already.

It ain't Osama. It wasn't translated correctly. And it was fraudulently sold to us as belated "proof" that Osama masterminded the attacks and "admitted it."

IMHO, the above facts are as telling as they are undeniable.

that you can point me to? More the better.

Overall, he's as authentic as Emmanuel Goldstein. However, he is pictured on the left in this photo:

of what he looks like.

I presume that's because you've seen pictures that you are 100% certain are of him.

we could write an open letter to him, explaining that there are those who doubt it is him in this video

let him address this in his next video. (which is probably coming out soon--to a news channel near you!)

doesn't he usually admit to the things he does? isn't al qaeda admitting to attacking the saudi oil facility (or at least trying to attack it? why, they are even admitting to a failed attack--right?)

"DUBAI, Feb 25 (Reuters) - Saudi-born Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda group claimed responsibility for Friday's attack on a major Saudi oil facility at Abqaiq, the group said in an Internet statement."
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L25496959.htm

if he was behind the attacks, why would he make a statement denying them? i mean, wouldn't it be a great recruiting tool to say: join al qaeda--we get the job done! or some such shit.

(or am i mistaken here? does he usually not take responsibility for any of the crap he's behind?)

at any rate--he seems to be a guy with a video camera, who isn't all that shy. (remember the election eve video where he told america not to vote for bushy? yeah, that really worked--thanks for the help osama!)

so why don't we just ask him? hey osama, was that you or not on that grainy video, the one where you smile and some people think you look a little overweight? was it you? and which hand do you really write with? and was a gold ring you were wearing? come on, osama. inquiring minds want to know!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x71483#72228

It was very big news before the 2004 election.

And where's your evidence that these words come from "Osama"?

This is even less convincing than fat bin Laden.

about molten steel dripping from the 80th floor of WT2. No matter how strong the evidence is greyl is there to debunk it..why is he in DU? greyl criticized people for their "hated of bush" what does that say about the person? All DU-ers should hate that stinking M-U-R-D-E-R-E-R LIAR AND THIEF. Yet greyl persists in antagonizing 911 hunters.
The bush crime family has more involvement with 911 than osama and his 19 merry murderers. as for that fat picture, rotf !! Could osama be on the bush payroll? are they working together? both love the attention, more so by the bush team,look at the half a trillion spent and the results, loss of our civil right, devastation in Iraq, chaos. AND NO END IN SIGHT..
greyl should expend this much energy helping to jail bush but greyl is not a "BUSH HATER"

Swing and a miss. It is a promoter of official-versiondom.

My beef is with their tunnel-vision Hijackers page.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=71614&mesg_id=72719

pauldp and Jose Diablo puncture this poorly cobbled myth-conception fairly well.