Article Image
News Link • Obama Administration

Paul Craig Roberts: Propaganda and the US Claim of Bin Laden’s Death

In my recent article, "Creating Evidence Where There Is None," about the alleged killing of Osama bin Laden by a commando team of US Seals in Abbottabad, Pakistan, I provided a link to a Pakistani National TV interview with Muhammad Bashir, who lives next door to the alleged "compound" of Osama bin Laden. I described the story that Bashir gave of the "attack" and its enormous difference from the one told by the US government. In Bashair’s account, every member of the landing party and anyone brought from the house died when the helicopter exploded on lift-off. I wrote that a qualified person could easily provide a translation of the interview, but that no American print or TV news organization had investigated Bashir’s account. An attorney with a British Master of Laws degree in international law and diplomacy, who was born in Pakistan, provided the translation below. He writes: "I have no problem with being identified as the translator, but would prefer to remain anonymous."

1 Comments in Response to

Comment by Doug Nusbaum
Entered on:

When will people stop paying attention to Mr. Roberts? Now I subscribe to the idea that name calling is the rhetorical technique when a person has neither facts, nor logic to support their position, and if they did, they would probably not have the intellect to organize the facts or logic, so they resort to someone with the intellect of a child. Name calling: I give an example of this technique from Mr. Roberts here: 

Before I give his response, note the fact that as near as we can tell, Mr. Roberts is not aware of the fact that hot air rises, so that any paper below the fire would not be warmed, much less incinerated. Also, any paper more than a floor or two above the fire would have remained intact, just like the people who were jumping from the upper stories. But let him blather for himself

If I were as utterly stupid and ignorant as you, I would not be broadcasting it to others. If temperatures in the towers were of sufficient heat to weaken steal such that there was uniform collapse, paper, in file cabinets or not (the flimsy cabinets themselves would have melted), would have reached combustion temperatures long before the steel weakened. I don't know why such ignorant, utterly stupid, totally brainwashed low grande morons like you dare to write to someone who knows what he is talking about. Where do such total dumbshits like you come from? --- On Fri, 9/18/09, Doug Nusbaum wrote: From: Doug Nusbaum Subject: 911 To: Cc: "Ernest Hancock" Date: Friday, September 18, 2009, 3:30 PM I have yet to see any evidence presented to me by a so-called truther that was not obfiously stupid, false, doctored etc. Here is but one example: I have asked on several occasions and have never had an answer, which does not mean that there isn’t one, how millions of pieces of unburnt, uncharred paper can be floating over lower Manhattan from the destruction of the WTC towers when the official explanation of the destruction is fires so hot and evenly distributed that they caused the massive steel structures to weaken and fail simultaneously so that the buildings fell in free fall time just as they would if they had been brought down by controlled demolition. 1. the fires occurred only on about 8 to 10 floors of a 100 story building. Now this may come as a shock to you, but by the time of the collapse any such pieces of paper would have been entirely consumed. The rest of the 90 stories that were not touched by fire would have a lot of paper that was not touched by fire. In addition, most paper would have been in file cabinates. I would think that even someone with an IQ of 70 would understand how 90 stories could easily contribute the equivelant of 50+ boxes of paper per floor of financial offices. As to the collapse. IT WAS NOT AT FREE FALL SPEED. It was about 15% greater. Anybody with a basic degree in physics would understand that this is exactly what would happen. You did not cite the " demolition experts". All the ones that I found on the internet think that truthers are idiots. Perhaps you have others. And by demolition experts, I do not mean someone trained in the military to blow up buildings, but those few that actually bring down large buildings. Let me say this again. I have not seen a single piece of evidence --- and by evidence I do not mean words or testimony which I have also found to be weak --- but actual evidence that was not false on its face. I particularly love the nano thermite idea. Was this put in place at the time of construction before any nano-technology actually existed, or was it done by that swarm of invisible agents who went into the building opened up walls, placed the wires and timers and "nano thermite" and then covered everything up without anybody seeing them. I would love to see a timeline on that. The best description of your believing the big lie is this Again, please just one piece of evidence that supports controlled demolition that is not false on its face. =============================== So, since Mr. Roberts is into name calling, at least this is humorous: And it so applies to this senile old gassbag:

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: