Archive for the ‘ media mind control ’ Category

Bilderberger Moles: More War To Come For The Middle East (Tops Meeting Agenda)

Jim Tucker: Libya War and Wider Middle East Conflict On Bilderberg Agenda

Kurt Nimmo
June 9, 2011

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show today, veteran Bilderberg reporter Jim Tucker cited his insider sources who have revealed that bankster kingpin David Rockefeller was spotted at the resort located in St. Moritz, Switzerland, where the Bilderberg meeting is now convening.

The current patriarch of the Rockefeller family is a co-director of the Bilderberg Group along with the notorious war criminal Henry Kissinger and J.P. Morgan bank director Paul Arthur Allaire.

Tucker said the NATO action against Libya heads the Bilderberg agenda. The globalists want to create a “big bloody war” in the region, Tucker explained. High oil prices and exorbitant prices reflected at the pump will be used to gain the support of the commoners for continued military action in the Middle East.

On Wednesday, it was reported that the U.S. has intensified a “secret campaign” of air strikes in Yemen, thus intensifying tensions in the region.

Tucker also said the elite are outraged by the patriot movement and the alternative media’s coverage of the Bilderberg meetings and the release of information by moles and insiders. He said the elite attempted to get media magnate Rupert Murdoch to convince The Guardian in the United Kingdom and the Irish Times to scale back their reportage on the Bilderbergers, but he was unable to do so.

Tucker’s sources also said the Bilderbergers are stunned the presence of demonstrators and alternative media. This outrage will undoubtedly increase on Saturday when demonstrators arrive following Alex Jones’ call for a protest against the globalists and their agenda.

Prior to Jim Tucker’s interview, Alex talked with Prison journalist Paul Joseph Watson who reported that a Bilderberg member taken ill was given the red carpet treatment at the St. Moritz airport earlier today.

The incident was witnessed by We Are Change Birmingham, a British affiliate of the activist group founded in New York.
Watch live video from Alex Jones Live! on

Additional flights were diverted to Zurich due to cloud cover and weather conditions. It is approximately a two and a half hour drive from the largest city in Switzerland to the resort town.

Arrivals have been reduced to a trickle. As noted earlier, our team has spied the arrival of the leading neocon and former assistant Secretary of Defense, Richard Perle, and possibly Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

Danish politician and current NATO boss Anders Fogh Rasmussen was also spotted. The presence of Rasmussen at the meeting lends credence to Tucker’s assertion that NATO’s campaign against Libya figures prominently on the globalist agenda.


Gun Control Laws Are A CLEAR Violation of our 2nd Amendment rights! Our Rights are Under Attack!

Our Constitution CLEARLY States the following:


As passed by the Congress:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As ratified by the States:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.


The clause in the 2nd amendment ‘Shall not be infringed’ clearly states that gun control laws are unconstitutional.  Our lawmakers and victims of gun crimes seem to be under the impression that guns are the problem more so than the individual who has committed the crime.  This is clearly an irresponsible take on reality.  Statistics have indeed shown that an armed society equals less violent crime. There are news stories all over the United States of the ATF seizing weapons of citizens because of the quantity and quality of guns found. Notice that our constitution does not impose limitations as to the quantity or quality of arms that we may possess even after the amendment was ratified.  The government and the news media automatically label these people as being a threat to society and peace even though no crime has yet to be committed until the ATF steps in and seizes the weapons usually ending up in an unfortunate shootout.  The government controls the media and the media is quick to propagandize and Americans are like sheep believing most of what is reported in the news including the tone of what is being reported.  For those fortunate to question everything that is being reported in the news, when doing so the blinders are completely off and unfortunately the government see’s free thinkers and constitutionalists such as myself as a threat to homeland security.  It’s clear that the intention of our government is to break our will, dumb us down and to accept that it is ok to trade in our freedoms for safety and security. Yet the government continues to slowly erode our constitution into oblivion such as an example in this Fox news article:


Obama Administration Eyeing Gun Control ‘Under the Radar,’ Groups Warn

By Judson Berger

Published May 28, 2011



  •   Print
  •   Email
  •   Share
  •   Comments (4072)





President Obama makes a statement to reporters during his meeting with Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev on the sidelines of the G-8 summit in Deauville, France, May 26.

The Obama administration, after keeping gun control on the back burner for over two years, is prompting concern among gun rights groups that it’s slowly starting to squeeze the trigger on tighter regulation. 

In the wake of the January shooting of Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 18 others, President Obama remained mostly quiet on the firearms front as lawmakers clamored for new restrictions. But the president has since made a public call for tougher background checks. The Justice Department launched a series of meetings with officials and advocates to examine gun control policy. And while gun-control bills in Congress have languished, the administration has started to chip around the edges with its own proposals. 

“They’re doing a pretty good job … as Obama has said, ‘under the radar.’ There’s a lot going on under that radar,” Gun Owners of America Director Larry Pratt said, referring to a remark Obama reportedly made in a private meeting with gun control advocates. “They’ve shown us how much they are prepared to do through regulation.” 

Pratt pointed to two proposals in particular. Under one proposed rule from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, dealers in four Southwestern states would be required to report multiple sales to the same person of certain kinds of rifles. The proposed requirement — which would apply to dealers in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas — is open for comment until the end of May. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence claims the change would help the ATF “crack down” on Mexico’s gunrunners. 

In addition, ATF released a study in January that looked at criteria for restricting the importation of certain shotguns. The authors were working off a 1968 law that restricts gun imports but exempts firearms used for “sporting purposes.” The report, then, tried to define which features on shotguns are not suitable for “sporting purposes” and therefore not importable — among the features they flagged are folding stocks, magazines over five rounds and “light enhancing devices.” 


The National Rifle Association has come out strong against this study. 

Pratt said the shotgun restrictions, if approved, could lead to broader restrictions on other imported long guns — at a time when the administration is trying to reduce federal regulations. Pratt also cited a decision last year to block the sale of U.S.-made antique rifles by the South Korean government to gun collectors in America. The State Department said at the time it was concerned the guns could fall into the wrong hands. 

These smaller-scale proposals come in lieu of sweeping restrictions like the assault-weapons ban Obama supported as a candidate but has not pursued as president. Another proposal on the table calls for banning high-capacity magazines, but it has not advanced in Congress. 

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., sponsor of that bill, has had trouble moving forward on the proposal in a GOP-dominated House and winning an endorsement from Obama — despite having 107 co-sponsors. 

“That’s just something we haven’t heard the president say anything about,” McCarthy spokesman Shams Tarek told 

Tarek stressed that the magazine ban wouldn’t exactly be treading new ground — it would reinstate an expired ban. “There’s a precedent there,” he said. But Tarek said the Obama administration is “very, very much in listening mode,” not revealing one way or the other which way it’s leaning on gun control. 

The most detailed statement to come out of the administration so far was the president’s March op-ed in the Arizona Daily Star, in which he pushed for better background checks. Obama stressed his belief in the “individual right to bear arms,” but said “there’s more we can do to prevent gun violence.” 

Based on the column, Tarek suggested the administration was with McCarthy and her allies when it comes to a new push to strengthen background checks. A bill she introduced earlier this month would impose stricter penalties on states that fail to enter the names of people prohibited from buying guns into a national database. And it would require background checks for all gun sales, including at gun shows. 

The move was hailed by the group Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which claimed it would fix “glaring gaps” in the background check system. 

But gun-rights groups are urging Washington against going down this road. National statistics show gun sales are going up while violent crime is edging down slightly. Though gun-related deaths and injuries still number in the tens of thousands every year, the groups say enforcement is the key. 

“The American public does not support gun control. … What the American public wants is for criminals to be punished for their mistakes,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said. 

The NRA and other groups have also harshly criticized the administration for its own gun-control problem — a Justice Department project by which hundreds of guns were allowed to “walk” across the border and into the hands of Mexican cartels.


Read more:



The only way this country is going to savor what little we have left of our rights under the constitution is to ‘Wake Up’ and expose these minions for what they are…global elitists whose intent is to enslave the public and practice the evils of eugenics in order to adopt what is commonly referred to as ‘The Perfect Society’. But when people state things in this way they are looked upon as being crazy conspiracy theorist and these critics who label these ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ are more than willing to allow themselves to be dumbed down and blinded by the new world order globalist society which is the intention of the global elitist…or society is falling for it hook line and sinker.  The only way to preserve our rights is to wake up and speak up!

WebRepOverall rating

White House Beefs Up Online Rapid Response

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has created and staffed a new position tucked inside their communications shop for helping coordinate rapid response to unfavorable stories and fostering and improving relations with the progressive online community.

“This week, Jesse Lee will move from the new media department into a role in the communications department as Director of Progressive Media & Online Response,” read an internal memo from Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, provided to The Huffington Post. “For the last two years, Jesse has often worn two hats working in new media and serving as the White House’s liaison with the progressive media and online community. Starting this week, Jesse will take on the second role full time working on outreach, strategy and response.”

The post is a new one for this White House. Rapid response has been the purview of the Democratic National Committee (and will continue to be). Lee’s hire, however, suggests that a portion of it will now be handled from within the administration. It also signals that the White House will be adopting a more aggressive engagement in the online world in the months ahead.

Lee has played that role in the past, including writing a semi-infamous White House blog post that said Fox News’ Glenn Beck was lying about the administration on his show. His new gig comes with its own Twitter account, precisely for the purposes of disseminating push back.

An equally telling requirement of Lee’s new job, however, is that of crafting strategy for outreach to the progressive community. Lee has been tasked with that responsibility in his previous incarnations, both as a member of the DNC online team during the ’08 election and as a senior new media adviser with then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

His new post may require even more delicate hand-holding. Instead of managing the administration’s web presence, he will be pressing to make the administration more popular on the web. In that respect, his Twitter account could also become an interesting window into the status of the always emotional, occasional testy dance between progressives and the president.

Lee enjoys good relationships with much of the online community, but as a member of the administration for the past two years he has also had his moments of friction.

The Globalist Own The Media: Heres Proof!

Don’t be fooled by the source…Fox News is no different (Rupert Murdoch is a tame version of Soros).  This is why I personally turn to alternative media for my news. When the elitist has their hands in the main stream media’s pockets you can bet for damn sure that the news is slanted towards their cause…just another element of “The New World Order’.

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004, has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

This information is part of an upcoming report by the Media Research Centers Business & Media Institute which has been looking into George Soros and his influence on the media.

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

The ProPublica stories are thoroughly researched by top-notch staffers who used to work at some of the biggest news outlets in the nation. But the topics are almost laughably left-wing. The site’s proud list of  “Our Investigations” includes attacks on oil companies, gas companies, the health care industry, for-profit schools and more. More than 100 stories on the latest lefty cause: opposition to drilling for natural gas by hydraulic fracking. Another 100 on the evils of the foreclosure industry.

Throw in a couple investigations making the military look bad and another about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and you have almost the perfect journalism fantasy – a huge budget, lots of major media partners and a liberal agenda unconstrained by advertising.

One more thing: a 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:

• Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;

• Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;

• Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press.

The Center for Public Integrity is another great example. Its board of directors is filled with working journalists like Amanpour from ABC, right along side blatant liberal media types like Arianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and now AOL.

Like ProPublica, the CPI board is a veritable Who’s Who of journalism and top media organizations, including:

• Christiane Amanpour – Anchor of ABC’s Sunday morning political affairs program, “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A reliable lefty, she has called tax cuts “giveaways,” the Tea Partyextreme,” and Obamavery Reaganesque.

• Paula Madison – Executive vice president and chief diversity officer for NBC Universal, who leads NBC Universal’s corporate diversity initiatives, spanning all broadcast television, cable, digital, and film properties.

• Matt Thompson – Editorial product manager at National Public Radio and an adjunct faculty member at the prominent Poynter Institute.

Once again, like ProPublica, the center’s investigations are mostly liberal – attacks on the coal industry, payday loans and conservatives like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. The Center for Public Integrity is also more open about its politics, including a detailed investigation into conservative funders David and Charles Koch and their “web of influence.”According to the center’s own 990 tax forms, the Open Society Institute gave it $651,650 in 2009 alone.

The well-known Center for Investigative Reporting follows the same template – important journalists on the board and a liberal editorial agenda. Both the board of directors and the advisory board contain journalists from major news outlets. The board features:

• Phil Bronstein (President), San Francisco Chronicle;

• David Boardman, The Seattle Times;

• Len Downie, former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, now VP;

• George Osterkamp, CBS News producer.

Readers of the site are greeted with numerous stories on climate change, illegal immigration and the evils of big companies. It counts among its media partners The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008.

Why does it all matter? Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots. Amanpour’s biography page, for instance, talks about her lengthy career, her time at CNN and her many awards. It makes no mention of her affiliation with the Center for Public Integrity.

If journalists were more up front, they would have to admit numerous uncomfortable connections with groups that push a liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently liberal George Soros. So don’t expect that transparency any time soon.

Dan Gainor is the Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture. He writes frequently for Fox News Opinion. He can also be contacted on FaceBook and Twitter as dangainor.

The Slippery Story of the bin Laden Kill

The Slippery Story of the bin Laden Kill

By Garance Franke-Ruta

May 3 2011, 4:34 PM ET 327

The early narrative of the assault on Osama bin Laden had him using his wife as a human shield and firing from behind her. Now we learn he wasn’t armed. OBL.jpg

The White House Tuesday blamed “the fog of war” for conflicting statements in its recounting of the events surrounding the Abbottabad raid that killed Osama bin Laden, but the history of misstatements from U.S. government officials about various combat operations raises questions about whether briefers also were subjecting us to a counterterrorism strategy and not just completely confused in their initial statements.

Consider the narrative put forward by John Brennan, the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, in a televised briefing the Associated Press described as an “uncharacteristically candid exchange with reporters.”

“Thinking about that from a visual perspective, here is bin Laden, who has been calling for these attacks, living in this million dollar-plus compound, living in an area that is far removed from the front, hiding behind women who were put in front of him as a shield,” Brennan told the world from the White House podium Monday. “I think it really just speaks to just how false his narrative has been over the years.”

There was a firefight and the al-Qaeda leader was “killed in that firefight,” Brennan said. There was a woman who was used “to shield bin Laden from the incoming fire.” The woman killed in the raid was bin Laden’s wife, Brennan said: “She was positioned in a way that indicated that she was being used as a shield.”

And bin Laden was killed because he resisted capture. “If we had the opportunity to take him alive, we would have done that,” Brennan told reporters at the briefing.

“Looking at what bin Laden was doing hiding there while he’s putting other people out there to carry out attacks again just speaks to, I think, the nature of the individual he was,” Brennan said.


And that’s the message our counterterrorism officials would, I expect, like the world — and especially any potential followers of al-Qaeda’s anti-American ideology — to get about our newly vanquished enemy, responsible to the single deadliest attack on American soil. The leader of the terrorist group was soft, a coward in the end who hid behind a woman’s skirts like a little girl, having grown accustomed to living in luxury in a mansion. Almost everything about this narrative seemed calculated to diminish any possible perception of strength or masculinity in bin Laden’s reaction to the raid by an elite team of U.S. Navy Seals — men who are in contrast among the most mythic and valorized in our armed forces, known for slogans like “pain is just weakness leaving the body.”

It wasn’t just Brennan, either. Politico’s Josh Gerstein reports:

At a Pentagon briefing earlier in the day, a senior defense official said bin Laden used a woman as a human shield so he could fire shots. “He was firing behind her,” the official said.In another background briefing early Monday morning, a senior administration official also said bin Laden put up a fight. “He did resist the assault force. And he was killed in a firefight,” the official said.

By end of day, that narrative — much like the narrative of Jessica Lynch’s heroism in 2003— was being picked apart. Reported Politico:

“A different guy’s wife was killed,” a different official familiar with the briefing for TV reporters said Monday night. Bin Laden’s wife was “injured but not killed,” the official said.Another official familiar with the operation said it did not appear that any woman was used as a human shield, but that the woman killed and the one injured were hurt in the crossfire. The official said he believed Brennan had mixed up the episode involving bin Laden’s wife with another encounter elsewhere in the compound.

“Two women were shot here. It sounds like their fates were mixed up,” said the U.S. official. “This is hours old and the full facts are still being ascertained as those involved are debriefed.”

Whether bin Laden was armed when he was shot also was initially unclear:

…during a background, off-camera briefing for television reporters later Monday, a senior White House official said bin Laden was not armed when he was killed, apparently by the U.S. raid team.Another White House official familiar with the TV briefing confirmed the change to POLITICO, adding, “I’m not aware of him having a weapon.”

As for the claim that bin Laden was living in a mansion, as opposed to just a big house, all that’s needed to debunk that description is some pictures of the house. A Wall Street Journal reporter went to the scene and gave this eye-witness account, concluding there was nothing mansion-like about it


The size and fortress-like nature of the compound stood out in the area, though many of the houses in Abbottabad, built by ex-servicemen and business people, also have high walls. Homes are separated by empty plots where people grow crops like potatoes and wheat.The top two floors of bin Laden’s three-story house are visible above the high perimeter walls. The house, built in 2005, appears run-down. Grass grows off a ledge below the roof. The outside walls are scarred with damp and mold. A hand-painted advertisement for Jamia Girls College, in Urdu and English, decorates one of the outside walls of the compound.

One of the awnings on an outdoor window hung down at an angle, perhaps after being damaged during the attack. Otherwise, the house stood intact, with few signs a major firefight only two days earlier.

There were no visible airconditioning units to keep residents cool through the Pakistan summer. At the back of the house was a small, private triangular garden with a towering fir tree, where bin Laden could have gotten air without being seen by outsiders.

White House spokesman Jay Carney at Tuesday’s briefing provided a fresh official “narrative” of the assault, noting “What is true is that we provided a great deal of information in great haste” yesterday “and obviously some of the information came in piece by piece and is being reviewed and updated.”

As the U.S. assault team entered the room where bin Laden was with his wife, she rushed the “assaulter” and was shot in the leg, Carney said. Bin Laden was also shot as he resisted the “assaulter.” He “was not armed” but “resistance does not require a firearm,” Carney said.

“It was a highly volatile firefight. He resisted. The U.S. personnel on the ground handled themselves with the utmost professionalism,” Carney said.

The special forces involved in the attack work under the aegis of the Joint Special Operations Command, which does not routinely provide accurate public information about its activities or “secret warriors,” according to National Journal’s Marc Ambinder. He reported Monday:

Several dozen JSOC operatives have died in Pakistan over the past several years. Their names are released by the Defense Department in the usual manner, but with a cover story — generally, they were killed in training accidents in eastern Afghanistan. That’s the code.

The new “narrative” laid out by Tuesday was written by the Department of Defense, Carney said.

I don’t imagine that many Americans will care whether bin Laden was armed or not when he resisted the individual who confronted him in Abbottabad. His “nature” was revealed to us long ago.

But the “narrative” of his death remains of significance to those who might seek to follow in his foot-steps. That’s why its worth looking at these early reports with a skeptical eye.

Image credit: Alexis Madrigal


Ok, so we ALLEGEDLY found Osama hiding in a palace in Pakistan (Which by the way was surrounded by US and Pakistani military buildings and bases) all of the sudden. First we are told that it took a few weeks to confirm that he was actually there and that there was a positive DNA match after we allegedly killed him.  Then we’re told that the DNA results have not been confirmed yet but he was identified through facial recognition technology and by his wife (The latest by the way is that the White House retracts the wife story).  So one day Obama supposedly gives the order to kill Bin Laden as he and other White House staff sits around a television to watch the event unfold and a picture was cleverly taken with the only important things missing….the monitor.  So news breaks that we killed OBL in this military raid orchestrated by the CIA and gave him a proper muslim sendoff before quickly disposing of his body into the ocean.  Of course Muslims everywhere now are refuting that it was a proper sendoff and not much if anything was done according to the Muslim tradition (But then again, we just shot him in the head so we must pay respects to the dead right?).

So we as Americans should just automatically believe the government with no pictures or photos of the dead corpse (And the fake photos released hours after his death that were quickly pulled from newspapers around the globe were deemed fake only THREE years earlier).  Sorry, it all sounds like a nice fairy tale especially that in minutes people were outside the white house celebrating with signs and newly pressed flags.  Yes the excitement is overwhelming…I guess Obama does deserve to be re-elected despite the fact he has forged his birth certificate, has led our troops into another unconstitutional conflict and that our economy is at near depression levels.  But we need not pay attention to that…he got Osama and that makes him our hero.  So now the war on terror must go on because there are a lot of terrorists out there which means we need a crackdown of security in major cities and the TSA needs to step up molesting the general public going through check points.  I think armed guards in every street corner on Humvee’s with big guns attached to the rear will work just fine. “Papers Please!”

Yes, Obama and this administration is my hero…


The Convenient Death of Osama Bin Laden

In the mid 1980’s the CIA created Alqueda and placed Osama Bin Laden under their payroll against the Russians in Afghanistan.  It is well documented and a thorough google search will uncover the undisputable facts.  False Flag terror operations have been taken place for decades (For example, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, The attack on the USS Liberty in 1967, The Oaklahoma City Bombing, 911 and the attacks on the British subway system in 2005).

With President Obama suffering from the worst poll numbers in Presidential history, his own party is divided on his decsisions and his own credibility coming under close scrutiny…thus we get the news that Osama Bin Laden the alleged terror master of 911 has been killed.  What a convenient time for the CIA to assasinate one of their own operatives!  Now I have no proof of my belief that Bin Laden actually died a long time ago from poor health but to say that the CIA went with a hit squad to Pakistan and didn’t find him in a cave but in a mansion is suspect enough.

A recent article alludes to the fact that the global elites are already gearing up to have Obama re-elected and we all know that elections are decided by the Global Financial elite and not the voters.  Of course Obama is a very unpopular President so something needed to be done to secure or boost his re-election victory…and what a convenient way to do so…to pronounce to the world that the man who ALLEGEDLY was responsible for 911 was killed under his presidency…call me crazy….just sayin’!