WikiLeaks Nuclear Bomb Story Preceded Osama Death
By Staff News & Analysis - May 03, 2011

Capturing bin Laden 'would unleash hell' … The mastermind of the 9/11 attacks warned. Also on that al-Qaeda has hidden a nuclear bomb in Europe which will unleash a "nuclear hellstorm" if Osama bin Laden is captured, leaked files revealed. The terror group also planned to make a 9/11 style attack on London's Heathrow airport by crashing a hijacked airliner into one of the terminals, the files showed. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told Guantanamo Bay interrogators the terror group would detonate the nuclear device if the al-Qaeda chief was captured or killed, according to the classified files released by the WikiLeaks website. –

Dominant Social Theme: We got this son-of-a-gun. Hooray. Now we need to watch out for pocket nuke retaliation.

Free-Market Analysis: What are the odds that WikiLeaks would release an Osama bin Laden nuclear bomb story only a week before his putative death at the hands of American Navy Seals? We have long pointed out that WikiLeaks is probably some sort of Anglo-American intel operation and this story excerpted above ran at US/ (NewsNine) – among other mainstream US outlets – is right in line with that expectation.

This seems to us, when coupled with the "death" of bin Laden, to be obvious propaganda, designed to frighten citizens of the West into giving up more wealth and power to the globalist facilities that will supposedly keep everyone "safe" from the terrorists. It is a kind of dominant social theme, that bin Laden's death will result in retaliation and thus the already authoritarian West will have to undergo further totalitarian incursions.

We wrote yesterday that the supposed death of bin Laden presaged other more dire consequences, possibly and we wonder now if they are not the most fundamental ones – merely a ratcheting up of the police state in the US and the West generally. The economic malaise has not lifted and has in fact gotten worse. It is very obvious that civil unrest remains feasible across the West, especially as summer approaches. Thus further measures are to be put in place. Osama bin Laden's "death" justifies such.

Nonetheless, the Western power-elite does not control information any longer to the same degree and the reactions to bin Laden's death on many alternative news, blogs and even mainstream media sites was overwhelmingly skeptical. The elites can continue to insist on framing the larger dialogue as they like, but they have lost the hearts and minds of many. Seen from this point of view, the probably phony death of bin Laden is an act of desperation more than a clever ruse. They continue to run the script. It's all they know how to do.

Osama bin Laden probably died years ago of kidney failure, or perhaps assassination. Al-Qaeda itself is a very dubious proposition, as it was initially funded by Western intel to fight the Soviet Union which invaded Afghanistan. Additionally Osama bin Laden apparently worked closely with the CIA in the 1980s and is said to have traveled to America and then to France for medical treatment. We are faced with the proposition that bin Laden himself was an American intelligence asset and that al-Qaeda (whatever it is/was) was in large part funded or at least set up by the West.

We have a great deal of difficulty with the announcement of the death of Osama bin Laden as we believe he died long ago. We think the war on terror itself is a phony enterprise designed mainly to provide an excuse to further erect the facilities of global governance by providing the US in particular with the justification to globalize its military and policing operations – and to position them more dramatically at home. The convergence of the WikiLeaks story with the death of bin Laden again reinforces this viewpoint. While bin Laden's supposed death may provide cover for NATO and the US, the larger significance may simply be a ratcheting up of the war on terror. This is what the WikiLeaks story is telling us.

But there are other ramifications to the story that are truly disturbing. The UK Telegraph, ordinarily one mainstream newspaper we can tolerate on a daily basis, was in full cry yesterday on the nuclear meme. Its writers and editorialists were claiming that the torture of Sheikh Mohammed and other Guantanamo detainees "gave the US the breakthrough in finding Osama bin Laden." The newspaper's website even presented a picture of the Sheikh before he had been tortured and afterward.

The bestiality of this kind of reporting cannot be overstated. Not only are the newspaper's editors promoting torture, they are positively gloating over it and presenting a before-and-after photo of the individual to show the effects of the torture. The debasement of what is left of the Western civil conversation continues. The Telegraph is one of the Anglo-American axis' most prominent newspapers.

It is, in fact, Sheikh, who has been water boarded hundreds of times apparently, who revealed the nuclear threat that WikiLeaks leaked. Of course we would hasten to point out that if we had been water boarded hundreds of times we would gladly tell our captors anything they wanted to hear too. How on earth can anything an individual tortured this way reveal anything trustworthy? And yet his every word becomes news, according to the Telegraph – which reported the following:

The German weekly Der Spiegel, also citing WikiLeaks, said that Sheikh Mohammed had told his interrogators he had set up two cells for the purpose of attacking Heathrow in 2002. The aim was to seize control of an airliner shortly after take-off from Heathrow, one of the world's busiest airports, turn it around and crash it into one of the four terminals … The attackers would have gained access to the airliner cockpits by setting off small bombs hidden in their shoes, it said.

So let us summarize once more. Bin Laden and al-Qaeda both seem supported, at least in their initial incarnations, by the CIA and other Western intel involvement. Meanwhile, the current narrative regarding these two entities is at the very least questionable. The idea is that bin Laden's death will cause al-Qaeda to try to strike at the West with nuclear weapons. Yet the holes in this narrative are many. Nuclear weapons are not easy to make, nor are they easily transportable. (Though God forbid an actual false-flag dirty bomb or nuclear attack! …)

Beyond this, al-Qaeda must actually exist as a workable entity to make such grim scenarios viable. Almost every high profile terrorist arrested in the 21st century can be seen to have some sort of entrapment associated with eventual exposure. These are seemingly manufactured incidents, not homegrown ones.

As for the most recent news – there are plenty of questions yet again. Bin Laden is said to have been shot in the face obliterating his features. And his body was immediately dumped at sea. Anyone looking at these facts objectively would have to be dubious in our view, given the fraud with which the whole of the "war on terror" is laced. The more we study these narratives the more incredulous we become. The initial 9/11 attacks have never been properly explained, and the antecedents of the war on terror are doubtful in the extreme.

The history books will faithfully record, we suppose, that bin Laden launched attacks from his well-appointed caves in Afghanistan (which were never found) and then was killed 10 years later in Pakistan. We don't know what the truth is, but this isn't it. It is a fantasy, propounded in front of our amazed eyes by a cynical, hidden money power that manipulates the truth for purposes of advancing its goal of world power through stealth and dissembling.

We are at a point of doubting all historical narratives, along with their timelines. G. Edward Griffin did everyone who cares a service by revealing that the Anglo-American elite funded the Russian Revolution. But who is to say that the Cold War that came afterward and militarized the West wasn't phony as well? Famous Austrian economist Murray Rothbard apparently believed it was. And why did the USSR invade Afghanistan? What sense did that make – though it did conveniently allow the CIA to aid in the creation of both bin Laden and al-Qaeda. And as long as we're at it, why did the USSR collapse? Someone please explain that to us – right after the antecedents of the First World War.

We are watching history being written and it is phony history being repeated millions of times by frightened naked apes populating the mainstream media. Money Power, which seeks to use such incidents to further global domination, demands it; but repetition doesn't make it so. We track and analyze the memes of the elites in this modest publication and the genesis of this war on terror has provided us with textbook examples of how Money Power works.

After Thoughts

You, dear reader, may believe anything you wish. But as for us, we know the truth. We can see it, hear it and smell it. And it stinks.

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap