Following some sort of perverted religious mandate, the bush regime is preparing yet another osama bin laden show for Americans which includes nuclear weaponry released on American soil. Operatives like Bin Laden were trained and are funded by US intelligence agencies such as the one this so called informant belongs to. bush and osama used to PARTY together in their younger days for crying out loud...I think these lazy-minded fools are trying to fulfill some kind of weird biblical prophecy to prove to themselves that their mind set is not devolved and convoluted (Which it IS!) and the mk-ultra sheep of this so called "Religion" here lap it up because they have been made too stupid to know what reality really is. The real problem this government has now is that all the control technology of the nazis which they have hidden and nurtured all these years has leaked, and this includes the chemming....people are talking about it a lot and the info is OUT...so these anti-american ratz will do ANYTHING to distract the weak from paying attention to what they are really doing to us:
www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm

CBS '60 MINUTES' BOMBSHELL INTERVIEW ON Sunday, November 14, 2004:
FORMER HEAD OF CIA's OSAMA BIN LADEN UNIT SAYS THE AL-QAEDA LEADER HAS
SECURED "RELIGIOUS APPROVAL" TO USE A NUCLEAR BOMB AGAINST AMERICANS AND
TURN AMERIKA INTO A 'NUCLEAR WASTELAND OF INFIDELS!' -
The Drudge Report,
Friday, November 12, 2004


Osama bin Laden now has religious approval to use a nuclear device
against Americans, says the former head of the CIA unit charged with
tracking down the Saudi terrorist. The former agent, Michael Scheuer,
speaks to Steve Kroft in his first television interview without disguise
to be broadcast on 60 MINUTES Sunday, Nov. 14 (7:00-8:00 PM, ET/PT) on
the CBS Television Network.

Scheuer was until recently known as the "anonymous" author of two books
critical of the West's response to bin Laden and al Qaeda, the most
recent of which is titled IMPERIAL HUBRIS: WHY THE WEST IS LOSING THE
WAR ON TERROR, Brassey's, Inc, August © 2004, ISBN# 1574888498,
$27.50.

No one in the West knows more about the Qaeda leader than Scheuer, who
has tracked him since the mid-1980s. The CIA allowed him to write the
books provided he remain anonymous, but now is allowing him to reveal
himself for the first time on Sunday's broadcast; he formally leaves the
Agency today (12).

Even if bin Laden had a nuclear weapon, he probably wouldn't have used
it for a lack of proper religious authority - authority he has now.
"[Bin Laden] secured from a Saudi sheik...a rather long treatise on the
possibility of using nuclear weapons against the Americans," says
Scheuer. "[The treatise] found that he was perfectly within his rights
to use them. Muslims argue that the United States is responsible for
millions of dead Muslims around the world, so reciprocity would mean you
could kill millions of Americans," Scheuer tells Kroft.

Scheuer says bin Laden was criticized by some Muslims for the 9/11
attack because he killed so many people without enough warning and
before offering to help convert them to Islam. But now bin Laden has
addressed the American people and given fair warning. "They're intention
is to end the war as soon as they can and to ratchet up the pain for the
Americans until we get out of their region....If they acquire the
weapon, they will use it, whether it's chemical, biological or some sort
of nuclear weapon," says Scheuer.

As the head of the CIA unit charged with tracking bin Laden from 1996 to
1999, Scheuer says he never had enough people to do the job right. He
blames former CIA Director George Tenet. "One of the questions that
should have been asked of Mr. Tenet was why were there always enough
people for the public relations office, for the academic outreach
office, for the diversity and multi-cultural office? All those things
are admirable and necessary but none of them are protecting the American
people from a foreign threat," says Scheuer.

And the threat posed by bin Laden is also underestimated, says Scheuer.
"I think our leaders over the last decade have done the American people
a disservice... continuing to characterize Osama bin Laden as a thug, as
a gangster," he says. "Until we respect him, sir, we are going to die in
numbers that are probably unnecessary, yes. He's a very, very talented
man and A VERY WORTHY OPPONENT," he tells Kroft.

Until today (12), Scheuer was a senior official in the CIA's counter
terrorism unit and a special advisor to the head of the agency's bin
Laden unit.
-----------------------------------------
CIA AGENT PUBLICLY CHIDES WHITE HOUSE FOR TERROR WAR -
By Faye Bowers, The Christian Science Monitor, Friday, November 12, 2004

www.csmonitor.com/2004/1112/p02s02-usfp.html

WASHINGTON - It's a little like yelling an obscenity at a wedding. In
the etiquette of Washington, it has always been an unwritten rule that
members of the CIA don't publicly criticize the people they work for --
namely the US government.
>From the agency's inception some 50 years ago, the mantra of top
officials in particular has been to provide "hard" information --
estimates and analyses -- not public opinions about their bosses'
policies or veracity.

Now a senior CIA official is violating the trench-coat oath -- and
roiling already sensitive relations between the White House and the
nation's top spy agency. It comes at a time of major reform of the
nation's intelligence apparatus. Mike Scheuer, a 22-year veteran who
works in the CIA's Counterterrorist Center and is a former head of its
Osama bin Laden unit, is criticizing the Bush administration for going
to war in Iraq and for the way it has conducted the war on terror in
general. And he's doing it very publicly.

Mr. Scheuer, who says he will leave his job today after holding
"cordial" talks with his superiors on Wednesday, has been granting
interviews to members of the media for days -- and will appear Sunday
night on CBS's "60 Minutes."

"I have concluded that there has not been adequate national debate over
the nature of the threat posed by Osama bin Laden and the forces he
leads and inspires, and the nature and dimensions of the intelligence
reform needed to address that threat," Scheuer said yesterday. He hopes
to produce "a more substantive debate."

In many respects, his mini-revolt is just the most visible sign of a
tension that has existed between the White House and the CIA almost
since 9/11. As the agency has been censured for its failures leading up
to the Sept. 11, and for incorrect estimates about weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq, agency members have circulated information
defending their intelligence reporting and criticizing the Bush
administration for going to war in Iraq and diverting attention from
Osama bin Laden. Most of the missives have been anonymous leaks.

Never before, say government officials and outside experts, have
relations between the CIA and the administration been so contentious.
And never, they say, has the agency so publicly crossed the line to
involve itself in policy debate. A Wall Street Journal editorial went so
far as to call the agency's leaks and criticisms an "insurgency."

The agency was already in tumult. In the wake of numerous investigations
and fault-finding charges, former CIA director George Tenet resigned
this past summer, as did James Pavitt, the man who ran the agency's
day-to-day counterterrorism operations. Now, Congress is debating the
recommendations of the 9/11 commission. It's not yet clear to what
extent reforms -- such as appointing an über director with supervisory
and budgetary control over the entire intelligence community, or
creating a national counterterrorism center -- will be implemented. But
the agency is likely to lose much of the power and prestige it has
garnered over the past 50 years.

"You can't be a member of the CIA and read that as anything but the
status and power of the agency is going to decline," says Jim Walsh, an
expert on security at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of
Government. "I think it's understandable that some people may be sick
and tired of this or pretty darned mad."

That basically sums up Scheuer's take on events within the intelligence
community and the administration's policies. He has published two books
in the past 2-1/2 years, "Through Our Enemies Eyes," and "Imperial
Hubris," under "Anonymous." The agency had to clear the books for
classified information and potential mentions of sources and methods,
but couldn't prevent him from exercising his First Amendment right,
agency officials say. The agency also permitted Scheuer to grant media
interviews about the subjects of his books.

The first book was an in-depth look at Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda
network, and was very well received by experts on terrorism as well as
policymakers.

But his second, best-selling book released this past July, "Imperial
Hubris," was nothing less than an indictment of the administration's war
on terror. He criticized the administration for not immediately
responding against bin Laden following the 9/11 attacks. And he further
wrote that the war in Iraq was "an avaricious, premeditated, unprovoked
war against a foe who posed no immediate threat but whose defeat did
offer economic advantages."

Even Robert Baer, a retired CIA operative who has written two books that
are at least somewhat critical of government positions, says he thinks
Scheuer's criticisms went beyond the acceptable. "The CIA should not be
in a hostile position to the president," Mr. Baer says. "And the
"Imperial Hubris" book had to look that way to the White House."

But the interviews in particular have rankled government officials.
Scheuer was again permitted to talk "anonymously" with the media after
his latest book. But he apparently went beyond what the CIA thought he
would, and agency officials squelched his speaking engagements.

The interviews he did before being reined in, however, have continued to
appear, including in Vanity Fair (November) and The Atlantic Monthly
(December). The Atlantic article excerpts a letter that Scheuer sent to
the Senate Intelligence Committee in early September. In it, he
enumerates 10 instances since 1996 in which "the decisions of senior
intelligence community bureaucrats ... have been at the core of our
failure against Bin Laden." Scheuer also decided, without agency
approval, that he would grant interviews about the Atlantic Monthly
article.

"I've presented this information to two Investigator General studies
before 9/11 and to two IG [Inspector General] studies inside our
building after 9/11," Scheuer said in a telephone interview. "I've
testified before the 9/11 commission and the Shelby-Goss [congressional]
commissions. So I've exhausted all the internal mechanisms available to
an agency officer ... but I think to the average American, this is
important."

It's unknown how the CIA will handle the criticisms. Some say it will
likely try to work out an arrangement that would require him to curtail
his critiques. Others say the agency may sue to set an example. For now,
the agency refuses to comment.

"Some people will say he is crazy to publicly say these things," says
Charles Battaglia, former staff director for the Senate Intelligence
Committee. "But others will say he's acting on the courage of his
convictions."