It may seem quite normal in any other country to house "combatants" they capture in their own country... Only in America however would this be a subject for debate. No state wants Gitmo and the controversy surrounding the criminal judicial process used to implicate them in crimes on their soil. For these reasons republicrats are signaling they want Gitmo to remain open until something can be done with these patsies.

In spite of the fact that forced confessions for the September 11th attacks were acquired through the same torture practices as those brought on the other gitmo residents in question, Attorney General Eric Holder is investigating whether these other suspects (not implicated in 9/11) had their cases compromised by torture practices. Yet no one is questioning whether these same practices could have in anyway compromised the validity of Khalid Sheik Mohammads confession, the man who has nearly taken full responsibility for 9/11! With the exception of hinting at it here and there, but never moving significantly from their assertion that it was him

So as this divergent issue of which country the AMERICAN prison should be in (!) rages on, the implication of this man in 9/11 using the torture practices in question has slipped by unscathed. This can not be overstated.

See full article in the New York Times for a bullshit diversion.

Upon further review of the recent Dutch reality TV program that exonerated Osama Bin Laden from direct involvement in the 9/11 attacks (staged a mock trial with judge, prosecutor etc.). I became concerned that I was repressing one obvious fact in the process of hastily absorbing this seemingly good news; something that typically occurs when we hear good news. The reason Osama was exonerated on TV wasn't because the mock courtroom characters decided that the US was at all complicit with the 9/11 attacks, rather they simply transferred the blame onto tortured patsi Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (the one held in Guantanamo Bay for 5 years, and convicted in a kangaroo court). The website 9/11 truth presents the story as if it somehow validates the LIHOP perspective (Government "let it happen on purpose" ). But it doesnt. In fact, the recent program is an indication that because the dubiety of the Bin Laden myth is now mainstream, and 9/11 inquiry as rabid as ever, big brother has been forced to make some concessions. Not any real concessions though...  more like simply exchanging one fall guy for another. One who was tortured for years on end, and forced to give a confession so he wouldn't be beaten when he got back to his cell after leaving the courtroom. This one terrorist was also allegedly responsible for all of the of inconsistencies and coincidences surrounding the event. Like demolishing World Trade Center 7 for example.

The bottom line is that this is more fractional truth; a mere tease. If anything it gets "truthers' to unknowingly accept the Khalid Sheikh Mohammad fantasy, while tricking them into thinking that the system has made some kind of concession. No they haven't, and this show was hardly daring or independent as it is painted out to be. They basically said the exact same thing they did on the mainstream news!!! So if 9/11 truth.com is telling you that this Dutch TV show is balsy, daring and independent for essentially regurgitating the mainstream lie (in a good cop/ bad cop sort of way) then maybe its time for the website to change its name...