Has Osama Bin Laden been dead for seven years

- and are the U.S. and Britain covering it up to continue war on terror?

Snipped from the article . . .

What if everything we have seen or heard of him on video and audio tapes since the early days after 9/11 is a fake - and that he is being kept 'alive' by the Western allies to stir up support for the war on terror?

Incredibly, this is the breathtaking theory that is gaining credence among political commentators, respected academics and even terror experts.
Of course, there have been any number of conspiracy theories concerning 9/11, and it could be this is just another one.

But the weight of opinion now swinging behind the possibility that Bin Laden is dead - and the accumulating evidence that supports it - makes the notion, at the very least, worthy of examination.

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'


Read More

Yes, he's dead. Yes, he's been dead. Yes he is a huge moneymaker for the U.S. and U.K. governments. Yes, he's helped them grab more power and control over their own citizens than possibly any other man in either of their histories.

Yes, I've been saying this for years.

 

Yeah? I heard the CIA has confirmed it so it must be true.

Hey Hank, did you ever see the movie Forrest Gump?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

Did you ever see the real Osama Bin Laden?

 

Neither Bush nor Obama would dare kill the goose that keeps laying the golden egg for the miltary industrial complex. Besides the nation building experiments in Iraq and Afghanistan never had anything to do with fighting terror.

There's more profit to be made for the likes of General Electric, SAIC, and all those other military contractors that make up the MIC in a neverending global war than a quick victory for the United States.

According to the January/February 2003 Multinational Monitor:

Each major element of the George Walker Bush administration's national security strategy -- from the doctrines of preemptive strikes and "regime change" in Iraq, to its aggressive nuclear posture and commitment to deploying a Star Wars-style missile defense system -- was developed and refined before the Bush administration took office, at corporate-backed conservative think tanks like the Center for Security Policy, the National Institute for Public Policy and the Project for a New American Century.

Unilateralist ideologues formerly affiliated with these think tanks, along with the 32 major administration appointees who are former executives with, consultants for, or significant shareholders of top Defense contractors, are driving U.S. foreign and military policy. The arms lobby is exerting more influence over policymaking than at any time since President Dwight D. Eisenhower first warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex over 40 years ago.

It is not just industry-backed think tanks that have infiltrated the administration. Former executives, consultants or shareholders of top U.S. defense companies pervade the Bush national security team. Exploiting the fears following 9/11, and impervious to budgetary constraints imposed on virtually every other form of federal spending, the ideologue-industry nexus is driving the United States to war in Iraq and a permanently aggressive war-fighting posture that will simultaneously starve other government programs and make the world a much more dangerous place.

The overarching concern of the ideologues and the arms industry is to increase military spending. On this score, they have been tremendously successful. In its two years in office, the Bush administration has sought more than $150 billion in new military spending, the vast majority of which has been approved by Congress with few questions asked. Spending on national defense is nearing $400 billion for fiscal year (FY) 2003, up from $329 billion when Bush took office. SOURCE

What purpose does the ghost of Usama Bin Lazarus serve? To spread radical Islam? Naw, something more basic and all American than that. He exists only to maintain and increase America's defense spending.

You might think in red white and blue but the arms traders and their partners in government only think in one color. Green!

There's more money in long wars than short ones.

 

Johnv said, "It makes more sense to accuse the government of faking his death, rather than faking his still being alive."

In light of the fact that one can hardly see a line of seperation between the arms dealers and the U.S. government these days I'd say it makes more sense to fake him being alive. C'mon John. Profit is the bottom line with the military industrial complex. Hundreds of billions of dollars and multiple thousands of jobs are at stake here. Killing off Bin Lazarus = killing off profits.

Killing off Bin Lazarus ergo long term profits isn't exactly in the best interests of those who butter their bread with war, wars and more wars is it?

Your conclusion seems to heavily rely on the assumption that government is basically honest and has the people's best interest at heart.

But . . . we all know better than that. The "cold war" is over and so the MIC needs another boogeyman/global threat in order to maintain and yes, increase it's funding. Simply put. Global threat = more money. Global stability = less money.

Which condition do you really think the global arms dealers that have infested our government prefer?

 

Which do they prefer Johnv, more money or less money? Long term profits or short term profits?

Killing off Bin Lazarus would be like cutting off their nose to spite their face. Bin Lazarus' ghost is a most valuable asset to the global arms traders and their political flunkies that have infiltrated Washington DC and the U.S. foreign policy making apparatus.

Strip away all the red white and blue propaganda, racism and fearmongering and we find out the "global war on terror" is nothing but a vehicle to sustain and increase defense spending in the post cold war era.

BTW, our borders are still unsecured and there's still three trillion dollars missing from the Pentagon.