“underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab transcript of statement on guilty plea to federal court

“underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab transcript of statement on guilty plea to federal court in Detroit:

“In the name of Allah, the most merciful, if I were to say I the father did not do it, but my son did it and he conspired with the holy spirit to do it, or if I said I did it but the American people are guilty of the sin, and Obama should pay for the crime, the Court wouldn't accept that from me or anyone else.

“In late 2009, in fulfillment of a religious obligation, I decided to participate in jihad against the United States. The Koran obliges every able Muslim to participate in jihad and fight in the way of Allah, those who fight you, and kill them wherever you find them, some parts of the Koran say, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

“I had an agreement with at least one person to attack the United States in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel and in retaliation of the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Palestine, especially in the blockade of Gaza, and in retaliation for the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Yemen, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and beyond, most of them women, children, and noncombatants.

“As a result, I traveled to Yemen and eventually to the United States, and I agreed with at least one person to carry an explosive device onto an aircraft and attempt to kill those onboard and wreck the aircraft as an act of jihad against the United States for the U.S. killing of my Muslim brothers and sisters around the world.

“I was greatly inspired to participate in jihad by the lectures of the great and rightly guided mujahedeen who is alive, Sheikh Anwar al-Awlaki, may Allah preserve him and his family and give them victory, Amin, and Allah knows best.

“Participation in jihad against the United States is considered among the most virtuous of deeds in Islam and is highly encouraged in the Koran; however, according to U.S. law, which is unjust and oppressive according to the Koran, my actions make me guilty of a crime in the United States, in particular, the following counts in my indictment.

“Count 1, conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism transcending national boundaries, so by me traveling to Yemen, then to Djibouti, to Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, the Netherlands, and eventually the United States, with an agreement with at least one person to carry an explosive device in an attempt to kill those onboard for the U.S. killing of innocent Muslims, I'm guilty in U.S. law of this count.

“Count 2, possession of a firearm or destructive device in the furtherance of a crime of violence, I carried with me an explosive device onto Northwest 253, again, to avenge the killing of my innocent Muslim brothers and sisters by the U.S. So I am guilty in U.S. law of this count.

“Count 3, attempted murder within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, again, in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel and Israel massacres of innocent Palestinians, so I am guilty of this count, too.

“Count 4, use and carrying of a firearm, destructive device during and in relation to a crime of violence by carrying an explosive device and attempting to use it on Flight 253 for the U.S. killing of innocent Muslims, I am guilty of this count, too.

“Count 5, willfully placing a destructive device in and upon, in proximity to a civil aircraft which was used and operated in interstate, overseas, and foreign air commerce which was likely to have endangered the safety of such aircraft, I intentionally carried an explosive device onto Flight 253, for the United States tyranny and oppression of Muslims, so I am guilty of this count in U.S. law, but not in the Koran.

“Count 6, possession of a firearm/destructive device in furtherance of a crime of violence. I was in possession of an explosive device intended for use against the United States for U.S. interference in Muslim countries, so I am guilty in U.S. law of this count.

“Count 7, attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction, I attempted to use an explosive device which in the U.S. law is a weapon of mass destruction, which I call a blessed weapon to save the lives of innocent Muslims, for U.S. use of weapons of mass destruction on Muslim populations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and beyond. So I am guilty in U.S. law of this count and innocent in Muslim law.

“Count 8, willful attempt to destroy and wreck a civil aircraft, I intended to wreck a civil aircraft for the U.S. wreckage of Muslim lands and property, so I am guilty in U.S. law of this count.

“The United States -- the United States should be warned that if they continue and persist in promoting the blasphemy of Muhammad and the prophets, peace be upon them all, and the U.S. continues to kill and support those who kill innocent Muslims, then the U.S. should await a great calamity that will befall them through the hands of the mujahideen soon by God's willing permission. Or God will strike them directly with a great calamity soon by his will, Amin.

“If you laugh at us now, we will laugh at you later in this life and on the day of judgment by God's will, and our final call is all praise to Allah, the lord of the universe, Allahu Akbar.”

Source: U.S. District Court, Detroit

✭Send link to others: http://tinyurl.com/UnderwearBomber
Please Join ☞ http://Tinyurl.com/JoinEmail
http://Tinyurl.com/YouTubeSub

NEW VIDEO: Underwear Bomber was retaliating for U.S. support of Israel & killing of innocent Muslims

http://m.freep.com/localheadlines/article?a=2011111012038&f=1231

http://www.freep.com/article/20111012/NEWS01/111012038/Transcript-Read-Abdulmutallab-s-statement-guilty-plea

#occupywallstreet I was down there last night, wanted to print put could not find a copy place that was open.

#occupywallstreet I was down there at Zuccotti Park last night, I wanted to print out my Solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street protesters flyer but could not find a copy place that was open!

If anyone wants to help, you can click here for a link to a pdf of the flyer, you can download, print and distribute it. It saves paper because each page has three flyers so you can cut it in thirds to hand out to people:

Not Just Israel

NEW VIDEO: Not Just Israel, Iraq War Lies BIG too! Parts 1 and 2

#occupywallstreet Tax Stock Trades NOW! Tax Stock Trading!

#occupywallstreet Tax Stock Trades NOW! A Key Demand: Tax Stock Trading!
Read about it: A small tax on all financial-market transactions

Checks and balances that could help the people aren't automatically implemented. If a small group of powerful interests don't want you to know about something, it is possible (there's a pattern) they can get away with keeping you in the dark. The Tobin Tax is a good example.

“Tobin Tax has been scorned or ignored by the world’s key financial institutions — and thus by their political and academic minions. The commercial media have also disdained to report or comment on Tobin’s proposal. So much so that, when a major book, The Tobin Tax : Coping With Financial Volatility, was published last year by the prestigious Oxford University Press, it was boycotted by the media because (according to Noam Chomsky ) of pressure exerted by the big American financial institutions, as well as the Clinton administration.” Rodney Schmidt Tobin Tax

Nader makes a good case for it, pointing out that a transaction tax "would certainly raise enough to make the Wall Street crooks and gamblers pay for their own Washington bailout." Also, I support a tax on currency trades across borders. "Called the Tobin Tax after its originator, the late James Tobin, a Nobel laureate economist at Yale University, 10 to 25 cents per hundred dollars of the huge amounts of dollars traded each day across borders would produce from $100 to $300 billion per year."

Economist Robert Pollin explains, “A small tax on all financial-market transactions, comparable to a sales tax, would raise the costs on short-term speculative trading while having negligible effect on people who trade infrequently. It would thus discourage speculation and channel funds toward productive investment.” - Tax The Speculators

If anyone wants to help, you can click here for a link to a pdf of the flyer, you can download, print and distribute it. It saves paper because each page has three flyers so you can cut it in thirds to hand out to people:

Tinyurl.com/OWSflyer

★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★

Please Join ☞ http://Tinyurl.com/JoinEmail

http://Tinyurl.com/YouTubeSub

The Problem Was Not "Faulty Intelligence"

Throughout his interview with UNSCOM, a U.N. special commission,Hussein Kamel reiterated his main point - that nothing was left. "All chemical weapons were destroyed," he said. "I ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear - were destroyed."

Nevertheless, the administration continued to selectively use Kamel's disclosures to bolster its case that Iraq had hidden stockpiles of banned weapons.

The Problem Was Not "Faulty Intelligence," the Problem Was Dishonestly Selecting And Omitting Intelligence

Video PROOF Bush Lied about excuse for Iraq War

PROOF Bush Lied about excuse for Iraq War: 'Saddam didn't let UN weapons inspectors in' is a LIE!

9/11 Suffering

NEW VIDEO: 9/11 Suffering: There hasn't been a full accounting for those sharing blame.

9/11/11 Video: 9/11 Motive & Media Betrayal

9/11 Motive & Media Betrayal See What Dan Rather would NOT READ on 9/11: ISRAEL, the MOTIVE, the WHY of the attacks Motive suppressed by the media! Anger at US support of Israel is something TV news reporters were clearly reluctant to report and that is outrageous because it was the main motivation for 9/11. See Dan Rather in action. Motive suppressed by the media! Omitting motive of anger at US support of Israel is Media Betrayal. Michael Scheuer (former CIA intelligence officer and CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief 1996-99) points out that our politicians are lying to us about why our lives are being put at risk with regard to the motivation of the terrorists attack the U.S. Why they hate us ISN'T "hatred of our freedoms" but rather hatred of specific foreign policies of the U.S. government which are, in fact, unjust, immoral and illegal. The top grievance is anger at the U.S. government's policy of aiding and abetting Israeli crimes.

9/11 Charlatans

9/11 Charlatans EXPOSED Denying Building 7 Damage

Look Across the Street from Building 7

Look Across the Street from Building 7

On 9/11, WTC7 Collapse Was Firemen's Concern (controlled demolition debunked)

On 9/11, WTC7 Collapse Was Firemen's Concern (controlled demolition debunked)

9/11: What You Don't Know is Killing People

NEW VIDEO: 9/11: What You Don't Know is Killing People

9/11 Truth Movement Doesn't Know These Facts. Let's set it straight for the 10th Anniversary. NOT controlled demolition!

Hurricane IRENE

Hurricane IRENE (The National Weather Service is vital!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yab1T0rYXoY

Gage Tells 9/11 Lies

SEE VIDEO: Gage Tells 9/11 Lies, See Bowing Debunks 'Controlled Demolition'

9/11 Truth FRAUD Richard Gage "Controlled Demolition" theory is a con.

9/11 Reality Regardless

9/11 Reality Regardless of What Rather Reported, Misreported or Wouldn't Report

http://TinyUrl.com/911Reality

Dan Rather wouldn't report anger at US support of Israel as motive on 9/11. This is one of my 9/11 10th Anniversary videos, more to come. Also read " As If Reality Wasn't Bad Enough

Obama Violated US Constitution

Obama Violated US Constitution, Libya War is Abuse of Power & Betrayal of People's Trust

Obama violated his oath to the U.S. Constitution and betrayed the trust of the American people because he had no right to involve our military in a war in Libya. His violation of the Constitution is a wrong against all U.S. citizens, not only those who trusted him when he made these explicate statements in order to gain our trust. He tricked people into voting for him. We are being robbed of our rights which are stipulated in our Constitution. We have rights, the primary one is our right to our Constitutional republic. The father of the Constitution warned of exactly this abuse of power on the part of a president, James Madison explained how our Constitution was deliberately designed to prevent a president from doing what Obama has done. "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." Our Constitution was deliberately designed to prevent Obama from doing what he explicitly promised he would not do if we entrusted him to uphold the Constitution!

He should be impeached. SEE VIDEO, PASS IT ON: http://tinyurl.com/ObamaViolatedOath

You Assume Obama Answered?

NEW VIDEO: You Assume Obama Answered Chuck Todd's Question if War Powers Act Constitutional?

(Response to a comment on my previous video.)

Obama didn't even answer Chuck Todd's question

NEWEST VIDEO: You Assume Obama Answered Chuck Todd's Q War Powers Act Constitutional?

NEW VIDEO: Chuck Todd's "Tough" Question for Obama just a Diversion

OBAMA: Chuck Todd?

CHUCK TODD: Thank you, Mr. President.

There have been a lot of questions about the constitutionality -- constitutional interpretations of a few decisions you've made, so I'd just simply ask: Do you believe the War Powers Act is constitutional? Do you believe that the debt limit is constitutional, the idea that Congress can do this? And do you believe that marriage is a civil right?

(LAUGHTER)

OBAMA: Well, that was a hodge-podge.

(LAUGHTER)

Chuck we're going to assign you to the Supreme Court, man.

(LAUGHTER)

I -- I'm not a Supreme Court justice, so I'm not -- I'm not going to put my constitutional law professor hat on here.

Let me focus on initially the issue of Libya. I want to talk about the substance of Libya, because there's been all kinds of noise about process and congressional consultation and so forth. Let's talk about concretely what's happened.

Moammar Gadhafi, who prior to Osama bin Laden was responsible for more American deaths than just about anybody on the planet, was threatening to massacre his people. And as part of an international coalition, under a U.N. mandate that is almost unprecedented, we went in and took out air defense systems so that an international coalition could provide a no-fly zone, could protect -- provide humanitarian protection to the people on the ground.
I spoke to the American people about what we would do. I said there would be no troops on the ground. I said that we would not be carrying the lion's share of this operation, but as members of NATO we would be supportive of it because it's in our national security interests and also because it's the right thing to do.

OBAMA: We have done exactly what I said we would do.
We have not put any boots on the ground. And our allies, who historically we've complained aren't willing to carry enough of the -- the load when it comes to NATO operations, have carried a big load when it comes to these NATO operations. And, as a consequence, we've protected thousands of people in Libya, we have not seen a single U.S. casualty, there's no risks of additional escalation, this operation is limited in time and in scope.

So I said to the American people, "Here's our narrow mission." We have carried out that narrow mission in exemplary fashion. And throughout this process we consulted with Congress. We've had 10 hearings on it. We've sent reams of information about what the operations are. I've had -- I've had all the members of Congress over to talk about it.

So a lot of this fuss is politics. And if you look substantively at what we've done, we -- we have done exactly what we said to do under a U.N. mandate and we have protected thousands of lives in the process, and as a consequence, a guy who was a state sponsor of terrorist operations against the United States of America is pinned down and the noose is tightening around him.
Now, when you look at the history of the War Powers Resolution, it came up after the Vietnam War, in which we had half a million soldiers there, tens of thousands of lives lost, hundreds of billions of dollar spent. And Congress said, "You know what? We don't want something like that happening again. So if you're going to start getting us into those kinds of commitments, you've got to consult with Congress beforehand." And I think that such consultation is entirely appropriate.

But do I think that our actions in any way violate the War Powers Resolution? The answer is no. So I don't even have to get to the constitutional question.
There may -- there -- there may -- there may be a time...

(CROSSTALK)

OBAMA: There -- there -- there may be a time in which there was be a serious question as to whether or not the War Powers Resolution Act was constitutional. I don't have to get to the question.

OBAMA: We have engaged in a limited operation to help a lot of people against one of the worst tyrants in the world, somebody who nobody should want to defend. And we should be sending out a unified message to this guy that he should step down and give his people a fair chance to live their lives without fear.
And -- and this suddenly becomes the cause celebre for some folks in Congress? Come on.
So, you had -- what? -- a three-parter?

(LAUGHTER)

CHUCK TODD: (OFF-MIKE)

OBAMA: What -- what are -- what are the other two?

CHUCK TODD: There is some question about the constitutionality of the War Powers (OFF-MIKE)

OBAMA: I'm just saying, I don't have to reach it. That's -- that's a good legal answer.

Chuck Todd's "Tough" Question for Obama

NEW VIDEO: Chuck Todd's "Tough" Question for Obama just a Diversion Obama's violated the Constitution with his Libya War but Chuck Todd helps divert attention away from that fact with question about the war powers act, asking if Obama thinks it is constitutional. The press conferences are not being run correctly, the people are being short changed. President Obama read from a list, he selected Chuck Todd to ask the question of him. http://TinyUrl.com/JoinEmail

Civil Discourse on YouTube

We Can Have Civil Discourse Here on YouTube (NEW VIDEO * CLICK HERE) Communicate Please! Civilized Society Must Have Civil Discourse. Let's not throw away our opportunity here on Youtube. We have to work together to overcome the domination of or public discourse by a powerful elite.

NBC Political Director Chuck Todd notified the Kucinich campaign

Remember:

"Less than 44 hours after NBC sent a congratulatory note and an invitation to Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich to participate in the Jan. 15 Democratic Presidential debate in Las Vegas, the network notified the campaign this morning it was changing its announced criteria, rescinding its invitation, and excluding Kucinich from the debate.

NBC Political Director Chuck Todd notified the Kucinich campaign this morning that, although Kucinich had met the qualification criteria publicly announced on December 28, the network was "re-doing" the criteria, excluding Kucinich, and planning to invite only Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and former senator John Edwards" - From Kucinich campaign Press release

See Video: Boycott the MSNBC Democratic Debate On Tuesday

Blockade of the Straits of Tiran

Image and reality of the Israel-Palestine conflict

By Norman G. Finkelstein

blockade of the straits of tiran, p137

p138

Also see: Egypt's actions were accordance with International Law and Egypt was willing to have the matter arbitrated.

The Menachem Begin quote ("In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.")

Also see this link for more about this: Egypt's actions were accordance with International Law and Egypt was willing to have the matter arbitrated.

NOT Weiner's Only Lie! See What He Claims ...

NOT Weiner's Only Lie! See What He Claims About ISRAEL and the WEST BANK!

About Israel & 9/11

About Israel & 9/11: Caller is Correct, Politician is Wrong

PASS IT ON: http://tinyurl.com/Israeland911

Let's go to James in Los Angeles. Independent caller, you're on the air.
Thank you. What about what General Petraeus had said about U.S. support for Israel against the Palestinians being a threat to American troops in theater? And yesterday, we see Netanyahu getting more standing ovations than President Obama did at the State of the Union. It's outrageous. You can go to America-Hijacked.com

Our support for Israel is what got us attacked on 9/11, you can read page 147 of the 9/11Commission Report, "Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel." Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

In their book, "Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission," Hamilton and Kean say "this was sensitive ground," and some commissioners worried "listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al Qaeda's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy."

Philip Zelikow, "According to KSM, Bin Ladin had even asked that the attacks occur as early as mid-2000, after Israeli opposition party leader Ariel Sharon caused an outcry in the Middle East by visiting a sensitive and contested holy site in Jerusalem that is sacred to both Muslims and Jews. Although Bin Ladin recognized that Atta and the other pilots had only just arrived in the United States to begin their flight training, the al Qaeda leader wanted to punish the United States for supporting Israel. He allegedly told KSM it would be sufficient simply to down the planes and not hit specific targets." p18
Play Video


MR. HAMILTON: I'm interested in the question of motivation of these hijackers, and my question is really directed to the agents. … But what have you found out about why these men did what they did? What motivated them to do it?
MR. FITZGERALD: I believe they feel a sense of outrage against the United States. They identify with the Palestinian problem, they identify with people who oppose repressive regimes, and I believe they tend to focus their anger on the United States as to what would motivate a young man to sacrifice his rights, to, really, go to that extraordinary next step to do that. Much of it, I believe, originates in rage, and I think when you look at the 19 hijackers and see where they came from, you can begin to see the seeds of that -- that disenfranchisement and anger.
Play Video

Jeremy Scahill: And then another event happened before the Fallujah ambush of the Blackwater contractors. On March 22, the Israeli military killed Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was a cleric bound in a wheelchair, as he was coming out of morning prayers, killed him and about a half a dozen people in his entourage. And in Fallujah, there was a massive protest against that. And already people believed that the Israelis and the US were working hand-in-hand during the occupation of Iraq. So that was the context leading up to the Fallujah ambush, and it’s almost never talked about.
So the people of Fallujah—I think, rightly—were very outraged at their treatment at the hands of the US and its allies and saw this sort of relationship between the US and Israel as one of conquest in the Middle East and certainly in Iraq. In fact, many people in Iraq believed that private military contractors, like Blackwater, were either CIA or Mossad. So it’s very likely that when those guys rolled into Fallujah that morning, that people thought they were attacking a CIA convoy or a Mossad convoy.
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/3/20/blackwater_the_rise_of_the_worlds

Atta was chosen as the emir, or leader, of the mission. He met with Bin Ladin to discuss the targets: the World Trade Center, which represented the U.S. economy; the Pentagon, a symbol of the U.S. military; and the U.S. Capitol, the perceived source of U.S. policy in support of Israel. The White House was also on the list, as Bin Ladin considered it a political symbol and wanted to attack it as well. p4 http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/staff_statements/staff_statement_16.pdf

How Israel is Reported to the American People

VIDEO: How Israel is Reported to the American People, Decades of Deception. BTW, Israel Started the 1967 War.
Notice how that almost always goes unreported?

New Video With Transcript

YOu can view the transcript on the video by clicking the "CC" at the bottom of the video. See video here: What Really Happened: Osama bin Laden Death Photo Claim Debunked open letter

Below is a transcript of the words spoke in the above video (Mike Rivero is talking first):
"The photograph presented to the world as proof that Osama bin Laden was dead is a fake. And not only is it a fake, it's apparently been floating around the Internet for like a couple of years. And so, this is another obvious very heavy handed government deception. Alright, obviously top story of the day continues to be Obama bin lying about Osama bin photoshopped."

No Mike, that picture is NOT what President Obama claims to be Osama bin Laden's body. You're fooling people into thinking that Obama released the picture you're showing. Obama, his administration and the US government are NOT making any claims about this photo. They didn't release it, you're taking an old photo from some other source and making a false claim about it.. Could you please post a link to this video to correct your false news story? It's unfair of you to push falsehoods on your website like this.

Those watching this video may not know that I'm addressing an open letter to Mike Rivero who operates a website which, if you have a false idea about bin Laden or 9/11, it's likely you received the false information, either directly or indirectly, from his site. False claims are a pattern on his site.

"But we have a DNA test, even though DNA tests actually take 48 hours. To prove it was really him. And then they had this photo of the dead body all over the media."

Within the same article he argues that the a DNA test couldn't be performed in less than 48 hours. Here's a clip that disputes that: You can get DNA results in less than 12 hours. Another geneticist has been quoted as saying DNA analysis can be completed in as few as 6 hours if it's a prioritized task.
Now look at the source for Mike's claim that DNA tests can't be done in less that 48 hours. This is the level of his research. The most frustrating thing is he has an enormous influence. Mike, you know you do. And it's damaging to the public discourse because I want to make several videos talking seriously about bin Laden and 9/11 and this kind of nonsense undermines that.
Usama bin Laden, we ca'' him "UBL." That's him. Yeah, he just released a fatwa to his followers, a declaration of jihad against America.

Look at his theory about "the plane that crashed into the Pentagon." Even when he understands the fact that a plane did indeed hit the Pentagon, he still manages to claim there's a government conspiracy involved! Even after he sees how absurd the "no plane hit the Pentagon" theory is, he doesn't want to learn from that and question just how possible it is that people are pushing false theories due to ignorance. Instead of questioning the reasoning of people promoting false theories, he wants to blame the government for creating the "no plane hit the pentagon" theory! Don't you think this demonstrates that Mike has government conspiracy on the brain? By blaming the government for tricking web sites, he shifts blame away from these web sites' poor reasoning and research skills.

Also sharing a big part of the blame for these conspiracy theories arising, is both mainstream and alternative media, because they failed to effectively report the motives for the attacks to the general public.They didn't adequately challenge the big lies about why the U.S. was attacked, instead their behavior reinforced confusion and suspicion. Powerful elites like Thomas Friedman have gotten away with fooling people and they share the blame for the existence of these illogical conspiracy theories. There are real abuses of power which we need to address, don't let people fool you into not doing something about it. Please subscribe and share this video with others.

Osama bin Laden & '9/11 Truth'

Osama bin Laden & '9/11 Truth' Conspiracy Factory: Axis of Ignorance Mike Rivero pushes conspiracy theories on his popular website. He's misdirecting people & thus undermining efforts to achieve peace.

Osama Bin Laden Conspiracy

Osama Bin Laden Conspiracy: BOTH Causes of Death! Died Naturally & Murdered?

Obama Speech: Osama Bin Laden Killed. Shot Dead in Pakistan

Obama Speech: Osama Bin Laden Killed. Shot Dead in Pakistan
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who's responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

It was nearly 10 years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history. The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory -- hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.

And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world. The empty seat at the dinner table. Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father. Parents who would never know the feeling of their child's embrace. Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts.

On September 11, 2001, in our time of grief, the American people came together. We offered our neighbors a hand, and we offered the wounded our blood. We reaffirmed our ties to each other, and our love of community and country. On that day, no matter where we came from, what God we prayed to, or what race or ethnicity we were, we were united as one American family.

We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice. We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda -- an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe. And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.

Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we've made great strides in that effort. We've disrupted terrorist attacks and strengthened our homeland defense. In Afghanistan, we removed the Taliban government, which had given bin Laden and al Qaeda safe haven and support. And around the globe, we worked with our friends and allies to capture or kill scores of al Qaeda terrorists, including several who were a part of the 9/11 plot.

Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan. Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world.

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body. SEE PART 2

"Long Story Short" Falsifies Iraq War History

Lies dominate public discourse in this country. Here's another example: Colin Quinn theater show on HBO.

Colin Quinn's False History Pushes Iraq War LIE about UN inspectors & Saddam

We need to be organized in order to push BASIC FACTS into public discourse so we can counter the elite's agenda to mislead the public. Please subscribe to this channel and tell others. Please join the email list too, we need to be able to act quickly to give our efforts an extra boost. We need to start creating the foundation for the formal establishment of a representative press — a media system of checks and balances which is totally transparent and under the general public's complete control. Add your ideas and questions in comments to this video AND at the Representative Press forum.

"We have Nothing to Hide" transcript

SEE VIDEO: "We have Nothing to Hide" US Hypocrisy: Refusing Access to Manning DAILY PRESS BRIEFING Apr. 12, 2011 Acting Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner delivers the U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing at the State Department.

STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN MARK C. TONER: … Look, for our part, we are – we do our Human Rights Reports every year. We are candid in our exchanges with China about human rights concerns both from the podium and in our private meetings with them. And certainly, we don’t regard it as an interference in our internal affairs when any foreign government or individual organization monitors our human rights practices. And we are proud to say that our system of government allows for that kind of comment without fear or without fear of recrimination. And it speaks to the value of our system, we feel. 

So I wouldn’t describe it as that. (*see botom of this post for prior question from Matthew Lee which includes the description Toner refers to.) Obviously, we’ve got a very broad and complex and varied relationship with China, and as the President said, it’s one of the pivotal relationships of the 21st century, and we feel that these kinds of people-to-people, individual-to-individual exchanges build that relationship and strengthen it going forward. 



MATTHEW LEE (Associated Press): Can you explain why, if the United States is proud of its human rights record, that the UN special rapporteur has complained that you’re not allowing him independent access to Bradley Manning? 



TONER: We’ve been in contact with the UN special rapporteur. We’ve had conversations with you in terms of access to –

LEE: With me?



TONER: I’m sorry. We’ve had conversations with the special rapporteur. We’ve discussed Bradley Manning’s case with him. But in terms of visits to PFC Manning, that’s something for the Department of Defense. 



LEE: And the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) with the same problem? You are – the State Department is the direct contact with the ICRC. At least it was for the Guantanamo inmates. Have you had any contact with them?



TONER: I’m not aware. I don’t know. I’d have to look into that. But in terms of the UN special rapporteur, we’ve had conversations with him. We have ongoing conversations with him. But in terms of access to Manning, that’s something for the Department of Defense. 



ARSHAD MOHAMMED (Reuters): If you welcome scrutiny, where’s the harm? 



TONER: I said we’re having conversations with him. We’re trying to work with him to meet his needs. But I don’t understand the question. 



MOHAMMED: Well, you said you welcome scrutiny from outsiders of the United States human rights record –



TONER: Right. We do.



MOHAMMED: – that you feel that it speaks to the strength of the U.S. system. So why does it take very lengthy conversations to agree to let a UN special rapporteur have access to an inmate? 



TONER: Well, again, for the specific visitation requests, that’s something that Department of Defense would best answer. But look, we’ve been very clear that there’s a legal process underway. We’ve been forthright, I think, in talking about Private – PFC Manning’s situation. We are in conversations, ongoing conversations with the special rapporteur. We have nothing to hide. But in terms of an actual visit to Manning, that’s something that DOD would handle.



LEE: Well, but you have conveyed messages from DOD back to the UN on this?



TONER: Well, no. We’re just – look, we’re aware of his requests. We’re working with him. 



LEE: Can – you said you’ve been forthright in your discussions of his treatment. It seems to me that the only person who was forthright in discussions of his treatment resigned several days after making those comments. What – can you explain what you mean by you’ve been forthright in terms of his treatment?



TONER: He is being held in legal detention. There’s a legal process underway, so I’m not going to discuss in any more detail than what I – beyond what I’ve just said because there’s a legal process underway.

LEE: So that’s what you mean by forthright?

TONER: I can’t discuss – I can’t discuss his treatment.



LEE: Being forthright is saying nothing because there’s a legal process underway; is that correct? 



TONER: That’s not correct at all. And we’ve – we continue to talk to the special rapporteur about his case. 



LEE: Well, okay. So if you’ve been – what do you talk to him about? 



TONER: I’m not going to talk about –



LEE: He says, “I’d like to visit him and I need to do it privately,” and you say, “No,” and that’s –



TONER: I’m not going to talk about the substance of those conversations. I’d just say we feel we’ve been –



LEE: Well, then I don’t understand how you can say that you’re being forthright about it if you refuse to talk about it. And if you don’t talk about it, at least – forget about what the actual conditions of his treatment are, but if you’re not prepared to talk about your conversations with the special rapporteur, that’s being even less than not being forthright because you’re not telling us what you told him. 



TONER: But you understand the legal constraints that I’m operating under because this is an ongoing legal process. 



LEE: Right. But –



TONER: He is being held –



LEE: I understand that you’re put in a difficult position where you say that you’re willing, as Arshad noted when the – that you’re – you don’t understand why China is so upset because the U.S. is willing to open up its human rights situation to all kinds of scrutiny -- 



TONER: And, Matt – 



LEE: And then the first example that anyone raises, you’re not. 



TONER: And, Matt, I would raise with you the fact that much of China’s report came from open source, which is what an independent media does, and would note that that kind of independent media does serve a function. And there are details about the Manning case and other human rights concerns out there, but I’m not going to talk about it here.

-------

LEE: Last week we saw the annual ritualistic dance of your release of the Human Rights Report and the Chinese immediate condemnation of it, which, frankly, has gotten a little bit tiring every year. But do you think that that coming so soon after this – after this exchange, the annual exchange of vitriol, that these talks will be as productive as they might otherwise be?

TONER: I don’t know if I agree with your characterization of it as an annual exchange of vitriol. Look, for our part, we are ... (continues at the top of this post)

New Chomsky Video

Chomsky explains who U.S. leaders work for and what they have done. NEW VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBI9mC77igo

Posted 2 Questions

I posted 2 questions to the "Ask YouTube" policy event.

SEE VIDEO:

My Questions for "Ask YouTube" policy event

Here is the longer version of 2nd question: I have seen some of my videos get excluded from being listed in "popular," is there an intentional mechanism by which this happening? I think people should know if videos are getting handicapped and why, the partner and the public. I don't know if there is software that adds up number of flags and automatically demotes a video out of the top 100 popular for a given category. It is not made clear how it is determined, could you do so? I don't even know if there is software or why it is happening. Does it clear an editor? Could you provide partners the math used to determine position within "popular" and "top news?" If people are able to group together and false flag a video and those flags can have an effect on if a video gets to be listed in the top 100 of a given category, I think that is obviously not fair. Could you provide partners with the math if it exists? Could you give a partner channel the benefit of the doubt after it has a good total track record of about 5 years and not exclude a video from being listed if it accumulates a buck of flags? I am not sure how or why it has happened to some of my videos.

Torturing Manning

Bradley Manning is accused of being the source for documents published by WikiLeaks which exposed U.S. government crimes. "I want people to see the truth . . . regardless of who they are . . . because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public." VIDEO: Forced Nudity Abuse & Torture MUST STOP NOW!

Chomsky on Egypt, Obama, Israel & Mubarak (U.S. Policy Supports Brutal Dictator)

VIDEO: Chomsky on Egypt, Obama, Israel & Mubarak (U.S. Policy Supports Brutal Dictator)

There is Strength in Numbers, Please Join the Email List

Even Subscribing Helps

You Can Tell Others

Donate to Help:

What We Say Goes: Conversations on U.S. Power in a Changing World

Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy

Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky

BTW, President Sadat of Egypt had offered a full peace treaty to Israel in 1971 but Israel rejected it. "Sadat's offer was closely in accord with official U.S. policy, but Washington decided to back Israel's rejection of it, adopting Kissinger's policy of "stalemate": no negotiations, only force." (Chomsky, Failed States, p. 173) Powerful media outlets like the New York Times falsify history by denying Sadat ever made the 1971 peace offer. "Newsweek refused even to print a letter correcting outright falsehoods on this matter by their columnist George Will, though the research department privately conceded the facts. The practice is standard." (Chomsky, Pirates and Emperors, Old and New: International Terrorism in the Real World, p.29) (Also see p. 127 of Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky)

Well, Obama very carefully didn't say anything. Mubarak would agree that there should be an orderly transition, but to what? A new cabinet, some minor rearrangement of the constitutional order, it's empty. So he's doing what U.S. leaders regularly do. There is a playbook whenever a favored dictator is in trouble: try to sustain him, hold on; if at some point it becomes impossible, switch sides. The U.S. has an overwhelmingly powerful role there. Egypt is the second-largest recipient over a long period of U.S. military and economic aid. Israel is first. "In fact, if you look at the leading recipients of U.S. aid, most of it military aid, two countries are in a separate category: Israel and Egypt, which gets half the aid given to Israel. This arrangement is part of the Camp David agreement from back in 1979, unofficially. Aid to Egypt is basically aid to Israel, to encourage Egypt to play along. But aid to Israel and Egypt is in a separate category, way above anybody else." Chomsky, What We Say Goes, p.165 Obama himself has been highly supportive of Mubarak. Asked by the BBC, Obama said he didn't regard Mubarak as an authoritarian ruler, he also said he was a "force for stability and good in the region"! This is one of the most brutal dictators of the region — how anyone could have taken Obama's comments about human rights seriously after that is a bit of a mystery. But the support has been very powerful in diplomatic dimensions. Military — the planes flying over Tahrir Square are, of course, U.S. planes. The U.S. has been the strongest, most solid, most important supporter of the regime. It's not like Tunisia, where the main supporter was France. They're the primary guilty party there. But in Egypt, it's clearly the United States, and of course Israel. Israel is—of all the countries in the region, Israel, and I suppose Saudi Arabia, have been the most outspoken and supportive of the Mubarak regime. In fact, Israeli leaders were angry, at least expressed anger, that Obama hadn't taken a stronger stand in support of their friend Mubarak.

An Open Letter to President Barack Obama about Egypt & Mubarak

NEW VIDEO: An Open Letter to President Barack Obama about Egypt & Mubarak

See video
Dear President Obama:
As political scientists, historians, and researchers in related fields who have studied the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy, we the undersigned believe you have a chance to move beyond rhetoric to support the democratic movement sweeping over Egypt. As citizens, we expect our president to uphold those values.
For thirty years, our government has spent billions of dollars to help build and sustain the system the Egyptian people are now trying to dismantle. Tens if not hundreds of thousands of demonstrators in Egypt and around the world have spoken. We believe their message is bold and clear: Mubarak should resign from office and allow Egyptians to establish a new government free of his and his family's influence. It is also clear to us that if you seek, as you said Friday "political, social, and economic reforms that meet the aspirations of the Egyptian people," your administration should publicly acknowledge those reforms will not be advanced by Mubarak or any of his adjutants.
There is another lesson from this crisis, a lesson not for the Egyptian government but for our own. In order for the United States to stand with the Egyptian people it must approach Egypt through a framework of shared values and hopes, not the prism of geostrategy. On Friday you rightly said that "suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away." For that reason we urge your administration to seize this chance, turn away from the policies that brought us here, and embark on a new course toward peace, democracy and prosperity for the people of the Middle East. And we call on you to undertake a comprehensive review of US foreign policy on the major grievances voiced by the democratic opposition in Egypt and all other societies of the region. See video (link to HD version here) info for link to this open letter and signers. Also a link to a FAIR article.

We Support WikiLeaks

We Support WikiLeaks, Please Sign Petition
Please pass it on: TinyURL.com/WeSupportWikileaks

Disgraceful Media FAIL on Korea Reporting

Disgraceful Media FAIL on Korea Reporting, Distorting North Korea & South Korea/US bias
See this 2 Part Video!

Please Pass it on: TinyURL.com/KoreaPeace

Sources for video on North & South Korea

"There have been frequent naval clashes around the Northern Limit Line, indeed it seems likely that it has been preserved by the current ROK and US authorities for that purpose. President Roh moo-hyun and Chairman Kim Jong Il, at their summit on 4 October 2007 agreed to a ‘special peace and cooperation zone in the West Sea’, but this peace initiative was overturned, as so many others, by incoming president Lee Myung-bak."

Tim Beal, "Korean Brinkmanship, American Provocation, and the Road to War: the manufacturing of a crisis," The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, Dec. 2010

"If Seoul were really interested in peace, you would think it would carry out its military drills in a less sensitive area." “It is appalling,” says Korea expert Leonid Petrov. “If it was a bona fide need for artillery practice they have plenty of islands in the Western sea. This is simply sending a message that the South is putting pressure on the North.”

Stephen Gowans, "Seoul and Washington play dangerous game with Korean lives," what's left, 12/17/10

"south Korean marines had fired live artillery into waters that, according to international customary law, belong to north Korea. Seoul, however, claims the waters as its own based on a sea border drawn unilaterally by the US military in 1953. Hardly unprovoked, the north Korean retaliation was triggered by the south Korean violation of north Korean territorial waters. Moreover, the artillery exchange between the two Koreas coincided with south Korean manoeuvres involving 70,000 ROK troops backed by US Marines. Pyongyang saw the exercises as a rehearsal for an invasion, not an unreasonable inference given the number of troops involved and Lee’s overt hostility to the DPRK."

Stephen Gowans, "Lee Myung-bak Heats Up Cold War on Korean Peninsula," what's left, 12/23/10

"The sea border that has become the main battleground between North and South Korea 57 years after it was imposed by a U.S. general has been called legally indefensible by American officials for more than three decades.

Then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wrote in a 1975 classified cable that the unilaterally drawn Northern Limit Line was “clearly contrary to international law.” Two years before, the American ambassador said in another cable that many nations would view South Korea and its U.S. ally as “in the wrong” if clashes occurred in disputed areas along the boundary."

Daniel Ten Kate and Peter S. Green, "Defending Korea Line Seen Contrary to Law by Kissinger Remains U.S. Policy," Bloomberg News, 12/17/10

(cited by Stephen Gowans in "Seoul and Washington play dangerous game with Korean lives.")

Please Pass it on: TinyURL.com/KoreaPeace

Great article

Added the following comment to this article Korean Brinkmanship, American Provocation, and the Road to War: the manufacturing of a crisis by Tim Beal (which I liked to in my previous video):
Great article, I've been telling people to read it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUxI0wXLBJg
I want to add that as far as the location of the civilians killed, the claim that the "two civilian contractors working on a military base" is supported by Kim Chi-joong, the brother of one of the civilians, "They were killed while engaging in construction work inside the military base. On top of industrial disaster benefits, the government should recognize them as those who sacrificed their lives for the country and others."
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/12/117_77317.html
Also, yes, North Korea may have been trying to fire into the water since that is what it did in response to a similar situation. On 8/9/10, North Korea fired about 110 artillery rounds off the coast of South Korea's Baengnyeong and Yeonpyeong islands. "Roughly 110 artillery rounds fired off by North Korea in the direction of the West Sea Northern Limit Line (NLL) on Monday afternoon, about 10 crossed the NLL and fell in the waters of Baengnyeong Island." "The Joint Chiefs of Staff, based on testimony from soldiers on patrol and analysis by relevant departments, concluded that about 10 shells fell in the waters off Baengnyeong Island, about one or two kilometers south of the NLL. It said that all 100 shells that fell in the waters off Yeonpyeong Island fell north of the NLL." "The Joint Chiefs official said, “Confirmation of the point of impact comes from splash the shells make as they hit the water, but as the waters of Baengnyeong Islands were experiencing 2.5m waves at the time, it was difficult to conclude that the shells crossed the NLL based on soldiers’ visual observations alone."
http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_northkorea/434543.html
Please send this link to everyone you can:
http://TinyURL.com/NoKoreanWar

How to Start a Korean War

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUxI0wXLBJg

Comments posted to this video in response to "prayfortruejustice" who claims that I " ignore all science and change the topic to misdirect any immutable facts about the 9/11 events":

prayfortruejustice,

WHAT "science?" WHAT "science?" I have repeatedly posted points of fact, all you have done is post notions with nothing to back it up at all. Before we even get into "science" can we start with basic logic and agree that scientific principles apply to all the buildings where steel and fire are concerned? Can we at least agree on that?

If we can agree that scientific principles apply to all the buildings where steel and fire are concerned then the theory pushed by Steven Jones, Alex Jones, Richard Gage, Mike Rivero and others has a serious flaw because steel has weakened to the point of failing due to fire in other buildings. And as pointed out in my first video uploaded to Youtube, we can see that progressive failure of the steel columns well before the collapses. This is a fact these men are ignorant of.

And that fact should not come as a surprise to people who have taken the time to educate themselves on the subject. THE BASIC FACT that steel can be weakened by fire has been understood for a long time (its the reason they spray fireproofing onto steel for example) and I have shown how this fact had been discussed years before 9/11.

"Class 1 (fire-resistive) buildings typical of high-rise construction usually are designated as having 3 or 4-hour fire resistance ratings. In the past, that was taken to mean that they would never be a serious collapse threat. While this is usually the case in the completed structures, it is not a guarantee, particularly in the steel-framed high-rise that relies on some type of spray-on or membrane fireproofing to protect the steel." - Sept. 1998, John Norman, captain with the FDNY


Here is my reply to degeneratgambler, I sent this comment:

You didn't or couldn't dispute the facts I went to the trouble of posting over at my blog.
WTC7 sure as hell didn't SOUND like a controlled demolition did it?
(because in CD we hear multiple explosions, with WTC7, right before it collapses we DON'T hear multiple explosions.)
I hear one low rumble (probably an internal failure of the steel column)
and it didn't look like one since CD buildings don't show signs of structural failure well before they collapse. Firemen expected it to collapse due to its condition. Read hat they have to say: WTC 7 was severely damaged on the south side of the building and was on fire for about 7 hours.

Being Innocent isn't Enough

Being Innocent isn't Enough, No Justice for CIA Torture Victim El-Masri
Please pass it on: Tinyurl.com/InnocentTortureVictim

No-Fire Zone Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3BrsYusZoE

MORE Drills!

MORE Drills! South Korea & US are at it AGAIN. I just added two "Recommended Reading" links in the video info. Check out the two articles I posted links to in the video info: "US Ultimately to Blame for Korean Skirmishes in Yellow Sea" and "Wrong country blamed for artillery exchange on Korean peninsula" by Stephen Gowans

About North Korea and South Korea

Korea Correction
Some Internet sites are claiming that because CNN's Stan Grant is reporting from onboard the USS George Washington it must mean something. They make this claim on their concocted notion that CNN reporters don't accompany training exercises. The fact that CNN reporter Kyung Lah was aboard the USS George Washington reporting on training exercises debunks their claim. And more, see video!

TSA

TSA Body Scans & Pat-Downs? CHANGE Foreign Policy FIRST (New Video)

YouTube Subscriptions FAIL

YouTube Subscriptions FAIL Solution

See links in the video description about Saddam's past.

Beyond Hiroshima!

The doctors who investigated Fallujah in Iraq found levels of cancer beyond what they found in Hiroshima, this hasn't even been reported in the United States. SEE NEW VIDEO: US Media Hides US War of Aggression's Toll on Fallujah's babies and adults.
Please pass it on: http://tinyurl.com/BeyondHiroshima

Media FAIL Again

NEW VIDEO: Media FAIL Again: Ahmadinejad & 9/11

Tinyurl.com/MediaFAILAgain

Someone asked, "@representativepress Could I ask what your take on the comments of President Ahmadinejad at the UN General Assembly, concerning 9/11? I personally found that part of his speech somewhat confusing, but I do not trust for a second, the media's accusation that he claimed 9/11 was an 'inside job.'

Thanks in advance!"

This video is my reply

Caveman?

http://tinyurl.com/NOTcavemen

9/11 Media Failure

NEW VIDEO: 9/11 Media Failure to Inform the Public about WHY we were Attacked
Please pass it on: http://tinyurl.com/911MediaFail
This was on the newswires on the morning of the 9/11 attacks:
Expert: Bin Laden Warned of 'Unprecedented' Attack
(Reuters) Sep 11, 11:19 AM ET

Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he and his followers would carry out an unprecedented attack on U.S. interests for its support of Israel, an Arab journalist with access to him said Tuesday.

Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi, an Arabic-language weekly news magazine, said Islamic fundamentalists led by bin Laden were "almost certainly" behind the attack of the World Trade Center in New York.
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2007/12/expert-bin-laden-warned-of.html

No Apology

In a letter to the editor about the 1953 coup against Iran, Jonathan Schwarz points out that "no prominent U.S. politician has ever apologized for our role in the coup." Examining a statements made by the Secretary of State admitting that the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development," Schwarz quotes Voice of America which accurately reported at the time, "Mrs. Albright did not actually apologize."

I have see other people in addition to Ray Takeyh, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, make the claim that the U.S. apologized. For those tempted to suggest that what Albright said was an apology, the question of whether what she said was indeed an apology was put directly to Albright. The same day she made her speech in which she said, "it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs," a reporter pointed out that she had not apologized for the coup that toppled Mossadeg. Responding to the question, "you didn't come out and say it -- an apology -- but does the United States apologize for supporting the coup against Dr. Mossadegh?", Albright replied flatly, "I said, I think, everything that I needed to say on the Mossadegh coup."