Kurt Nimmo TruthNews December 12, 2007

Lost in the debate over the alleged waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah is the fact the government tortured a mentally ill person, a person not capable of committing the crimes he is accused of committing.

In his book, “The One Percent Doctrine,” author Ron Suskind, a former Wall Street Journal journalist, portrays Abu Zubaydah as a prime candidate for a mental hospital. On June 21, 2006. Think Progress wrote:

Ron Suskind details the story of Abu Zubaydah — a man President Bush once described as “one of the top operatives plotting and planning death and destruction on the United States.” Suskind writes that Bush made this claim despite CIA and FBI analysis that showed Zubaydah was “mentally ill and nothing like the pivotal figure they supposed him to be.” (“This guy is insane, [a] certifiable, split personality,” the FBI’s top al-Qaeda analyst said.)

Nevertheless, “under White House and Justice Department direction, the CIA would make him its first test subject for harsh interrogation techniques.” Ultimately, his story became an example of how torture doesn’t work.

Of course, the 9/11 whitewash commission, tasked with affixing blame on the phantom al-Qaeda, did not mention the FBI’s characterization of Zubaydah as a possible weaver of baskets. Instead, Zubaydah was portrayed as a big player, something of a managerial genius. He allegedly operated the Khaldan and Derunta terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. “While the camps were not al-Qaeda facilities,” the 9/11 Commission declared, “Abu Zubaydah had an agreement with bin Laden to conduct reciprocal recruiting efforts whereby promising trainees at the camps could be invited to join al Qaeda.” In other words, Osama entrusted this most crucial task to a man who was “certifiable,” a “split personality.”

If we are to believe the official fairy tale, people suffering from mental illness were crucial to al-Qaeda operations: “According to the Middle East sources, who insisted they not be identified further, Abu Zubaydah developed a unique talent in mortars and other heavy weaponry that attracted the attention of bin Laden,” CBS News reported on April 3, 2002, as the al-Qaeda legend was still in its formative stage. “He was apparently named bin Laden’s second deputy in 1995, responsible for screening recruits and devising terrorist plans. Where bin Laden and deputy Ayman al-Zawahri would set policy, Abu Zubaydah would implement it. U.S. officials said when the inner circle would order the bombing of an embassy, Abu Zubaydah would select the embassy, cell and method of attack. ”

“He is the person in charge of the camps. He receives young men from all countries. He accepts you or rejects you. And he takes care of the expenses for the camps. He makes arrangements for you when you travel coming in or leaving,” explained Ahmed Ressam, convicted April 2001 of smuggling, terrorist conspiracy and other charges in the Los Angeles millennium plot.

As for the camps in Afghanistan, they were built by the CIA. “Did bin Laden, our newest Enemy Number One, once polish his terror resume with the aid of the U.S. taxpayer? Were the Afghanistan camps hit last week actually built by the CIA?” asked James Ledbetter way back in 1998, years before everything changed. Ledbetter explored the topic after Clinton sent a few hasty cruise missiles into Afghanistan, sort of a distraction as he was taking a lot of heat for his oral antics with Monica Lewinsky at the time.

The most prominent journalist making the charge that bin Laden is to a large extent “one of ours” is Robert Fisk of London’s Independent. Fisk is assumed to have some authority on the topic because he interviewed bin Laden at one of his camps in Afghanistan in 1997.

In a Friday morning National Public Radio interview, Fisk charged: “Most of the big camps — and they were all, in that area, built by the CIA with British assistance — would have been set up in 1982, ‘83, with the specific purpose of training the very same guerrillas they are now firing at to [shoot and attack] Soviet forces.”

Morning Edition host Bob Edwards asked: “So if the U.S. built them, it wouldn’t have too much trouble finding where they are to target them?” Fisk replied: “No, they were shooting last night at what they had themselves constructed. They set the camps up, they were firing missiles at the camps that they set up, that’s correct.”

Indeed, not only were the camps “ours,” but so were the patsies taking up residency there. It is instructive to quote Webster G. Tarpley at length on this subject:

The patsies ultimately have three vital functions. The first is that they have to be noticed. They must attract lots and lots of attention. They may issue raving statements on videotape, or doubles can be used to issue these statements for them if they are not up to it. They need to get in to fights with passersby, as Mohammed Atta is said to have done concerning a parking space at the airport in Maine early in the morning on September 11.

Even if they are presumed dead they must remain prominent, as in the case of Atta’s passport, which is alleged by the FBI to have survived the fiery collapse of the World Trade Center towers to be found undamaged and unsinged on a nearby street. Even when presumed dead they must be eloquent about themselves and their activities, as they accused 9/11 hijackers when they left behind a copy of the Koran, airline schedules, terrorist literature and videotapes, and Atta’s crudely forged last will and testament in a car and in luggage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UGXVic15ho

Finally, if all else goes well, it is the destiny of the patsies to take the blame for the terror action once it has happened. At this point the moles in the government apparatus, who had earlier been the patsies’ greatest friends and protectors, become their most implacable enemies. The patsies must be hunted down and, preferably, liquidated on the spot, as the British Special Air Services anti-terrorist force always prefers to do, with a maximum of firepower. Their faces and stories will be demonized as the latest manifestation of absolute evil. The nationality, philosophy, or religion which the media portray them as representing will become the target of raving vilification, arrest, economic sanctions, cruise missile retaliation, and armed invasion, as the case may be.

It appears the CIA, through Pakistan’s ISI, became, if not friends, at minimum Abu Zubaydah’s enablers, that is if we suspend our critical judgment and assume a mental case was able to do all the things the government and corporate media ascribe to him. It makes more sense that Zubaydah was chosen because he was manageable and easily demonized, as the mentally ill often are.

Lastly, it is not a stretch to conclude that Abu Zubaydah is not in custody — although possibly interned in a mental ward — and was not subjected to waterboarding or was a videotape of this supposed event recorded. It is all part and parcel of a larger hoax perpetuated on the world at large, although more than a few Pakistanis have less problems discerning reality (see video): Osama and his dour cave-dwellers were creations of the CIA.