And in any case, the tape does not prove that he acted alone. There remain the same number of unanswered questions surrounding the attack on the WTC and the Pentagon that are not solved by this tape. See Konspiracy Korner under the archived e-zines entitled, Planet Warlord, The Great Game Continues as well as on this page.

One of the most interesting of which is what exactly is his relationship with the CIA at this point. If he is still a CIA asset as he has been in the past, why is he? The US has now destroyed the Taliban, the Al Qaeda network and he is being hunted down. Given the treatment the CIA metes out to those it double-crosses, why would Bin Laden have set himself up to begin with? In other words, knowing that the wrath of the US would be fearsome what did he think he had to gain by blowing the towers? Was the momentary satisfaction of 'getting even' worth his eventual destruction as well as the destruction of the network he took so much trouble to create? We are constantly being told that the purpose of the Al Qaeda network is fight the US. But what does that mean? As a guerrilla force they have a better their long term chance of success by harassing the US forces in the Middle East than they do by inflicting damage on the US at home. So why would they guarantee their own destruction with one highly publicized act?

It is now part of the public record that Bin Laden meet with a CIA agent in his hospital room on the American hospital in Dubai in July of this year. But do we know exactly what was said at that meeting? In other words was he warning or getting warned? Yes, the US has certainly found him useful in the past as an accomplice but it is possible that he is far more useful as the scapegoat in the present.

The US gave the Taliban $124 million earler this year in 'food aid'. Why then did the UN pull food shipments to Afghanistan on 9/12?

Another question would be: Is the war against Afghanistan not in fact a war against Pakistan. With the exchange heating up between India and Pakistan after the suicide bombers attack in the New Delhi parliament, that seems the likely place for the war to continue. Pakistan only stands to loose at this point despite the rhetoric and IMF funds. A pipeline running through Afghanistan and terminating in Pakistan would have benefitted both as well as provided an outlet for oil in the East, where the future demand will be. Now that deal is off and 'replaced' by the pipeline running from Kazakhstan to Russia. China, Pakistan's ally, would presumably have been a beneficiary of such a route as well.

So Pakistan now has a disgruntled Afghanistan to its west, a possible war with India on the east, and American troops inside Pakistan for an "extended stay". The possibility that Osama has or will flee across the border even makes Pakistan a possible bombing target. The population is already angry, and the opposition vocal. It certainly looks as though Musharraf made the wrong decision, though he probably didn't have much choice.

It seems that Britain dropped the no first use policy as regards nukes shortly after 1997 elections, as the US did during Clinton's Administation.

Russia continues to do business with and support Iraq. This is only one of the weak links in the 'coalition against terrorism'. Despite US hawks fervent desire to come up with an excuse for bombing Iraq, it ain't selling. It seems to be off for the time being. Maybe Pakistan is the compromise?