Michael Ruppert: Proof Obama Is Lying About the Killing of Bin Laden

Ghosts of September 11, By Mike Ruppert

Proof Obama is lying (as if we need proof!)

this is an excerpt:


Here is what he wrote me:






Can we get a link to the article? Thanks for posting this, pfg.

Analysis time

I went looking for information on the amount of time required to properly perform a forensic DNA analysis. In the brief time I spent, all I found was the following, on a Wikipedia talk page:
"If you're talking about just doing the lab work, it is about a half day's work with current STR techniques. You'd go from some kind of sample, say a blood stain on a shirt, cut a portion of that and extract the DNA from the cells on the fabric using PCI, total time ~20 mins. Next you'd go to quantification of your extracted DNA -- a simple, rough estimate can be performed with a fluorescent method in about 5 minutes. Next the extracted DNA would be taken for preparation for amplification by PCR, total setup time about 5 minutes as well. A standard amplification takes roughly 3.5 hrs, then preparation/running on a CE instrument for roughly 1 hr. Just like that, you've gone from sample to genotype in about 5 hrs of work. The reason labs take so much longer to get results out is that in the forensic process, steps like accurately documenting evidence for future trial or chain of custody issues are time consuming and do not produce any of the required lab work for generating a profile. After a genotype has been obtained, it still needs to be interpreted by a DNA analyst, then those results need to be reviewed by other analysts and reviewers to make sure that everything was done correctly before any kind of results can be released to law enforcement or the public. Unlike TV shows such as CSI, most crime labs cannot clear their plates and devote 100% of their time and effort to a single case as it comes through the door. So while it's not as fast as simple blood typing, it's not necessarily as slow as you might think. Sekiyu (talk) 07:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)"

This should not be taken as reliable or authoritative; but it does provide a second opinion on the actual processing time, and is independent of the Osama bin Laden issue (having been stated in 2009). Even if the basic processing can be done fairly quickly, it seems reasonable to expect that the subsequent analysis and review should take at least days to perform properly.

Something to talk about

From the post:


:"POSTED: 8:53 am MST October 28, 2010
UA Scientists Develop Quick DNA Test Device
Scientists: Results Returned In 2 Hours, Not 2 Weeks"

"Late in 2010, a University of Arizona team presented research on a machine that can do the analysis in just two hours in a largely automated way. It's possible that knowing they were engaged on a mission to capture Bin Laden, U.S. Forces arranged for access to a machine like this to be on quick alert--probably for flying blood, cheek cells, and other samples taken from the body to the lab for expedited analysis."

"But here's the thing: DNA matching isn't an exact science, and sibling matching is slightly more inexact. It all comes down to a probability, with a statement like "there's a one in one quadrillion chance this isn't the same person in both DNA samples." In other words: conspiracy theorists still have something to talk about."

Just like the pentagon let's be sure and ignore the witnesses that were there. And make up a conspiracy theory - that's always fun. And be sure to ignore the fact that Bin Laden was an intelligence asset of the Saudi's and the ISI....


and the ISI has now been caught red handed protecting him because 9-11 was carried out by intelligence agencies--ignore all that and say it's all fake-it's the "truther" way. Saudi-ISI-CIA --- it aint the first time. They have a long history.

9-11 commission-"No Government involvement" <---BS



That about sums it up. Especially the making up a conspiracy theory because that's always fun part.

And boy does the USG like it when folks believe in the wrong conspiracy theory. Keeps us all ineffective.



Accepting lies

Like Dick Cheney supposedly saying in an interview with Tony Snow that OBL had nothing to do with 9/11?

Have you read Crossing the Rubicon, seen all of Michael Ruppert's presentations, seen "Collapse" and read FTW and followed Mike's blog? I have. He's very good, but his feet are made of clay.

Ruppert crash lands here with this DNA fakery malarkey. I'm disappointed.