The Osama bin Laden Myth

“American “Free Press”: A Press Free to Lie for the Government but Not to Tell the Truth”

BinLadenThe interview below with Osama bin Laden was conducted by the Karachi, Pakistan, daily newspaper, Ummat and published on September 28, 2001, 17 days after the alleged, but unsubstantiated, al Qaeda attack of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center twin towers and Pentagon. The interview was sensational. The alleged “mastermind” of 9/11 said that he and al Qaeda had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack. The British Broadcasting Corporation’s World Monitoring Service had the interview translated into English and made public on September 29, 2001.

Osama bin Laden’s sensational denial was not reported by the US print and TV media. It was not investigated by the executive branch. No one in the US Congress called attention to bin Laden’s refusal of responsibility for the greatest humiliation ever inflicted on a superpower.

To check my memory of the lack of coverage, I googled “Osama bin Laden’s interview denying responsibility for 9/11.” Some Internet sites reproduced the interview, but the only mainstream news source that I found was a 1 minute YouTube video from CNN in which the anchor, after quoting an al Jazeera report of bin Laden’s denial, concludes that “we can all weigh that in the scale of credibility and come to our own conclusions.” In other words, bin Laden had already been demonized, and his denial was not credible.

The sensational news was unfit for US citizens and was withheld from them by the American “free press,” a press free to lie for the government but not to tell the truth.

Obviously, if bin Laden had outwitted not only the National Security Agency, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the FBI, but also all 16 US intelligence agencies, all intelligence agencies of Washington’s NATO puppet states, Israel’s Mossad, and in addition the National Security Council, NORAD, US air traffic control, and airport security four times on the same morning, it would be the greatest feat in world history, a movement building feat that would have made al Qaeda the most successful anti-imperialist organization in human history, an extraordinary victory over “the great satan” that would have brought millions of new recruits into al Qaeda’s ranks. Yet the alleged “mastermind” denied all responsibility.

I remember decades ago when a terrorist attack occurred in Europe, whether real or an Operation Gladio false flag attack, innumerable organizations would claim credit. Perhaps this was the CIA’s way of diverting attention from itself, but it illustrates that every intelligence service understands the value to an organization of claiming credit for a successful attack. Although bin Laden denied responsibility, in 2011 some al Qaeda leaders, realizing the prestige value of the 9/11 attack, claimed credit for the attack and criticized Iranian President Ahmadinejad for questioning the official US story.

Although only a few Americans are aware of the September 28, 2001 interview in which bin Laden states his non-involvement with the 9/11 attacks, many Americans have seen post-2001 videos in which a person alleged to be bin Laden takes credit for the attacks. There are two problems with these videos. Experts have examined them and found them to be fakes, and all of the videos appeared after bin Laden was reported by the Pakistan Observer, the Egyptian press, and Fox News to have died in mid-December, 2001, from lung disease.,2933,41576,00.html See also

Bin Laden also suffered from kidney disease. According to a CBS news report on January 28, 2002, Osama bin Laden was hospitalized for dialysis treatment in the Pakistani military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10, 2001, the day before 9/11.

Obviously, a man suffering from terminal lung and kidney disease did not survive for another decade to be murdered by a US Navy SEAL team in Abbottabad. A Pakistani TV interview with the neighbor of the alleged “bin Laden compound” exposed the assassination hoax. This sensational interview also went unreported by America’s “free press.” I had the interview translated, and it is available here: See also

Shortly after the alleged assassination 30 members of the SEAL unit died in a mysterious helicopter crash in Afghanistan, and now we learn that not a single one of the thousands of sailors on the aircraft carrier, the USS Carl Vinson, witnessed bin Laden’s alleged burial at sea from that ship. The press reports with a straight face that for unexplained reasons it was kept secret from the ship’s sailors. This is supposed to be the explanation of the sailors’ emails reporting to family and friends that they witnessed no burial at sea. Some speculate that the SEALs were bumped off before their questions to one another, “Were you on that raid?,” reached outside the unit. Apparently, it doesn’t strike the media or the public as strange that the US government captured and killed the terror mastermind without interrogating him and without keeping any evidence or presenting any witnesses to support the assassination claim.

Adolf Hitler claimed that communists burned down the Reichstag and that Polish troops had crossed the frontier and attacked Germany. With 9/11 Americans experienced Washington’s version of these grand lies. An omniscient bin Laden dying from terminal illnesses in distant Afghanistan defeated the American National Security State and drove his attack through the walls of the Pentagon itself, requiring for our defense a “war on terror” that destroyed US civil liberties and financially ruined the country in order to prevent the triumph of a man who died of natural causes in December 2001.

On May 9, 2011, Professor Michel Chossudovsky republished the September 28, 2001, Osama bin Laden interview in Global Research.

Interview with Osama bin Laden. Osama Denies his Involvement in 9/11 By Global Research Global Research, May 09, 2011 Url of this article:

# # # #


Paul Craig Roberts, Boiling Frogs Post contributing author, is a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has been reporting on executive branch and cases of prosecutorial abuse for two decades. He has written or co-written eight books, contributed chapters to numerous books, and has published many articles in journals of scholarship. Mr. Roberts has testified before congressional committees on 30 occasions on issues of economic policy, and has been a critic of both Democratic and Republican administrations. You can visit his website here.


This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVD .

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. Mr. Roberts,

    I didn’t listen to the interview and don’t speak Arabic. Perhaps Sibel can translate what he actually said. There is a big difference between being not RESPONSIBLE for as you write and not being involved in the idea of attacking the USA. The chief executive does not get involved in the operational details in any large organization or even not so large. The CEO may be technically responsible for what his organization does, may approve it, may direct others to plan and execute but often remains separated from the action… the so called plausible deniability.

    OBL was clearly being played by intel and engaged in mutual exploitation. I believe I read somewhere… that the organization of AQ was very losely organized and the take away was that independent groups who shared the same over arching agenda could and would use the name and association, but not necessarily act as direct operatives for the *head office*.

    Frankly, I don’t know what to make of OBL. I do believe international terrorism is a realm phenomena and it’s also something that is exploited by intel in all manner of false flag ops such as Gladio and Northwoods.

    I think it is naive to think that the USA can go around the globe trashing it and not expect some sort of kick back, blow back or terrorism to be created. If there was no resistance the USA would walk in and take everything they wanted… Right?

  2. If you listen to this interview with Sibel:

    She talks about the US being involved, as a director, of EVERY major terrorist attack in Central Asia and the Caucasus from the mid 90’s through the end of 2001, working with and directing folks like Al Qaeda leader OBL. She also mentions the hundreds of mosques and madrasas we built and used as recruitment and religious brainwashing institutions for desperate young men to become terrorists for hire.

    To me, this means that these events are not blow-back by victimized nations and peoples, but US directed terror by proxy. This is a very strong MO to consider, when investigating the crimes of 9/11, whether or not OBL was involved.

  3. One more thing,

    I do find it VERY telling that on 9-11 Israeli Ehud Barak was in the UK on the BBC pointing the finger of blame at Osama bin Laden and “al Qaeda” before the WTC towers had even fallen and absolutely no criminal investigation had taken place . . .

    Meanwhile on 9-11, in the USA fellow Zionist and dual Israeli National Jerome Hauer was on the television NEWS channels reading the exact same “Osama bin Laden did it” script . ..

    And in Israel on 9-11, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon held a special press conference to announce the special bond between the USA and Israel against our new “common enemy” . . . “Radical Islam” . . .

    Cui bono? Who benefits?

    Who had the MOTIVE, the MEANS, and the OPPORTUNITY?


  4. I find it interesting that Charles Gaouette, who was the rear admiral on the Carl Vinson when it supposedly dumped bin Laden, has been “reassigned” from his position. What are we to make of this? Coincidence?

  5. jschoneboom says:

    Yeah, SanderO, but the point is that a CEO, even if not at all involved in a SUCCESSFUL operation by his subordinates, will generally not go out of his way to DISAVOW it. He’ll take credit for it, no?

    It just doesn’t add up. He’s getting the blame anyway, so it’s not like he can plausibly be trying to avoid the consequences. Bold enough to stage the most successful anti-imperialist attack in history, but too timid to stand up and take authorship? Doesn’t add up.

    The only reason I can think of why he’d deny involvement AND criticize the Islamic legitimacy of the attacks is because he’s telling the truth, he wasn’t involved and he doesn’t think it’s a valid form of jihad. That’s the reason that makes the most sense. But it doesn’t contradict the idea that there are still real terrorists out there, nor that they are routinely used and abused by intelligence agencies.

  6. Peace Activist says:

    I had thought of typing out a much longer comment; but then no one would understand it anyway, and it would be very boring. Like a great many people I do not believe much of what we are told about anything. Whilst this may have been too some degree an opportunistic venture and would need
    considerable flexibility anyway; I believe the scenario of Bin Laden not being involved to be very plausible. I cannot help but reflect upon the fact that most criminals do not use all of the technology and resourcefulness that could lead to greater success. Even most senior figures of organised crime lack any real personification, innovation; just the usual violence and stuff. The US Admin starting with Bush, Blair and continuing on; have used all that has been available to further their aims and aspirations. One of the most useful, but least understood tools available is human emotion, with all its many aspects.If one understands sociology and can control the bulk of opinion, anything can appear to be the truth.In a very complex situation with vast numbers of people, various cultures, degrees of opulence, religions difference and the various strong desires for certain truths to have more value than others; who really knows where truth lies? Whilst I believe that any fair and honest trial in a court of law, is too some degree subject to the same failings I have mentioned above; the so called “war on terror” has never been anything to do with fair trials or justice. If someone is accused of a crime and put on trial; then what happens is, simply there’s a trial. If the US Gov say someone or some group of people are criminals and all must be hunted down and killed; but any crimes approved by the US Gov are to be covered up at any cost; then we see what we see now, anarchy. The Military Industrial Complex has become the beast that must be feed, with endless tax $ & £ and it demands sacrifices like the ancient Gods of the past. Certainly most people in the UK where I live could not care less what bin Laden or any of them did or did not do; they take the easy option and believe what ever is the easiest. However the so called “time of austerity” makes them even more easy to manipulate. If we have austerity, then according to logic, if we look at the situation now; we could deduce that vast amounts of Gold Bullion has most probably been stolen or manipulated some how. This would give the Military Industrial Complex even more power.

  7. Al Qaeda is the US’s own privateer cell. Same system the British used to attack Spain and France at sea, only our payroll terrorist are on the land.

  8. Terrorism as a force in world affairs is certainly an interesting one. I don’t think anyone can claim that there is no terrorism… that all claimed acts of terrorism are false flags, black ops and not what we are told they are. I think we can probably agree that the national security state from local police to the US miliary, Mossad, FBI, CIA and the whole lot of intel agencies engage in sting operations, use double and triple agents and DO create false flag operations. When the police engage in drug deals or place operative within dissident groups they are pretty much NOT just gathering info about the target, but trying to ensnare them into a situation where they can arrest or even kill. The public then sees that the NSS has caught the bad guys and this justifies the idea of having a NSS and leading to the NSS having more and more power to act in extra judicial means.

    If you take the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians it appears that most of the “terrorist” acts against the Israelis are not false flags and are real acts of struggle… blowing up buses and launching rockets and so forth. Of course, Israel COULD blow up a bus, claim it was done by Palestinians terrorists and use it as an excuse to launch an attack. But of course they don’t usually have to engage in false flags with the Palestinians because the Palestinians WILL use the only means of force to fight Israel that they have and that terrorism. They have no army and can’t declare war.

    Peurto Rican separatists or Anti Castro Cubans, for, example have engaged in terrorist acts to advance their agenda. Both will justify their violence as legitimate means of struggle and claim that innocents are ALWAYS a causality of war. Look at how many non combatants were killed by the US military in its war campaigns… hundreds of thousands died when the US dropped 2 nukes on Japan… the Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan… innocents are always victims of violence. War IS terrorism.

    One cannot deny that the US policies of hegemony has left a trail of anti Americanism around the developing world. We have virtually supported every repressive despotic regime in these countries because they allow trans national corporations to plunder their resources and exploit their citizens for slave wages. In exchange the despots are armed to the teeth and use the weapons sold or given to them to control their own populations under the guise of protecting their national sovereignty. Aware observers of history know this very well.

    And they must know that the only form of struggle for the oppressed people is insurgency and what is labeled terrorism. In the cold war both the US and the USSR engaged in proxy wars in various countries arming locals, to fight guerrilla wars. In Afghanistan the US backed various local tribes to fight the Soviet installed communist government. Communisit government tend to suppress religion and so religious people in these religions… formed pro Islamic fighters to wage war against the puppet regime. And of course the USA was right there giving them EVERYTHING they needed… and using all manner of influence and double dealing to manipulate the situation to advance the USA corporate agenda. The ME and the Caucuses are energy resource rich and sit in key locations for international commerce.

    OBL and the CIA were in a mutual exploitative relationship. It’s likely that both sides intended to sever the relationship… double cross when they achieved their goals… if that is ever possible with the USA is another question. OBL made all manner of statements (I believe) that he was not happy about the US backing Israel in the conflict with the Palestinians. Perhaps he believed (I doubt it) that he could bargain some sort of deal where the Palestinians gained their rights and homeland or something better than being occupied and living in an open air prison for the foreseeable future.

    The US policy apparatus has been heavily infiltrated mostly through perfectly legal and legitimate means by pro Israeli fanatics. The Israel lobby is strong and well funded and even dual nationals have been placed in important US policy decision making positions. The US system has allowed money to buy influence legally. And the pro Israeli or Israel firsters simply got into the government and have pushed the USA in a very pro Israeli and anti Palestinian position. Of course it’s completely not even handed… and irrational. The excuse of course is that Israel is claimed to be a democracy and so unlike the surrounding Arab/Islamic states which are not, we MUST support them at all cost. The hypocrisy is is right in your face… USA had no problem supported Pinochet, Marcos and scores of other despots.

    OBL represented a problem because when the communist backed regime fell in Afghanistan a fundamentalist Islamic regime took over – The Taliban. The US got what it wanted but it turned out to be equally bad and now it has a monster in the form of OBL trained Islamic fighters who would want to topple other oppressive and anti Islamic regimes. Insurgency WORKED for them. I think it’s perfectly understandable that the word would spread throughout the Islamic world that terrorism and insurgency can defeat not only the communists but the capitalists and all the oppressive despots that exploit them. I think it’s perfectly understandable that small groups or cells or whatever one calls them would begin to organize, communicate and share information, funds, money in their coming terrorist war against their oppressors. The Western lefty press would label this blow back as a direct response to US hegemony and support of repressive regimes and especially Israel which was seen as engaging in regular war, murder, killing in the West Bank, Gaza, and refugee camps in Southern Lebanon. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the rallying cry and the clear example of which side the US was really on. Of course the US was in bed with the Saudi royal family and partners with them in the oil extraction business. Face it… all the high tech industries such as oil extraction and refining were from the West and so the West gave the technology and shared the profits from the oil and gas. We see the same thing going on in the States where energy companies exploit (steal) energy from under the lands regardless of who “owns” the property and make it into a revenue stream at times giving a pittance to the land owner while destroying the environment.

    My hunch is that OBL was aware of the many cells who were hatching up various attacks around the world. I suspect he supported most of them and may have even helped in the planning by directing some technical help to them.. such as training and bomb making and so forth. I rather doubt he sat in cave with a 5 or 10 year plan with all sorts of operational details and flow charts as a western institution would do. Who knows what he actually considered a legitimate use of force. We do know that the Nairobi embassy was bombed, the Khobar towers were bombs, the marines headquarters were bombed.. all installations of the empire.. and the USS Cole was attacked… an actual military target. Clearly some acts of struggle and terrorism are against innocent people with no ostensible tactical value other than installing fear in the population which… I suppose… is intended to get their government to change its policies. Only pathologically disturbed people for the sake of killing. It certainly can be debated as to whether there is any justification for killing innocents for some greater political struggle. But this sort of killing has been going on forever. The official position of the US and all democracies is that killing is wrong except as a judicial punishment after due process… and if the death penalty is going the way of the Dodo in most jurisdictions. Yet the hypocrisy of war remains part of the zeitgist.

    Many in the truth movement will argue means motive and opportunity and use this calculus to accuse the intel, Cheney, MIC, Israel and the Mosad… all of which apparently has means, motive and opportunity to get planes into the targets. The argument goes that without insider involvement those attacks would have been prevented or if not stopped in progress. Both represent failures of the gold plated national defense establishment. Citizens have been led to believe that the CIA has ears around the world and since the 1960s has had the power to engage in operations without open congressional hearings and approval to act to protect the USA and her *interests*. This has apparently includes coups and assassinations.

    We also know that the MIC, the gov. the DOD and CIA are engaged in all manner of propaganda and public relations to shape public opinion. This enables the bought and paid for *representative government* to act (rubber stamp(the agenda of the status quo… the 1%ers… the transnational corporations, the energy giants… the MIC, the media and so forth) They literally produce fake news… engage in perjured testimony to congress. The population has come to believe that powerful constantly lie about what they are up to and are not held accountable. Our system is only a shadow of what it purports to be in the founding documents and principles. It’s a fiction that most are resigned to live with because they see no mechanism to change this. Elections are bought, lobbyists are the functional constituents of congress, media is serving the interest of its owners (profit and political agenda).

    One needs to look at the outcome of 9/11 or the possible outcomes that those who undertook to fly planes into those targets had expected. Since no one is actually claiming responsibility and what their precise agenda was we can only guess.

    One could claim that instigating a war between the West and Islam was the desired outcome of the Islamic radicals and the West. Each saw the event as catalyzing support for their cause. The Islamists of course expected not to crush the great satan with 4 hijacked planes.. but to goad the West over to their neighborhood where fighters would materialize and defeat the West as was done in Vietnam. DOD can’t fight guerilla wars. Their approach was shock and awe… massive almost indiscriminate killing. It doesn’t seem to work though the generals keep asking for more lethal weapon systems. nukes, strategic bombers, fighter jets, carrier groups, star wars and all sorts of other massively destructive weapon systems… which can only work by destroying everything or bombing it back to the stone age so to speak. Although this is bizarre many people seem to think of this as a legitimate tactic.

    A successful strike of planes into the targets was all that was needed by the hijackers to make the point that the great satan was vulnerable even at their most treasured symbols of the power of the MIC and the oppressive transnational finance system which dominates the world. It’s unlikely that the intent was to complete destroy any of the targets. Simply landing a hit would accomplish the objective. It would rally Islamic activists to come out of their tents so to speak and join the struggle. It would inspire them that they can hit the enemy and the West IS vulnerable. It will absolutely drawn the West over to the ME where guerrilla have an advantage. Waging war 10,000 miles from home taxes any empire. If the towers fell… it would only be icing on the cake and prove that a loaded jet could do enormous damage to certain types of targets. I suspect no one knew the outcome of a jumbo jet hitting a huge high rise. We all found out (assuming it was not the result of placed devices).

    Why was it necessary for Islamists to claim responsibility for the attack? They would be blamed for it regardless. They were before the dust settled anyway. Aside from a self inflicted attack who else could possibly do such a thing? Terrorists use planes…have in the past and there was even chatter about Bojinka which was a massive hijacking plot which was infiltrated and foiled way before 9/11.

    The MIC of course not only was engaged in intel gathering information and tracking radicals who opposed US foreign policy. Israel was following Islamists most of whom wanted Israel gone and they believed Israel to be a land grab and illegitimate and a fascist racist state. Much of the world has come to agree with this position, vis a vis the Palestinians.

    And of course the MIC and it’s inside the gov foreign policy *action group* the CIA understood that bait and switch is a clever tactic to achieve goals… control of and assured access to energy ME energy resources. Respond to the 911 attack and grab more power and control of the ME oil and install puppet governments their tactic of choice. The MIC had all sorts of hatched up plans for all sorts of military operations in probably every country of interest around the world. These plans are on the shelf ready to implement. Many are rehearsed and gamed. What else would the DOD be doing in peace time? Getting ready to defend and actually advance the power and control of the empire.

    The empire is the open secret that everyone knows but no one in the western governments will admit to. ]It’s world unfettered no state border laissez fair capitalism which defines the empire and has become the entire world economy. Wall street is on board… they fund, trade shares, develop partnerships and financial deals, structure and profit handsomely from it all and have every person literally invested in their system in shares, pensions, bonds and savings. Capitalism has become a system no different in effect from feudalism. It’s the new feudalism masquerading behind a fig leaf of a fake feckless and useless democracy… which provide a veneer of cover. Heck the USA is a democracy… not a fascist state like Nazi Germany.

    The MIC, and the CIA needs events to react to. It’s rather impossible to simply hatch a plan behind closed doors and launch the DOD to go grab a country which has what they want. That would be rather brazen and hard to explain to the people who believe the myth that the military is the department of DEFENSE. We don’t do OFFENCE we defend. So all plans are about RESPONSE. And so they apparently consider and engage in provocation so that our defense establishment can then go in with a justification and to a bait and switch and grab the prize.

    Islamic terrorism is the sort of provocation that the MIC needs to justify aggression in the ME. So they support these groups. They’re handy. When they need to scare the public… they stage a little terrorist attack by giving some of these radical the go ahead. Heck they probably use all sorts of mind control, hypnotism and post hypnotic suggestion to get people to engage in suicide missions or risk getting caught and killed. We know the CIA has researched mind control.

    If the MIC was behind 9-11 they would get the precise same outcome that the Islamists wanted – war between Islam and the West IN the ME. MIC was itching to use their toys and go for the next round of high tech weaponry. Without a need to replenish and an actual adversary the MIC faced downsizing and the resources directed their way would be available for… god forbid… social entitlements… infrastructure restoration and universal health care. The MIC didn’t need or care of the WTC was destroyed. What would they need to blow up WTC 7 to destroy the SEC files? The CIA and FBI was in the building and could make them magically disappear with some fabricated action. No one would investigate and the cover story would hold… afire of mysterious cause raged through the SEC when the fire alarm failed, the sprinklers malfunctioned and the FDNY couldn’t get there quick enough. Case closed.

    Why would they need to blow up the twin towers? Silverstein wanted to get rid of them because he didn’t want to pay for the asbestos abatement? Why was it unusual for a property owner to insure his property? Silverstein is a scumbag real estate developer… but the fact that he bought insurance does not make him a suspect for the destruction of the complex. And the fact that he wanted insurance against terrorist attacks is perfectly consistent with the fact that in ’93 there was a terrorist attack at the WTC. It was prudent to make such a clause as part of his policy.

    There are many other aspect which suggest that an inside job of placed devices was unlikely. Surely the operational guys with their fingers on the trigger were aware that there were perhaps thousands of people in those towers in addition to hundreds of first responders. Why wouldn’t they let the people … as many as possible to get out and press the button when the evacuation was complete? Was killing thousands of innocents part of their plan… in addition to solving the asbestos abatement issue? Why take down WTC 2 hit second before WTC 1 hit first?

    The case can be made from the public record for incompetence and a stand down… for doing nothing and blocking those who had some intel that something was up… for a let it happen so we can start wars in the ME. There is a case that NIST and the 9/11 commission could not reveal what the insiders knew and did and did not do. In light of the killing that would lead to some charges of treason and intel would be disbanded. But of course as we were attacked… and already engaged in war it was the conventional wisdom.. that we NEEDED the MIC, intel more than ever at that time. We could not clean house… dismantle our defense establishment right after an attack. The CIA, the MIC the 1%ers made it clear that the status quo was to go on and further they needed more cash and more power to *defend* the USA. Nothing will be accomplished by punishing CIA, FBI and so forth. We can’t dismantle our defense establishment for democracy.

    With the existence of so much animus to the USA and the growing bravado of radical Islamic terrorists it was only a matter of time before something like 9/11 would happen. The MIC was ready and willing to let it happen because they would make lemonaid from lemons and no one would or could want to question the narrative they would launch. It made perfect sense. We were attacked for our freedoms by radical women hating Islamists who also hate Israel. Get with the program and head to your recruitment office.

    And they did.

    Were these insiders sick enough to murder thousands of innocent people on 9/11? Hard to know. They certainly don’t care about the people they drop bombs on. But they can justify that somehow in their own minds and to the people. The elaborate plot and coverup are hard to accept when the simple one makes so more sense. Leave the door unlocked and then wait for the burglar to come in.


  9. SanderO has swallowed the cover story hook, line, and sinker. They are reeling him in as I write. How many others will swallow the bait?

Speak Your Mind