Creative Speculation

... devoted truthseeker that you are.

> You provide no authority for your timeline of

> 1. Abu Zubaydah identifies KSM before Abu Zubayhda was waterboarded

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrogation_of_Abu_Zubaydah

> 2. Fouda did not know of Abu Zubaydah's alleged claims when he allegedly visited al Qaeda in 2002

The earliest mention of Abu Zubaydah with respect to KSM that I can find is a June 2 2002 NYT article which simple said that KSM's "importance was confirmed recently by Abu Zubaydah." Fouda may or may not have read that NYT article, but the article did not say Zubaydah had named KSM as the 9/11 "mastermind." The Bush administration later tried to claim that that information was extracted from Zubaydah by "enhanced interrogation" but we know from the agents mentioned in the Wiki article that he had stated that in his initial "conventional" interrogation. If you can prove that Fouda could have known that Zubayduh fingered KSM as the major planner, please do so.

> You also provide no authority for your claim that KSM's computer confirmed his involvement. Says who. Where? The CIA? And you believe them?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120822713

Yes, I believe them because it's consistent with all the other evidence (including KSM's involvement with other suicide attacks) and contradicted only by the incredulity of certain people who desperately want to believe some other story -- ANY other story as long as it's not the "official" story told by the available evidence. Sorry, but simply dismissing all the available evidence as faked doesn't do trick.

> FBI director Robert S. Mueller III told the Commonwealth Club in the spring of 2002...

Really? And how about AFTER the spring of 2002, for example after KSM's capture?

> Please provide some authority to support your claim that Osama confessed to doing 9/11.

You seem to familiar with (and predictably dismissive of) the "fat Osama" video in which he is bragging to his buddies about authorizing the attack, but not with the 2004 video sent to Aljazeera, not released by the US government, in which he gives his justifications for the attack. (You might not be familiar with that one because "truther" sites generally avoid it.) You got anything better than personal incredulity for either one of those?