There might be more to this than meets the eye. I'll wait and see .. but I still don't see the importance of this. I can't imagine a 'coverup' here - why? It's doesn't have the significance of (say) the question of a coverup of pre-9/11 security incompetence, or anything like that. So what if he turns out to be some kind of agent? Perhaps (I wonder) you are outraged at the government putting him in that danger in the first place?

I'm assuming you wouldn't conclude that he 'deserved' or 'brought on' his fate if it turns out he was an agent - but some people would say that, and being new here I still don't know you that well. You don't seem the nasty type - actually I'm impressed with your calm responses in the face of occasional open abuse.

I do keep an open mind to new evidence (on any topic I hope) but I think your points so far only divert our attention away from the obvious and real perpetrators here.