"The death of Osama bin Laden at the hands of U.S. Navy commandos"... is an unsupported claim.
"The death of Osama bin Laden ... a year ago" is an unsupported claim.
"Bin Laden was the founder and spiritual leader of al-Qaeda" is unsupported and misleading, because it neglects to mention the fact that bin Laden was an intelligence asset of the United States and because it fails to mention "al Qaeda's" role as an instrument of U.S. policy.
"Bin Laden ... orchestrated not only the Sept. 11 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans..." is an unsupported claim. In fact, FBI spokesman Rex Tomb is on record stating in June 2006 that the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to the 9/11 attack.
"Yet the principal strength of al-Qaeda is that it is designed to operate without a central leader like himself, experts say" is misleading in that it fails to address a more fundamental strength of "al-Qaeda," that of U.S. proxy-funded asset, used repeatedly for false-flag operations to achieve Western policy goals.
"Bin Laden stitched together local and regional Muslim militant groups worldwide and encouraged them to act on their own initiative, analysts say" is misleading in that attributes actions to bin Laden that are more accurately attributable to Western intelligence agencies. See, for example, this summary on Ali Mohamed, a U.S. Army officer and instructor at the JFK Special Warfare School at Fort Bragg as well as FBI informant and CIA asset:
"'He created an organization and developed it,' said Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA official..." is an unsupported claim.
"...said Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA official and senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies" accepts as worthy of print a quote from a representative of a foundation with quite an Orwellian name and populated by spooks, neocons, and chicken hawks (i.e., James Woolsey, Bill Christol, Joe Lieberman).