What he is referring to is an executive order called W99I, it was first signed by Clinton. However it was signed back into place by Bush shortly before 9/11.

Here is a high resolution scan of the document:

http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/7829/w199i6bl.gif
http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/Debunking911Myths/Bin_Laden.htm

Now we're really entering the realms of fiction. The reality is as we say at the end of the page: "W99I" is part of an FBI case ID, not an "executive order": it even says this on the image Chris uses. As such, Clinton didn't sign it, neither did Bush. 

Mike can say what he wants about the Bin Laden tapes, but the fact is Bin Laden did deny responsibility. Numerous Intelligence agencies have commented on the supposed Bin Laden videos. And pretty much all of them have confirmed the Bin Laden tapes are a fake. They have compared his voice to actual recordings of Bin Laden and said the man in the videos is clearly not Bin Laden. Many of the videos have actually been compilations of old videos from the 1980's.

But a French terrorism expert cautioned yesterday against taking the video at face value. Roland Jacquard, head of the International Observatory on Terrorism based in Paris, told French radio that it was mostly a collection of old footage and soundtracks which have been aired.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,1040347,00.html
http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/Debunking911Myths/Bin_Laden.htm

Issues:

Mike can say what he wants about the Bin Laden tapes, but the fact is Bin Laden did deny responsibility.

Chris says this like it's something new, but we make that point early in the page. More evidence that he hasn’t really read what he’s trying to debunk, perhaps?

Numerous Intelligence agencies have commented on the supposed Bin Laden videos. And pretty much all of them have confirmed the Bin Laden tapes are a fake.

No evidence provided here, you just have to believe him.

They have compared his voice to actual recordings of Bin Laden and said the man in the videos is clearly not Bin Laden.

Who has? Chris forgot to tell us.

Many of the videos have actually been compilations of old videos from the 1980's.

Where’s the support for this?

But a French terrorism expert cautioned yesterday against taking the video at face value. Roland Jacquard, head of the International Observatory on Terrorism based in Paris, told French radio that it was mostly a collection of old footage and soundtracks which have been aired.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,1040347,00.html 

Aha, some evidence! So does this support the "debunking"? Uh, no.

But a French terrorism expert cautioned yesterday against taking the video at face value. Roland Jacquard, head of the International Observatory on Terrorism based in Paris...

A single source, not "numerous". Not an intelligence agency, either.

it was mostly a collection of old footage and soundtracks which have been aired

Okay, he is saying that, but this guy isn't claiming the tape doesn't show bin Ladin, just that it doesn't contain any new footage.

"The voice of Bin Laden that we hear in the background, thanking the World Trade Centre plane hijackers, is exactly the same message that was broadcast in a video cassette by al-Jazeera on December 26 2001," he said.

The closest we get to anyone saying this isn’t bin Ladin is here...

A CIA official said yesterday that analysis of the "Bin Laden" voice on the latest tape had been inconclusive.

Hardly supporting the claim that “numerous Intelligence agencies have commented on the supposed Bin Laden videos. And pretty much all of them have confirmed the Bin Laden tapes are a fake”.

But even if they did, so what? This is yet another straw man. If Chris bothered to read the piece, we clearly say that we cannot be 100% sure that the tape shows bin Ladin. The purpose of the page was to show that conspiracy sites typically present an inaccurate view, showing the lowest quality images for example, and so don’t provide readers with a fair opportunity to judge the tape for themselves. Here, as ever, nothing we said has been debunked at all.