“I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act.”

– Osama bin Laden, October, 2001.

The hunt for Osama Bin Laden cost the US government about the same amount of time and money it took to send men to the moon: ten years and $100 billion. But for some, this is a conservative estimate with more probable figures reaching as high as a trillion dollars. [1] This makes the behaviour of successive US administrations even more inexplicable until that is you accept the high probability that Osama bin Laden – the former CIA asset in 1980s Afghanistan and whose oil-banking family did business with the Bush dynasty – almost certainly died in the latter half of September 2001 from kidney failure. [2] There was even a funeral announcement published in the December 26, 2001 in an edition of the Egyptian newspaper Al Wafdeven.

Though clearly a faithful of supporter of a Holy War against the United States and Zionism he did not take responsibility for the September 11th attacks, and actually expressed contempt toward the actions of whoever did perpetrate the atrocity. As a follower of Qutbism, a violent resistance against what he saw as the moral and spiritual decadence of the United States was unavoidable in order to be true to the tenets of Islam. This did not however extend to civilians, the deaths of which are traditionally a state-sponsored action to gain needed emotional ammunition from its population.

Osama bin Laden: CIA asset that was setup?



In a rare interview, in all probability shortly before his death, bin Laden stated:

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel. There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya and Bosnia? Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti-Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either rulers or enemies of Muslims. […] … we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in control of the American-Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the U.S. is not uttering a single word. [3]

Al-Wafd, Wednesday, December 26, 2001 Vol 15 No 4633 Translation of article title: “News of Bin Laden’s Death and Funeral 10 days ago” Read more



Though many will not agree with the above sentiments and an argument can be made that bin Laden exhibits the traits of classic religious fanaticism, the above does not fit with the history of what we know of the real bin Laden. Many of his statements are grounded in fact. He knew very well the nature of Anglo-American governments and their business interests believing that “[The American system] sacrifices soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations.” He was deeply cognizant of contemporary Western thinkers and praised liberal academics like Noam Chomsky stating: “Chomsky is amongst the greatest [thinkers] of the West.” Bin Laden expressed repugnance at what he saw as American hypocrisy masquerading as a global moral crusade while creating the exact opposite in the world. It was not that Muslims hated them for their freedoms but how a nation pretending to be a democracy was imposed on others. In bin Laden’s eyes the US was indeed “The Great Satan.” He stated: “A man with human feelings in his heart does not distinguish between a child killed in Palestine or in Lebanon, in Iraq or in Bosnia. So how can we believe your claims … while you kill our children in all of those places?” [4]

Contrary to attempts by US media to extract a “confession” from spurious interviews no evidence ever came to light that bin Laden was involved with the attacks on 9/11 which was why, despite being on the FBI’s “Most Wanted” list, no mention of 9/11 is made. There is no “hard evidence.” [5] However misguided and ruthless, bin-Laden was fully aware of the nature of the forces arraigned against him and his beloved Islam: “When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, they will naturally want to side with the strong horse. When people of the world look upon the confusion and atheism of the West, they see that Islam is the strong horse.” It was the strength of Islam viewed through his own beliefs which allowed his destiny to become the primary icon of CIA induced “blowback”; to be used as the perfect tool in a major false flag operation.

For a myth to continue to hold its power it must be injected with the requisite emotional ingredients and stirred for maximum effect, which is where PSYOPS comes in.

Everyone knows how easy it is to manipulate images. Whether using Photoshop for your holiday photos or the Computer Generated Images (CGI) of the Hollywood blockbusters which can literally create new worlds, reality can be malleable in ways undreamt of. In the hands of the military-intelligence apparatus with technological applications far in advance of the public market it is not just easy to align multi-media sophistication with public relations, but a necessity. No one can seriously entertain the idea that such possibilities are off limits to those without any scruples and who are willing to use technology to further their own desires.



The myth-making machine has been working over-time in relation to the Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden story with a blend of CIA-MOSSAD inspired PSYOPS. The nature of any kind of genuine fundamentalism – Islamic or otherwise – means that it reaches a crescendo of conflict where it is difficult to know what is fake and what is real. Jihad martyr videos are liberally uploaded to the internet, often after Intel agents have manipulated the content. Sleeper agents or unconscious dupes already integrated into Al-Qaeda cells can then carry out their duties on behalf of their paymasters – or Allah. It has never been easier to pull the wool over our eyes, even when video manipulation is shoddy in the extreme.

Recall the 1999 Washington Post article by William Arkin “When Seeing and Hearing isn’t Believing,” where he described the new technology of ‘voice morphing’ or ‘voice synthesizing’, explaining that, “if audio technicians have a recording of your voice, then they can create a tape in which your authentic voice says anything they wish.” [6] What we can be sure of is that a large proportion of videos circulated on the internet at politically opportune moments have proven to be fake.

In early 2003, Iraq provided another testing ground for not just planting stories in the world’s media but to create fake videos to keep the war on terror narrative alive in the public’s mind and therefore promote the objective of regime change and the toppling of Saddam Hussein. The CIA’s Iraq Operations Group floated ideas to show Hussein as a paedophile molesting a boy and “… to flood Iraq with the videos…” As cultural constraints made this concept unworkable, it was soon dropped. Other ideas included the interruption of Iraqi television programming with a fake special news bulletins and fake inserts or “crawls”—messages at the bottom of the screen—into Iraqi newscasts. The CIA also began playing with the idea of an Osama bin laden impersonator. The Washington Post reports that the CIA abandoned the projects leaving the way open for their revival in military circles. As one military official comments: “The military took them over,” due to the “… assets in psy-war down at Ft. Bragg,” at the Army’s Special Warfare Centre.[7] (One wonders how many paid bin Laden, Hussein and other high profile figures have been paraded for media consumption).

Hot on the heels of September 11th attacks, the CIA embarked on a massive propaganda campaign to fuse Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein in order to justify the invasion of Iraq. With the help of Britain’s Tony Blair, the idea of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) was cooked up as a further PR exercise.

This matches the production quality of subsequent videos which appeared on the scene as the CIA project was taken over by the Pentagon at some point after 2003. This is most evident in the video released just prior to the 2004 election and an obviously digitally manipulated duplicate from 2007, in which bin Laden is sporting a trimmed, dyed beard and a bottled sun-tan. It was not just Intel groups having fun with their video collections. At the level of the mainstream US and British media videos were often edited in line with government policy.

When Osama Bin Laden videos periodically surfaced throughout the Iraq war and up to his alleged Hollywood-esque death it was inevitable that they would be thoroughly cleansed of all references and remarks that might prove problematic to the accepted “Osama-under-the-bed” formula. Obviously doctored and fully fabricated videos would be given unfettered access to the mass media outlets, with the Bush Administration taking media propaganda to new heights. From 2001–2011 more than 30 audio and video recordings were released, most of which found their way to the internet.

In October 2001, bin Laden appeared on Al Jazeera, in a pre-recorded video statement shortly after US-led strikes on Afghanistan begin. It was the first time the Al-Qaeda leader had apparently spoken after the 9/11 attacks. Sitting in a flack-jacket next to his right hand man Ayman al-Zawahiri he proceeds to softly berate the United States. No responsibility for the 9/11 attacks is forthcoming. A common and frustrating characteristic of the video and subsequent offerings was the lack of date or time stamp which meant there was no way to know when and where it was made. Bin Laden states: “What the United States tastes today is a very small thing compared to what we have tasted for tens of years.” He praises those responsible, saying, “I ask God Almighty to elevate their status and grant them paradise.” [8] Zionist and Bush Administration Press Secretary wasted no time in drawing our attention to the obvious fact that bin Laden “virtually took responsibility” for 9/11, despite explicitly denying his involvement. This soon turned bin Laden into designated arch-terrorist No.1 commensurate with Zion-Conservative planning. [9]

On December 13, 2001, a home video was apparently filmed without his knowledge and conveniently found in a house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. It was reportedly delivered to the CIA; by whom, no one knows. The video shows a conversation between Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al-Qaeda spokesman Suliman abu Ghaith, and Al-Qaeda veteran Khaled al-Harbi. The Pentagon delivered what could be loosely called a “translation” to all major news outlets which was so in line with the official 9/11 story of the day and similarly riven with errors and fallacies as to be wholly unbelievable. The Bush Administration screamed from their Neo-Con pulpit that this was definitive proof, effectively calling for an end to any doubts as to the intent of Al-Qaeda and their culpable Commander-in-Chief. However, it wasn’t long before even some within the MSM began to have serious doubts about its authenticity. So many people began scratching their heads that Bush was forced to comment exclaiming in true reactionary form that it was: “preposterous for anybody to think this tape was doctored. Those who contend it’s a farce or a fake are hoping for the best about an evil man.” [10]

Apart from the obvious fact this video could easily have been faked by anyone, it is also true that previous videos had usually been given their formal consent by bin Laden and passed through to the Arabic Al-Jazeera network. It didn’t happen on that occasion and subsequently many others. More importantly, the person in the video is clearly not bin laden no matter how hard the Bush administration and 9/11 debunkers scream and shout that it is. As 9/11 journalist and Islamic studies historian Dr. Kevin Barrett noted, the person in the video is “at least 40 or 50 pounds heavier, and his facial features [are] obviously different…” all of which led the video to be dubbed the “Fatty Bin-Laden tape” and widely ridiculed. [11]

Dr. David Ray Griffin offered another problem with the video by pointing out that:

“… its stocky bin Laden praised two of the alleged hijackers, Wail M. Al-Shehri and Salem al-Hazmi, by name, and yet both the London Telegraph and the Saudi embassy reported several days after 9/11 that al-Hazmi was still alive and working in Saudi Arabia. Given the fact that the earlier video in which Osama confessed was clearly a fake, we should be suspicious of this latest apparent confession.” [12]

We then come to what this imposter actually said. The latest “bin-Laden” gave a convenient up-date on the technical details of the 9/11 narrative as if to quell any criticism of the official story :

“[W]e calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all… (inaudible)… due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and all the floors above it only. This is what we had hoped for.” He continues: “We had notification since the previous Thursday that the event would take place that day. We had finished our work that day and had the radio on. It was 5:30 p.m. our time.… Immediately, we heard the news that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. We turned the radio station to the news from Washington.… At the end of the newscast, they reported that a plane just hit the World Trade Center … After a little while, they announced that another plane had hit the World Trade Center. The brothers who heard the news were overjoyed by it.” [13] [Emphasis mine]

The above passage is distinctive for its hackneyed attempts at creating a 9/11 script and placing it at the foot of bin Laden. Firstly, sentences in italics referring to the reasons and causes for the WTC destruction, are so closely aligned to the official story that it becomes far too pat. It is especially odd that “bin Laden” refers to the Twin Towers as made of iron rather than steel. For a trained civil engineer as he was, this is nonsensical. [14] The reference to not revealing information to the “brothers” until: “… just before they boarded the planes,” is also curious as all of the alleged hijackers bought their tickets for the 9/11 flights two weeks in advance, not forgetting flight training for the leaders. The pilots and the hijackers all knew each other and had contact with each other prior and during the flights which is the opposite to what is said in the video. [15]

A German TV show also confirmed that the translation provided by the Pentagon was seriously flawed. Professor Gernot Rotter, scholar of Islamic and Arabic Studies at the University of Hamburg found that the: “… tape is of such poor quality that many passages are unintelligible. And those that are intelligible have often been taken out of context, so that you can’t use that as evidence. The American translators who listened to the tape and transcribed it obviously added things that they wanted to hear in many places.” [16]

Further incredulity was to arrive in January 2004, as research into several audio recordings allegedly made by bin Laden was carried out. Professor Richard Muller of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) concluded there was evidence of “cut and paste” editing from past recordings, believing that the audio examples are fake and bin Laden either “dead or injured.” He pointed the finger at Al-Qaeda’s difficulties in countering American counter-terrorism rather than CIA fabrication. [17]

In the same year on October 29, immediately prior to the US elections (a curiously common occurrence for Al-Qaeda audio and video messages) an alleged bin Laden video recording was

released which came to be known as the “Towers of Lebanon Speech” in which he explained his vengeful reasons for planning 9/11: “As I looked at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me to punish the oppressor in kind by destroying towers in America, so that it would have a taste of its own medicine and would be prevented from killing our women and children.” The individual also heavily criticised Bush by highlighting some of his bizarre actions on that day: “It did not occur to us that the commander in chief of the American armed forces would leave fifty thousand of his citizens in the two towers to face this great horror on their own, just when they needed him most. It seems that a little girl’s story about a goat and its butting was more important than dealing with airplanes and their butting into skyscrapers.” [18] This was referring to Bush’s behaviour when told that America was under attack he continued reading to the class of schoolchildren and sat in the class for another half an hour so as not to “scare them.” The speech also criticised security, corporate control and US–Israel imperialism.

Perhaps the most important question to ask is who benefited from this particular video at pre-election time? It is widely accepted at the time that rather than hurting Bush’s popularity it would actually help to ensure his re-election by stirring the memories of 9/11 and America under attack, thus fuelling the fires of religious nationalism. [19] Bush sailed on to victory with ghost runner and fellow Bonesman John Kerry left in his wake.

An audio recording from May 2006 arrived in the post claiming to be the latest sermon from Osama. It asserts that Guantanamo Bay terrorist Zacharias Moussaoui could not have been involved in 9/11, because he had personally assigned the 19 hijackers involved in those events. The latest bin-Laden therefore contradicts his original and authentic message of December 2001 and suddenly confesses his responsibility for orchestrating the attacks. [20]



Sure, he just forgot…

And what of the identities of the hijackers themselves? It seems that seven of those he ‘personally assigned’ had nothing at all to do with 9/11 and turned out to be alive and well. More coincidences? Or flaws in an extensive cover-up characterised by an ever-present ineptitude?



***

Previous releases of tapes by Intelcenter the U.S. monitoring group which describes its role as providing: “counterterrorism intelligence when, where & how you need it” extends to manufacturing and fabricating video tapes on behalf of “Al-Qaeda.” The company delivered several videos to the Western media press from 2006–2008, even selling them on their website at intelcenter.org. Most of the videos have been conclusively proven to be culled together from old footage dating from five years previously, yet they continue to be seen as authentic by the MSM. [21]

Intelcenter is an offshoot of IDEFENSE, a web security company that monitors intelligence from the Middle East. It is positively crawling with ex-military intelligence veterans, US Army and Defence Intelligence Agency individuals, many of whom have ties to Zio-Conservatives of the last Bush Administration. IntelCenter has been caught red-handed fabricating video evidence in order to attribute it to Al-Qaeda terrorist networks on a number of occasions.

It was on another anniversary on September 11th 2007 that we saw another video shunted off the Al-Qaeda-CIA home movie production line with a contribution credit to Intelcenter. The “video” consisted of a still picture of Osama “provided” by the controversial US-Based SITE Institute and given to Associated Press on 7 September of that year. Describing itself as an organization “that provides information related to terrorist networks to the government, news media, and general public,” SITE’s non-profit status has earned it more than $500,000 from the government”, with “over $273,000” coming directly from taxpayers in 2004. [22] But “the organization believes such work is consistent with its exempt purposes”, which of course it would, raking in that amount of money. [23]

SITE Executive Director Rita Katz co-founded the intelligence company with her husband and senior analyst Josh Devon, both committed Zionists with links to Israeli intelligence. Having worked with former terrorism Czar Richard Clarke and his staff in the White House, the Department of Justice, Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Homeland Security garnering: “… wide attention by publicizing statements and videos from extremist chat rooms and Web sites, while attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE’s methodology.” [24] Professor Bruce Hoffman is also listed as a senior advisor and “currently a tenured professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Washington, DC.” Not only has Hoffman residing at the notorious recruiting ground for the Liberal arm of the 3EM, but had a post as Corporate Chair in Counterterrorism and Counterinsurgency and a directorship

of the Rockefeller/Rothschild connected RAND Corporation, also conveniently in Washington DC. Recall that RAND has a long association with PSYOPS research. (Indeed, the description of the corporation’s successful PSYOPS implementation can be read in a 2007 178 page document originally prepared for the US Air Force titled: Project Air Force by Stephen T. Hosmer).





Rita Katz co-founder of the SITE Institute doing what she does best: keeping the war on terror narrative flowing by propagating (and possibly creating) numerous Al-Qaeda videos made fresh for the internet. BE AFRAID! Is the message. SITE is likely a PSYOPS front for MOSSAD masquerading as a legitimate intelligence gathering operation for mainstream media. By 2015, we have seen Katz getting behind the new bogeyman meme this time in the guise of ISIS/ISIL, better known as Islamic State, the new kids on the propaganda block designed to up the ante in emotional horror in the mass mind.

Previous to her post as SITE director Katz worked as Research Director of “The Investigative Project on Terrorism” and served as a counsel for the plaintiffs—Families of victims of September 11 terrorist attacks who happen to be suing Saudi princes for $116 trillion of damages from the loss of life in September 11. She was also hired by 1,000 relatives of those who died on September 11th in order to research terrorism. A civil lawsuit was filed in 2002 against those suspected of financing terror plots. No doubt spurred on by the legacy of the Muslim Brotherhood, Katz however continued to earn substantial sums of money from the Homeland Security and intelligence raids on Muslim think tanks and institutions, much of it based on her own research alone.

She is also the author of Terrorist Hunter: The Extraordinary Story of a Woman who Went Undercover to Infiltrate the Radical Islamic Groups Operating in America published 2003 by HarperCollins, owned by ardent Israel supporter Rupert Murdoch. To say that this should be categorised as a work of fiction is an understatement. The breathless title gives you all you need to know as to the plot, and is thus utterly false since gender restriction means that fundamentalist gatherings would allow no woman to be present save Katz taking on some of the false beards and make-up seen in her own videos. Regardless, she has managed to create quite a money spinner. And like so many in the terror industry, the SITE Institute has much to gain financially by keeping the Intel flowing into American and Israeli military-security complex.



Katz and Devon are part of an outsourced unit that is effectively part of the Zio-Conservative and government intelligence apparatus. The website describes itself as a “monitoring service” on the Jihadist threat,” which is severely problematic considering the couple’s obvious lack of impartiality against anything associated with the Arab nationalism, let alone the war on terror. One might even say this is about as obvious an Israeli PSYOPS operation as its possible to be. In other words, Katz’s handlers are MOSSAD.

With a fat new propaganda bogeyman in the guise of ISIL tearing up the Middle East it seems the SITE Institute’s PR role for the terror industry is set to continue. Geo-political analyst Professor James F. Tracey summed the sad state of affairs within the MSM: “Since mid-August 2014 major news organizations have conveyed videos allegedly found online by the SITE Intelligence Group. Unsurprisingly the same media have failed to closely interrogate what the private company actually is and whether the material it promotes should be accepted as genuine.” [25]

From one fake brand to another: Osama to ISIL hatchet man “Jihadi John”

This manufacturing of threats and the subsequent erosion of civil liberties has been going on a long time now. Timothy H. Edgar, National Security Policy Counsel for the ACLU testified in April 2005 before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security of the House Committee on the Judiciary stating:



“… federal agents seized confidential files, computer hard drives, books, and other materials from some of the most respected Islamic think tanks and organizations in the United States and raided the homes of many of the leaders involved in those organizations. The search warrants targeted two entities whose main purpose involves activities at the core of the First Amendment: the Graduate School of Islamic Thought and Social Sciences (GSITSS), an institute of higher education, and the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), an Islamic research institute and think tank, as well as the private homes of a number of their employees and scholars,”

Apart from the danger of slipping into “witch-hunts” on a whim and therefore breaching civil rights, it seems the evidence against the organisations was less than substantial. Mr. Edgar pressed on to highlight the most important points:

“The complaint in the civil rights action says the affidavit in support of the search warrants contained fabricated material facts regarding non-existent overseas transactions. The complaint also says the search warrant affidavit was drafted with the help of private author and self-styled ‘terrorist hunter’ Rita Katz, who was paid $272,000 for her advice by the federal government and has made much more in a book deal and as a consultant for news organizations. According to federal investigators, Katz ‘lost the trust of some investigators from the FBI and Justice Department’ as a result in part of the ‘reckless conclusions’ she drew in her book, …” [Emphasis mine]

With SITE as the only source for the video and disregarding other influences, surely we could be forgiven for thinking there are not only are there severe conflict of interests but financial and public relation concerns that cast serious doubt on the authenticity of the recording.

What of the video itself? Needless to say, a few “problems” came to light.



It seems the devoutly religious and moral “Osama” has suddenly undergone a midlife crisis and sort refuge in a make-over for his adoring minions. This has resulted in a chocolate brown dyed hair and a beard suitably clipped into a more suburban, Muslim-terrorist-about-town style, topped off with a garish gold ring just to show that his taste in contemporary jewellery and his adherence to Islam do not clash. It appears the rationale of wearing of a ring which is forbidden by Muslim law, and the magical transformation of a left-handed Osama to a right-handed one is all perfectly understandable in the world that some analysts prefer to inhabit.

The SITE Institute happily made up the claim that it is “common practice” amongst Muslim men to dye their hair when in fact, the opposite is the case. According to one BBC report other analysts: “… have suggested that rather than being dyed, it may be actually false, and that to help avoid detection he is clean-shaven these days.” [26] Ah, of course, the old false beard trick. Works well in the caves of Afghanistan or the market streets of Pakistan. If he was a paid Osama look-alike then you have to go with what’s available. Times are hard, after all…

Given the satellite and surveillance technology that is at least sophisticated enough to read the newsprint as you sit on the John, it appears it isn’t up to the job of finding a Muslim terrorist dressed in yellow grab and a false beard. Of course, if a gaggle of Muslim terrorists are intelligent enough to pull off the biggest false flag in history and penetrate the most heavily defended region on Earth then it is probable that they would have thought about the idea of sophisticated surveillance. Yet, we asked to place our trust in the logic of a false beard nonetheless.

Moreover, the tape itself has been so hacked, chopped and generally messed around with, that it represents a frozen CGI image manipulated to give the illusion of a living, speaking human being. In the whole 26-minute recording, two short sections are sandwiched into the 26 minute recording where the man said to be bin Laden is seen talking: one at the beginning and one towards the middle. For the remaining 23 minutes of the tape we are invited to watch a still image of the speaker. (It is all the more extraordinary that no one in the MSM considers this odd. If they did, they weren’t about to say so, for obvious reasons). Apparent to anyone who has been exposed to the usual diet of a TV we can see cuts and edits all over the place, even the introduction of sections which appear to be from different recordings altogether. As noted by computer analyst Dr. Neal Krawetz of the University of Winnipeg: “… the new audio has no accompanying ‘live’ video and consists of multiple audio recordings… and there are so many splices that I cannot help but wonder if someone spliced words and phrases together. I also cannot rule out a vocal imitator during the frozen-frame audio. The only way to prove that the audio is really bin Laden is to see him talking in the video.” [27]

That seems to be a tall order since Osama appears to have long since met his Maker.

(left) “Osama bin Laden” makes his Towers of Lebanon Speech in 2004 Source: Al-Jazeera | (right) A frame from “Osama bin Laden’s” 2007 video. Source: Intelcenter

Krawetz also noticed remarkably similar themes and technical details from bin Laden’s previous video, released in 2004, a few days before the US presidential election:

“[T]his is the same clothing [a white hat, white shirt and yellow sweater] he wore in the 2004-10-29 video. In 2004 he had it unzipped, but in 2007 he zipped up the bottom half. Besides the clothing, it appears to be the same background, same lighting, and same desk. Even the camera angle is almost identical.” Krawetz also comments, “if you overlay the 2007 video with the 2004 video, his face has not changed in three years—only his beard is darker and the contrast on the picture has been adjusted.” [28]

If the Pentagon can concoct fake Al-Zarqawi letters boasting about suicide attacks and then leak them to The New York Times, to be printed on the front page the next day, it is much more than probable that videos would most certainly not be off limits.

Now, take this analysis and apply it to the present chaos that is ISIL. We have had mass civilian carnage on a scale all supported by extremely fake-looking videos, with hostages likely agreeing to stage mock set ups over a year before the televised “beheadings”. The first high profile beheading victim, journalist and anti-Assad James Foley is an example. A UK Times article reported on the findings of forensic analysts’ conclusion that the video of Foley’s beheading” was staged. Several points are made to explain why this is so, including:

The sounds made by Foley are not consistent with beheadings.

There is no blood shed while ‘several cuts’ are made to the neck of Foley.

Foley’s words appear to have been scripted.

The analysis highlights a blip in the imagery that could indicate the journalist had to repeat a line.

Sounds made by Foley do not appear consistent with what might be expected.

The video begins with a clip of President Barack Obama. This footage appears to have been downloaded directly from the White House website. [29]

The propaganda video by ISIL with the victim James Foley 2014. His murder likely took place off camera.

Apart from embedded journalism which was the first red flag, Foley also worked in Iraq for a known CIA front USAID in 2009. By 2011, he had been kidnapped by Gaddafi’s military and then happened to repeat a round of bad luck with his capture in Syria. As a hostage in Libya, then again in Syria and finally beheaded by ISIS. This is a little far-fetched to say the least. As journalist Michael Krieger notes, his resume: “… reads more like a James Bond film script than that of a journalist with a teaching background.” Proof of complicity? Not really. It’s usually a mix of lies and truth with patsies not even knowing they’ve been sacrificed until it is too late.

Regardless of whether individuals were CIA/MOSSAD agents as some have suggested, they had, in truth, been murdered a long time before their few minutes of tragic fame. Once again, agents and patsies are collateral for the greater vision which follows exactly the same formula every time:

create / fuel radicalism through a complex mix of genuine cells and manufactured ones



= embed agents in chosen grouping to incite ideology to fever pitch and making sure to eject moderates

= Make sure a good cluster of psychopaths are present for the bloodletting and ensuing mayhem

= supply with bombs and assorted weaponry

= direct toward geopolitical aims

= ensure propagandized coverage via mainstream media.

Nothing has changed. The same people are in charge as they were during Al-Qaeda’s reign. The revolving door of politics has no effect on shadow government machinations. If these shoddy attempts at video manipulation are the best that outsourced military PSYOPS can come up with and the public still believes that the enemy is “out there” rather than the government and its agencies, then we are surely in for a very dark future. [30]

Notes



[1] ‘Apollo 11 Moon landing: ten facts about Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins’ mission’ The Telegraph, July 18, 2009 | See also: http://www.business.time.com/2011/05/03/how-much-has-osama-bin-laden-cost-the-us

[2] Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive? By David Ray Griffin, Published by Olive Branch Press July 2009. ISBN-10: 1566567831. Also read a great summary found surprisingly in The Daily Mail, not noted for the finest journalistic standards. This article is however, an exception: ‘Has Osama Bin Laden been dead for seven years – and are the U.S. and Britain covering it up to continue war on terror?’ By Sue Reid

Daily Mail, 11 September 2009.

[3] Bin Laden: Authentic Interview by Carol A. Valentine, Curator, Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum, http://www.Public-Action.com October, 2001.

[4] ‘Transcript of Osama Bin Ladin interview by Peter Arnett’The first-ever television interview with Osama Bin Ladin was conducted by Peter Arnett in eastern Afghanistan in late March 1997. Questions were submitted in advance. Bin Ladin responded to almost all of the questions. CNN was not allowed to ask follow up questions. The interview lasted just over an hour. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7204.htm | ‘CNN Transcript of Osama Bin Laden’s October Interview’ with Taseer Allouni February 5, 2002. Al-Jazeera reporter Allouni was sent to jail for having links to Al-Qaeda and financial irregularities. The interview in question is used by US authorities as proof that 9/11 was carried out by Bin Laden but no such proof is in evidence and allusions of which go counter to bin laden’s previous claims.

[5] ‘Osama bin Laden, among the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted Fugitives”: Why was he never indicted for his alleged role in 9/11?’ By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 17, 2006.

[6] ‘When Seeing and Hearing Isn’t Believing’ By William M. Arkin, The Washington Post, Feb. 1, 1999.

[7] ‘CIA unit’s wacky idea: Depict Saddam as gay’ By Jeff Stein, The Washington Post, May 25 2010.

[8] ‘Bin Laden Taunts US and Praises Hijackers’ By John F.Burns, The New York Times, October 8, 2001. | ‘Bin Laden’s warning: full text’ BBC News, 7 October, 2001.

[9] ‘Bush: Bin Laden “virtually took responsibility” CNN.com October 8, 2001.

[10] ‘US urged to detail origin of tape’ By Steven Morris, The Guardian, December 15, 2001.

[11] p.179; Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie By Kevin Barrett Published by Progressive Press, 2007.

[12] ‘Osama Tape Appears Fake, Experts Conclude’June 1st, 2006, PRWeb.com

[13] TRANSCRIPT OF USAMA BIN LADEN VIDEO TAPE (“Transcript and annotations independently prepared by George Michael, translator, Diplomatic Language Services; and Dr. Kassem M. Wahba, Arabic language program coordinator, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. They collaborated on their translation and compared it with translations done by the U.S. government for consistency. There were no inconsistencies in the translations). http://www.defense.gov/news/Dec2001/d20011213ubl.pdf.

[14] National Institute of Standards and Technology, 9/2005,( p. 6 ) | op.cit US Department of Defense, December 13, 2001.

[15] op.cit US Department of Defense, December 13, 2001. | Flight tickets booked: http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/ST00001A.pdf |, ‘The British Breeding Ground’ By Neil Mackay, The Sunday Herald September 30, 2001.

[16] ‘Bin Laden Video: Faulty Translation as evidence?’By George Restle and Ekkehard Seiker, Monitor TV December 20, 2001.

[17] ‘The Voice of Osama bin Laden: Osama’s voice on tape proves that the leader of al Qaeda is still alive. Or does it?’ By Richard A. Muller, MIT Technology Review, Communications News, January 23, 2004.

[18] p.237; Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama Bin Laden, By Osama bin Laden (Author), Bruce Lawrence (Editor), James Howarth (Translator) Published by Verso, 2005. | ISBN-10: 1844670457.

[19] ‘Lou Dobbs Tonight’ -Recent Video of Bin Laden Airs; Iraq Missing Explosives Still an Issue Aired CNN.com October 29, 2004. Transcript: www. transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0410/29/ldt.01.html

[20] ‘Osama Tape Appears Fake, Experts Conclude ’US government fabricating evidence to manipulate American public, scholars say. Duluth, MN (PRWEB) May 30, 2006.

[21] ‘CIA-Linked Intel Center Releases Highly Suspicious Bin Laden Tape’ By Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet.com, September 14, 2009.

[22] Ibid.

[23] http://www.SITEinstitute.org/

[24] ‘SO, A ‘Charitable Organization’ (The SITE Institute) Released the Bin Laden Video…,’ By Berni McCoy, Berni McCoy’s Journal/Democratic Underground, September 10, 2007 | ‘Leak Severed a Link to Al-Qaeda’s Secrets. Firm Says Administration’s Handling of Video Ruined Its Spying Efforts,’ By Joby Warrick, Washington Post, October 9, 2007.

[25] ‘Who is Behind the Islamic State (ISIL) Beheadings? Probing the SITE Intelligence Group’ By Prof. James F. Tracy, Global Research, September 15, 2014

[26] ‘Trimmed Bin Laden in media-savvy war’ By Frank Gardner, BBC News, September 8, 2007.

[27] ‘Bin Laden’s beard is real, video is not’ Digital evidence supports the theory that Al-Qaida is recycling old footage to create new messages. – by Robert Vamosi, http://www.news.cnet.com, September 12, 2007. | op.cit BBC News, (Gardener.)

[28] Ibid.

[29] ‘Foley video with Briton was staged, experts say’ By Deborah Haynes, The Times, August 25 2014.

[30] For further analysis of the video fakery see this article from 2011: ‘Exclusive: Osama bin Laden’s Nose and Left Ear’ By Joe Quinn Sott.net. 08 May 2011.