A 9/11 anniversary” video was reportedly released by Osama Bin Laden which was quickly deemed to be an iron clad forgery, and not even a good one at that. All references to current events made by the figure said to be Bin Laden occurred at a point in the video where the picture was frozen and only audio was present. Bin Laden also presented a pre recorded martyrdom video of one of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, Waleed al Shehri, who was reported by the BBC as still alive (along with several others and living normal lives) and well in Saudi Arabia.
Analysts were also baffled by the wholly ridiculous fake beard Bin Laden seemed to have donned. A computer expert later provided evidence that suggested the video was old footage re-released and manipulated. Other analysts came to the same conclusion. It was also revealed that Adam Pearlman, a suspected Mossad double agent, who once wrote stinging essays condemning Muslims as “bloodthirsty terrorists,” was the scriptwriter of the video.
According to a report by PrisonPlanet, “Every single notorious Bin Laden tape released since 2001 has contained vague non-specific messages, making it impossible to pinpoint the date of the recording. The occasional tape that has contained specific references to current events has been an audio tape which has never been independently verified as even being the voice of the real Bin Laden.”
The Report continues:
One of the only times Bin Laden specifically “confessed” to having planned the 9/11 attacks was in a video that was later declared to be a total fake.
The December 2001 “Fat nosed” Bin Laden video, was magically found in a house in Jalalabad after anti-Taliban forces moved in. It featured a fat Osama laughing and joking about how he’d carried out 9/11. The video was also mistranslated in order to manipulate viewer opinion and featured “Bin Laden” praising two of the hijackers, only he got their names wrong.
This Osama also used the wrong hand to write with and wore gold rings, a practice totally in opposition to the Muslim faith.
Leading expert on Bin Laden, Duke University professor Bruce Lawrence is also adamant that this so called “9/11 Confession” tape is an outright fake that has been used by US intelligence agencies to deflect attention from “conspiracy theories” about 9/11.
In reality, shortly after 9/11, Bin Laden had denied any involvement in the attacks on at least two separate occasions. Furthermore, the London Independent reported a claim attributed to a friend of one of the six men accused of plotting to detonate bombs on London’s underground tube system on July 21 2005, that suggested that Osama bin Laden personally told hook handed radical cleric Abu Hamza that Al-Qaeda was not behind the attacks of September 11, 2001.
This isn’t like a kid caught thieving in a sweet shop – terrorists always claim responsibility for attacks they have perpetrated otherwise why bother killing people to send a political message? One must therefore ask why has Bin Laden flip flopped around on the issue of 9/11?
When researchers continued to point out this fact, a second Bin Laden 9/11 “confession” appeared, this time in the form of an audio tape, released November 2007. “A speaker who sounded like bin Laden”, according to Reuters, specifically pointed out that he was solely responsible for 9/11 and had received no outside help.
Once again, the tape contained no reference to current events that would have indicated when it was recorded.
Every analysis of a newly released Al Qaeda or Bin Laden tape has revealed inconsistencies, flaws and suspicions.
In Spetember 2006, a video surfaced that purported to show Bin Laden meeting with alleged 9/11 hijackers Wail Alshehri and Hamza Alghamdi in Afghanistan days before the attack. Telling therefore it is that Wail Alshehri was one of the accused hijackers reported by the L.A. Times and others to still be alive and protesting his innocence in Saudi Arabia after 9/11.
Furthermore, the other alleged hijacker in the video, Hamza Alghamdi’s original mug shot as it appeared on the splash of 19 hijackers bore, “no resemblance” to the real Hamza Alghamdi – according to his own father after being informed of his son’s involvement in the attack. The Hamza Alghamdi in the new video appeared to be the same individual in the FBI’s mug shot parade. As with at least seven of the hijackers, it seems that there are two of each one, and the ones that appeared in the video are patsies or dupes.
The London Telegraph not only reported that four of the named hijackers were still alive, THEY INTERVIEWED THEM! Furthermore one of the “hijackers” they interviewed was Hamza Alghamdi, the very same man who was supposed to be in the “Bin Laden meets the hijackers” tape.
In 2007, a “9/11 anniversary” video was released by Osama which was quickly deemed to be an iron clad forgery, and not even a good one at that. All references to current events made by the figure said to be Bin Laden occurred at a point in the video where the picture was frozen and only audio was present. Bin Laden also presented a pre recorded martyrdom video of one of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, Waleed al Shehri, who was reported by the BBC as still alive and well in Saudi Arabia.
Analysts were also baffled by the wholly ridiculous fake beard Bin Laden seemed to have donned. A computer expert later provided evidence that suggested the video was old footage re-released and manipulated. Other analysts came to the same conclusion. It was also revealed that Adam Pearlman, a suspected Mossad double agent, who once wrote stinging essays condemning Muslims as “bloodthirsty terrorists,” was the scriptwriter of the video.
In another previous groundbreaking investigation, we exposed IntelCenter, the middleman between “Al-Qaeda’s media arm” and the press, and the organization that routinely obtains the tapes, as little more than a Pentagon front group staffed by individuals with close connections to Donald Rumsfeld and the U.S. war machine.
Computer analyst Neal Krawetz discoveredthat the As-Sahab logo (the alleged media arm of Al-Qaeda) and the IntelCenter logo were both added to the Al-Qaeda videos at the same time. Though Krawetz re-affirmed his conclusion in an interview with Wired News, after the fact became public, he mysteriously recanted.
Sources indicated that the footage was shot in either October 2001 or March 2002, with the earlier date being the favorite as Bin Laden’s appearance matches with thefootage from a different tape that was released in October 2001.
Krawetz original analysis, before he was obviously pressured to withdraw it, clearly suggests that IntelCenter is directly manufacturing the tapes and that “As-Sahab” is a contrived hoax to promulgate the myth that the tapes are coming from Al-Qaeda.
IntelCenter’s later denial of of this whole episode was taken with a pinch of salt, for it was the same company that knowingly re-released 6 year old footage of Bin Laden that many quarters of the media treated as new in July 2007.
Though some reports at the time included the proviso that the tape could contain old footage, the importance and ceremony attached to the re-release of this particular Bin Laden tape left the distinct impression that the footage was new and that it correlated with the alleged increase of “chatter” amongst terrorist organizations indicating that a huge new attack was imminent, a message that was then pushed by the U.S. government following the release of the National Intelligence Estimate.
In reality, the tape was being released for the third consecutive time, having first popped up in 2002 before re-airing again in 2003. The footage of Bin Laden was filmed six years previously in October 2001.
“Possible New Message From Osama Bin Laden,” reported ABC News, noting that “a brief clip of an older-looking Osama bin Laden is contained in a new al Qaeda videotape,” when in reality the graying in Bin Laden’s beard was exactly the same as when he appeared in a 2001 videotape, while also wearing the exact same jacket.
The footage was not new and any small amount of cursory research would have verified that fact, and yet the media went full board with the story, creating the illusion that it was new, while rabid Neo-Cons lauded the tape as another reason for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq while fearmongering about upcoming terror attacks at home.
Sources indicated that the footage was shot in either October 2001 or March 2002, with the earlier date being the favorite as Bin Laden’s appearance matches with the footage from a different tape that was released in October 2001.
Al-Jazeera said they had the footage as far back as October 2001, but chose not to air it as they saw it as “not newsworthy” and “nothing more than a PR stunt.” Six years later, and with the footage having been released on two separate occasions already, the western media insinuated that the tape was new and splashed it everywhere as a top headline.
IntelCenter issued a tacit warning that the footage may be re-hashed when they released the “new” tape to the media, but they failed to mention the fact that they released portions of the exact same clips in October 2003. The screenshots of Bin Laden which clearly correlate with the “new” tape were on their website all along, and yet they still labeled the footage as “significant”. IntelCenter knew the tape was definitely old, yet their meandering uncertainty left doubts that the media exploited to the full in claiming the footage may be new.
The organization was also behind the so-called “laughing hijackers” tape, which was passed off as originating from Al-Qaeda’s media arm, but was later exposed as being secret surveillance footage filmed by U.S. intelligence in 2000.
In previous articles, we have also outlined how almost every so-called “Al-Qaeda” tape has been released at the most politically opportune time for both the Bush and the Obama administrations, including Bin Laden videos right before the State of The Union Addresses in 2010, 2007,and 2006. In addition, a Bin Laden video was released immediately preceding the 2004 election and a tape in which he ludicrously declared himself in league with Saddam Hussein in the weeks before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Even if you believe that Al-Qaeda itself was deciding to re-package old footage and constantly re-release it, and that this isn’t a crude propaganda ploy on behalf of IntelCenter in collusion with US intelligence, why would the government and the media consistently afford lavish attention and give prominence to such activity, aiding the terrorists to spread their propaganda ad infinitum?
One specific example was a November 2002 audio tape which experts at the Lausanne-based Dalle Molle Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence compared with 20 earlier recordings of Bin Laden, concluding that the tape was fraudulent, in other words that it was someone pretending to be Bin Laden.
The US government, the intelligence agencies and the mainstream media reporting on the videos and tapes NEVER clarify whether they are genuine, nor have they ever issued retractions when tapes have been proven to be false. They carefully maintain plausible deniability, but still reap the political benefits.
The trove of Bin Laden material is about as genuine as Forest Gump’s meeting with JFK, and has been proven fraudulent on countless occasions. The vast majority of tapes and videos we have seen over the past decade are nothing more than crude propaganda unleashed in a desperate move to keep the genie in the bottle as far as what really happened on 9/11, and bolster the desperately flagging legitimacy of the so-called war on terror.
It is this track record, this decade long history, this epic fail on behalf of the military industrial complex to hoodwink the world, that has assured the fact that any image or video now released of Bin Laden’s death at the hands of US special ops will be forever viewed at best as highly dubious and at worst complete unadulterated fakery.
London Bomber Tapes:
After months of flip flopping contradictory statements about Al Qaeda involvement in 7/7 from the British Government, a video of alleged London Bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan was released apparently showing him in attendance at a terror camp in Pakistan and admitting his future intentions to take part in the bombings.
However, the people closest to Khan were extremely skeptical over the video. the London Guardian reported:
His friends were less easy to persuade. Paranoid that their conversations were being recorded by MI5, none would give their names but their sentiments were clear.
“It’s a fake,” said one. “Look at the way his lips were moving; they looked odd, the whole thing is a fake.”
It is not just the young who need persuading. Many older men in the grid of potholed streets and boarded-up houses which back on to alleys where rubbish lies uncollected believe Khan, a dedicated teaching assistant at Hillside Primary school, is the victim of a conspiracy.
“It’s crap,” said Mohammed Afsal, a father of five and member of the Hardy Street mosque.
“I know people can change in a second, but I can’t say he is one of them. He taught my son, he was a very good teacher. He was never hardline – no one could say he was an extremist – he was peaceful and dedicated to the children. They all loved him.”
A further video made at the same time of Shehzad Tanweer, one of the other bombers, was then later released TEN MONTHS LATER to coincide with the anniversary of the 7/7 bombings in London.
The schedule is so scripted, timed and orderly that Brian Ross at ABC News was able to report days in advance that the tape was about to be released.
If intelligence is so good that it is known in advance when tapes are going to be released, you’d expect intelligence agencies to also know the exact location where these tapes are coming from and who is releasing them, but no.
The videos could have been filmed under the proviso that the role players were just acting out another scene in the script of their MI5 training exercise – after all once again terror experts came forward to stress that the ringleader Mohammed Siddique Khan was on the payroll of British Intelligence. He was also under MI5 surveillance before the bombings.
Another terror expert, John Loftus, told Fox news that the reported mastermind of the bombings was working for British Intelligence.
Ayman al-Zawahiri Tapes:
In May 2003 A Zawahiri tape’s authenticity was seriously questioned by counter terrorism experts:
“The authenticity of the latest message purported to be of Ayman al-Zawahiri,” B. Raman, a former Indian government official and director the Institute for Topical Studies, wrote on May 22, 2003, “is yet to be established. According to counter-terrorism experts familiar with the voice and accent of al-Zawahiri, while the language and accent in the tape resemble those of al-Zawahiri, the voice seems to be of a person younger than al-Zawahiri, who is 51 years old.” As Raman notes, “one generally depends on the voice analysis experts of the US intelligence community” to establish the veracity of such recordings, although it “is not certain how accurate are their analysis and conclusions”
There is also a glaring flaw in the al-Zawahiri tape: in the May 21, 2003 message, al-Zawahiri mentions attacking Norway for its support of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. “Some observers have interpreted the reference to Norway in the message as possibly a mistake and said that he was probably having Denmark in mind,” notes Raman, writing for the South Asia Analysis Group. “Al-Zawahiri is reputed to be an intelligent and well-informed person. It is difficult to believe that he would have mistaken Norway for Denmark. This indicates the possibility that the message might have been recorded by someone else, not well-informed and hence not able to distinguish between Norway and Denmark, in the name of al-Zawahiri in order to mobilize the remnants of Al Qaeda and the IIF [Bin Laden’s International Islamic Front] for action in retaliation for the occupation of Iraq.”
Irrefutable evidence confirms that Musab Al-Zarqawi was a US agent provocateur used to both sell the necessity of the war in Iraq and as a patsy to take the fall for numerous suspicious bombings which only had the effect of realizing a long-held US and Israeli goal to deliberately foment civil war in Iraq and break up the country along sectarian lines.
Furthermore, before he was laid out to pasture earlier this year, presumably because it was getting ridiculous the amount of times he had already been reported captured or killed, Musab Al-Zarqawi’s role was exaggerated by The Pentagon in order to subtly link Iraq and 9/11 and quell criticism of the war.
Leaked documents even admitted that the Pentagon had concocted fake Al-Zarqawi letters boasting about suicide attacks and leaked them to the New York Times. The same documents directly stated that the false promotion of Al-Zarqawi included marking the the “U.S. Home Audience” as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.”
The last video of Al Zarqawi was a series of “outakes”, much like the latest Atta/Bin Laden video has been described as, which revealed the fact that he didn’t even know how to fire a gun.
Al Zarqawi’s shining achievement in terms of aiding his Neo-Con bosses was to launch a wave of copy-cat beheadings after appearing in the production of the fictional Nick Berg beheading tape.
Azzam the American Tapes:
Last month (April 2011) saw the release of another “Azzam the American” tape and allowed an opportunity for thorough debunking and exposure on our part. We revealed the shady past and the possible MOSSAD links to this Al Qaeda convert in a feature article stating “Adam Gadahn is in fact the grandson of the late Carl K. Pearlman; a prominent Jewish urologist in Orange County. Carl Pearlman was also a member of the board of directors of the Anti-Defamation League, which was caught spying on Americans for Israel in 1993. This information today also appeared in the Jerusalem post. ”
We also highlighted the various uses of Al Qaeda as a front group by several different intelligence agencies around the globe. (PrisonPlanet.com)
LeeF
Christian, Patriot, Entrepreneur. Built ThePatriotConnection,com (Patri-X.com) to unite patriots, empower content creators, educate others, and to crowdsource a true accounting of history.
