Image and video hosting by TinyPic














Thursday, January 19, 2006

Osama on tape

My first reaction to the new Osama tape mirrors the point others have raised. Why is there no new terror alert as a result of this recording? During the election, we had plenty of 'em; they kept a sector of the populace in a constant state of anxiety. Since then -- well, correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can recall, there have been no alerts whatsoever.

Odd.

Some have also questioned whether the tape is real. Even if the voice is that of Osama Bin Laden, it could still be a fake, thanks to advances in technology. Check out this Washington Post piece from 1999:
"Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government." So begins a statement being delivered by Gen. Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations Command.

At least the voice sounds amazingly like him.

But it is not Steiner. It is the result of voice "morphing" technology developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy of the tape.
I have no way of knowing if this technology has been applied to any Bin Laden recording. But no-one can deny that the article referenced above raises unnerving possibilities.

A manipulation of this sort would explain why Osama has recently shown a tendency to say what Republicans would like him to say. He discusses polls in America. He no longer dwells on obscure (to Americans) points of Islamic history or theology.

Faked audiotapes and television broadcasts were prophesied by Dr. Steven Metz and Lieutenant Colonel James Kievit (of the Army War College) in their extraordinary 1994 document The Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War, which is one of those revealing "think" pieces the Pentagon probably wishes had never seen a public release. You can read the file here.

Interesting, wasn't it, how an Osama communication hit the public in late 2004 -- just in time to help deep-six John Kerry's chances?

By the way, you may be interested to learn that rightists have put this latest development to typically bad use. This conservative blog includes the following observation:
Sounds to me like raising a white flag without admitting defeat. I am sure all the lefties will jump on it and agree with Osama's "opinion" (or more likely an attempt at creating deeper fissures between left and right in the US) that it is big business that supports Bush and the war. Um, excuse me, but there was a little matter of the destruction of the WTC and damage to the Pentagon and loss of three planes and thousands of innocent civilians...
I am forever struck by the contrast between the way right-wingers think we think and the way we actually do think. This boob, like many of his boob brethren, actually believes that progressives want to do business with Osama Bin Laden. Anyone who studies this blog knows that -- to the contrary -- I've consistently damned Bush for not capturing him, and for coddling the Saudis who have supported Al Qaeda. I've damned the Bush administration for ignoring warnings of the WTC disaster and for not conducting a genuine investigation of how the hijackers moved about this country so freely. And, because the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend, I've damned the Reagan/Bush I administrations for supporting Bin Laden's efforts against the Russians.

Scan the Democratic Underground responses and you will see many insults hurled toward Bush but not one iota of support for Bin Laden.

Alas, conservative fantasists will believe precisely what they want to believe -- and apparently, they want to believe that Democrats wear "I like Osama" t-shirts. Folks who view reality as a malleable commodity can be described in one word: Nuts.
Comments:
Bush and OBL need each other. This just makes explicit the implicit non-aggression pact that has existed since 9/11.
 
Surely these tapes would have been denounced by Al Queda operatives, if they were American fakes, no?

That aside, in all the discussion over whether Bush has successfully "protected the Homeland" since 9/11, or why there hasn't been another attack, one point is never made: "the terrorists" had no need to attack the U.S. mainland again, because the 9/11 attack accomplished exactly what Bin Laden wanted: a U.S. occupation of an Arab country, with disastrous results.

Bin Laden said as much to Western journalists, before the attacks. He was quite open about it, and repeated it several times, over several years.

At this point, another attack in the U.S. would simply be punitive. It would have no strategic value. It makes far more sense to do what they're doing: terrorist acts in other countries, where there is more to gain.

Or maybe now, they *do* see strategic value of another attack...
 
It is quite plausible from what you write, Joe, that the tape was faked. It also seems perfectly plausible that King George and Osama are partners in crime, especially given their families' intertwined histories and Osama Bin Laden's previous support from the US in Afghanistan and other less well-known intrigues among these elements with western intelligence services.
 
Just to let you know - the boob is a she, not a he. Not that it really matters, but I like being a girl.

I apologize for not drawing a distinction betwen the far left extremist fringe and the center-leaning left. I HAVE read the opinions from more than a few leftists that Bush, Halliburton, Carlyle and PNAC all wanted the war in order to line the pockets of certain people and their corporations. I would NOT put it past Bin Laden to try to deepen the antipathy between the left and the right for his own purposes. I certainly didn't intend to help him in his task.
 
The take-away message I got was...oh, so the Iraq war and 9/11 ARE related - bin Laden said so himself. Since we know they are not, the message must be a fake.

~ Miss P.
 
Gail, I apologize for the mix-up over gender. I will not apologize for my own belief that, yes, Bush, Halliburton, Carlyle and PNAC all wanted the war in order to line the pockets of certain people and their corporations.

Neither will I apologize wanting GREATER antipathy between right and left. Why? Because the right is pure evil -- a fetid puss-pool of corruption, Al Qaeda-esque religious fanaticism, hypocrisy, lies, propaganda and nescience -- while the left is good. Well, some of it good. At least, that's just about the only place where any good is to be found in the political sphere.

And I felt that way long before Osama Bin Laden came on the scene. Since conservatives never feel embarrassed about their own beliefs, we on the left should stop apologizing for ours. The right -- not the left -- turned ideological debate into ideological war (don't bother denying it: We all own radios) and we thus have no choice but to engage in combat and prevail.

Only an ethnocentric fool would think Osama Bin Laden cares much about political divisions in this country. I've no doubt that to him, all Westerners are as alike as makes no difference.

And only a fool would think that the Iraq war has anything to do with Al Qaeda. By invading an Arab country, we did the salafist fundamentalists a favor.
 
i wouldn't put anything past this administration, but even if they are faking Osama tapes, it is a double edged sword for them. it also reminds everybody what a miserable failure bush is.
thanks for asking the questions most bloggers are afraid to ask.
 
No doubt BushCo had profits and long-term control of the Iraqi oil fields in mind when planning this invasion, but there's another reason as well: to ensure Bush's reelection. A country at war rarely throws out the incumbent, even if he's not much liked.

The strategy nearly backfired (actually it *did* backfire), but by then they had vote fraud down pat, and the will of the electorate was irrelevant anyway.
 
Wayne Madsen has posted recently this piece declaring the tape fake based on some very specific knowledge he has of an author quoted by Bin Laden:

January 20-21, 2006 -- What's not right about the Osama Bin Laden audio tape. One thing that the Bush administration does well is manage perceptions of the public. Amid protests over the NSA wiretapping, the extension of the Patriot Act, and the nomination of neo-Fascist Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, an audio tape on Osama Bin Laden is sent to Al Jazzera. On the tape, Bin Laden suddenly veers from being a traditional right-wing Wahhabi fanatic to the right of the House of Saud to a leftist progressive. The tape by Bin Laden was quickly verified as "authentic" by a CIA that is now firmly in the grasp of neo-cons under Porter Goss.

However, the tape is an obvious fake being used by the Bush administration to scare Americans into believing "Al Qaeda" is making plans for another attack and an attempt to link Bin Laden to Democrats.

The reason the tape is as phony as Niger yellowcake documents and Saddam's weapons of mass destruction is as plain as day. "Bin Laden" allegedly quotes from the introduction of a book written by long-time Washington, DC progressive author and journalist and a friend of mine, Bill Blum. Bill was once an editor and contributor to Covert Action Quarterly, a magazine devoted to exposing CIA operations like the arming, funding, and training of Bin Laden and his mujaheddin guerrillas during the Afghan-Soviet war.

The Bush perception managers are either incredibly stupid or are trying to ensnare liberal journalists as aiders and abettors of Al Qaeda, something that is certainly within their scope. Bin Laden allegedly quotes the following passage from Blum's book, Rogue State: "If you (Americans) are sincere in your desire for peace and security, we have answered you. And if Bush decides to carry on with his lies and oppression, then it would be useful for you to read the book Rogue State, which states in its introduction: 'If I were president, I would stop the attacks on the United States: First I would give an apology to all the widows and orphans and those who were tortured. Then I would announce that American interference in the nations of the world has ended once and for all.'" However, this quote is not from Rogue State, again, pointing to a very bad forgery of the Bin Laden audiotape. No sooner had the alleged Bin Laden tape been released, neo-con activist Cliff Kincaid was already spinning nonsense about Blum and his publisher, Common Courage Press of Monroe, Maine, being part of some sort of pro-Bin Laden progressive and liberal "Fifth Columnist" grouping in the United States.

Bin Laden might not be so eager to quote Blum if he was aware of his other work, Killing Hope, an expose of the CIA's covert wars. In it, Blum defends to Soviet occupation of Afghanistan as self-defense against the CIA-backed Islamist guerrillas, including Bin Laden's forces, that were backed by the CIA. Now, why would Bin Laden plug an author like Blum who backed Bin Laden's hated enemies, the Soviet Communists and their Afghan allies? Because the Bin Laden tape and his purported oratory are frauds. In Killing Hope, this is what Blum wrote about Bin Laden and his CIA masters' war in Afghanistan:

"The new government under President Taraki declared a commitment to Islam within a secular state, and to non-alignment in foreign affairs. It said the coup was not foreign inspired and that they were not Communists but rather nationalists and revolutionaries. They pushed radical reforms, they talked about class struggle, they used anti-imperialist rhetoric, they supported Cuba, they signed a friendship treaty and other cooperative agreements with the Soviets and they increased the number of Soviet civilian and military advisers in Afghanistan.... In May 1979, British political scientist Fred Halliday said 'probably more has changed in the countryside over the last year than in the two centuries since the state was established.'

In March 1979, Afghan President Taraki visited Moscow to request Soviet help to fight the mujahideen. The Soviets did promise some military aid, but they would not commit ground troops. As Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin told Taraki: 'The entry of our troops into Afghanistan would outrage the international community, triggering a string of extremely negative consequences. Our common enemies are just waiting for the moment when Soviet troops appear in Afghanistan. This will give them the excuse they need to send armed bands into the country.'

. . . prior to the Soviet invasion, the CIA had been beaming radio propaganda into Afghanistan and cultivating alliances with exiled Afghan guerrilla leaders by donating medicine and communications equipment. U.S. foreign service officers had been meeting with Mujahideen leaders to determine their needs at least as early as April 1979. And, in July, President Carter had signed a 'finding' to aid the rebels covertly, which led to the U.S. providing them with cash, weapons, equipment and supplies, and engaging in propaganda and other psychological operations in Afghanistan on their behalf."

So, we're now supposed to believe that Bin Laden has come around to plug the book written by an author who demonstrated that the Soviet cause in Afghanistan was for self-defense and in furtherance of the well-being of the Afghan people and that Bin Laden's and his mujaheddin compatriots' cause was anti-progressive and destabilizing to the central Asian region? This would be laughable if it were not for the fact that the neo-cons are once again using the Big Lie to further their ambitions of global domination and worldwide fascism. The 911 attacks are beginning to look more and more like the Reichstag Fire, both engineered to bring about fascist control.

 
Let's not overlook Saddam's iniative of basing Iraq's oil sales in Euros instead of dollars as an equal if not greater reason for the Bush Admin. to fabricate the case for American pre-emptive attack, leading to even further Middle East insecurity. Iran's Oil Bourse using Euros scheduled for March may be the primary reason for the Bush Gang's efforts to demonize Iran in preparation for another major bombing campaign, aka war and 'regime change' and 'liberation' -- as a popular alternative to Dollar Imperialism, having the very real potential to undermine America's economy and global influence. (This issue has been getting a lot of discussion in the alternative media lately.)

I think it's readily evident via rigorous observation that OBL, like Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, are essentially tools and props created and directed to suit the US/corporatocracy's vigorously militant, Globalist, fascist agenda. One of the biggest frauds going is the War on Terror -- with indications that US and ally intelligence services have provided cover to shield the intricate links between US/western politicans, businesses and interests with financing terrorism via nuclear technology transfers, arms and drugs running, human trafficing, war-profiteering and money-laundering. It would seem the PTB see perpetual war as the ONLY way to hold onto power and cover their asses for the unprecedented institutionalized corruption, fraud, treason, war-crimes etc. that have completely subverted the principles and ideals America was founded on.

Uncovering the truth behind the labyrinthe of deception the criminal elites hide behind is an enormously difficult, complex project -- but there are few more important for the sake of future generations.
Starman
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?


























Image and video hosting by TinyPic



Image and video hosting by TinyPic


FeedWind



FeedWind




FeedWind