I'm glad that Slate saw fit to bring up the "Innocence of Muslims"
video which ignited protests in various parts of the Islamic world (and it really did
ignite protests, despite what you hear from some Republicans). But I'm also kinda ticked off. A lot of people talk about this production without looking at the obvious indications that the video was created by right-wing mischief-makers who wanted to undermine Obama and install Romney.
Let's review the evidence. Here's the stuff that the new House investigative panel should
discuss (but probably won't)...
1. The semi-confession.
Remember the recording of Mitt Romney's infamous "47 percent" remarks? Nobody mentions the most important part of his address...
And yet, in that election, in the Jimmy Carter election, the fact that we had hostages in Iran, I mean, that was all we talked about. And we had the two helicopters crash in the desert, I mean, that was the focus and so him solving that made all the difference in the world... If something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.
Could the guy have been more obvious? Of course
he knew that something was up behind the scenes. If you think otherwise, you're just naive. A lot of people have forgotten this important piece
by Craig Unger...
The source, who has firsthand knowledge of private, high-level conversations in the Romney camp that took place in Washington, D.C., last week, said that at various times the GOP strategists referred to their new operation as the Jimmy Carter Strategy or the October Surprise.
2. Trailer or feature?
The Innocence of Muslims
video was presented on YouTube as the trailer for an upcoming Hollywood feature. In reality, it seems that there was never anything more to the movie beyond what was placed on the internet. So why tell such a lie? Because the perps wanted to create riots in the Middle East -- riots that would have made Obama look like a Carter. In order to make that happen, the spooks who put together Innocence of Muslims
wanted to convince Muslims that Hollywood
(not just a few penny-ante jerks with a video camera, but a major studio) had made a big, expensive film denigrating Islam.
3. "One hundred Jews."
Remember when director "Sam Bacile" told reporters that his movie was funded by "one hundred Jews"
? That was a lie. So why did he say those words? Obviously, that inflammatory statement was part of the op. The whole purpose of this movie was to create riots.
4. Who paid for the Arabic translation?
Without a translation into Arabic, the YouTube presentation would not have had the desired impact in the Middle East.The man responsible for the translation would appear to be one Morris Sadek, who is a very intriguing fellow in his own right. He's an anti-Islam zealot with ties to Republican bigwigs. He was also a leading promoter of the "mosque at Ground Zero" myth.
So how did Sadek even hear
about this pseudo-movie? It was totally obscure. Nobody knew about it. It wasn't even a real movie.
5. Bacile's legal troubles.
If you study these ops over any period of time, you learn to spot certain patterns. One key thing to look for: Does the guy on the hot seat have legal troubles?
A man with legal troubles will happily play "Let's Make a Deal." He will do whatever it takes to make his problems go away.
"Sam Bacile," the supposed producer of Innocence
, has been identified as Nakoula B. Nakoula, a Coptic American convicted of defrauding banks to the tune of nearly $800,000. He was allowed to sprint out of the joint in June of 2011 after doing less than a year (even though many people have served longer terms for robbing convenience stores) and then he immediately
started work on the film.
The guy had never before shown any particular interest in either film-making or Muslim-bashing. (Most Copts seek to improve relations with the Islamic world.) He wasn't political and he wasn't religious. But suddenly -- right after leaving jail -- Nakoula decided he had to make a movie that bashed Islam and insulted Muhammed.
We're talking about a guy with no money, a guy who should have been struggling to put his life back together, a guy who should have been happy to get a job washing dishes. He suddenly rents an office and hires people and pretends to be Mr. Hollywood Big Shot.
Does that make any
sense to you?
It makes sense to me only if we presume that Nakoula made a deal. The real
instigators of this project took a look at his Coptic background and decided that he would make a perfect fall guy/front man. The poor, dumb, desperate bastard probably never understood that his job was to take the blame when the shit hit the fan.
Don't dismiss this assessment as "conspiracy theory." It's theoretical only in the same sense that the nose on your face is theoretical. This stuff is obvious
. I wish more people would just grow the fuck up and read a few books about spies. Learn how the world actually works.
6. Actual CIA guys.
Okay, so "Sam Bacile" was just the patsy. Who were the real
instigators of this project? The guys running Nakoula
would appear to be Steve Klein and James Horn. (Officially, Klein was just an "adviser" to the production. Heh heh heh
Wikipedia mentions Klein only as an "anti-Muslim activist." He's the one who told the world that "Bacile" was a pseudonym for Nakoula, thus making sure that the fall guy took the fall. What Wikipedia does not tell you is that Klein has had (or at least claims to have had) a special ops background. He's a former Marine and anti-Muslim zealot who gives paramilitary training to "church groups." He also describes himself as an "unsophisticated James Bond."
His partner is one James Horn, who is "former" CIA. Tellingly, Wikipedia neglects to mention him.
7. The covert op.
Most articles about The Innocence of Muslims
make scant reference to the movie's midnight "premiere" at the dumpy Vine theater on Hollywood Boulevard. (Back in my film buff days, I visited every movie house on that street except
for the Vine, which always looked kind of scrofulous.)
Remember: There was no actual full-length movie
. They had only about twenty minutes of footage.
The only people who were told about the showing were members of the Muslim community in Los Angeles. Fliers were handed out within that community -- and the ads portrayed the movie as a film in favor of Osama Bin Laden. In fact, the given title was "The Innocence of Bin Laden." The screening was also advertised in the newspaper Arab World
; someone known only as "Joseph" paid for the ads. (It wasn't me -- honest!)
The point of the exercise was to draw out American jihadis. Klein has been very open
about the fact that the movie (if we can call it a movie) served as a covert op...
"We passed out fliers at mosques around California where we knew there was a small percentage of terrorists. And the idea was to locate...those folks who believed Osama bin Laden was a great guy and to try to get them to come to the movie."
Was Klein just a private individual? Of course not. The guy had to have links to the FBI or Homeland Security. A private individual does not try to identify jihadis -- because what would a purely private
with that kind of information? Why would a purely private individual run a covert op?
Now that some time has passed, it's easier to figure out what must have happened. The actual makers of the film were probably told that they were participating in an exercise designed to catch terrorists. Lots of decent Americans would go along with that kind of project; nobody likes terrorists.
But the director and crew members might have balked if they were told: "And then
we're going to use this movie to stir up riots throughout the Middle East! Those riots will make Obama look bad and put a Republican in the White House!"
8. The Way TV.
Klein runs something called The Way TV
, (a.k.a. Media For Christ) located in Duarte, California. This studio produces "Christian" programming
for the Arab world.
I suspect that they have other agendas as well. Back in 2010, The Way TV published this article
about a spook named Mosab Yousef...
Yousef says his intelligence work for Israel required him to do anything he could to learn about Hamas and that neither he nor Israel knew they were suspects in a suicide bombing when he gave them rides.
“Yes, while working for Israeli intelligence, I posed as a terrorist,” he wrote on his blog last month. “Yes, I carried a gun. Yes, I was in terrorist meetings with Yassir Arafat, my father and other Hamas leaders. It was part of my job.”
Yousef has rallied support from members of Congress and others. Former CIA Director James Woolsey calls him a “remarkable young man” who should be commended for “extraordinary heroism and courage.”
Yeah. These guys are just Christians
. Not spooks. Not covert operators. They're just ordinary Jesus-lovin' Christians hoping to spread the Word of the Lord.
9. More spooky connections.
It's not so difficult to figure out how Klein and Horn might have been able to cut a deal with Nakoula, a.k.a. Mr. Perfect-Fall-Guy. Someone who can flash CIA credentials while muttering something about an anti-terrorist operation is very likely to get cooperation from the local justice system.
Besides, I happen to know of one guy in the Los Angeles D.A.'s office who may fairly be described as a right-wing freakazoid. This fellow has, in the past, participated in what I consider to be some rather strange operations. Some of you may be able to guess who I'm thinking of.
Nakoula may have been a chiseler, but he somehow managed to be represented by a bigshot lawyer named James Henderson
, who has a very strange history
. He once headed up an organized crime strike force in L.A., and was accused of taking bribes from "Arabs." Although he was cleared, the federal informant who leveled the accusation ("Jerry Vann") later made a dead-on prediction of the September 11 attacks.
How did Nakoula afford Henderson's services?
10. The Argo factor.
Spooks like to use "movies" -- both real movies and fake movies -- as cover for their activities.
Why do Slate and other media outlets talk about Innocence of Muslims
without stating the obvious -- that the whole thing was a classic covert operation? If you study the great psy-war campaigns of the past -- for example, the CIA's plot to overthrow the government of Guatemala in the 1950s (a project code-named PB-SUCCESS), or the covert op against Sukarno of Indonesia, or the plot against Allende of Chile -- you can see that this operation fits a long-established pattern of destabilization.
The trouble is, our media obstinately refuses to acknowledge the existence of spooks. Our idiot journalists toss all such research into the "conspiracy theory" file folder. (That's why I despise
guys like Alex Jones. Their insane claims about imaginary secret societies have discredited anyone who tries to study real covert operations.)
Do I think the CIA per se
had anything to do with The Innocence of Muslims
? Hell no! This thing was amateur hour. If Klein had gotten involved in a thing like this while on the official CIA payroll, he would never have been so blabby when interviewed by the Los Angeles Times.
No, I don't think that this was any kind of approved covert op. The person who approves of clandestine plans is the president -- and in the end, Obama was a target
of this little scheme.
What more people should understand is this:
1. Those who have worked in the covert world know how to pull off operations. They aren't really that hard to do. All they require is some money, some planning, and some guts.
2. Once you learn how to do these little projects, you can go out into the larger world and have all sorts of fun. You don't need to work for an American intelligence service. You can work for a political party, or a billionaire, or a private group, or...well, anyone
. (A long time ago, Jim Hougan wrote a book called Spooks
which talks about the privatization of clandestine skills.)
3. Intelligence field work usually attracts right-wingers with a "cowboy" mentality.
So...do you think that the proposed House investigative committee will talk about any
of this stuff?