Expert Suspiciously Reverses Stance On Doctored Al-Qaeda TapesWho are you gonna believe? Spook infested Pentagon propaganda arm IntelCenter or your lying eyes?
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, August 3, 2007
After unwittingly exposing the fact that IntelCenter, a private intelligence group made up of Pentagon affiliated ex-spooks, was doctoring and releasing so-called Al-Qaeda propaganda tapes, computer expert Neal Krawetz has now suspiciously reversed his position, despite the fact that he appeared on camera and re-affirmed his research when directly asked.
As we reported yesterday, Krawetz's most telling discovery came in the form of a detail contained in a 2006 Ayman al-Zawahiri tape. From his analysis he concluded that the As-Sahab logo (the alleged media arm of Al-Qaeda) and the IntelCenter logo (a U.S. based private intelligence organization that "monitors terrorist activity") were both added to the video at the same time.
This clearly indicates IntelCenter itself is directly creating or at least doctoring the Al-Qaeda tapes before their release. After all, why would Al-Qaeda terrorists be interested in branding their videos with the logo of a U.S. based organization that is run by individuals with close ties to the military-industrial complex?
(Article continues below)
In an update to the original Wired News article on the subject, Krawetz recanted his research that the two logos had been added at the same time after Ben Venzke of IntelCenter denied that his organization added the As-Sahab logo.
"I was finally able to reach Neal Krawetz at the BlackHat conference to respond to the questions about the IntelCenter and As-Sahab logos (Krawetz doesn't have a cell phone on him so finding him at the conference took a while). He now says that the error levels on the IntelCenter and As-Sahab logos are different and that the IntelCenter logo was added after the As-Sahab logo. However, in a taped interview I conducted with him after his presentation, he said the logos were the same error levels and that this indicated they were added at the same time. Additionally, after I'd written the first blog entry about his presentation, I asked him to read it to make sure everything was correct. He did so while sitting next to me and said it was all correct. He apologizes now for the error and the confusion it caused," writes Wired blogger Kim Zetter.
The skepticism of the writer in response to Krawetz's reversal, when Krawetz himself had affirmed the findings of his research on two previous occasions and presented them to a live conference audience, is clearly evident.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Internet leader in activist media - Prison Planet.tv. Get access to hundreds of special video reports, audio interviews, books and documentary films. Subscribers also get instant access to our hugely popular forum where you can network with like-minded people, meet up and get active! Click here to subscribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems entirely possible that, having unwittingly exposed the fact that IntelCenter itself is doctoring and directly releasing the Al-Qaeda propaganda videos, Krawetz fears for his livelihood and has reversed his position to avoid potential consequences.
The military-industrial complex, to which IntelCenter is basically married, do not play games and one can imagine the kind of paranoia that is generated when you cross them, therefore we do not blame Krawetz for his back-peddling. However, all our previous experience suggests that it's much safer to be out in the light and rather than hide from his findings, Krawetz should blow this whole can of worms wide open.
IntelCenter's denial of of this whole episode should be taken with a pinch of salt, for it was Ben Venzke's company that knowingly re-released 6 years old footage of Bin Laden that many quarters of the media treated as new. IntelCenter itself had released the same footage in October 2003 and it still appears dated as such on their own website. Their credibility has already been shot to pieces.
