Atlantis Online
January 20, 2021, 04:56:57 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Underwater caves off Yucatan yield three old skeletons—remains date to 11,000 B.C.,000b.c.yucata.html
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Benazir Bhutto claimed that Bin laden assasinated in censored version of BBC vid

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
Author Topic: Benazir Bhutto claimed that Bin laden assasinated in censored version of BBC vid  (Read 233 times)
Measured Justice
Hero Member
Posts: 153

« Reply #15 on: January 07, 2008, 11:11:35 pm »

Here are some interesting facts:

Daniel Pearl was investigating, among other things, connections between the Pakistani ISI and terrorist groups when he was kidnapped and killed.
On February 5, 2002, before Daniel Pearl's body was found, Omar Sheikh turned himself in to ISI officials. ISI kept Omar Sheikh (one of their agents) in custody for a week before turning him over to Pakistani police. What happened during that week is unknown as Omar Sheikh wouldn't discuss the details fearing his family will be killed.
The trial of Omar Sheikh in Pakistan, the result of which was a death sentence, was held entirely in secret and with questionable evidence. According to The Guardian, both US officials and Marianne Pearl (Daniel Pearl's wife) have concluded that Omar Sheikh is not guilty.
Before Omar Sheikh's trial had concluded, Pervez Musharraf publicly declared that he wanted the trial to result in a death sentence, leading many to believe he effectively ordered the courts to render that verdict.
As of today, Omar Sheikh has not been executed. He has been held by the Pakistanis for years awaiting his appeal which has been delayed 32 times.
Condoleeza Rice and Alberto Gonzales told Marianne Pearl (Daniel Pearl's wife) that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad confessed to the murder of Daniel Pearl. Daniel Pearl's family and former CIA investigators doubt that the confession, received only after Mohammad was tortured, is true.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammad is the so-called "9/11 mastermind" whose identity was supposedly provided by the interrogations of Abu Zubayda and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. The tapes of these interrogations were the ones famously destroyed by the CIA in 2005.
On October 7, 2001 General Mehmood Ahmed was replaced as the head of the ISI at the request of the United States due to numerous reports that he had ordered Omar Sheikh to transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta before 9/11.
ISI director General Mehmood Ahmed was in the United States during 9/11. In the days preceding the attacks, he met with CIA director George Tenet and US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Mark Grossman. During the attacks, we was meeting with Senator Bob Graham and Representative Porter Goss (who will take over as CIA director after George Tenet leaves). After the attacks, Graham and Goss will co-head the House-Senate investigation into the 9/11 attacks.
The previous time the director of the ISI, Ziauddin Butt, came to the United States was a few days before Pervez Musharraf took over control of Pakistan in a 1999 military coup.
General Mehmood Ahmed received his position as the director of the ISI after helping dictator Pervez Musharraf claim power.
Benazir Bhutto said that a "key figure in security" (ISI?) would be on the list of people who would want her dead.
The ISI has been in existence since the 1980's due to the financing of the CIA and according to The Guardian "it has long been established that the ISI has acted as go-between in intelligence operations on behalf of the CIA."
I don't really know what to make of these facts and don't even know if all of them are relevant. But I do have some questions:

Is it possible that Daniel Pearl had found out that Osama bin-Laden had been killed during the course of his investigation, leading him to be kidnapped one month after the alleged murder?

If Omar Sheikh did kill Osama bin-Laden, could that explain why he was falsely accused and convicted of the murder of Daniel Pearl? To shut him up? Is he still alive, as believed, because of his ties to Pakistan's ISI?
(The uncomfortable question) How much do CIA and Bush Administration officials know about the murder of Daniel Pearl? Did they have an interest in the silence of both Daniel Pearl and Omar Sheikh? Why hasn't the Bush Administration demanded that Pervez Musharraf allow the United States to question Omar Sheikh, since he is still alive and in their custody?

How deep and how sinister is the alliance of the Bush government and the Musharraf government? How interconnected are the ISI and CIA and could the ISI assist Osama bin-Laden, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, and the Taliban without the knowledge of the CIA?

Why does the Bush Administration want us to think Osama bin-Laden is still alive? How do they personally benefit from this deception more than they would benefit by publicly taking credit for catching Osama bin-Laden?

I understand that Benazir Bhutto's statement is uncorroborated and could very well not be true. However, she was the Prime Minister of Pakistan twice and is no doubt privy to more information than any reporter, especially reporters working for the American press. Also, it's her word against those of the Bush Administration, the CIA, Pervez Musharraf's government, and the American and British mainstream press. Who is more deserving of our trust?

If only she had not been assassinated. We could have asked her ourselves...
Report Spam   Logged
Measured Justice
Hero Member
Posts: 153

« Reply #16 on: January 07, 2008, 11:19:10 pm »

Saturday, January 5, 2008
BBC Edited Bhutto Interview to Hide bin-Laden Revelation

In an interview with David Frost on November 2, 2007, Benazir Bhutto mentioned in passing that Omar Sheikh murdered Osama bin-Laden.

David, one of my readers, asked if this interview was broadcast outside of the Al-Jazeera network. The answer is yes - and no.

The BBC aired the interview, but edited out the sentence where Benazir Bhutto says Omar Sheikh murdered Osama bin-Laden. Here's a video showing the edit

(FYI: This is not the original video I had posted here, but the original is "no longer available". YouTube's very sorry. I have a feeling this is not the last time this will happen so just know that if I need to keep switching out this video, I will.)
Report Spam   Logged
Iron Man
Full Member
Posts: 2

« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2008, 08:45:37 am »

Kristina Borjesson: Are the Osama Tapes Fake?
Submitted by BuzzFlash on Tue, 01/08/2008 - 3:17pm. Guest Contribution
by Kristina Borjesson

Late in December 2007, The Associated Press reporter Salah Nasrawi wrote a story about a Bin Laden audiotape that had just been released. Headlined "Bin Laden Threatens Israel, Warns Iraqis," Nasrawi's piece details Osama's dire threats to expand al Qaeda's jihad in Israel and to "liberate Palestine, the whole of Palestine from the (Jordan) river to the sea," threatening "blood for blood, destruction for destruction."

Then, 11 paragraphs down, Nasrawi writes: "The authenticity of the tape could not be independently confirmed. But the voice resembled that of bin Laden. The tape was posted on an Islamic militant Web site where al-Qaida's media arm, Al-Sahab, issues the group's messages."

If the tape can't be vetted, it shouldn't be used. That's Journalism 101. At the very least, the fact that it can't be authenticated should be mentioned in the story's title and continuously mentioned throughout the story as the quotes are being used. Worse, all the mainstream TV outlets picked up on Nasrawi's story and liberally quoted "bin Laden" without bothering to use the word "purported" or another adjective indicating they had no proof it was Bin Laden on the tape. Collectively, what these journalists are doing is worse than outright lying to the public. They are literally helping dangerous people with deadly hidden agendas create a virtual reality by unquestioningly conveying their messages.

Nasrawi didn't just bury the authentication problem in his story. He also referred to earlier, equally questionable "bin Laden" communiqués. "The tape was the fifth message released by bin Laden this year, a flurry of activity after he went more than a year without issuing any tapes. The messages began with a Sept. 8 video that showed bin Laden for the first time in nearly three years. The other messages this year have been audiotapes."

Reporting on unauthenticated bin Laden tapes as if they were real is, shamefully, getting to be an old practice. In November 2002, a "bin Laden" audiotape surfaced and a senior State Department official explained to CNN that the voice on the tape was indeed Bin Laden's, but that "we don't know yet whether anybody put it together, spliced or computer-generated it."

Just how could "anybody" computer-generate bin Laden's voice and create an entire bogus statement?

On February 1, 1999, William Arkin, writing for, described a voice-morphing technology that government scientists at Los Alamos laboratory in New Mexico had developed.

"By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's [Gen. Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations] voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile," Arkin wrote. "To refine their method, they took various high quality recordings of generals and experimented with creating fake statements. One of the most memorable is Colin Powell stating, "I am being treated well by my captors."

Arkin also indicated that morphing was not limited to audio, and could be used for some very interesting and disturbing purposes: "Digital morphing -- voice, video, and photo -- has come of age, available for use in psychological operations. PSYOPS, as the military calls it, seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations to pursue national and battlefield objectives."

Arkin's article inspired me to dig a little more into the bin Laden tapes.

I decided to compare this video of Osama that al Jazeera released on December 27, 2001 with other Bin Laden videos. The December 27 video is not dated, but it provides an up-close, in-focus look at the guy we all recognize as Osama from many previous photos. Now (dear reader, you're going to have to do a little work here), compare that to a tape that the U.S. government released on December 13, 2001 [see CNN footage in "Loose Change" documentary at 1:14:25 into the program]. The tape, ostensibly shot on November 9, 2001, is of very poor quality -- dark and out of focus with fuzzy audio. One can't positively ID the man who is supposed to be Osama in this tape. And curiously, this alleged bin Laden is seen writing with his right hand. According to the FBI, bin Laden is left-handed.

In the November 9 tape, the purported bin Laden says things such as, "We calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower," and "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 all that we had hoped for." He also says that, "Mohammed Atta was in charge of the group."

When the U.S. State Department released the tape, one BBC reporter prudently used quotation marks in this headline, "Tape 'proves bin Laden's Guilt'," before quoting President Bush and then-British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw saying that the tape was proof of Osama's guilt. "But the BBC's Middle East correspondent, Frank Gardner," adds the BBC reporter, "says that at street level in the Arab world, many believe the tape is a fake, a PR gimmick dreamed up by the US administration. And the defence minister of the ousted Taleban [sic] regime in Afghanistan told the BBC that he was doubtful about its authenticity, saying it was unlikely that Bin Laden would have been naïve enough to say such things on a recording."

It is hard to imagine a mainstream American TV reporter calling a former Taliban defense minister for a comment on anything. Yet running to President Bush for the truth hasn't always worked out for certain high-profile journalists either.

Unlike the BBC, CNN expressed no doubts about the December 27 tape's authenticity: "Osama bin Laden recounts with delight the September 11 terrorist attacks against the United States as he talks with associates on a videotape released Thursday by the Bush administration." And further down, this: "The Bush administration hopes the tape will convince skeptics, particularly in the Muslim and Arab worlds, of Bin Laden's complicity in the attacks."

A few months earlier -- six days after 9/11 to be exact -- CNN reported that Bin Laden had sent a statement to Al Jazeera denying that he had been involved: "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it... I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons." [September 17, 2001].

The FBI says it has no hard evidence that Bin Laden participated in 9/11. That's what the FBI's Rex Tomb told Muckraker Report's Ed Haas. The FBI doesn't want Osama for 9/11. They want him in connection with the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which killed more than two hundred people.

Turning back to those tapes one last time, there are other troublesome videos, including two mentioned in an October 29, 2007 MSNBC story, "Was Bin Laden's Last Video Faked?". The story has to do with two videos, one released on September 7, 2007 and another released about three years earlier on October 29, 2004. Oddly, the man in both (fuzzy, of course) tapes looks exactly the same -- sitting in front of the same background and wearing the same clothes--except that in the later one, the purported Osama's beard appears younger with a beard that seems to have been dyed black. Experts are asked for their opinions and they can't say for sure what exactly is up with the tapes. Then the requisite "senior US intelligence officer" is asked the requisite question about the October 2007 tape's authenticity and the officer gives the requisite response, saying he "believes" the tape is new, but he can't discuss why. Another "even more senior intelligence officer" says he doesn't think the black beard in the new tape is fake, but again, he won't say why. I think it's time reporters stop giving passes to sources such as these. If they can't back up their statements, don't quote them. The secrecy and lack of transparency everywhere in government have reached absurd levels and journalists should fight both hard at every turn. In this case, find other, better sources that are willing to talk. They exist.

MSNBC does get points for raising the question. But excellent journalism would involve pursuing the matter until definitive answers on the provenance and authenticity of the tapes were found.

These details boil down to two things. One, all the unauthenticated audiotapes and fuzzy videos look and sound suspicious. Two, there hasn't been any clear, up-close, "look at me, I'm alive" videos of Bin Laden for years. The journalism community would do well to wonder why -- and then move forward aggressively from there. The American public needs to know what's going on here.

And while they're at it, America's journalists should take a good hard look at Mr. Gadahn and his recent tape encouraging al Qaeda sympathizers to greet President Bush in the Middle East with "bombs and booby-trapped vehicles." Mr. Gadahn's real name is Adam Pearlman and he's a young Jewish man from California. Frankly, I'm not buying Pearlman's shtick or his videotapes.

Pearlman is straight out of central casting with the usual sketchy background for characters who aren't what they purport to be. He should be investigated very, very closely, as should the provenance of his tapes.


Kristina Borjesson is an investigative reporter and the author of FEET TO THE FIRE, The Media After 9/11: Top Journalists Speak Out.

Bookmark/Search this post with:
 buzzflash |  delicious |  digg |  technorati
 Technorati Tags: Guest Contribution Kristina Borjesson Osama bin Laden George W. Bush Dick Cheney journalistic integrity
» login or register to post comments | printer friendly version
Submitted by margie Lee on Tue, 01/08/2008 - 7:37pm.
I think what we need to do here is look at a constellation of events. Like putting together a puzzle and this is one of the pieces. Fake Osama. It makes sense to me.
If we isolate each thing we can't see the whole picture. I see a whole country railroaded into
war and I see some theatrics that even a child could spot as fake, yet we remain duped again and again. I think it was best said by someone way back in the thirties I think in germany
that the country was like a woman that was raped or abused and then loved to cry out,
"if only I had known," and then go right back and do it again. Is that it with Bush, that we like to be fooled because it gives us a thrill that he is this powerful guy who has this control over us?
God Forbid. But I'm worried.

» login or register to post comments
SITE Institute
Submitted by liberalmind on Tue, 01/08/2008 - 7:31pm.
I think the biggest questions should be who is Rita Katz (besides an Iraqi born Israeli who served in the in the Israeli army and whose father was convicted and executed in Iraq for being an Israeli spy), and who funds her SITE Institute? Why so few questions about a private company that, apparently, is always the ONE that finds all these Bin Laden gems on the internet? I think I smell a whopping pile of rotten gefilte fish being served to a very gullible world.

» login or register to post comments
Give it up
Submitted by CyberChas on Tue, 01/08/2008 - 6:29pm.
Get over it folks.


Stop wasting your and our time thinking that the truth about any of this can EVER be known.

Don't you understand? If the truth were to turn out to be that the Republicans in power lied to us at every turn about 9/11 and Bin Laden and everything that they were doing to "protect us," there would be a massive revolution in this country. Each and every republican that had ever served in the Bush/Cheney administration (and anybody who supported them in congress, the courts, or the media) would be hunted down and killed. It would be the French Revolution, only ten times worse. The blood would run in the streets like rivers. Remember the Killing Fields? This counter-revolution would make that one look downright peaceful.

Our country has been looted of TRILLIONS of dollars. Our environment (and that of the world) has been sold down the river for silver. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights has been shredded and shat upon. Our reputation and morality has been totally destroyed. Our infrastructure has been decimated. Our economy turned on its head. AND IT ALL COMES BACK DOWN TO TERROR and BIN LADEN and 9/11.

If the root of their evil is exposed, then everything they have done is revealed as suspect, criminal, without moral basis, and treasonous.


And please understand, that the corporate mainstream media was totally complicit in all this. They might tease at the truth, but they will never work to reveal a truth that shows them to be at best worthless stooges who didn't do their jobs and at worst complicit collaborators who knowingly passed on lies. If there is one thing that news organizations (or even entertainment organizations like Faux News) don't like, it's to be shown to be liars or idiots. That would be the last straw that would drive the American people from the MSM and to finding the news themselves on the internet and through peer-delivered news.


So let's move on and try to do the best we can to recover from the mess and destruction they have wrought.

Yes, our home has been burgled and even slimed, and YES, the burglers/criminals are walking down the street with our stuff in their hands. But we might as well just start cleaning up, and seeing what they didn't steal, because they ARE going to get away with it. Didn't you notice that team of black-jacketed AK-47-carrying guards they had with them?


After all, it's a much more positive direction to be thinking about than having to hunt down and kill everybody who is, or has ever been, a supporter of the Republicans.

» login or register to post comments
Never give up...
Submitted by ironman on Wed, 01/09/2008 - 12:57am.'s what "they" want you to do.

But please get the bloodlust out of your heart and mind - that is not the way to healing.

Truth should be found and legal process should be followed in order that we should return to our ideals.

Considering how the corrupt regime currently in control has steered us away from our historical reaction to criminal acts we should not even think of violent acts of anarchy - that smacks far too much of the mindless behavior this bunch has fomented.

Justice is the answer. They've broken laws. Use the great laws of our land to prosecute them to the fullest. Stop the ****-footing around with the legal shenanigans that allow side-stepping the issues and delaying judgements until the public can be distracted by another celebrity wardrobe malfunction. The magnitude of the crimes here call for live coverage just as the tragic events of 9/11 did.

I don't believe lynch mob mentality should rule when we find out "suspects" but what about "swift and speedy justice" being applied to insure against beliefs the guilty parties will escape punishment? The day after the World Trade towers fell it was declared that Osama was guilty and the sham had begun. Let's not fall into that same pit again. Let's make sure we use the process our greatness depends upon: The Rule of Law.

It's the American Way that Lincoln asked for when the Civil War ended to avoid excessive recriminations and begin the process of rebuilding the country after the tremendous losses during that great rift between our peoples. Finding out and punishing all who were/are complicit in this "war on terror" sham WILL be a drastic blow - perhaps as divisive as the Civil War. But I don't think we should just "move on" either and allow that "they ARE going to get away with it" as suggested.

Those who've used the turmoil of the last years to loot CAN be found out and forced to make retribution - individuals and corporations as well. It only requires the will of the people and our politicians shall see to it that it happens. THAT is the "revolution" that will take place when Truth and Justice return to the limelight. Every politician will fall over in shame and infamy or stand up tall to demand the corrections necessary to right all the wrongs that have been done. And that will show the world the American Way still DOES work!

Those are my hopes. I love this country and its ideals. I can't just "get over" the losses that have occurred. Adding more blood is senseless. Combatting lies with lies is even more so and every bit as deadly. We must have the Truth brought to light! We must have Justice!

» login or register to post comments
I get your point, but...
Submitted by brian on Tue, 01/08/2008 - 8:10pm.
While I agree that the government---republican and democrat--will do all they can to avoid the revolution (that you speak of at the top of your post...) There's more to what you're saying... The fact is: America, at this very point in time; cannot protect itself from itself; and when a half million soldiers return from Iraq, and they begin to hear "the buzz..." When they begin to see what many others see... And when they have no job to come home to, or no limbs to move with... And when they fill with despair and mental disorders from battle fatigue... And when these soldiers learn that they're government let them down; they'll realize that all they know how to do is kill... These 21 year old kids are coming home to no money, no jobs and no chance. When they get home, they're gonna be mad as hell and they're gonna be coming after somebody.

So you see, whether there's a revolution now or whether there's a revolution later, there's still gonna be a revolution. Something is going to happen in America... What it is? I don't know.

The American people will decide. Or will they?

» login or register to post comments
Thanks, Kristina Borjesson!
Submitted by North Coast Craig on Tue, 01/08/2008 - 4:38pm.
There has been no motion video of Bin Laden for a long time, and the news media is not questioning this! Ridiculous! Then there was the gray beard-to-dark beard sequence. And the videos with no motion. The message is clear: "Critical thinking is not desired. Everybody, be scared!" Thanks for your work, Kristina Borjesson!

» login or register to post comments
We will never know
Submitted by anagitator on Tue, 01/08/2008 - 7:11pm.
The Democrats are in it up to their eyeballs, right along with the Republicans and Bush? The Democrats can't go after another 9-11 investigation because that would be admitting that the first investigation that had Democratic participation, was a coverup. They would then have to admit that taking impeachment off the table was wrong and that Pelosi by inaction is guilty of collusion. This country desperately needs a third party that would keep the other two honest.

9-11 was orchestrated to provide cover for a US-Iraqi invasion and the war on terror and the PNAC neocon goal. OBL may have had nothing to do with it, or he may have had help from US inaction. Either way Bush had no real desire to catch him. Iraq was about oil but mostly about oil flowing through a pipeline from northern Iraq to Israel through Jordan to the Israeli port city of Haifa.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy