How do I know that Khan and Tanweer’s videos weren’t faked?
I have seen technology in the course of my work that could, with some suitable source material, recreate Khan and Tanweer pretty accurately, along with their voices. (Hell, voice talent alone could do that, no need for audio technology there!)
So if I know that such technology exists, doesn’t that mean that it would have been easy for the government, or secret services, or whoever, to have faked the videos? Yes, but they didn’t.
Why?
If they had been fakes, they could and would have been a lot more incriminating. People are perplexed when they hear this. “But they were suicide videos!” they protest.
Well, actually, they were nothing of the sort. The real story, and the one I relayed to Darshna Soni of Channel 4 News is that the videos, released with almost perfect timing to the media, didn’t include some very important facts. Like:
- Any mention of suicide bombing, or any bombing at all for that matter
- Any mention of the London Underground, or of London for that matter
- Any mention of any bus
You see, such important questions as “where was the due process before the whole media bought into the story that these guys were suicide bombers” are scorned at by witchfinder generals and their crazed posses, pretending to look for the truth whilst quite stupidly burying it. And such questions are sidelined by the mainstream media as they seek to prosecute the entire British Muslim community for views, which whilst fuelled by Islamophobia spewed from the highest level, are not necessarily as homogenous as we might be led to believe.
59% of Muslims don’t believe the official account, but then I doubt if 59% of the wider public believe anything that Tony Blair will ever say, ever again.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 16 comments… read them below or add one }
Stef 06.18.07 at 11:31 pm
Spot on. I’m with you 100%. If those videos were faked they’d actually include some specifics.
If they were real jihadist suicide bomber testimonies they’d also include some specifics
They’re neither
The Antagonist 06.19.07 at 2:59 am
What you said, Shahid, closely followed by what Stef said.
Let’s go one stage further and take the Luton CCTV image — an image taken 30 miles from the scenes of the crimes — at face value (even though three of the faces cannot be identified) and presume that it is a legitimate image of four people. So what?
Even with all the ‘evidence’ taken at face value, the official story still lacks any credible evidence, and by that I mean evidence that would stand up in a court of law, to support it.
David Eastman 06.20.07 at 3:37 am
The Luton CCTV image hinged on the important principle that “Pakis don’t go camping - QED they were bombers”.
Surely good enough.
shahid 06.20.07 at 8:06 am
It would have been good enough if three of the four people in the image could have been identified, never mind identified as pakis, let alone as the “suspect pakis”.
jon doy 06.20.07 at 12:42 pm
agreement here from top to bottom
viewers of the news must have nagging doubts at the very least as what was so ‘confessiony’ about these “confession (?) videos”
the only ‘confessions’ i noted were to humanity and empathy for those being terrorised by governments
that’s a very large, and not so very ‘extreme’ point of view
David Eastman 06.20.07 at 4:35 pm
What they have not shown is the “Khan shopping list” remnants of which were found with his body:
______________
1/2 pint milk
cast. sugar
2 dvds
sliced loaf
Blow Myself Up On London Transport For The Cause Of Global Jihad!!!
sr. flour
______________
Definitely not faked
Adam 06.21.07 at 1:12 pm
Well said shahid, they’re not fake, and not genuine suicide videos.
Maybe a personal blog, maybe something to do with the people who hired them as the targets in the training excersise that morning..
77insidejob 06.25.07 at 8:09 pm
You need to explain why the Khan dialogue on his confession tape clearly slips out of lip synch with what he is saying, that is the only clear flag of fakery in the tape. Otherwise the talking army of trees in Lord of the Rings are more authentic.
shahid 06.25.07 at 9:52 pm
I don’t need to explain that at all. The videos might well be faked, but the strongest evidence against that, apart from Occam’s Razor, is that had they been faked, they could have been a hell of a lot more incriminating.
Lip-sync? Well, without access to the source material provided to Al-Jazeera, we will never know, will we?
The fact is, that the videos, even if real, if if uncut, could not convict anyone of anything in a court of law.
My issue with the aftermath of 7/7 was always that any semblance of due press went out of the window when we realised that the press lied constantly and the police lied constantly. Put the two together, stir in the lack of supporting evidence, the complete lack of CCTV imagery of the four in London, the over-use of the 28/6 images of the three (minus Hasib) in lieu of 7/7 footage, often deceptively, and really, there is no need to go any further to believe that the whole thing stinks pretty bad.
lwtc247 06.26.07 at 3:08 pm
Perhaps an interview with those involved with the exercise being run at half past nine on the morning of July 7th in London, for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened might prove useful. Something tells me however that four of these indivuduals will no longer be available for interview.
‘over a thousand’ people in London at half past nine on the morning of 7th July 2005, running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.
four of the 1000 men participating on if we picked Peter Powers paranormal pantomime of that day by interview
lwtc247 06.26.07 at 3:16 pm
If one to suggest to me that such video’s were done as part of the exercise, and of course the ‘dummy run’, then the degree to which I would be fabbergasted would be less than the puff of air from the beating of a butterflies wings.
Muncher 06.27.07 at 9:03 am
The lip sync issue is not a lip sync issue. Whoever encoded the video did an inept job. The video and audio tracks weren’t synchronised during encoding and as the video plays the audio gradually drifts.
lwtc247 06.27.07 at 3:29 pm
I’ve experienced audio drift with .flv downloads, but there is still an issue with this one becasue we have no way of telling if the ‘original’ is also like this, which would be an indication that it is a fake.
Personally, I think the tape is likely to be genuine, perhaps as part of the preparation for the exercise taking place on 7-7.
I wonder if lipreaders could confirm if the lip movements do match the audio?
lwtc247 07.24.07 at 12:03 pm
Hummmm…. I’m afraid I have to revise my opinion. I’ve recently seen again the Mohammad Sidique Khan video, having only seen ‘talked-over’ {usually by some BBC correspondent pushing the ‘they did it’ [schhhh... but there's no proof] line} clips before. It is precisely becasue of my familiarity with out of lip sinc .flv downloads that I was very very conceren at what I saw. There was at best, poor correlation between audio and lip movement. At worse it was a total mismatch!
In absence of better information, I believe that the audio is NOT original and in light of all the other anomalies merely reinforces my belief that the government is head deep in a conspiracy of mass murder against its own citizens.
shahid 07.24.07 at 2:55 pm
Oh the govt has always been head deep in a conspiracy of mass murder against its own citizens, I wasn’t denying that, but without access to the source material, how could you say for sure that the videos are faked? And even if it was faked, why not make him say more? Video manipulation software nowadays is good enough to have made “him” say anything at all, so why didn’t he say anything more self-incriminating?
lwtc247 07.25.07 at 12:43 pm
My opinion is that the audio may well be genuine in its own right. The video also, but that the video and audio are actually strangers to each other and have been married for the purposes of ‘proof’. Just a guess of course, and I’m more than willing to accept he really ‘did’ it, but such a move would require a reasonable level of proof. This video is proof of nothing at all, but actually, suggestive of a conspiracy. I’ve no proof but I’m pretty sure that video doesn’t belong to that audio.
Why not make him say more? It would be logical to say that if the voice is his, and he didn’t do it, then of course he would never have said more becasue he wasn’t intent on going out bombing. Even if he was say a recruit to simulate terror attack for Visor consultants for example, then perhaps he would have a little bit of hesitation or suspicion if asked to give an ultra real “full confessional” - perhaps the guy had come across a 9-11 truth video.
What if he was living out a fantasy? or actually expressing greviences against the wholesale slaughter of Muslims the US and its siamese twin the US have been indulging in? A fantasy or verbal display of anger or empty threats do not prove he is a bomber. I can accept they are circumstantial evidence that suggests his anger might have been so great, which resulted in him deciding to act on it, but there is no legitimite basis for his actions in Islam which some would have us believe was the reason why he decide to act on his feelings.
If we look at it from the other side, If he was a real bomber then wouldn’t he have given more info? wouldn’t the tape be far more likely to be faultless? How many of your home videos are out of sync?
This line of thinking along with the ridiculous claim of a bomb factory (where did they get the huge amount of peroxide and acetone from, where are the purchase recepits and sales dockets? Which company supplied them or what equipment dod they use to get increase the perodide concentration to useable levels? I’m pretty certain that water content would cause severe problems in the prep of TATP and purifyting H2O2 to that level would I’m sure be too difficult if not impossible. Then we have the whole other catelogue of impossible things.
If you were to plan a conspiracy would you be more or less likely to encorporate flaws into the plan, bearing in mind, some kind of official explanation would be necessary afterward. Imagine the sheer difficulty in making such a grand lie appear to be the truth and seemless. By putting or allowing accidental flaws, you allow for confusion, for a flexible story (as we have seem the govt modify) that can evolve as needs must.
What would you do? Adopt ridgity or flexability?
If one honestly looks at the facts then its impossible to say he did it, and in fact, in addition to all the other stuff, the authorities reluctance to answer the serious questions of that day and actually withhold evidence is a great indication that its a black-op.