"Khan's lips appear to be out of sync at times."

This problem could be corrected by even the most stoned and mediocre and underresourced sound engineer with a demo program of Ableton Live (running over Rewire with Nuendo)= tosh!

"The video glitches at the start but the audio doesn't."

What you think they recorded it on? Super 8???= tosh!

"As we are told the footage has obviously been edited. As anyone that has seen a few Hollywood movies knows it is possible to completely fake video and audio."

Anyone who knows nothing about AV technology that is:

1.) It is impossible to fake someones voice right down to a foresensic level at this period in time. The best you can do is to get an actor with a similar accent. Which wouldn't fool relatives.= tosh!

2.) The same goes for video imagery: there is a big difference between compositting actors over archive footage and creating a whole new set of images. 3D modelling still isn't close to photrealism, despite what the PR will tell you= tosh!

"In the days after the bombings we saw clips of Khan on a video made when he was teaching - with this video and the right technology and skill you would have enough to rework Khan's appearance and voice."

See above: absolute total bollocks and I challenge you to come back with testimony from knowledgable sources to gainsay my analysis. But you won't, because you can't!

Would someone post a link to the full video?

Lying with Pixels by Ivan Amato

Seeing is no longer believing. The image you see on the evening news could well be a fake-a fabrication of fast new video-manipulation technology.

Last year, Steven Livingston, professor of political communication at George Washington University, astonished attendees at a conference on the geopolitical pros and cons of satellite imagery. He didn't produce evidence of new military mobilizations or global pandemics. Instead, he showed a video of figure skater Katarina Witt during a 1998 skating competition.

In the clip, Witt gracefully plies the ice for about 20 seconds. Then came what is perhaps one of the most unusual sports replays ever seen. The background was the same, the camera movements were the same. In fact, the image was identical to the original in all ways except for a rather important one: Witt had disappeared, along with all signs of her, such as shadows or plumes of ice flying from her skates. In their place was exactly what you would expect if Witt had never been there to begin with-the ice, the walls of the rink and the crowd.

So what's the big deal, you ask. After all, Stalin's staff routinely airbrushed persona non grata out of photos more than a half-century ago. And Woody Allen ushered a variation on reality morphing into the movies 17 years ago with Zelig, in which he inserted himself next to Adolf Hitler and Babe Ruth. In films such as Forrest Gump and Wag the Dog, reality twisting has become commonplace.


What sets the Witt demo apart-way apart-is that the technology used to "virtually delete" the skater can now be applied in real time, live, even as a camera records a scene and instantly broadcasts it to viewers. In the fraction of a second between video frames, any person or object moving in the foreground can be edited out, and objects that aren't there can be edited in and made to look real. "Pixel plasticity," Livingston calls it. The implication for those at the satellite imagery conference was sobering: Pictures from orbit may not necessarily be what the satellite's electronic camera actually recorded.


But the ramifications of this new technology reach beyond satellite imagery. As live electronic manipulation becomes practical, the credibility of all video will become just as suspect as Soviet Cold War photos. The problem stems from the nature of modern video. Live or not, it is made of pixels, and as Livingston says, pixels can be changed.


The best-known examples of real-time video manipulation so far are "virtual insertions" in professional sports broadcasts. Last January 30, for instance, nearly one-sixth of humankind in more than 180 countries repeatedly saw an orange first-down line stretched across the gridiron as they watched the Super Bowl. New York-based Sportvision created that line and inserted it into the live feed of the broadcast. To help determine where to insert the orange pixels, several game cameras were fitted with sensors that tracked the cameras spatial positions and zoom levels. Adding to the illusion of reality was the ability of the Sportvision system to make sure that players and referees occlude the virtual line when their bodies traverse it.


Last spring and summer, as Sportvision and rivals such as Princeton Video Imaging (PVI) in Lawrenceville, N.J,, were airing virtual insertion products, including simulated billboards on walls behind major league batters, a team of engineers from Sarnoff Corp. in Princeton, N.J., flew to the Coalition Allied Operations Center of NATO's Operation Allied Force in Vicenza, Italy. Their mission: transform their experimental video processing technology into an operational tool for rapidly locating and targeting Serbian military vehicles in Kosovo. The project was dubbed TIGER, for "targeting by image georegistration." "Just dial in the coordinates and the thing goes," explains Michael Hansen, a young, caffeinated Sarnoff gadgeteer who can hardly believe he was helping fight a war last year.


Compared to PVI's job, the military's technical task was more difficult-and the stakes were much higher. Instead of altering a football broadcast, the TIGER team manipulated a live video feed from a Predator, an unmanned reconnaissance craft flying some 450 meters above Kosovo battlefields. Rather than superimposing virtual lines or ads into sports settings, the task was to overlay, in real time, "georegistered" images of Kosovo onto the corresponding scenes streaming in live from the Predator's video camera. The terrain images had been previously captured with aerial photography and digitally stored. The TIGER system, which automatically detected moving objects against the background, could almost instantly feed to the targeting officers the coordinates for any piece of Serbian hardware in the Predator's view. This was quite a technical feat, since the Predator was moving and its angle of view was constantly changing, yet those views had to be electronically aligned and registered with the stored imagery in less than one-thirtieth of a second (to match the frame rate of video recording).


In principle, the targeting step could have been hotwired to precision guided weapons. "We weren't actually doing that in Allied Force," Hansen notes. "We were just telling targeting officers exactly where Serbian targets were and then they would vector in planes to go strike the targets." That way the human decision makers could pre-empt flawed machine-made decisions. According to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, TIGER technology was used extensively in the final three weeks of the Kosovo operation, during which "80 to 90 percent of the mobile targets were hit."


So far, real-time video manipulation has been within the grasp only of technologically sophisticated organizations such as TV networks and the military. But developers of the technology say it's becoming simple and cheap enough to spread everywhere. And that has some observers wondering whether real-time video manipulation will erode public confidence in live television images, even when aired by news outlets. "Seeing may no longer be believing," says Norman Winarsky, corporate vice president for information technology at Sarnoff. "You may not know what to trust."



The Sublime to the Ridiculous

A crude form of video manipulation already is happening in the satellite imagery community. The weekly publication Space News reported earlier this year that the Indian government releases imagery from its remote-sensing satellites only after defense facilities have been "processed out." In this case, it's not real-time manipulation and it's up front, like a censor's black marker. But pixels are plastic. It is perfectly possible now to insert sets of pixels into satellite imagery data that interpreters would view as battalions of tanks, or war planes, or burial sites, or lines of refugees, or dead cows that activists claim are victims of a biotech accident.


A demo tape supplied by PVI bolsters the point in the prosaic setting of a suburban parking lot. The scene appears ordinary except for a disturbing feature: Amidst the SUVs and minivans are several parked tanks and one armored behemoth rolling incongruously along. Imagine a tape of virtual Pakistani tanks rolling over the border into India pitched to news outlets as authentic, and you get a feel for the kind of trouble that deceptive imagery could stir up.


Commercial suppliers of virtual insertion services are too focused on new marketing opportunities to worry much about geopolitics. They have their eyes on far more lucrative markets. Suddenly those large stretches of programming between commercials-the actual show, that is-become available for billions of dollars worth of primetime advertising. PVI's demo tape, for instance, includes a scene in which a Microsoft Windows box appears-virtually, of course-on the shelf of Frasier Crane's studio. This kind of product placement could become more and more important as new video recording technologies such as TiVo and RePlayTV give viewers more power to edit out commercials.


Dennis Wilkinson, a Porsche-driving, sports-loving marketing expert who became CEO of 10-year-old PVI about a year ago, couldn't be happier about that. Wilkinson's eyes gleam when he describes a (near) future in which virtual insertion technology pushes advertisements to the personalized extreme. Combined with data-mining services by which browsers' individual likes, dislikes and purchasing patterns can be relentlessly tracked and analyzed, virtual insertion opens up the ability to shunt personally targeted advertisements over phone lines or cables to Web users and TV viewers. Say you like Pepsi but your neighbor next door likes Coke and your neighbor across the street likes Seven-Up-the kind of data harvestable from supermarket checkout records. It will become possible to tailor the soft-drink image in the broadcast signal to reach each of you with your preferred brand.


Just 15 minutes up the road from PVI, Sarnoff's Winarsky is also glowing-not so much about capturing market share as about the transforming power of the technology. Sarnoff has a distinguished history in that regard; the company is the descendant of RCA Laboratories, which started innovating in television technology in the early 1940s and has given birth to a plethora of media technologies. The color TV picture tube, liquid crystal displays and high-definition TV all came, at least in part, from RCA qua Sarnoff, which has five technical Emmys in its lobby.


The ability to manipulate video data in real time, he says, has just as much potential as some of these forerunners. "Now that you can alter video in real time, you have changed the world," he says. That may sound inflated, but after looking at the Katarina Witt demo, Winarsky's talk of "changing the world" loses some of its air of hyperbole.


Deleting people or objects from live video, or inserting prerecorded people or objects into live scenes, is only the beginning of the deceptions becoming possible. Pretty much any piece of video that has ever been recorded is becoming clip art that producers can digitally sculpt into the story they want to tell, according to Eric Haseltine, senior vice president for R&D at Walt Disney Imagineering in Glendale, Calif. With additional video manipulation technologies, previously recorded actors can be made to say and do things they have never actually done or said. "You can have dead actors star again in entirely new movies," says Haseltine.


Contemporary shots featuring footage of dead performers have been around for several years. But the Hollywood illusion-craft that, for example, inserted John Wayne into a TV commercial required painstaking, frame-by-frame post-production work by skilled technicians. There's a big difference now, says Haseltine: "What used to take an hour [per video frame], now can be done in a sixtieth of a second." This dramatic speed-up means that manipulation can be done in real time, on the fly, as a camera records or broadcasts. Not only can John Wayne, Fred Astaire or Saddam Hussein be virtually inserted into pre-produced ads, they could be inserted into, say, a live broadcast of The Drew Carey Show.


The combination of real-time, virtual insertion with existing and emerging post-production techniques opens up a world of manipulative opportunity. Consider Video Rewrite technology, which its developers at the Interval Corp. and the University of California, Berkeley first demonstrated publicly three years ago. With just a few minutes of video of someone talking, their system captures and stores a set of video snapshots of the way that a person's mouth-area looks and moves when saying different sets of sounds. Drawing from the resulting library of "visemes" makes it possible to depict the person seeming to say anything the producers dream up-including utterances that the subject wouldn't be caught dead saying.


In one test application, computer scientist Christoph Bregler, now of Stanford University, and colleagues digitized two minutes of public-domain footage of President John F. Kennedy speaking during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Using the resulting viseme library, the researchers created "animations" of Kennedy's mouth saying things he never said, among them, "I never met Forrest Gump." With technology like this, near-future political activists conceivably will be able to orchestrate webcasts of their opponents saying things that might make Howard Stern sound like a mensch.


Haseltine believes video manipulation techniques will quickly be carried to their logical extreme: "I can predict with absolute certainty," he says, "that one person sitting at a computer will be able to write a script, design characters, do the lighting and wardrobe, do all of the acting and dialog, and post production, distribute it on a broadband network, do all of this on a laptop-and viewers won't know the difference."


The End of Authenticity


So far, the widely witnessed applications of real-time video manipulation have been in benign arenas like sports and entertainment. Already last year, however, the technology began diffusing beyond these venues into applications that raised eyebrows. Last fall, for instance, CBS hired PVI to virtually insert the network's familiar logo all over New York City-on buildings, billboards, fountains and other places-during broadcasts of the network's The Early Show. The New York Times ran a front-page story in January raising questions about the journalistic ethics of altering the appearance of what is really there.


The combination of real-time virtual insertion, cyber-puppeteering, video rewriting and other video manipulation technologies with a mass-media infrastructure that instantly delivers news video worldwide has some analysts worried. "Imagine you are the government of a hypothetical country that wants more international financial assistance," says George Washington University's Livingston. "You might send video of a remote area with people starving to death and it may never have happened," he says.


Haseltine agrees. "I'm amazed that we have not seen phony video," he says, before backpedaling a bit: "Maybe we have. Who would know?"


It's just the sort of scenario played out in the 1998 movie Wag the Dog, in which top presidential aides conspire with a Hollywood producer to televise a virtually crafted war between the United States and Albania to deflect attention from a budding Presidential scandal. Haseltine and others wonder when reality will imitate art imitating reality.


The importance of the issue will only intensify as the technology becomes more accessible. What now typically requires an $80,000 box of electronics the size of a small refrigerator should soon be doable with a palm-sized card (and ultimately a single chip) that fits inside a commercial video recorder, according to Winarsky. "This will be available to people in Circuit City," he says. Consumer gear for virtual video insertion is likely to require a camcorder with a specialized image-processing card or chip. This hardware will take signals from the camera's electronic image sensors and convert them into a form that can be analyzed and manipulated in a computer using appropriate software-much as photo editors at newspapers use Adobe Photoshop and other programs to "clean up" digital image files. A home user might, for instance, insert absent family members into the latest reunion tape or remove strangers they would prefer not to be in the scene-bringing Soviet-style historical revisions right into the family den.


Combine the potential erosion of faith in video authenticity with the so-called "CNN effect" and the stage is set for deception to move the world in new ways. Livingston describes the CNN effect as the ability of mass media to go beyond merely reporting what is happening to actually influencing decision-makers as they consider military, international assistance and other national and international issues. "The CNN effect is real," says James Currie, professor of political science at the National Defense University at Fort McNair in Washington. "Every office you go into at the Pentagon has CNN on." And that means, he says, that a government, terrorist or advocacy group could set geopolitical events in motion on the strength of a few hours' worth of credibility achieved by distributing a snippet of well-doctored video.


With experience as an army reservist, as a staffer with a top-secret clearance on the Senate's Intelligence Committee, and as a legislative liaison for the Secretary of the Army, Currie has seen governmental decision-making and politicking up close. He is convinced that real-time video manipulation will be, or already is, in the hands of the military and intelligence communities. And while he has no evidence yet that any government or nongovernment organization has deployed video manipulation techniques, real-time or not, for political or military purposes, he has no problem conjuring up disinformation scenarios. For example, he says, consider the impact of a fabricated video that seemed to show Saddam Hussein "pouring himself a Scotch and taking a big drink of it. You could run it on Middle Eastern television and it would totally undermine his credibility with Islamic audiences."


For all the heavy breathing, however, some experts remain unconvinced that real-time video manipulation poses a real threat, no matter how good the technology gets. John Pike, an analyst of the intelligence community for the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, D.C., says the credibility risks are simply too great for governments or serious organizations to get caught attempting to spoof the public. And for the organizations that would be willing to risk it, says Pike, the news folks-knowing just what the technology can do-will become increasingly vigilant.


"If some human rights organization popped up at CNN with some video, particularly an organization they were not familiar with, I would think that [CNN] would consider that radioactive," says Pike. Same goes for nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). "No responsible director of an established organization would authorize such a thing. And they would fire on the spot anyone caught doing it. The stock-in-trade of NGO policy organizations is that 'we tell the truth.'"


Even cool heads like Pike, however, concede that the media's fortress of skepticism has an Achilles heel: the Internet. "The issue is not so much your ability to get fake video on CNN, but to get it online," he says. That's because so much Internet content is unfiltered. "This could play into the phenomenon in the news production process where you would not replicate the original report, but you might report that it was reported," says Pike. And that could cascade into a CNN effect. "These are undoubtedly experiments that will be done," Pike says.


The trouble is, says Livingston, it may only take a few such experiments to forever make people question the authenticity of video. That could have enormous repercussions for military, intelligence and news operations. An ironic sociological consequence might emerge: a return to heavier reliance on unmediated face-to-face communication. In the meantime, though, there will undoubtedly be some interesting twists and turns as pixels become ever more plastic.


Ivan Amato is a correspondent for National Public Radio and the author of Stuff: The Materials the World Is Made Of a chronicle of cutting-edge research in materials science.
 http://www.nodeception.com/articles/pixel.jsp

Download link to the best video available :

 http://www.aljazeera.net/mritems/streams/2005/9/1/1_560847_1_12.wmv

On Swedish TV today there was a program about manipulation of video films.

One fact that is known now in Sweden after the Goteborg incident a few years back when it came up in court the police had manipulated the sound to make it as if the police were attacked FIRST by masses and therefore attacked or something like that. This was discovered afterwards in a TV program that goes deep into issues. The question of today’s program was to see if people could see that a film had been manipulated and inserted a new person into the background. Well they did not. Then they showed this thing between a guy and a computer who gave back his face on the screen and what they did to show us how easy it was to manipulate that face was by changing the face on the screen to Bill Clinton, who moved his lips and his face as the Swedish guy did. So yes it can be manipulated enormously.

Um, I don't need to read all that guff to know what IS and ISN'T possible. The allegations in the post are ridiculous. I have been working in AV for over 10 years. But the article posted just backs me up. They cite the INSERTION of STAGED footage INTO archived footage. Which is a million miles away from manipulation of archive footage into totally new footage. Se how they handles Oliver Reed's death in Gladiator. How they did the Forest Gump scenes. The penny dropping?

The article also doesn't address my point regarding manufacturing fake speech.

But hey, everyobe will believe what they like at the end of the day!

What i can tell you
The video has two light sources of different Kelivin grades, the first is a halogen tungsten light of around 600k at angle of 70% to the top right hand corner which given estimated readings of height is around 2 meters from the ground and 4 meters from the subject, the light is not unlike a tungston security or flood light in it's tempreture.
the second light source is slightly warmer and around 6500-6700 in kelvin scale and appears to be about -.5 meters from the ground to the lower left of camera, it appears to have been added to counter the long shadow caused by the tungston source of lamp 1
this would could be a reading lamp style spotlight lantern that has been placed on the floor.

The sound has a shadow of .015 milliseconds which would equate to a surface of not more than 4 meters in depth from the source.

If i were to hazard a guesse I would go with a domestic garage with a internal security light in a far corner and a reading lamp place upon the floor to the left of the camera, the scan rate of image would lead me to suggest that this was made on a PAL system camcorder, possible of a 8mm nature, however it is possible that the image was scanned via a tv card input which could have been pal, so this is inconclusive.
however one point is, the first video is shot on 8mm camcorder, the second part is a NSTC digital corder not unlike a a sony digital 8 in its colour tone appearence, over toned red, weak blue ?.

I take it then you don't see anything suspect?

Being on gas-powered dialup all I can go by is memory of seeing it on TV.

There's not really any concrete evidence to suggest this IS a fake; whilst that doesn't in itself mean that it isn't, it does mean you need to suggest a plausible motive/benefit for faking the video. I can't see how the video, faked or not, helps the government or 'secret services' to achieve anything in their interests.

It's healthy to be questioning things like this; but it's not healthy to insist that it must be a fake just because you want to believe that everything that reaches the mass media must be part of a big orchestrated conspiracy.

If the story of the three Leeds lads and the Jamaican WAS manufactured as a means of reassuring the public - and a significant section of the public weren't buying this because of the inconsistencies - e.g. Luton station, stories continually being altered on 7th/8th/9th July - there would be very considerable motive for producing such a video.

Someone earlier on the thread said the families wouldn't be fooled. Well I thought one (or more) of the family members DID say it WAS a fake. Thought it was even a BBC webpage at one point. Was I dreaming?

There have been too many examples of innocent people taking the rap for crimes they never committed. The justice system must take all steps to safeguard people from being convicted on police intelligence versions of "conspiracy theories".

Copernicus, I beleive the story you are referring to is this, from the Guardian:

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1561938,00.html?79%3A+Uk+latest

Some of those who knew Khan have questioned its authenticity, but a number of others, as you can see, do concede that the video is him:

'Afzal Choudhry, a youth worker who spent six months working with Khan in Beeston, hopes they will not.

He said the video may have a positive impact in the long term, forcing young people to accept that he was involved. "It makes it more clear that he perpetrated these acts, it was definitely him, it was his voice and his face, that cannot be denied," he said.'

As I understand it his family have made no comment. Personally, I cannot see why some people are so determined not to accept that ordinary people like Khan can become radicalised and carry out terrorist acts in response to our own government's actions.

Why is believing that it was instead a 'state job' in any way more progressive/radical? Of course, if people would prefer to beleive some alternative theory involving the 'security services' then that is up to them, but many of these proponents seem to have drawn a very firm conclusion (ie it was a 'false flag' operation) from very little solid evidence. As far as I can see, the anomalies with the so called 'official version' (such as they are) do not as yet prove anything substantial.

If the video was a fake. Why wouldn't they choose someone more stereotypical then? Why not just INVENT someone!? If this conspiracy is so widespread as to encompass every civil servant and expert in the UK, why go to all that bother???

They couldn't technically fake that video statement from archive footage. So that leaves the gun to the head theory. Again, why the hell bother??? Why not take a known radical kill him and plant the evidence later? Why not invent some bogus foreigners and that'd serve the ID cards argument better instead of damaging it? It'd also make teh job of all the fake evidence light years easier.

Copernicus, "a significant section of the public weren't buying this because of the inconsistencies". Um, I guess the media are too gagged to notice this? All I can see is an eeny weeny tiny minority of fruitcakes hellbent on denying anything other than a conspiracy.

I get the impression that some of the detractors are loonies, some are in denial and some just think that anything that attacks Bush, Blair and Israel if fair game.

There's not really any concrete evidence to suggest this IS a fake

2 cctv pictures in Luton
[the others in Kings x, and elsewhere
have never been senn]

and the word of the authorities
that clothing DNA samples match
descriptions

and of course the assertion that ID was found near the 'bombers'

are all the British public have for proof there were
EVEN WERE ANY BOMBERS AT ALL

This video is being presented as proof that
Khan was what? an 'extremist'

perhaps that is true

but that is still a long way from placing him at the scene of the bombings

Well according to this, his headless corpse is currently lying in a London mortuary:

 http://www.miw.com.sg/Mindef/news/military_afp_article.jsp?fileName=050904012824.dklnc8ci.txt&adate=20050904

So you think someone would have noticed if was already dead before he got on the bus. Or perhaps his body planted in the wreckage afterwards, or just turned up at the morgue later? No doubt the fact that he was merely decapitated and not completely obliterated in the blast will generate further speculation, but as yet we have no access to any forensic evidence relating to the bombings so you cannot claim with any degree of certainty that the official view is either complete bollocks or true. With sub judice in force there certainly is not enough evidence apparent at present to conclude that it was undoubtedly a 'state job'.

IT SAYS ITS THE TRUTH SO I BELIEVE IT.....EVERY TIME

ACCORDING TO THIS
ACCORDING TO THAT
ACCORDING TO BLAIR

ACCORDING TO NEWSMEDIA

ACCORDING TO CONTROLLED PERCEIVED
REALITY

ACCORDING TO MANAGED PERCEPTIONS

ASK YOURSSELVES

ACCORDING TO 'WHAT'?

WHAT CAN WE REALLY TRUST?

(DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT!!!)

My apologies, that should be 'train' not 'bus'. The link (above post) is not where I read the original article, but it seems to have been reproduced on a number of sites.

It is not a matter of accepting things at face value, I have merely pointed out that there is much evidence which is still missing at the moment. I am quite prepared to be open minded, but many of those who are supposedly questioning the 'official view' are not open-minded in any way at all. They have long ago decided to believe it was a state job, string together a number of assertions and anomalies as 'proof' and claim that it was OBVIOUSLY a false flag operation, and wish to dismiss 'troubling' evidence like the Siddique Khan video out of hand. Alternative theoroes should not be immune to scrutiny/criticism.

It has been said that the state benefits from the video being believed to be true, as it reinforces its 'fiction' about Muslim extremists being behind the bombings. Yet no-one has yet offered any real explanation as to why believing that this is the case is so terrible/wrong. It seems perfectly logical to me, that ordinary Muslims have become radicalised due to our governments actions in the Middle East. If anything the London attacks has merely served to make people even more critical of the government, rather than unify the country behind further war.

If state operatives 'forced' Siddique Khan to make his statement or faked it completely, why then did they allow him to make a clear link between the London attacks and the war in Iraq. This is something that our government still seeks to deny. If the ultimate aim of this state conspiracy is to justify some forthcoming attack on Iran, why not make him make some reference to Iran instead.

I simply cannot see the benefit of the state making this all up.

If it's possible to convince someone to strap explosives to himself and then set them off in a crowded public place then it's also possible to get them to appear in the promo video.
Suicide bombers are a reality. Although, lets be very clear about this I mean generically speaking and not necessarily in regard to 7/7,
You could also take the line that the guy was in some way duped into becoming a so called suicide bomber.
As some one who thinks that religion is one of the biggest causes of all evil I would definitely say that he was duped. Taking my fruit bats raving conspiracy theory on another step and making it's also possible to say that intelligence agencies, again generically speaking, are well known for setting up clandestine operations which they finance with the proceeds of drug trafficing Herion, Cocaine (Nikki Lauders!) .
They often cooperate with jount ventures and anyway the "intelligence community" in general knows all about it or at least have a rough idea and so do organized crime gangs because the ports and methods used to ship large quantities of drugs are the same as used by say the Italian mafia.
The pay master in London or Leeds will then hire some totally unscrupulous types who will then form a cell of dedicated muslims or what ever religion, believe is required.
As with the Italian Red Bridgades and the kidnapping of the Italian prime minister Aldo Moro it comes out years later that they were at least partly run by elements of the right and the intelligence services and in my opionion they were set up by and entirely by the italian secret services.
Oliver North set up a huge drug smuggling racket which financed dozens of operations all round the world and involved tons of cocaine moving through Costa Rica and routes through the caribbean and into the USA and Europe. The BCCI (bank of Cocaine and Criminals Incorporated) was involved with North and was undoubtedly one of many banks that will willing ship large sums of cash around to support these operations.
I don't really think that a couple of gliches on the audio of this video any more relevant than the Bin laden / Disney production. it seems that until China is ready to become the worlds second super power and we can
get down to a serious WW$ then the wheelers and delaers of arms and their security company spin offs are gonna have to rely on the War on Terror to earn a crust so LET THERE BE TERROR and roll out the anti conspiracy theories, for those who think that it's not going to happen, get along to the DSEI and check out the hard ware on offer

The important thing to remember is that the EVIDENCE to support the Conspiracy Theories of the people who told us "Iraq has WMD!!!" still seems to be missing. Such tapes, released under similar circumstances, have become somewhat of a transparent and disturbing trend.

Until some actual EVIDENCE supports what the LIARS in power want us to believe, we should ignore this tape, or at the very least, regard it with suspicion, and suspend the powers Bliar has seized for himself - which the courts had denied him for four years - until the evidence has been presented, or these criminals concede that there is none to be had.

Al Qaeda tape no proof of London bombing role: US official

2 September 2005

WASHINGTON - An Al Qaeda videotape featuring a pre-death statement by the suspected ringleader of the July 7 London suicide bombings does not prove the attack was carried out by Osama bin Laden's militant network, a US official said on Friday.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said the Bush administration believes the tape containing the statement by Mohammad Sidique Khan and a message from Al Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahri is authentic.

"There's never been a fake (Al Qaeda) tape," the official told Reuters.

"I'm sure Al Qaeda is happy to get the word out saying they inspired the event. But the tape doesn't prove that Al Qaeda was behind the attack.

"Clearly they're capable of getting their message out. They use their PR machine to do just that," the official added.

Al Jazeera television on Thursday showed Zawahri and Khan in separate segments of videotaped statements, which the network described as a claim of responsibility from Al Qaeda for the blasts on London's transport system that killed 52 people.

London police have said the attacks bore the hallmarks of an Al Qaeda attack but have no evidence that an Al Qaeda mastermind was behind the bombings.

In the tape, Khan referred to bin Laden, Zawahri and Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, as "today's heroes" and warned of more attacks.

Zawahri praised the London bombings a slap in the face of "arrogant, crusader British rulers" and warned of further retaliation for Western intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East.


 http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2005/September/theworld_September66.xml&section=theworld&col=

"we should [...] suspend the powers Bliar has seized for himself" I take it you mean you and your fellow Canadians?

You always fall into a pattern of citing one lie to prove another then attacking dissenters personally when you have run out of puff. It's almost as though you are following a propaganda formula.

Very sad!

....and yet wholeheartedly embrace other press stories such as that about 'Peter Power/Visor Consultants' etc - both stories come from the 'mainstream' media (though in fact, the video originated from a source which is commonly seen as being far more critical of western imperialism than our own BBC). Seems to me we should look at all material relating to these events, not just choice bits which suit our already pre-determined theories.

comes shining through. The only actual 'evidence, which has been shown with regard to the 7th July attack is the frame allegedly from CCTV at Luton, many miles from the scene of the crime. Eric is correct and so is Psyops , in that they agree that the bald facts so far do not amount to evidence for the prosecution. Given the chief cop's propensity for speaking untruths, some of the evidence which we lack rather would seem to perhaps deserve a little further consideration if not scrutiny. Sooo many cameras, so many faulty, empty, useless but yet strangely convenient cameras. And so on..

...I agree about the current lack of hard evidence Gunter, but that applies to the so called counter-theories as well as the 'official' version. I have not seen enough real evidence produced yet to prove it was some kind of state fit-up.