I believe firmly that the bin Laden videos are not real, but I need help.

[Writer]

Over the last three years, since the US's raid on Tora Bora, videos by subjects purporting to be bin Laden have appeared on Al Jazeera, and have immediately been rebroadcast on American news media programs. The videos are sketchy. Some may disagree, but I personally question their timing, their quality, and their source.

I want to find the truth, yet I am only one woman without access to the proper equipment, time, and energy needed to uncover this. I believe bin Laden has long since perished, because of his ill health preceding Tora Bora, and the fact that administration seems oddly comfortable with our conventionally believing that he simply "got away."

I believe the bin Laden videos are merely PR props. His commentary seems appropriately targeted to our domestic discourse - most recently the trial of Zaccharias Moussaoui, the American presidential election of 2004, and random comments concerning the war in Iraq. Whether or not the speaker on these tapes appears to be adhering or defying the administration is moot, in my opinion. I think this is part of scare tactics - to inject fear and xenophobia as we debate illegal immigration and national security this mid-term election year.

The 2004 video the weekend before the election triggered me into believing this way. The picture seemed red, distorted. Bin Laden seemed well-fed, and quite healthy. To the American eye, any man in a turban and a beard, seated, can be bin Laden. We don't distinguish subtle differences for something we're not personally familiar with. I think that's why these tapes are so especially effective.

I need help. Do you work with video? Can anyone take a closer look at these videos and decipher any tricks used to cloud whether these are really not bin Laden? Could older footage of bin Laden have been used with new soundtracks? If so, what about the diction of his speeches? Has it changed? Can anyone with knowledge of Arabic take a closer look at what he's saying?

If I'm wrong, so be it. But it would be good to examine these videos, I think. Why do we keep accepting them at face value, without speculation? The American people are primed to hear that their government would stoop to this trickery, if this is yet another example of the Bush Administration's attempt to manipulate the citizenry, we must uncover this.

Sincerely,

Writer.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Loose Change II

went into this in detail, taking closeups from bin Laden videos and comparing photos of the real bin Laden compared to the man on the film. Also, look at any bin Laden film and see if the man is wearing a gold watch. Wahhabist men won't wear gold-it is forbidden. Also, according the Loose Change, bin Laden is left handed while the man in the video signed something using his right hand.

[Writer]

2. Would you mind posting the links to this? n/t

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. Here it is from google

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

It will open up the film and you can watch it right away.

[benddem]

6. that is clearly

NOT TRUE! I've lived in Saudi Arabia. There are no proscriptions against gold. Bin Laden is a billionaire. I'm sure he has lots of gold.

[Writer]

7. That's good. That's the kind of personal expertise we need.

Because the Internet is full of misinformation.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. Strict Muslim fundamentalists

have a whole series of proscriptions as far as dress goes. They don't wear silk and don't wear gold. I'm not talking about everyone, only the strict Wahhabists. My husband checked this on a Muslim message board after we saw the film. Are you, perchance, a Muslim?

[pnwmom]

44. Strict Wahhabists prohibit the wearing of gold.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/gulf/wahhabi.htm

"Under Al Saud rule, governments, especially during the Wahhabi revival in the 1920s, have shown their capacity and readiness to enforce compliance with Islamic laws and interpretations of Islamic values on themselves and others. The literal interpretations of what constitutes right behavior according to the Quran and hadith have given the Wahhabis the sobriquet of "Muslim Calvinists." To the Wahhabis, for example, performance of prayer that is punctual, ritually correct, and communally performed not only is urged but publicly required of men. Consumption of wine is forbidden to the believer because wine is literally forbidden in the Quran. Under the Wahhabis, however, the ban extended to all intoxicating drinks and other stimulants, including tobacco. Modest dress is prescribed for both men and women in accordance with the Quran, but the Wahhabis specify the type of clothing that should be worn, especially by women, and forbid the wearing of silk and gold, although the latter ban has been enforced only sporadically. Music and dancing have also been forbidden by the Wahhabis at times, as have loud laughter and demonstrative weeping, particularly at funerals."

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Writer]

5. This is all great, but what I think would help is our own eyes and ears...

looking at the video itself and, using our expertise, deciphering whether this is real. If we, at the very least, can agenda set this, perhaps even better experts can take a closer look at these tapes.

But we need to do the dirty work first.

[Disturbed]

8. Remember the chubby Osama Video?

That one sure seemed fake.

[Writer]

10. You might be thinking of the same one...

from 2004. The reddish-hued one with Osama on a wide shot. The tape seemed underexposed and of poor quality. But there was a rather cherubic bin Laden in the center.

[MissWaverly]

9. compare noses

Bin Laden has a long thin nose, there is no way that his nose could change into a nose the
shape of a potato, this is impossible. I had to have my nose rebuilt after an accident,
the doctor said that they can subtract but they can't add, so your nose can get smaller
but not larger unless you are Pinocchio.

[Caution]

12. Other than a gut feeling do you have any evidence

that would show those tapes to be faked? Anything at all?

[Writer]

13. Does my OP NOT CLEARLY STATE that...

it's concrete evidence that I'm seeking???

Do YOU have any evidence either way? Please share if you do.

edit: to make this idiot-proof

[Caution]

14. You mean other than the VIDEO?

Generally, actual video of the guy speaking is considered to be pretty hard evidence of him being alive.

What else is there that could possibly satisfy you if this won't? I can't think of anything anyone anywhere could provide that would convince you he's alive that goes beyond video of him speaking.

[Zodiak]

16. It has to be proven that it is him

A Porter Goss-controlled CIA assuring us that it is indeed Bin Laden is not good enough these days.

I have seen many arguments and comparison of stills. According to what I have seen, the last true video of Bin Laden was the one where he sais he had nothing to do with 9/11. All of the rest of the Bin Ladens do not share the same facial characters when studied in detail, if detail can even be gleaned (the 2004 video was too grainy, but there are some serious acial issues there).

I do not take what our government says at face value any more. Too many lies about very important issues. Why would Bin Laden be any different?

[Caution]

28. No it has to be proven that is ISN'T him.

This is a simple application of Occam's Razor. faked videos with a faked Bin Ladin, that are widely accepted as authentic are the most obvious answer to this dilemma. Prove all of these videos are faked and maybe people will start to come over to the conclusion many here have obviously already come to. Evidence. Right now the evidence that Bin Ladin is still alive is the video and the audio that he regularly releases. What is the evidence that he is dead? Speculation from people who want to believe the US government (or more commonly the Israeli government) are perpetrating some hoax to push Bin Ladin as the bogeyman is the only thing I have seen thus far. Speculation is of course not actually evidence.

Those claiming these tapes are faked are the ones making the extraordinary claim. The extraordinary claim is the one that requires proof.

Hell, I have yet to see even a single good reason why anyone would bother to fake these videos. A small bump in the polls for Bush? Hasn't helped much has it? Also, if they can fake the videos, they can certainly arrange a fake capture or kill of someone who is already dead, I would think that a time when Republicans and Bush are in total freefall would be a good time for that wouldn't you? Why hasn't that happened? The guy is alive. He still wants to harm Americans and if the Democrats had half a fucking brain they would campaign on that. They would come right out and say "Bin Ladin is still alive and Bush has done nothing about this. We pledge to capture the fucker come hell or high water."

[Writer]

29. Caution, while I understand where you're coming from with...

"extraordinary" claims, what I'm aiming for in this thread is that we use empirical evidence - from our senses - as well as our expertise here on DU to try to uncover whether the videos and audio tapes are fake or not. Not just pull quotes from somesuch site that claims what our gut believes.

I think Up2Late provides a good example below. Take a look at that morphed juxtaposition between bin Laden before Tora Bora and bin Laden in the 2004 tape and tell me what you think.

[Zodiak]

30. Here we go with Occam's razor...do you even know what that means?

Occam's razor is not a law...it is a principle in the absense of enough evidence to make a conclusion. It does not provide proof, but provides a working hypothesis based on the simplicity BY CONVENTION. Look it up.

Also, we are at WAR because of Bin Laden...the extraordinary circumstance of war ratchets up the burden of proof on the government, but of course, they hide everything. So we do not have enough proof either way. We are left with guessing whether the most secretive, mendacious government in our history is telling us the truth about this important event.

If you have not seen these analyses yourself concerning the videos (which aren't proof, but they cast enough doubt), I suggest you look. When you see all of the faces on "Bin Laden" next to each other, you will see why so many are doubtful about these videos. Don't epect it to become common wisdom because our media will NEVER entertain this idea.

Lastly, one cannot prove a negative, so don't ask me to. I can no more prove he is dead than you can that he is alive. Videos are no good unless we KNOW it is Bin LAden. All we have are assertions by our compromised government.

Also, the 2004 election went to Bush because of a Bin Laden video (according to CNN), so it is hardly a condition where Bush has never been helped by these videos. Other videos were released just before important national security votes, and I suspect that this recent upsurge of Bin Laden sightings has to do with NSA wiretaps. So these videos are coming up when Bush needs help.

Why is his capture not staged? DNA and a need for an Emmanual Goldstein to scare the piss out of us whenever Bush needs a power grab. Bin LAden being alive means the war on terror goes on, and Bush can invoke national security at the drop of a hat.

I must interject to say that you are accepting the analysis of the Bush government on faith...what evidence do YOU have that proves Bin Laden did 9/11? I saw a video where he claims he didn't do it, followed by another video of a fat Bin LAden saying he did it. Which Bin Laden is right?

And what you call "widely accepted" is simply asserted over and over in the absence of any real proof. If the CIA says it is authentic, then we must belive them? I am not so trusting any more.

There are a lot of unanswered questions.

[Caution]

31. I know exactly what Occam's Razor is. And it most certainly applies here

We have video of the guy, we have audio of the guy. He's alive.

And here we go again with the idea that a skeptic is not questioning something. Bullshit. I am using my own two eyes to look at the evidence right in front of me. I see a video of Osama Bin Ladin. You as the claimant that this is something extraordinary beyond what the evidence shows must show counter-evidence that bolsters the extraordinary claim.

This is not difficult to grasp.

[Writer]

32. Yeah... but...

the question we're discussing here is: Is that ACTUALLY Osama bin Laden? Can we determine, based on comparing these tapes over time, whether this might be someone POSING as OBL?

Do you think you are looking at the real OBL, or do you think this could be a fake?

[Caution]

38. I understand your question

But the fact is that the vast majority of people take the tapes at face value. Videotape is generally considered to be good evidence (see any number of criminal cases, the most obvious and well-known being Rodney King). You are starting from the assumption that Bin Ladin is dead. OK fine. Prove it.

I take the standard position. Osama Bin Ladin is alive. I assert that the evidence points to him being alive. There are video tapes and audio tapes that have been authenticated by reputable agencies (yeah we could argue about this, but the vast majority of people would agree that the anti-terrorism office of the CIA and FBI are authoritative here. Certainly they are more authoritative than your average 9/11 was a CIA plot website). In this case it is useless to attack the authority (you cannot possibly prove to me that the CIA is disreputable in this instance any more than I could convince a conspiracy theorist that they are just regular people doing a job and typically doing it well), you must attack the source material itself. So prove the tapes are faked.

I am not attacking your position, I personally think that Bin Ladin, whether alive or not is largely irrelevant as anything other than a symbol and that symbol will endure whether he is alive or dead (captured alive is another matter). My point is that you are operating from an assumption that evidence has been faked. Well, that violates any number of rules of logic unless you provide counter-evidence.

Put it this way. I have something that I claim cures cancer. You disagree with me and ask for evidence that it cures cancer. Instead of producing medical records of patients who had cancer, who then took my miracle cure while another group of similar patients did not take my miracle cure (neither of which had knowledge of whether they were taking the cure) and show that the patients who did not take my cure did not show improvement and those who did all universally no longer had cancer, I instead said to you: Prove it doesn't work.

Evidence and process are important when making an assertion. A gut feeling doesn't cut it. And simply asking that other people provide that evidence also doesn't cut it.

You must approach the situation neutrally. Ask "Is Osama Bin Ladin alive?" The take a look at what evidence there is for either side of the question and make a determination. Don't pre-judge the information you receive. There is anecdotal evidence that he is dead. There is anecdotal evidence that he is alive. There is video record of him and audio record of his voice. There are documents containing his handwriting and signature that reference current events. There is no body. What does the preponderance of evidence say?

Is it possible that he is dead and the CIA is fooling literally the entire world into believing he is still alive? Certainly. Is it possible that unicorns actually exist? Certainly. But this is where Occam's Razor comes in. And contrary to the above poster's postulate of how and where Occam applies this is a perfect case for Occam. All of the evidence points to Bin Ladin being alive. The belief that he is dead and this is a massive conspiracy has ZERO evidence and in fact is pretty ludicrous on the face of it in perfect violation of Occam.

[Writer]

39. But I am staring at two videotapes, both purportedly to be of the same...

person, but the faces are different! What am I to conclude here - that he's been eating McDonald's and has received botox shots and a nose enlargement since Tora Bora? They appear to be two different people, according to my eyes. Other eyes can conclude similarly - that they are not the same individuals in these tapes.

The differences between the tapes indicate a fakery that hides in plain site, and whatever logical hoops I need to jump through to prove this become practically moot when we can simply observe a difference between the two Osama bin Laden's on the tapes.

Do you not see a difference in their faces?

Regarding the CIA: I'm sorry, but their credibility with the American public dismantled in Iraq. They claimed that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, and even within the CIA that evidence was in disrepute. Why take the "evidence" that OBL is alive at face value?

Most of us in DU operate with a healthy skepticism, and within the confines of history over the last six years in this country, under Bush, I think that skepticism is warranted and this exercise essential to our democracy. Why impede the discovery and vetting of what may be important information for the rest of us? This is something that many of us may have thought about, and there is no problem dissembling it to see if our hunches turn out to be true.

[Zodiak]

41. You might disagree with me

but still, Occams Razor does not distinguish truth; it only provides a working hypothesis before new evidence comes to light. It is a preference...it is convention and nothing more. It certainly does not prove anyone's point in a debate. That is why I object to its use. In addition, one cannot apply Occam's Razor if one is not sure of the quality of the data. If the tapes are real, then your hypothesis applies...if they are fake, then the more sinister hypothesis applies. Which is it?...we honestly do not know.

I have seen the videos. Those are not the same Bin Ladens. We have computer technology that can identify faces based on ratios of nose length, eye width, etc. A cursory analysis of two dimensions of Bin Laden's face (his nose length, and his ear-to-eye angle) in both videos shows a rather large difference in this ratio. Something that cannot be altered without massive cosmetic surgery (and even then, bone structure would have to be altered). Now it could be bad lighting, compressed resolution, etc., but it is enough evidence for me to doubt at least some of these tapes, if not all.

Also, one cannot say ALL of the evidence points to Bin Laden being alive. Nor is there ZERO evidence that the tapes are faked. You understand logic well-enough, but what about impartiality? Those terms are awfully absolute.

And I never stated he was dead...I have no evidence of that. I only state that the tapes are fishy because Bin LAden has said contradictory things in the video and the faces do not match from tape to tape. I will let Writer's explanation suffice as to why the CIA cannot be trusted.

[Up2Late]

43. "We have video of the guy, we have audio of the guy. He's alive."

What a ridiculous argument. I have video of George W. Bush from the 2006 SOTU, and I can make him say that he's plotting to kill all the leaders of the EU, but does that make it true?

Here, check out this video someone edited from the 2002 SOTU, video and especially audio are easy to manipulate these days. <http://www.fuckitall.com/bsh/>


If someone has enough audio of a person, anyone can make anyone say what ever they want.

<http://www.fuckitall.com/>

[leesa]

19. There have been several quotes from experts who have claimed these were

likely false over the years. I would just try and google it to find the sources.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PATRICK]

17. This clarifies a lot

Juxtaposing the US media getting their feed almost totally from the regime to the authentication done at various times by non-Us technicians you see HOW the government handles authentication issues.

First, it has no concern in mentioning authentication UNLESS some reputable source outside makes the attempt. The US media then settles, word for word with the WH response, not even probing in any degree exactly what the government does to authenticate the tape. At most we hear excuses, anonymous opinions galore, then silence. Little attempt is made to spin the tapes as they fit without critique into the general background of extremely simplistic American opinion. Osama is a routine bogeyman, but don't care too much, don't look too hard.

NOW, with public trust about sub zero, another general CIA statement suddenly becomes nearly absolutely positive- after years of fudging vagaries. Again, outside the apparent nonchalance of the supposedly superior US tech wizardry, the response seems coded only to minimally deal with public doubt. That was easy if the people were outside the country. Some politician or other in some country or other- NOT an expert, not privy to any specific Intel- was always making a comment on where Bin laden was. The real info, the best thinkers, the best techs were thus balanced out by bloviators, some undoubtedly with agendas. The American Media Curtain, minimally concerned with facts or truth, maintains the "legend".

So the confusing variant statements and "authentications" done by the mighty US concerning its most unwanted terrorist make a lot more sense in conjunction with outsiders trying to do the real work and getting nary a peep in our press. Those of us wondering why no one in the world could apply science to a seemingly critical issue were simply cut off from the real world by looking for clues in the US media. This also confirms the lack of awareness by chief Democrats because they TRUST our government and media to provide this information when it would have been crucial for them to find real analysis elsewhere and use it.

Regardless of the facts concerning Osama, it is a protected dog and pony show whose only substance is in service to W and off limits to the gray matter of all Americans. Bush amazingly and incompetently announced that at the outset. The tone would be to keep Osama as a backdrop, not an object of the war against terror. So much so that offing a "good" Bin Laden for his resemblance and DNA would never be questioned and a dutiful triumph given to all concerned by our submissive dupes. The same is alarmingly true of war and terror in almost any aspect regardless of actual public opinion, still groping angrily through the murk.

Much concerning the strange nature of the messages themselves suggest both Osama and Omar are deader than Bush's popularity. They never bothered and still don't to show reasonably how these things are authentic- and even the opinions and the sources are vaguer than Osama's whereabouts. The implications of the messages themselves they keep their hands off too slyly or nonchalantly again for any rational person not to suspect something is rotten in the Oval Office.

[Writer]

18. I agree with much of what you say...

A major issue I'd add, however, is that WE THE PEOPLE are not looking too hard. If we put some effort into truly creating a firm, united voice (as well as some elbow grease) to something we suspect might be true, we may actually discover whether or not it's so AND enlighten our fellow citizens.

We have too long persuaded ourselves that, because we lack money, we are powerless. We are not.

[Eurobabe]

20. If OBL has his own dialysis machine and

used it 3X a week, he could possibly extend his life for 10 yrs. But that's not taking into consideration the other stresses he may have, so yeah I think he's a PR tool, and he died a long time ago.

[Bonobo]

21. Read "Cat's Cradle". Bin Laden = Bush's Bokonnon. n/t

[Up2Late]

22. Here, I'll try again. I had written a bunch of stuff, but when I went to..

...watch an old CNN video, it caused a Java error that crapped out my web browser, so I lost all I wrote.

The Short answer is NO, any video you will find on the internet is too fuzzy to be able to tell absolutely. My feeling is, and a lot of so-called experts also felt back in January 2002, that bin Laden died in December 2001. The top link below, has his funeral notice.

I did find most of the real bin Laden videos (pre-2002) and the first FAKE video (the "Smoking Gun" Fat Osama, released by the Bush Administration) and at least one I hadn't seen before.

Below are a few links, I'm not going to test them this time, until after I post this.

Fair warning, some of the videos at these links might cause a similar Java error when you click them, so save you work first:

<http://www.welfarestate.com/binladen/funeral/>

Lots of link at this page under the side-box with this banner , this is the video I didn't see and haven't found yet.

<http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/01/19/gen.musharraf.binladen.1.19/index.html>

<http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/index.html>

<http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/01/31/gen.binladen.interview/index.html?related>

<http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/01/31/gen.aljazeera.statement/index.html?related>

<http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/12/14/ret.bin.laden.video/index.html?related>

This is the first fake, Bush WH supplied, "Fat Osama" video:
<http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/12/13/ret.bin.laden.videotape/index.html?related>

More links on the side and at the bottom of this one:
<http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/26/ret.bin.laden.statement/index.html?related>

<http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/02/01/gen.bergen.cnna/index.html>

Here's some info on the second fake (October 2004) video:

<http://www.welfarestate.com/binladen/surprise/>

[Up2Late]

23. Here's another bunch of links from CBS News...

...in this July 17, 2002 video, they speculating on his death. Plus, check out the side-bar item labeled "Hunting Bin Laden," then click "Tale of the Tapes"

Note: you need to turn OFF any pop-up blocker for this to work:

<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/17/attack/main515468.shtml>

[Writer]

25. There's something else to consider here... who put together the new OBL?

I don't think that the CIA or the Pentagon put together these tapes. Could Al Qaeda, after the death of bin Laden, be using another man in order to rally their supporters?

But even if that is the case, how could the CIA/Pentagon miss such obvious cues that this wasn't the original bin Laden? And the timing and speech of the tapes - could that be used for politically expedient purposes, even if the source truly is Al Qaeda covering the fact that bin Laden is dead?

Okay... let me slow down here. Really, though, I think this is information that American public has a right to know and discuss.

[Up2Late]

26. Oh, I think this most definitely is coming from either the WH...

...the Pentagon or the "secure, undisclosed location" of the VP. This stuff is very easy to do, especially since so few in this country speak Arabic, and those who do have been vilified as Terrorists.

[Writer]

40. Yeah, but I think it's good to be prudent about assuming their origin...

I'm thinking it's Al Qaeda. They need their symbol. The CIA might be looking the other way, not caring, releasing the tapes to the public when convenient. But what's striking is that the information - and I'm talking true comparisons of the videotapes, at least - is so apparently different that I am boggled that it isn't discussed with more skepticism in the public.

[Up2Late]

42. One thing you need to ask yourself when considering the origin...,

...who benefits from these "new Osama tapes" (all of which have been audio tapes for the last 20 months)?

Al-Quida has moved on, they have plenty of other leaders to lead the fight, so who's left?

AlJazirra TV and the Bush Cabal.

The Bush Cabal are proved liars, and they also say that AlJazirra can't be trusted and all "those Arabs" that say the tapes are fake are all crazy, but that's from the proved liars who are telling us that. (check out some of the links a and text on those 2002 CNN links)

Most of the world (other than people in the U.S.) do think Aljazirra is a trust worthy news source.

So, who does that leave?

They come from the Bush Cabal. The U.S. Government has a VERY long history of lying to us very well, most just refuse to see that.

Bush and his Cabal are very bad liars. Those audio and video tapes are made in the USA (or Dubai).

[Writer]

24. Up2late this is very very good. Thanks! But let's brainstorm...

Especially the morphed comparisons between the old and current Osama bin Laden...

I think we need to keep up the discussion on this. Despite our putting together this information, I don't think the average non-DU American would either a) dismiss this altogether as conspiracy theory, or b) non-chalantly accept it but not think more of it, because the WH has lost all benenfit of the doubt.

So what's a good way to discuss this so that it effects more individuals... that individuals may actually CARE about this issue, much like the NSA wiretapping issue?

Writing to friendly congresspersons? Senators? PR forms to friendly media? How can this story evolve from simply chatting about it in a Democratic bulletin board site?

[Up2Late]

27. I don't know if most Americans would call this a wacky...

...conspiricy theory any more. 2 years ago, yes, but Bush has lost so much more credibility since then.

Probably the best thing to do is start a brainstorming post in either Media or the September 11 forums. Just don't let the discussion stray off the subject too much, as it tends to deteriorate into the "truth movement" crap there, in the September 11 forum.

I need to get to sleep now. I'll check back in a few hours.

[AngryAmish]

33. Maybe it is a robot?

[Writer]

34. * snort! *

;)

[wizdum]

35. Couldn't agree more. UBL's videos always seem to surface...

...when Bush is running for office or when his poll numbers are in the toilet. Isn't that special? It's historical fact that UBL was working with the CIA at one time against the Soviets in Afghanistan. For all we know, he still could be. Since Saddam was our one time friend, whom we supplied with the seed germs for his bio terror weapons, nothing about our government does would surprise me.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

36. They're real.

Do you think that if the U.S. faked bin Laden videos that the thousands of people around the world who support bin laden wouldn't have something to say about it?

[Writer]

37. First, check out post #22...

Also understand that, if these are fake, Al Qaeda may be the one's putting them together for their own supporters. The CIA/WH interests may be using them anyway...

but then again, the whole point of this thread is to try to figure out if they are fake. I think there's enough empirical evidence to show that they likely are fake.

[Writer]

45. Kicking this to keep the conversation alive. n/t

[The Magistrate]

46. Locking

Asked and answered.