Skip to content


Zero Dark Thirty Review-Analysis; Eleven Instances of Disinformation

There will always be questions about when Osama Bin Laden was killed and happened to his body. At Cabal Times, we have posited a reasonable theory that Osama was killed in December 2001 by a Pakistani, Omar Saeed Shaikh. And that the residents of the Abbottabad compound were mainly female members of Osama’s family.

Hollywood coming to rescue of the official narrative in Zero Dark Thirty (released 19th December 2012) only hints that the cover-up is crumbling, and a face lift was required. For the sceptic, Zero Dark Thirty is mandatory viewing. Because a critical analysis reveals the cracks and fault lines in the official narrative that the film is so desperately trying to hide. Zero Dark Thirty goes beyond hiding these cracks, and even tries to cover-up some other suspicious events, completely unrelated to the hunt for Osama.

Zero Dark Thirty also tries to make viewers empathize with the heroine, a young American woman. In reality, a person in that position would probably be an bald headed, overweight, swarthy Dr. Strangelove, but with owlish features, visible nostril hair, big hood-like eyelids and a Russian surname. And given US military statistics, there is a one in four chance that our heroine is getting molested right now. The movie also tries to make the intended audience (Americans) more accepting of torture. When the American people tacitly accepted drone warfare abroad, little did they know that drones would soon be flying over them at home within a few years. The same goes with torture.

Disinformation # 1

That Osama was killed by US Special forces in a compound in Abbottabad on 2nd May 2011. And that this location was figured out by the relentless efforts of our beloved heroine.

The cracks in the official narrative have been discussed in detail here, and won’t be duplicated. But what precipitated the raid was the insistence of a Pakistani doctor, Shakil Afridi, who had becomes suspicious about the compound in Abbottabad where some members of Osama’s family were secretly living. Dr. Afridi went to great lengths in surveying the compound personally. Posing as a doctor, he even tried obtaining DNA samples of the occupants under the guise of a vaccination campaign. The pesky Dr. Afridi was later thrown into jail with a 33 year sentence by Pakistani authorities. And there was no $25 million bounty offered to him by the Americans. In fact, the Americans went to great lengths to distance themselves from Dr. Afridi. Maybe the Powers That Be did not want him to talk about what he knew (the absence of the long-dead Osama in the compound?). Dr. Afridi does get a 30 second cameo in the movie though. Completely omitting him would look suspicious.

The fact that the Abbottabad compound was a mile away from Pakistan’s “West Point” hints that Pakistan was protecting Osama’s family, with the tacit approval of the United States. And even before 9/11, Pakistan was serving as a surrogate state for The Powers That Be.

Disinformation # 2

That Abu Faraj  al-Libbi was a major Al Qaida operative.

Abu Farraj Al-Libbi was a Libyan Al Qaida operative in Pakistan who was involved in two assassination attempts on President Musharraf. These assassination attempts appear to be retaliation for Musharraf not cooperating in the cover-up of Osama’s death. Apparently, the Powers That Be wanted to keep Osama alive indefinitely, as his existence was critical to the so-called War on Terror. And when he was killed in December 2001, they wanted to keep up the myth that he was still alive. Abu Faraj closely fits the profile of a Western double agent within the ranks of Al Qaida. And it seems that Western forces were deliberately overlooking him. But the Pakistani forces finally managed to catch him. He was then believed to have been transferred to Guantanamo Bay. But from what we know, the company keeps good care of its men.

Disinformation # 3

The Marriott Hotel in Islamabad was completely levelled in September 2008. Was this the result of a single truck bomb?

That the Marriott Islamabad was destroyed on September 20th 2008 by an Al-Qaida truck bomb.

While there was indeed a truck bomb at the site, there were numerous secondary explosions throughout the building. There were also claims of American soldiers breaching security the night before. According to a Wikipedia entry,

The bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad on Saturday September 20, 2008 was followed the next day by an article in the Pakistani newspaper The News International written by journalist Ansar Abbasi in which an account is presented of Alam Gillani being present outside the Marriott several days preceding the attack, witnessing, and protesting, a serious security breach. The story was retold also in other publications based on the story in The News. The story describes how Alam Gillani and two friends witnessed steel boxes being unloaded from a US Embassy truck by US Marines. The article by Abbasi does not reveal who the newspaper’s source is for the events being described involving Alam Gillani. Among the several people who witnessed this incident was allegedly also PPP leader Sajjad Chaudhry.he article states that Alam Gilani was the only one who objected to and protested the apparent security breach that was taking place and that he was met with silence from the American marines. The hotel security staff also did not respond to Alam Gilani’s protests as they passively watched what was taking place, not being allowed to go near the boxes by the US marines. On Monday, two days after the terrorist attack, Mumtaz Alam Gillani pronounced that the story presented by Abbasi in The News was a “pack of lies” and contrary to all professional ethics. He stated that on the night in question he was standing outside the Marriott making “conversation in a light mood with the reporter”. In this version of the events which was printed in a short article in the Associated Press of Pakistan (APP) Gillani only tells of having relayed to the journalist that “Pakistan is a victim of terrorism”. Alam Gillani also states that he has contacted Abbasi and demanded that the journalist contradict the article in The News “and tender unconditional apology as he tried to belittle my image as Member of the parliament in the eyes of people particularly of my constituency” and also that he would be issuing a legal notice and if necessary sue Abbasi and The News if after 10 days his demands were not met.[19] In a reply in The News on Tuesday the 23rd, Ansar Abbasi denies having spoken with Mumtaz Alam Gillani, ever. Abbasi explains that the September 21 story “was based on the eyewitness account of a source, which narrated the whole episode of what many witnessed that night”, and that it was this source who “quoted the PPP MNA objecting and protesting to the Marines’ activity.” According to this source Alam gillani was shouting thus attracting the attention of several others. Abbasi also expressed his bemusement that the image presented of Alam Gillani in any way could be seen as belittling the MP. Abbasi also claimed that one of Alam Gillani’s friends who was accompanying him during the alleged incident had confirmed the accuracy of the September 21 story in The News. The September 23 article ends by stating “The News stands by the story.”

Disinformation # 4

That the CIA work culture would allow a gutsy female to have her own way with the investigation of Osama’s whereabouts, and that she would stand up to her Station Chief.

Anyone that has worked for a Western institution or corporation may be fully aware that the work culture in no way resembles the Office TV series. Most workers are drones who never deviate from the path set by their superiors. And if one does, there are ten more waiting to fill his or her shoes. Commonly, there is a complete absence of individualism and emphasis on groupthink, especially in institutions related to defence offence. The Powers That Be regard the employees as their “human resources,” and most employees tacitly accept that. We would never have had such extreme cover-ups in an individualistic work culture.

Disinformation # 5

That Area 51 is used to develop top-secret resources for the US Armed Forces, such as the stealth choppers used in the Abbottabad raid.

The unusual secrecy surrounding Area 51 speaks of activities that may not be in the best interests of the American people, such as building pretend-alien fleets, all on the taxpayer dime.

Disinformation # 6

That American Special Forces met with little resistance at Abbottabad, and that most of the operation was a cakewalk.

To the contrary, there is a strong possibility that one of the helicopters was shot down. However, it remains unclear who the engaging party was.

Disinformation # 7

That the 2004 Khobar Massacre was an Al Qaida operation.

To the contrary, the attack was carried out by a previously unknown group, which later affiliated with Al-Qaida. Some of the attackers were allowed to escape, lending credence to the theory that the Saudis may have been involved. What is suspicious about this attack was that its main target was the Arab Petroleum Investments Corporation (APICORP), and its highly able director, Michael Hamilton. Mr. Hamilton was murdered in a very gruesome fashion. APICORP is a creation of OPEC. To quote its website,

APICORP was created by the Organisation of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) as a multilateral banking institution that can help create an efficient capital market for the industry. In the last four decades, APICORP has worked to raise capital access and enhance the financial stability and performance of the Arab energy industry through an array of strategic equity investments, project loans, trade finance, advisory and research.

Why were the “terrorists” targeting this organization when many American owned corporations operate in the region on a much larger scale? Or  was this emerging organization seen as competition by global interests?

Disinformation # 8

There were only two helicopters involved in the raid.

The film tries to shamelessly peddle this myth because it helps maintain the myth that Pakistan is an independent nation, not a surrogate state, and therefore would not tolerate a full scale assault. Here’s what Wikipedia has to say:

The SEALs flew into Pakistan from a staging base in the city of Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan [……] provided the two modified Black Hawk helicopters that were used for the raid itself, as well as the much larger Chinook heavy-lift helicopters that were employed as backups [..….] The Chinooks kept on standby were on the ground “in a deserted area roughly two-thirds of the way” between Jalalabad and Abbottabad, with two additional SEAL teams consisting of approximately 24 DEVGRU operatorsfor a “quick reaction force” (QRF). The Chinooks were equipped with M134 Miniguns and extra fuel for the Black Hawks. Their mission was to interdict any Pakistani military attempts to interfere with the raid. Other Chinooks, holding 25 more SEALs from DEVGRU, were stationed just across the border in Afghanistan in case reinforcements were needed during the raid. The 160th SOAR helicopters were supported by multiple other aircraft, including fixed-wing fighter jets and drones. According to CNN, “the Air Force had a full team of combat search-and-rescue helicopters available”.

But the film depicts only two helicopters taking off from Jalalabad. There are no other helicopters taking off in the vicinity. This also became a major plot hole in the story. We are told that Pakistan has scrambled jet fighters and the American forces quickly leave the area with the one working helicopter and the body of Osama, when they are informed that Pakistani jets are on their way. But would they all fit in one heavily modified helicopter? They wouldn’t. Therefore, they were picked up by a Chinook kept in reserve. But the film fails to depict this pick up or the Chinook. And how would this pick up work when Pakistan had already scrambled fighter jets?

Abbottabad is roughly 50km from Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. It is also home to Pakistan’s “West Point.” There would have been a reasonable Pakistani security presence there (unless they were told to stand down). And Abbottabad is roughly 250km from Jalalabad. The Chinook, without the stealth technology, would have to traverse this distance back and forth, without being detected, for the official narrative to be correct.

Disinformation # 9

The Pakistani army did not facilitate the raid in any way.

According to neighbourhood accounts, several men ran through the neighbourhood, shouting out in Pashtu (using loudspeakers) instructing residents to stay inside. These could have been none other than members of Pakistan’s Armed Forces. To quote,

Late on Sunday night, locals heard the clatter of helicopters, gunfire and loud explosions. Most residents emerged from their homes turning on their lights. “I saw soldiers emerging from the helicopters and advancing towards the house. Some of them instructed us in chaste Pashto to turn off the lights and stay inside,” Gul Khan told India Today .

The film tries to cover up this widely reported fact by showing one member of the US Special Forces as an ethnic Pakistani an interpreter named Ali who was part of the raid team, who goes around the compound alone, with a loudspeaker in his hand, instructing locals in Pashtu to stay inside.

Disinformation # 10

That the London Terrorist Attacks of 2005 and the attempted 2010 Times Square Bombing were connected to Osama and/or Al Qaida.

Maybe…but maybe not.

Disinformation # 11

Osama’s body was positively identified, and the marines who participated in the raid lived happily ever after.

Having a mythical woman identify Osama on the movie screen does not mean that Osama was really identified, or even that they really had his body. A later FOIA request in November 2012 reveals that no American sailors aboard the USS Carl Vinton witnessed Osama’s burial at sea.

Later on, an American military helicopter was shot down in Afghanistan, killing 25 American Special Operations personnel. The personnel were believed to be involved in the raid on the Abbottabad compound, bringing the cover-up full circle.

Conclusion

While there is little else to expect from Hollywood, it is important to interpret the signals Hollywood is sending. Clearly, the cover-up surrounding the last days of Osama Bin Laden occupies an important priority for The Powers That Be. And dissecting this cover-up sometimes requires an introspective viewing of propaganda meant to hide the fault lines in the official narrative.

Share

Posted in Reviews, Terrorism.

Tagged with , , , , .


11 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. SatyaviraNo Gravatar says

    Great article, thanks.

  2. JamesNo Gravatar says

    Damn, you are dumb. Why don't you try reading the rest of the Wikipedia post?

    "Since the helicopter that had made the emergency landing was damaged and unable to fly the team out, it was destroyed to safeguard its classified equipment, including an apparent stealth capability.[70] The pilot smashed "the instrument panel, the radio, and the other classified fixtures inside the cockpit," and the SEALs "[packed] the helicopter with explosives and [blew] it up". Since the SEAL team now had only one helicopter, one of the two Chinooks held in reserve was dispatched to carry part of the team and bin Laden's body out of Pakistan."

    • Hamad SubaniNo Gravatar says

      The movie shows the team quickly exiting in the second WORKING helicopter after they are notified that Pakistani jets are on their way. If the remainder if the team was picked up by a Chinook, why did the movie avoid any depiction of the Chinook? Only two helicopters are shown taking off from Jalalabad.

      And how could the reserve Chinook pick up the rest of the team when Pakistani jets were on their way (according to the film)?

  3. JamesNo Gravatar says

    No, the movie shows a standard UH-60 (as opposed to the secret modified Blackhawk) coming into pick them up. I agree this is an error in the movie, but it has nothing to do with any type of "cover up". It is well known what happened. Maybe they couldn't get a Chinook for filming, or the director thought that Blackhawks look cooler? I have flown in Chinooks, they are reminiscent of a flying school bus. Who knows? To attach some meaning to such a trivial item is silly.

    • Hamad SubaniNo Gravatar says

      The Chinook was obviously not fitted with stealth radar-evasive technology like the Black Hawks. How did it enter Pakistan undetected? And the film mentions that Pakistan had scrambled F-16s so they had minutes to leave. If that was really the case, then how did the Chinook, without the stealth capability, get out of there? Cover-up or not, its a plot hole.

  4. JamesNo Gravatar says

    Because the Nightstalkers fly those things 50 feet off the ground and in mountainous terrain, which is not that conducive to radar. I have seen them in action. They are insane. The Chinooks were actually already staged inside of Pakistan already so they didn't have far to go. As ungainly as it looks, it is actually the fastest helicopter we have in our inventory, so it would not be that difficult for it to shoot in, pick up the SEALs and shoot back, before being intercepted. The Pakistanis were far more focused on the Indian Airforce coming in over Kashmir, than the US from Afghanistan, and from accounts I have read never got close to intercepting our helicopters.

  5. Hamad SubaniNo Gravatar says

    This reeks of some serious cooperation with Pakistan.

    Apart from the scene where we are told that the Pakistanis just scrambled their F-16s to intercept, there are numerous other instances where the movie tries to perpetuate the myth of Pakistani sovereignty, which is almost non-existent. If the movie makers only wanted to make money, there was no reason to add these little details.

  6. JamesNo Gravatar says

    Not really. Remember, the US armed the Pakistani military. I am pretty sure they are aware of their radar capabilities. People have this image (based on movies, ironically) of infallible technology, where perfect trackings of aircraft always show up on screen and highly trained technicians immediately respond and vector in perfectly, but in reality it is so much more confused and messy. But if you want to hang on to your far fetched speculative theories not based on any facts, knock yourself out.

  7. Hamad SubaniNo Gravatar says

    Facts are not being released, and wont be anytime soon. Therefore, all we are left with are theories, educated guesses and speculation. The question is, whose theory should be trusted.

Continuing the Discussion

  1. Was Osama for Real? And Was He Killed in 2001? | Cabal Times linked to this post on January 12, 2013

    [...] 19th 2012: Hollywood releases a movie that tries to salvage the official version of events. The movie tries to bundle in totally [...]



Some HTML is OK

or, reply to this post via trackback.