I will be posting links to debunk the sources cited by Michael Rozeff at Lew Rockwell.com.

(Check back for the next rebuttal, which will be post below No. 1, debunking Gunaratna)

SOURCE NO.1

Source 1 is Rohan Gunaratna, a Sri Lanka terrorism expert (and please, note I am no fan of the Tamil Tigers, who also question him):

Here is a lengthy piece questioning the credibility of Gunaratna, his flimsy credentials as a terrorism expert, his history of making exaggerated claims, and his interest in pushing for more government surveillance in Britain, Australia, and elsewhere.

Here’s a crucial excerpt:

Gunaratna’s unstinting support for the US, British and Australian governments’ foreign policy objectives was well rewarded. His contacts in US intelligence and counter-terrorist circles grew and his writings were published in several foreign policy and international security journals. But the biggest coup took place in June 2002: the publication of his book Inside Al Qaeda: Global Network of Terror, by Columbia University Press. Promoted heavily in the media, it went on to become a best seller around the world.

Inside Al Qaeda received universal media acclaim. “A remarkable new study,” enthused the Times (London), “Excellent,” declared Peter Bergen from the Washington Post, while Thomas Powers, in the New York Review of Books, called it “a careful and methodical account” that “does the work of many tomes”.

But it was not long before several of the book’s claims were vigorously challenged. The Malaysian government attacked the book’s assertions of links between the ruling Barisan Nasional party and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) of the Philippines, and through the MILF to Al Qaeda—and threatened legal action. Interviewed on Singapore television about the controversy, Gunaratna backtracked, changing his allegation to a link “between MILF operatives and a few individuals in the Barisan parties” [emphasis added].

In one of the book’s more sensational accounts, Gunaratna described in detail an Al Qaeda plot to hijack a British Airways plane on September 11, 2001, and crash it into the houses of parliament. Only the grounding of all aircraft after the bombing of the World Trade Centre supposedly prevented the London attack.

The source was an alleged Al Qaeda member, Mohammed Afroz, who had been arrested in Bombay, India in October 2001. Afroz had also allegedly claimed he had planned to fly a plane into Melbourne’s Rialto Towers. After his release by an Indian court in April 2002, New Delhi police declared the claims to be a fabrication by the Bombay police force. An investigation by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation into the alleged Melbourne plan assessed it “to be lacking in credibility.”

Inside Al Qaeda also fudged the record of its author. The book claimed he was “principal investigator of the United Nations’ Terrorism Prevention Branch”, and that after the September 11 attacks, he “was called to address the United Nations, the US Congress and the Australian Parliament”.

After the Sunday Age conducted an investigation into his biographical details, Gunaratna apparently admitted that there was, in fact, no such position as “principal investigator” at the UN’s Terrorism Prevention Branch, and that he simply “worked there in 2001-02 as a research consultant.” According to the July 20 article in the Sunday Age, “He also confirmed that, rather than directly addressing the UN, Congress, and the Australian Parliament, he had actually spoken at a seminar organised by the parliamentary library, given evidence to a congressional hearing on terrorism and delivered a research paper to a conference on terrorism organised by the UN’s Department for Disarmament Affairs.”

So concerned was the British publisher of Inside Al Qaeda about possible legal repercussions arising out of the unreliability of its assertions, that it published an extraordinary disclaimer under the heading “Publisher’s note” advising the reader to treat the book’s contents as mere “suggestions”.

“A wide range of organisations—banks, governmental and non-governmental bodies, financial enterprises, religious and educational institutions, commercial entities, transport companies and charitable bodies are referred to in this book as having had contact or dealings with Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Unless such references specifically state otherwise, they should be treated as nothing other than a suggestion that the organisations concerned were the unwitting tools of those who attempted, successfully or otherwise, to infiltrate, use or manipulate them for terrorist purposes.”

SOURCE TWO is Mike Rudin, who runs the BBC’s  “Conspiracy Files,” which, if you know anything about these things, is the way that the major media co-opts conspiracy research and turns it into infotainment (see also Jon Ronson, who does something similar).

Here is a piece that might tell you what Rudin’s agenda is (hint: Popular Mechanics was the vehicle used by the CIA and by Alexander Cockburn to debunk 9/11 alternative theories  at Counterpunch).

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=60

SOURCE THREE is General McChrystal.

In an entertaining example of “cognitive diversity” in action in a major propaganda outlet  (Christian Science Monitor), Eric Holder is reported to believe that Osama will only be captured dead, whereas McChrystal is said to believe he will be captured alive.

This is typical media “framing,” whereby beneath the superficial “diversity” of opinion, the underlying assumption is the same.

You can call it Propaganda 101.  It’s that basic.

As for McChrystal, this isn’t his first time venturing into psyops.

He master-minded the Pat Tillman cover-up.

Eric Holder’s lengthy history of malfeasance, including lying about Fast and Furious, should be enough to establish his lack of credibility .

SOURCE 4 is Omar Bin Laden, Osama’s son. (LOL)

No comment needed.

Source 5 is Wikileaks (More LOL)

The article is from 2010; notice that Wikileaks, which was developed in 2006-07, established its credentials with the anti-war crowd and with libertarians in 2009….and then started its disinformation in 2010.

Search  “Assange,” “Wikileaks,” “Snowden,” “Anonymous,” “Bitcoin” etc. at this blog to get the lowdown on the best psyops that a mult-billion dollar black budget can buy for the outsourced (private, corporate) intelligence community that now RUNS the US, if not a large part of the world.

Putting out a story through a dozen credentialed talking-heads (and that’s all they are) is small change for the spy agencies.

SOURCE 6: Two Navy Seals, Rob O’Neill and Matt Bissonette, who were allegedly on the 23-man team that conducted Operation Neptune’s Spear.

O’Neill claims to have fired the shot that killed Osama Bin Laden.

However, even the Independent article (November 12, 2014) in which O’Neill FIRST makes his claim cites fellow Seal, Matt Bissonette, who contradicts the claim.

Bissonette and unnamed military chiefs assert that both Bissonette and O’Neill shot “Osama” only after the fatal shot had been fired by an “unidentified point-man.”

So, what we are left with is 23 young American special forces troops, hyped-up with adrenaline and stress (they thought they were sure to die on the mission), jumping out of helicopters in a foreign country and bursting into a room in the middle of the night, where they shoot at someone who is already dead, whom they are told is “Osama.”

So that’s the great “revised standard version’ of Osama’s killing.

Lies by the government (2011).

Followed by more lies by the establishment media and Hollywood (2012).

Followed, most deplorably, by still more lies by the alternative media (Seymour Hersh, Zero Hedge, Wikileaks,  and a few evil or cowardly activists who know what they’re doing  when they lend their name intentionally to such stuff)…. and a herd of naive, lazy,  or confused folk who rush off after them.

As I said, anyone who believes this stuff, please give me a call.

I need to unload some swamp property on you.  Eric Holder has the details, Sy Hersh will co-sign your mortgage, and GPS coordinates are of course on Google view,  uploaded to Wikileaks.

[Disclaimer: The paragraph above is sarcasm. I do not own swamp property, nor would I unload it on someone if I did own it, since I am rather fond of swamps. Please do not construe this as investment advice,  counsel to commit fraud or anything else other than a lame joke arising from my despair at the credulity and corruption of the alternative media, which poses as a critic of the daylight government but is happy to serve – slavishly – as an arm of the secret government of the intelligence agencies.]