CIA Considered Making Fake Video Depicting Saddam as Gay

CIA Considered Making Fake Video Depicting Saddam as Gay

blog.washingtonpost.com

During planning for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the CIA’s Iraq Operations Group kicked around a number of ideas for discrediting Saddam Hussein in the eyes of his people.

One was to create a video purporting to show the Iraqi dictator having sex with a teenage boy, according to two former CIA officials familiar with the project.

“It would look like it was taken by a hidden camera,” said one of the former officials. “Very grainy, like it was a secret videotaping of a sex session.”

The idea was to then “flood Iraq with the videos,” the former official said.

Another idea

(visit the link for the full news article)

HA this IS Government Propaganda at it's finest. now their is a much deeper meaning behind this and that is that the Government does make FAKE videos to serve their own needs.
If you have ever had to try and argue with some one about fake Osama Videos you should point to this and say "See the Government has tried this before.

blog.washingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by Vinveezy


I suppose that's one of the dangers of closing one's country to outside media/internet opportunities. Censorship and or state sponsored media will leave you open to exploitation.

If anyone thinks this isn't happening, then it's time for a naiveté check... Psych warfare right?

My personal favorite was when the military blasted music like "We will rock you" and "I fought the law" at Noriega 24-7 - while waiting for his surrender...

In one of the more bizarre episodes of the invasion, US forces played loud rock music – including I Fought the Law, by the Clash – to put pressure on Noriega to give himself up. (1)

It's not easy falling out of grace with Uncle Sam...

reply to post by Vinveezy


hel yeah, they been doin this for years

reply to post by LadySkadi


Do you think that western media isn't censored? Do you think that our media is not state-sponsored either? At least these other countries make no bones about it. Here in the west, they do it in super secret while fooling the public into believing that we have a free press. Truth is, that makes us more deprived then them.


To the OP, you make a good point with the Osama videos, S&F for you!


--airspoon

[edit on 25-5-2010 by airspoon]

reply to post by airspoon


No I don't think western media is not censored or biased, but I DO think we who do not live in a closed society have the ability to and access to resources that those who live in censored or state run media controlled societies do not. Think about it... if a video goes up depicting something like this of a western leader OR if a faked interview of Obama claiming he was stepping down from the Presidency were to surface - how long before that was exposed as a fraud? Don't negate that opportunity is not the same...

Great point, Lady Skadi...

I have been saying for years that the use of contentious social issues are intentionally used in order to either dissuade the public from further interaction with the specifics of a story/sequence of events or to rile up the controversy and public debate in an irrelevant direction... accomplishing the same distraction from actual analytics.

Societal Engineering is just providing sensational media...

reply to post by LadySkadi

No I don't think western media is not censored or biased, but I DO think we who do not live in a closed society have the ability to and access to resources that those who live in censored or state run media controlled societies do not. Think about it... if a video goes up depicting something like this of a western leader OR if a faked interview of Obama claiming he was stepping down from the Presidency were to surface - how long before that was exposed as a fraud? Don't negate that opportunity is not the same...

While we might, at the moment, have access to the resources needed for an open society, we do not use them for whatever reason which makes me question our ability. Take 9/11 for instance, so far we do not have the ability to get the truth out, even though we supposedly have access to the resources to do so. Now, that lack of ability isn't necessarily tied to our access to resources but that still does not change the end result, our ability to live in an open society.

Think about it... If an article or news report comes out about 19 cave dwelling Arabs, armed with box cutters defying not only the laws of physics and probability but also the defenses of the strongest and mightiest nation in history, how long before it's refuted in a manner which allows most people to learn the truth? How long before that article is exposed as a fraud?

At least the people in those "closed" countries know they are getting fed a bunch of bull, while the vast majority of westerners do not.

"Our mind is of three categories: What we know, what we don't know and what we don't know we don't know. Not knowing is unfortunate; Not knowing that we don't know is tragic." --W. Erhart

--airspoon

Edited to add: Pretty soon, we won't even have access to such resources, regardless of whether we are able to use them effectively or not, seeing how the current administration is a big supporter of Cass Sunstein and his blatant assault on our freedoms, including the 1st Amendment. Also, Obama's latest nominee to the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan, who is a champion of censorship and refuting valid information points to the trend of those in power closing our minds to the truth.


reply to post by MemoryShock


I completely agree with you and that just drives home my point. TPTB, regardless of whether we believe they conspire together or not, have some of the smartest minds in the world at work to retain their profit, power and influence. They know how to socially engineer the public in an effort to keep themselves on top and the people in line. What difference does it make, if you control society through censorship policies or if you control society through secret censorship policies?

--airspoon




[edit on 25-5-2010 by airspoon]

It's a shame that a country is so backward that it wouldn't blink an eye at showing a video of Sadamm's Army gassing Kurds by the thousands, or torturing those that dared to speak out against Sadamm. But show them their leader having gay sex........yeah that would outrage them! That's Muslims for you.



[edit on 25-5-2010 by Carseller4]

What this tells me is that those CIA planners were pretty sure they could get their hands on someone who looked sufficiently like Saddam to pass on Iraqi TV. Forget the gay sex, nobody would have cared much anyway, but the vid would've been grainy. What about the stepping down idea? That would've had to be clear.
So... Who was that man found in a hole, given a speedy trial & hanged even more speedily?
Was he a former high ranking military officer with the intelligence & ruthlessness to climb the greasy pole to become a dictator with access to billions in foreign currency? A man with means & motive to get himself smuggled out of Iraq to a luxurious retirement, who also had collaborated with the west in various dodgy ways we know of (& who knows what he knows about the CIA that we dont)?
Or was he a lookalike, that was found in a hole, passed off as Saddam & got rid of before he could blow his cover, with the conivance of everyone involved?
Afterall, what have we got to go on but our media?

There have been so many lies given to the world by my goverment that there is no reason to belive anything I hear. It could be that Sadam never even existed. There might not even be a country called Iraq.

Originally posted by Carseller4
It's a shame that a country is so backward that it wouldn't blink an eye at showing a video of Sadamm's Army gassing Kurds by the thousands, or torturing those that dared to speak out against Sadamm. But show them their leader having gay sex........yeah that would outrage them! That's Muslims for you.

[edit on 25-5-2010 by Carseller4]

More money spent investigating the Clinton-Lewinsky affair than was allocated to the 9-11 Investigation. What does that tell you ...... ?

==============================================

G.W.Bush survived the release of photos depicting the torture of prisoners held by U.S military personal ....... would he of been so fortunate had a videotape surfaced depicting " their leader having gay sex "

"yeah that would outrage them! "

Yes , yes it would .

" That's Muslims for you. "

Naaaa ..... thats just people for you .

Originally posted by Carseller4
It's a shame that a country is so backward that it wouldn't blink an eye at showing a video of Sadamm's Army gassing Kurds by the thousands, or torturing those that dared to speak out against Sadamm. But show them their leader having gay sex........yeah that would outrage them! That's Muslims for you.

[edit on 25-5-2010 by Carseller4]

Same thing could be said about Christians or even Americans. Show Americans a pictures of our leaders torturing people and we are unfazed. Show us videos of our leaders invading another country for the sole purpose of profit and we are still unfazed. But hear a story about an American leader who passed his foot under a bathroom stall in a proposition for a gay "quickie" and Americans are pissed.

That's Christians for ya!

--airspoon

reply to post by Vinveezy


If they admitted to consider doing that...I can't understand how some people can still think Bin Laden is real...it's just...sad.

Many of the videos produced by the CIA are thought by most to have been made by ressistance fighters, Bin Laden, and other entities. Sophisticated techniques have shown them to be fakes but people still believe them. The real videos, like when they "captured" Saddam, seem to get lost.