Why the Osama Confession Video Still Looks Fake

[pauldp]

While the Bad PAL Conversion Theory laid out in the Muckraker report is compelling,
(I'd like to see the original tape on a PAL Monitor to determine whether in fact it is a bad PAL to NTSC conversion)
there are still several facial features on the confession Osama that are inconsistent with other pictures of him.
The PAL conversion theory does account for the fatter face but other features are still quite off.
I have pointed these out in many other posts and they are still an issue when the video frame is corrected
for a bad PAL conversion.

Among the discrepancies are:

1) Relationship of the nose to the cheek bones.

2) Pronounced labial nasal folds characteristic of bin Laden are missing

3) Shape of the nose including the nostrils and bridge still appear incorrect.

For now I will highlight the first one.

1) Relationship of the nose to the cheek bones.

Most pictures of Osama show cheek bones high above the nostrils. The following "corrected" frame
from the confession video does not. The small white lines show how the nostrils and cheek bone are parallel in the confession video.

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4942836]

compare with other pics of Osama and you will see the difference. Osama's nostrils are well below the cheek bones.

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4942290]

In the following comparison pic, the confession video frame was elongated significantly and still shows the same thing.

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4942292]

Elongating the frame does not resolve this discrepancy. The relationship between the two facial features remains the same.

To be clear if the tape is not bin Laden, I don't think it proves govt. complicity or state sponsorship of 911.
It would just prove we are being lied to about the tape.

[JackRiddler]

1. Origins of the tape...

1) Authentic

and

2) CIA/US intel fake, "ergo" (logical fallacy) proving 9/11 complicity

are not the only possible answers. There are many other possibilities. This might be one of the "Osama doubles" we heard so much about in the early days after 9/11. Anyone could have faked it before it fell into the hands of the US military: amateurs, the Northern Alliance, a third-country intel agency... even Curveball!

Almost always left out of these discussions is the misleading translation provided by the State Department. The OBL of this video speaks of "they" and "them" doing 9/11, not "us" and "we." The translation was provided in less than 10 hours by translators who later complained about the rush job. German TV journalist Ekkehard Siekker (Monitor/ARD) hired translators who worked on it for more than 30 hours before giving up on the inaudibles and calling the State Dept's freelancers to find out how they had arrived at their results - that was when the latter said, well, if you had 30 you'll know better than us!

But a direct question to you: what do you think are the camera angles in the two shots you use? Could the difference be attibutable to camera height?

[pauldp]

2. All the angles I've looked at seem to show the same thing.

Obviously if his head was tilted far back and he was shot from the front, foreshortening
would affect the apparent realationship of the facial features, but any profile or frontal angles,
when compared to similar angles of other pictures of OBL seem to show these same discrepancies
very consistently.

I would encourage other people to do the same analysis with other pics of OBL.
Any good sculptor would do the same sort of comparison between his model
and his work piece from as many angles as possible.

[naboo]

3. It's highly suspicious that

a tape comes out allegedly of bin laden and people think it's fake, then later a "corrected" version comes out looking more like him but still off. You'd really have to be a Church of 9-11 follower to buy this. It's more than measurements, etc..., it's the facial expressions and movements. Also, you can see there was an attempt to "flatten" the nose when he goes into profile in the moving footage.

[William Seger]

4. Looks like OBL to me

Rotated to more similar orientation:

[pauldp]

20. Thanks for bringing that up William. I need to address that one.

At first glance I found that analysis very convincing. However upon closer inspection
I noticed that particular analysis would show the same thing with any face that looked similar to bin Laden,
or not so similar. Take George W. Bush for example.
http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4956305]

Actually the picture on the left shows the main point I've been discussing - nostrils below the cheekbone -
I've highlighted this again with the two small white lines.

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4956307]

Whereas in the image from the confession video I have already shown how the cheek bone is parallel to
the nostrils. This can also be seen in the following pic from the confession video. ( I elongated the aspect ratio
just in case it was a bad PAL conversion)

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4956306]

Edit: I have yet to find a frame from the confession video that shows Osama's nostrils below
his cheek bones, yet many (most) other pics of OBL show that. If anyone can find one I would love to see it.

[William Seger]

21. Still looks the same to me

Where you judge the cheekbone to be is going to depend on the angle of the head and the lighting. But I don't see enough difference between these two photos to justify saying they aren't the same guy:

[pauldp]

22. OK good so you added a line to the cheek bones.

Now would you say the cheek bone on the left photo is above or parallel to the top of the nostril?
I would say it is clearly above the top of the nostril by about a half inch .
Whereas on the right photo I would say the cheekbone
is directly parallel to the top of the nostril. All of the frames/angles I've seen of the
confession video seem to show the same thing. I don't think lighting in this case
would have much to do with it - it seems to be general fill lighting - incandescent or fluorescent
either way there's not a lot of harsh shadows and I think we are seeing the features
relatively clearly. The camera angle seems to be a basic shoulder to eye level tripod shot -
not anything that would distort facial features. Again I would like to see a frame
from the confession video that shows OBL's nostrils to be below his cheek bone, but
I have not found one.

[William Seger]

24. Take a look at the (slightly enhanced) image now

You may need to force a reload to see the change, but I applied a "clarify" filter and some contrast adjustment to compensate a little for the washed-out video image. The upper yellow line is where I judge the most prominent point of the cheekbone, and the lower yellow line (which is at the same level as the green line between where I judge the tip of the noses to be) is about at the bottom of the cheekbone shadow. They still seem to line up pretty well in the two photos.

[pauldp]

32. If you extend your cheek bone line over it shows what I'm talking about.

It lands clearly above the nostril on the left photo. Whereas on the right it lands directly on top of the nostril.
(you can click the link to enlarge the photo)
www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4977848]

[William Seger]

34. Extend it a little farther

... to the same (right) nostril. OBL has a crooked nose -- in both photos.

[oblivious]

5. What I like about the fat (or new slim) Osama video is that his hair got darker.

Both the hair on his head and his beard is darker in this video than in previous authentic pics.

Fake, fake, fake, fake, fake, fake.

[William Seger]

11. Gee, his turban is darker too!

Good catch. :eyes:

[oblivious]

12. How many greying beards have you seen get blacker over the years?

What does the colour of his turban have to do with anything?

[William Seger]

14. You have a very appropriate handle

Hint: The turban is darker because of poor lighting.

[oblivious]

15. Very good. Every time someone has nothing to say they attack the handle.

It's always the same creeps. Wasting people's time promoting crap theories. You couldn't pay me enough to do what you do.

[William Seger]

16. I had something else to say

Something quite relevant, in fact. I guess you were oblivious to that part of the post?

[Contrite]

6. Funny how the Pentagon responds to some CT questions

but not to others. They are very selective.

Did someone write to them and ask them to prove something? Why is this "correction" being brought out now?

P.S. Unless UBL got a nose job, the "fat Osama" is a fake. And from what I know, his nose could not go from crooked to straight and back to crooked again, unless he got into some mean fistfights.

http://www.september11news.com/OsamaSpeeches.htm

[William Seger]

7. So...

Are you saying that if the "fat Osama" tape shows a crooked nose, then you'll believe it's the real Osama?

(ETA: It wasn't the Pentagon who discovered the PAL/NTSC conversion problem. It was just some guy in Colorado, and first reported by a "truther" site, MuckRaker Report: http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id372.html )

[Contrite]

8. I'm pointing out flaws, just as you were trying to point out symmetry.

Does my flaw invalidate your belief that "fat Osama" is authentic?

[William Seger]

9. Your "flaw" was that you jumped to a conclusion based on one image

The nose of the guy in the tape is crooked; in fact, it's crooked the same way as the left photo of OBL I showed:



Looks a heck of lot like OBL to me.

[Contrite]

10. I was referring to the center photograph from the page I linked to.

Compare it to the other two on that page.

The image you have provided is too "fuzzy" to properly determine anything.

Also, note how "fat Osama" has a broader bridge.

[William Seger]

13. What does the photo on the other page have to do with the confession video?

Strange that you think the video is too fuzzy to be sure about the obviously crooked nose but think it's good enough to judge the broadness of the bridge.

[Contrite]

17. I am not referencing the "fuzzy" image at all.

I can't properly discern the bridge in the "fat Osama" video still. I am comparing the photos on the page I linked to, to examine the bridge. Point being, there are probably Osama "doubles", just as there were "Saddam doubles".

The photo in the middle looks more like "fat Osama" to me--he is a bit heavier-set and there is a difference in the nose. He is also wearing a ring, whereas it has been pointed out that UBL would not. The "Osama in the middle" also has slightly beefier hands.

There is a subtle difference in the shape of the eyes and the slope of the lids, also. "Real Osama" has slightly more rounded eyes; the "other Osamas" have a slightly more downward slant at the outer edge.

[William Seger]

18. Well, it would be easier to follow you if you stick to the topic at hand

... or at least alert people when your diverting. Does the OBL in the confession video look like the "real" OBL or not? I say yes, and I'm not reading anything in your posts to make me think otherwise.

[Contrite]

19. I am not convinced it is the real OBL.

The eyes are still not right, and I really can't be certain about the nose.

But the conversion does certainly make a strong case.

Thanks for giving the source, BTW.

[Laurier]

23. It isn't a "Pentagon" response but a "truther" site response.

How did you miss that?

Originally posted by Contrite: Did someone write to them and ask them to prove something? Why is this "correction" being brought out now?

Did someone write to you and ask you to post something? Why is your ill-conceived and misguided assertion being brought out now?


Edit to fix the quote box.

[Contrite]

26. I know. Bolo already told me, two days ago.

How did you miss that? Or is it just your preconceived idea of me?

[Laurier]

30. Well, bolo's pretty sharp.

So, what you're saying is that you know that your assertion here was wrong but you didn't correct it or even acknowledge your error even though you knew it was wrong. I see.

And to answer your questions, I don't see any posts by bolo in this thread, so he must have corrected your error in another thread, and I don't see any posts from you on this thread acknowledging your error, so I guess that's how I missed it since I don't post here very much.

I guess people can judge for themselves the fact that you chose not to correct your obvious error here.

[Contrite]

33. I did acknowledge it. I thanked Bolo for the source.

Look up at #19.

[Contrite]

35. I just noticed I said Bolo; meant William Seger.

I sometimes get them confused; they are both "pretty sharp".

[naboo]

25. So did they "correct" the faces of

the people he was sitting with? Why didn't they need to "adjust" those?

[pauldp]

27. Very good question.

I'd like to see "corrected" frames of those faces as well.

[Grateful for Hope]

29. Yes

It would stand to reason that the entire video would need "correcting" including ALL persons in it.

[Laurier]

31. So, what's stopping you

from asking the troofer who posted the corrected info about OBL in the first place?

(Not you personally, necessarily, but troofers in general since the guy that posted the proper video is a troofer, too)

[greyl]

28. No need to. CTists never noticed those people, and never considered

the ramifications of their claims that osama is fake.
The video always looked authentic, but CT sites created a stupid myth based on dishonesty.