econd that anything underhand is being put before them.

Even when someone explains that the 'Bin Laden' broadcasts are a digital/audio construct and not the real 'him' they are widely met with laughter and dismissal because the sceptics do not understand what is possible.

People see what they believe they see or, more to the point, what they are told they see. If they are unaware of the potential for manipulating what they see then when they are told they are looking at Osama bin Laden making 'new' threats to the world this becomes their unquestioned reality. 'It must be true, I saw him with my own eyes.'

But, of course, we don't see with our eyes, we see with our brain when it has decoded electrical signals from the optical system into an illusory holographic reality. If you can intervene in this decoding process you can make the brains of the population see what you want them to see - or not see.

It is a form of mass hypnotism. You give them one thing, but tell them repeatedly through the pathetic, unquestioning media that they are seeing something else, in this case 'Bin Laden's' latest statements.

Technology that exists outside the public arena, developed in the underground bases and secret research projects, is decades - at least - ahead of what we know about. It involves mind-control, the manipulation of magnetic fields and whole host of other possibilities that the public would file under science fiction.

But, to be fair, we really should be more streetwise about what is possible with anything to do with audio/visual techniques because what is possible is put before us in the movies all the time.

Okay, the secret technology may be ahead even of that, but what we can see on the cinema screen alone is enough to produce a 'Bin Laden video'.

I was amazed when I saw the first Stuart Little movies to see how authentically animals, especially cats in this case, could be made to speak. As one review said:

'The animation of Stuart is pretty ... fantastic. I sat there the whole time trying to see his flaws, and there are a few. But overall, it's the best damn representation of a mouse I've ever seen. He looks like an honest-to-God emotive and talking rodent. Even his little eyes take shape when he cries or gets happy.'

We now have endless examples of how people long dead can be inserted into modern movies and apparently interact with living actors. Forrest Gump is a great example.

They were able to have the Forrest Gump character, played by Tom Hanks, shake hands with President Kennedy and even have Kennedy speak to him. This was done by 'mixing' the old footage of JFK with that of an actor called Jed Gillin.

The image of Gillin was replaced by computer with the image of President Kennedy, but the lips and part of the cheeks and jaw of Gillin remained in the final 'Kennedy' sequence below to allow the President to say words he didn't actually speak.

This was all done in the early 1990s and so think how technological possibility has moved on since then, even without the developments in the unofficial projects. Making a 'Bin Laden' video becomes child's play. As an article on 'virtual actors' said:

'After millions of years of natural selection, human beings have some serious competition for their lofty perch on the evolutionary ladder - and the challenger has only been evolving for less than a decade. Some computer artists contend that anything we can do, "virtual humans" can do better, and they're poised to revolutionize moviemaking with a new species that doesn't require an astronomical salary, works around the clock without complaint, and lives quietly on a hard drive between death-defying stunts.

'A generation of computer-generated characters, called "synthespians" or "vactors", are attracting notice in Hollywood. Some insiders envision a future when digital stars compete for roles with the flesh-and-blood variety. While a photoreal digital actor has yet to carry a major motion picture, synthespians have captured supporting roles for some time now, whenever the going gets too tough or too expensive.

'Synthespians serve as doubles for breathtaking stunts too dangerous for mortal stars: a girl leaping from a skyscraper in "The Fifth Element," Sylvester Stallone chasing through the skies on an airborne motorcycle in "Judge Dredd," and a luckless attorney becoming tyrannosaur fodder in "Jurassic Park". And producers cut costs on the "cast of thousands" by using digital extras to stand in for the legions of troops in "Hamlet", mobs of Washington demonstrators in "Forrest Gump", and passengers aboard the doomed Titanic.'

It is vital that we know what is possible in terms of manipulating voices and images if we are going to see through the manufactured 'tapes' that are put before us as genuine. I found a face animation on YouTube produced through something called a Face Motion Capture system. This is not even at the cutting edge of this technology, but you can see how people can be tricked into believing they are seeing someone when they are watching something. In the Bin Laden examples, his beard makes it even easier because it obscures lip movement. There's no need to watch the whole of this sequence, just a few seconds will make it clear how far even the public arena development has gone. Click here to watch ...

In 2006, Pendulum Studios, a San Diego-based 3D production house, produced a demonstration of their digital animation with a computer-generated 'Mark Antony' making a famous speech from Shakespeare and here is a simple explanation of what the computer-generators can do with just a single image of a face. Keep thinking 'Bin Laden' as you watch and the scam becomes clear. Click here to see ...

'We will kill dee infidels ...'

'Cut, hold it, computer problem ... take five everyone ... '

The voice is no longer a problem, either. This week the Washington Post ran an article under the headline 'When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing'. It was based upon the development of voice recognition techniques at the deeply sinister Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. It is in such, largely underground, facilities that image and voice manipulation has reached levels way beyond even the clips you saw earlier. It is in these establishments that 'Bin Laden' videos and their like are produced.

Los Alamos ... the real deal goes on underground

The Post reported that the Los Alamos boffins, led by scientist George Papcun, had taken a ten-minute recording of the voice of General Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations Command, and made it say whatever they liked through a technique known as 'voice morphing'. As the Post said:

'Whereas early voice morphing required cutting and pasting speech to put letters or words together to make a composite, Papcun's software developed at Los Alamos can far more accurately replicate the way one actually speaks. Eliminated are the robotic intonations.'

Apparently, they had the voice of General Steiner say: 'Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government'. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy.

They have done the same with the voices of many military top brass and they even had former Secretary of State Colin Powell 'saying': 'I am being treated well by my captors'. Think of the implications of that with people alleged to have been kidnapped by 'terrorists'. The Post was partly right when it said of such potential to deceive: 'For Hollywood, it is special effects. For covert operators in the U.S. military and intelligence agencies, it is a weapon of the future'.

Except that it not 'of the future' at all. It is of the now.

It has been used to produce 'Bin Laden' statements whenever it suits the Illuminati agenda to frighten the people into allowing their freedoms to be demolished or supporting the 'war on [of] terror' A 'Bin Laden' appearance this week before the sixth anniversary of 9/11 was a gimme. 'We need a Bin Laden video, Chuck, give Alamos a call will you?'

This takes us into even stranger territory, or strange if you are new to the conspiracy or its true breadth and depth. It became public that when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 the Pentagon was planning to create a computer-manipulated Saddam Hussein showing weakness, crying and in a sexual situation. Daniel T. Kuehl, chairman of the Information Operations department of the National Defense University in Washington, the military's school for information warfare, said: 'Once you can take any kind of information and reduce it into ones and zeros, you can do some pretty interesting things.'

So what 'things' exactly? Think fake videos, yes, of course; but also fake phone calls from 9/11 aircraft, fake statements from world leaders and others, and fake scenes from 'the front' or anywhere else in the world.

In George Orwell's 1984, Big Brother could feed the people propaganda about the 'terrorist' Emanuel Goldstein, but now he can put him on the screen to speak to millions with words digitally implanted from a mouth digitally animated.

The manipulation of reality goes still further with holographic technology that can project scenes in the sky of religious deities, UFOs or even 'alien battles'. This is connected to Project Blue Beam, a long-standing plan to make religious heroes holographically 'appear' to their followers and basically tell them what to do.

The Washington Post said it has confirmed that a super secret program was established in 1994 to pursue this hologram agenda. The 'Holographic Projector' was described in a classified Air Force document as a system to 'project information power from space ... for special operations deception missions', the Post reported. It went on:

'Video and photo manipulation has already raised profound questions of authenticity for the journalistic world. With audio joining the mix, it is not only journalists but also privacy advocates and the conspiracy-minded who will no doubt ponder the worrisome mischief that lurks in the not too distant future.'

The truth is that it's already happening.

But across the media, this one Post article apart, they cannot even comprehend that the authorities claiming to protect people from Bin Laden could actually be producing the videos broadcast in his name. It is too much for 95% of 'journalists' to even contemplate and the same for the lower-level gofers who do the bidding of the shadow people in ignorance of who their true masters really are.

So while another fake video hit the airwaves this week, the discussion centred not on its origins, but on 'Bin Laden's' suddenly black beard. Republican Senator Norm Coleman asked Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell during Congressional hearings about the beard. 'Is it a signal?', Coleman demanded to know, that Bin Laden was using to send a message to his Al-Qaeda members. I kid you not, that is what he said.

Maybe Bin Laden wants his followers to watch Pirates of the Caribbean. Arrest Johnny Depp, I say. But spy chief McConnell was in no doubt that the beard was a legitimate source for debate:

'The big question in the community this morning, "Is that beard real," because as you know, just a few years ago, the last time he appeared, it was very different. So we don't know if it's dyed and trimmed or real, but that's one of the things we're looking at.'

Not a word about whether the tape was a fake, only the colour of his beard. I can help them there - ask the computer guy why he made it black, mystery solved.

But the classic of the week with regard to the latest 'Bin Laden tape' came from the UK's Guardian 'newspaper' when reporting the assertion by Cuba's Fidel Castro that the United States government is lying about what really happened on 9/11 and who did it. The Guardian could see a flaw in his claims immediately. I quote:

'... in a glaring omission, Mr Castro's conspiracy theory failed to mention Osama bin Laden, who this week issued a video praising one of the hijackers who crashed into the World Trade Centre, and his militant Islamist al-Qaida network.'

Such is the power of illusion when mixed with the arrogance, naivety and ignorance which pervades the entire mainstream media. We have to get informed ourselves if we want to see through the smoke and mirrors that are constantly set before us and lesson number one is now blatantly obvious: What you see and hear may only be what you think you see and hear.

Ain't that right, Osama?