Was This Movie a PsyOp?
Everyone should know by now the events that have transpired due to the release of the alleged movie called Innocence of Muslims
against American embassies abroad have left several people dead, and things seem to be getting worse. American flags are burning all across the
Violence in Tunisia
The movie went out of its way to be inflammatory to Muslims. I feel it was so over the top that the only purpose of it was to cause anger in Muslims.
What I have asked myself is why would someone make a film like this, knowing it might incite violent incidents? Sure, it could be a lone nut out to
insult his perceived enemies, no matter what the cost in damage and lives. How utterly irresponsible that would be. Instead of winding down the War
on Terror, this is like pouring gas on smoldering embers.
Who benefits? Well, the military industrial complex as usual. The war keeps going, contracts renewed, weapons deals. A perpetual state of war in
the Middle East. Also, this could ultimately be used as justification for tighter control of the internet and free speech. After all, if posting a
YouTube video can get people killed across the globe, is that too much power in the hands of some idiot who makes a video on a whim? It just seems so
In addition to the overly disparaging way it treats the Prophet Mohammed, the film was panned by critics as also having zero production value or
artistic merit, yet the maker of claims to have raised $5M in private donations to fund it. Where did the money go? We can tell he didn't use it to
hire decent actors or spend it on production value. Did the donators know this guy was going to make such a crappy movie that would never have a
chance of making money? I show this picture from the movie only to illustrate just how awfully cheap it is:
Critics panned the film. It "includes not a single artistically redeemable aspect at all." The directing is "atrocious"; the sets "terrible"; the
acting consists of "their blank eyes and strained line readings". It’s been called an “inept vanity project” that's "far beneath any
reasonable standard of moviemaking." Neumaier concludes "Even if you believe that art can be blasphemous, you’d have to consider this thing art
first. And that is impossible to imagine."
The cast and crew said they were duped into making the movie. They had no idea what it ended up being about, being fed lies that it was a historical
film set in the time of Christ. Why hide what the film's about if it is a legitimate artist making art?
The cast and crew have publicly stated that they were deceived about the purpose and content of the film. In a statement obtained by CNN, the
film's 80 cast and crew members disavowed the film, saying: "The entire cast and crew are extremely upset and feel taken advantage of by the producer.
We are 100% not behind this film and were grossly misled about its intent and purpose."
Last but not least it turns out the film maker is an ex-con with a long list of convictions for drugs and fraud. And he turned into a Federal snitch
to get a lighter sentence. It was in jail that this career criminal decided to become a film maker and he wrote the script for Innocence of
What made this guy all of sudden make this film? He obviously didn't have any film-making skills. Did it have anything to do with his snitching? So
many questions and so few answers.
Here's what I think: this was a covertly funded psyop to inflame Muslim extremist into a new round of violence and terror attacks. Who is ultimately
behind it, whether CIA, MOSSAD or some other clandestine group, I don't know.
Morris Sedak is the guy who put up the Arabic translation, key to getting an obscure YouTube video noticed by millions of Muslims in the Middle
Something doesn't smell right, in my opinion.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula
Innocence of Muslims
edit on 15-9-2012 by TheComte because: (no reason given)