Full Version: Nick Berg beheading
first to the mods/admins, I'm not sure where this should be posted. it is rather serious, in my opinion, and I feel it must be discussed. however I can't think of any questions for debate per se. if you feel it is too vauge or missing, please move rather then closing this thread, thank you.
now, I know I am likely to be viewed as a conspiracy nut and derided for daring to question the autheticity of the claims about the video showing Nick Berg's murder. while some (not here) are claiming he isn't actually killed in the video (it was a hollywood stunt type thing) I do not promte that view and think the Nick is as dead as Elvis.
however, what I do question is the identity of the killers and some of the claims made about them, as well as circumstances surronding this whole thing.
first and foremost, is the claim that the man weilding the knife is al-Zarqawi. the problem is that he doesn't identify himself as al-Zarqawi, he is wearing a mask, and Iraq militants claim al-Zarqawi is dead (Alleged Statement Says Extremist Killed)
second, the timing of the release of the video. it conviently coincides with the abu ghraib torture scandel. most media is now focusing on the beheading and not the torture. (though it still comes up) this is of paticular advantage to bush. people are now focused on the beheading instead of the torture. I find it strange this video came out JUST as bush needed it.
third, what's up with that jumpsuit? out of the hostage/pow photos I have seen, non had any with coalition pows/hostages in jumpsuits. there are however photos of prisoners in the same type of jump suit: such as this one, this one, this one and this one. (you can also see an orange jumpsuit in one or two of the torture photos (go to gallery, photos 2, 6 & 7)
fourth, if you look at the hands of the people responsible, their skin is fair light colored, not like you would expect to see on an arab.
fifth, when they start to say allah akbar, at around 4 and a half minutes, some of the voices sound rather western, almost as if they were non-arabic speakers. also, what they are saying, allah akbar, is inaccurate. a fundelmentalist muslim would pronounce it allahu akbar, which is the real way to say "god is greatest". (compare:ALLAH akbar vs. ALLAHU akbar. also, mp3raid.com has the call to prayer so you can hear it properly pronounced (follow the link, search for "adhan")
sixth, the rifles the men are holding. a reader of what really happened with a sharp eye pointed this out: at approximatly 4 minutes and and 33 to 40 seconds the man that is second to left puts down his rifle, providing a profile. at first it appears to be an AK (47 or 74) but upon further scrutinity it isn't. it does however match almost to a T another rifle (similar in design to the AK) and that is the Galil (possibly AR version) also, at about 1 minute and a half minutes the man on the right ends shoulders his weapon, and it has a telescoping stock. I have NEVER seen any AKs with a telescoping stock. both weapons are western and very expensive (which one reason terrorists like the AK, it's cheap)
seven. artemise pointed out to me that the screaming start BEFORE he is cut. one would figure that would happen AFTER.
eight. this one is rather ominous. prior to be "kidnapped", mr Berg was being held by iraq and US authorities. this is why he did not leave Iraq sooner.
how convenient, he was realeased and the HAPPENED to get "kidnapped" right away.
there many more tiny details and discrepancies and I don't have time to post them all.
wquestion for debate are:
is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
now, I know I am likely to be viewed as a conspiracy nut and derided for daring to question the autheticity of the claims about the video showing Nick Berg's murder. while some (not here) are claiming he isn't actually killed in the video (it was a hollywood stunt type thing) I do not promte that view and think the Nick is as dead as Elvis.
however, what I do question is the identity of the killers and some of the claims made about them, as well as circumstances surronding this whole thing.
first and foremost, is the claim that the man weilding the knife is al-Zarqawi. the problem is that he doesn't identify himself as al-Zarqawi, he is wearing a mask, and Iraq militants claim al-Zarqawi is dead (Alleged Statement Says Extremist Killed)
second, the timing of the release of the video. it conviently coincides with the abu ghraib torture scandel. most media is now focusing on the beheading and not the torture. (though it still comes up) this is of paticular advantage to bush. people are now focused on the beheading instead of the torture. I find it strange this video came out JUST as bush needed it.
third, what's up with that jumpsuit? out of the hostage/pow photos I have seen, non had any with coalition pows/hostages in jumpsuits. there are however photos of prisoners in the same type of jump suit: such as this one, this one, this one and this one. (you can also see an orange jumpsuit in one or two of the torture photos (go to gallery, photos 2, 6 & 7)
fourth, if you look at the hands of the people responsible, their skin is fair light colored, not like you would expect to see on an arab.
fifth, when they start to say allah akbar, at around 4 and a half minutes, some of the voices sound rather western, almost as if they were non-arabic speakers. also, what they are saying, allah akbar, is inaccurate. a fundelmentalist muslim would pronounce it allahu akbar, which is the real way to say "god is greatest". (compare:ALLAH akbar vs. ALLAHU akbar. also, mp3raid.com has the call to prayer so you can hear it properly pronounced (follow the link, search for "adhan")
sixth, the rifles the men are holding. a reader of what really happened with a sharp eye pointed this out: at approximatly 4 minutes and and 33 to 40 seconds the man that is second to left puts down his rifle, providing a profile. at first it appears to be an AK (47 or 74) but upon further scrutinity it isn't. it does however match almost to a T another rifle (similar in design to the AK) and that is the Galil (possibly AR version) also, at about 1 minute and a half minutes the man on the right ends shoulders his weapon, and it has a telescoping stock. I have NEVER seen any AKs with a telescoping stock. both weapons are western and very expensive (which one reason terrorists like the AK, it's cheap)
seven. artemise pointed out to me that the screaming start BEFORE he is cut. one would figure that would happen AFTER.
eight. this one is rather ominous. prior to be "kidnapped", mr Berg was being held by iraq and US authorities. this is why he did not leave Iraq sooner.
QUOTE(http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/05/12/berg_custody040512)
CNN reported on Wednesday that Berg's family has e-mails in which the 26-year-old said he had been turned over to coalition forces, who held him for 13 days.
The Bergs filed a lawsuit on April 5, saying their son was being held illegally by the U.S. military. Berg was released on April 6.
Berg told his parents he would try to get out of Iraq as quickly as possible. They last heard from him on April 9.
The Bergs filed a lawsuit on April 5, saying their son was being held illegally by the U.S. military. Berg was released on April 6.
Berg told his parents he would try to get out of Iraq as quickly as possible. They last heard from him on April 9.
how convenient, he was realeased and the HAPPENED to get "kidnapped" right away.
there many more tiny details and discrepancies and I don't have time to post them all.
wquestion for debate are:
is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
QUOTE(unabomber @ May 12 2004, 09:07 PM)
is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
NO becuase the dogs "attacking" the nude prisoners is not torture because they dont actually "attack" the prisoners. If anything it is Embarrasment which means that these people that we have "tortured" cant go back to their tribes or if they do they risk being killed. This is a method to get them to talk, EMBARRASMENT.
How many inconsistencies and discrepancies are there in anything that we see in todays world. You cant say that the tape is illegitimant because of these minor problems. And what if was western weapontry dont you think by now the iraqis have some how come across western weapons. I mean they have taken POW's which had weapons.
If the man did know something about the coalition then he keep his mouth shut or he is going agianst his country which usually has a very harsh punishment. The government wouldnt do this to keep something under wraps and if they did what made them do it?
For now I will comment on the weapons.
I know that you can have a telescoping stock on an AK variant, the steel rod type that slides up along the receiver, but to my knowledge, it was not standard issue (rather an after market effect) on the AK's, with the possible exception of the AK-100. And I'm still trying to research that.
I had downloaded the video yesterday, and I could not see the weapons close enough to tell. But I can't really see how you would really be able to tell if it's a Galil or an AK on a grainy third world webcam.
From AK-47 Link
Even if some were Galil's, though not as widespread as the AK's, the Galil's are available just as any assault rifles are. I personally don't think Mossad (or whomever) would overlook that technicality.
And I would imagine that if someone knew he was about to be executed, he just might start screaming in terror, before the knife came down on his neck.
I really don't see how anybody in government or elsewhere would think that this would wag the dog. It hasn't knocked out media coverage of the prison abuse. Not by a long shot.
I know that you can have a telescoping stock on an AK variant, the steel rod type that slides up along the receiver, but to my knowledge, it was not standard issue (rather an after market effect) on the AK's, with the possible exception of the AK-100. And I'm still trying to research that.
I had downloaded the video yesterday, and I could not see the weapons close enough to tell. But I can't really see how you would really be able to tell if it's a Galil or an AK on a grainy third world webcam.
From AK-47 Link
QUOTE
Basically, the Galil assault rifle can be described as a modified Kalashnikov AK-47 design. The key differences between the Galil and the AK-47 are;
the Galil featured a machined steel receivers of the original AK-47 rifles, but of slightly different shape.
The AK-47-style safety - selector switch at the right side of the gun is complemented by the additional smaller switch at the left side of the receiver, above the pistol handle.
The cocking handle is bent upward, so it can be operated with either hand.
The sights of the Galil featured a front hooded post, mounted on the gas block, with the rear diopter sight, mounted on the receiver top cover. Rear sight is of the flip-up type, with settings for 300 and 500 meters.
Additional folding night sights with luminous inserts can be raised into position, which allows to aim the gun in the low light conditions at the ranges of up to 100 meters.
The barrel and the flash hider can be used to launch the rifle grenades from the barrel, using the blanc or live cartridges (depending on the rifle grenade type).
The Galil ARM also features a folding detachable bipods and a carrying handle.
The bipod base incorporates a bottle opener and a wire cutter.
The standard folding buttstock is patterned after FN FAL Para, folds to the right to save the space.
Some of the late production Micro-Galil (MAR) rifles also are fitted with the Picatinny-type rail, which allows to mount various sighting devices.
Standard AR and ARM rifles can be fitted with scope mounting rail on the left side of the receiver.
All 5.56mm Galil rifles are fed using proprietary 35 or 50 rounds curved box magazines with AK-47 style locking.
M16-type magazines can be used via the special adapter.
7.62mm Galil rifles are fed using proprietary 25 rounds box magazines.
Civilian semi-automatic Galil variants sometimes are fitted with 10 rounds magazines to comply with local firearms laws.
the Galil featured a machined steel receivers of the original AK-47 rifles, but of slightly different shape.
The AK-47-style safety - selector switch at the right side of the gun is complemented by the additional smaller switch at the left side of the receiver, above the pistol handle.
The cocking handle is bent upward, so it can be operated with either hand.
The sights of the Galil featured a front hooded post, mounted on the gas block, with the rear diopter sight, mounted on the receiver top cover. Rear sight is of the flip-up type, with settings for 300 and 500 meters.
Additional folding night sights with luminous inserts can be raised into position, which allows to aim the gun in the low light conditions at the ranges of up to 100 meters.
The barrel and the flash hider can be used to launch the rifle grenades from the barrel, using the blanc or live cartridges (depending on the rifle grenade type).
The Galil ARM also features a folding detachable bipods and a carrying handle.
The bipod base incorporates a bottle opener and a wire cutter.
The standard folding buttstock is patterned after FN FAL Para, folds to the right to save the space.
Some of the late production Micro-Galil (MAR) rifles also are fitted with the Picatinny-type rail, which allows to mount various sighting devices.
Standard AR and ARM rifles can be fitted with scope mounting rail on the left side of the receiver.
All 5.56mm Galil rifles are fed using proprietary 35 or 50 rounds curved box magazines with AK-47 style locking.
M16-type magazines can be used via the special adapter.
7.62mm Galil rifles are fed using proprietary 25 rounds box magazines.
Civilian semi-automatic Galil variants sometimes are fitted with 10 rounds magazines to comply with local firearms laws.
Even if some were Galil's, though not as widespread as the AK's, the Galil's are available just as any assault rifles are. I personally don't think Mossad (or whomever) would overlook that technicality.
And I would imagine that if someone knew he was about to be executed, he just might start screaming in terror, before the knife came down on his neck.
I really don't see how anybody in government or elsewhere would think that this would wag the dog. It hasn't knocked out media coverage of the prison abuse. Not by a long shot.
DTOM,
Actually he is not screaming, he is calm before he is knocked over, so calm I dont think he has a clue whats going to happen. The screaming starts before the guys are finished reading, even before the knife is pulled, in fact to me the screaming is in the foreground in compared to the speech, much closer to the camera (?) and after it starts you can hear the guys in the backround still. It seems to me like theres a crap load of commotion going on in the foreground right before the actual incident.
I never considered conspiracy on this, my question was at first, was he the only one?
The other possibility is that it was dubbed, which brings up some questions. Dubbing is more difficult and there is no need since audio is already on a webcam or a regular video camera.
I just found it odd.
Actually he is not screaming, he is calm before he is knocked over, so calm I dont think he has a clue whats going to happen. The screaming starts before the guys are finished reading, even before the knife is pulled, in fact to me the screaming is in the foreground in compared to the speech, much closer to the camera (?) and after it starts you can hear the guys in the backround still. It seems to me like theres a crap load of commotion going on in the foreground right before the actual incident.
I never considered conspiracy on this, my question was at first, was he the only one?
The other possibility is that it was dubbed, which brings up some questions. Dubbing is more difficult and there is no need since audio is already on a webcam or a regular video camera.
I just found it odd.
Is it possible? Sure, anything is possible. Faking the moon landings was also possible. Alien abduction is also possible. The question is really....is it likely?
People often try to use the conspiracy theories when they are presented with situations and truths they wish not to deal with. The Arab world blamed Jews for the Sept 11the attacks, even after Bin Laden admitted that he planned the event and knew the attacks would occur ahead of time. To get around that bit of evidence, they simply dismissed the tapes as American forgeries, carried out by Jewish Hollywood film directors. See a pattern?
Anyway, my point is, what is the likelihood of a tape like this being a forgery? Would the US behead an American civilian on tape and then leave his body on the side of the road for the US army to pick up? I guess your answer to this question depends on your personal perspective (and the amount of Ted Rall and Michael Moore you consume).
Personally, since these animals have already done this once before under similar circumstances, I think you would have to be completely brain-dead not to see this as the real thing. But, what do I know.
People often try to use the conspiracy theories when they are presented with situations and truths they wish not to deal with. The Arab world blamed Jews for the Sept 11the attacks, even after Bin Laden admitted that he planned the event and knew the attacks would occur ahead of time. To get around that bit of evidence, they simply dismissed the tapes as American forgeries, carried out by Jewish Hollywood film directors. See a pattern?
Anyway, my point is, what is the likelihood of a tape like this being a forgery? Would the US behead an American civilian on tape and then leave his body on the side of the road for the US army to pick up? I guess your answer to this question depends on your personal perspective (and the amount of Ted Rall and Michael Moore you consume).
Personally, since these animals have already done this once before under similar circumstances, I think you would have to be completely brain-dead not to see this as the real thing. But, what do I know.
Odd. There was a program on TV last night about the top ten conspiracy theories, number one being the government using mind control techniques. If this was a set up, that is certainly the category it would fit into.
However, this video (to me) is quite clearly genuine. And I am always up for a good conspiracy theory; I'm a firm believer of conspiracies behind the deaths of the Kennedies and Luther King, and strange goings on at Roswell, New Mexico.
It does appear convenient that this video came out at a good time to try and take the heat off the abuse photographs (although that isn't working, at least in the UK media - it's actually put more focus on the photos). On the other hand, this execution being 'punishment' for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners is more likely.
I'm sure theres a lot of things in that video that could be used to argue this is a conspiracy. At the same time, to me it seems to border on the 'crazy' conspiracies (fake moon landing, 9/11 being a government setup etc). Afterall, what good will this do the US government? Will they use it as a scapegoat to pull out of Iraq and leave the mess they made? I don't think the world would buy that, some American civilian responses on the news were along the lines of 'pull out' but just as many said something like 'send more troops'. For that matter, will they use it as proof that they have to stay for as long as it takes. Well, the same argument applies, I would think the relatives of soldiers in Iraq will want their loved ones back more than ever.
Come to think of it, this being a conspiracy could be less likely than the moon landing or 9/11, because the arguments for those theories included a clear purpose (to win the space race against the Soviets, justification for reducing civil liberties and increasing government power at home and abroad). The dreadful execution of Nick Berg does not have such a purpose, although it is still early days I can't see this being used to make any significant changes that could not have been made without this video as justification.
I have as much mistrust of our governments as anyone, I feel that it is important to question the actions and motives of your government if you have any hope of continuing democracy. People can be evil and wicked, and we've seen some hard evidence recently that nationality/race/religion does not play a part in what makes a twisted human being. While I believe that there are certainly some twisted people in high positions, I would have to dismiss this as being a step too far.
However, this video (to me) is quite clearly genuine. And I am always up for a good conspiracy theory; I'm a firm believer of conspiracies behind the deaths of the Kennedies and Luther King, and strange goings on at Roswell, New Mexico.
It does appear convenient that this video came out at a good time to try and take the heat off the abuse photographs (although that isn't working, at least in the UK media - it's actually put more focus on the photos). On the other hand, this execution being 'punishment' for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners is more likely.
I'm sure theres a lot of things in that video that could be used to argue this is a conspiracy. At the same time, to me it seems to border on the 'crazy' conspiracies (fake moon landing, 9/11 being a government setup etc). Afterall, what good will this do the US government? Will they use it as a scapegoat to pull out of Iraq and leave the mess they made? I don't think the world would buy that, some American civilian responses on the news were along the lines of 'pull out' but just as many said something like 'send more troops'. For that matter, will they use it as proof that they have to stay for as long as it takes. Well, the same argument applies, I would think the relatives of soldiers in Iraq will want their loved ones back more than ever.
Come to think of it, this being a conspiracy could be less likely than the moon landing or 9/11, because the arguments for those theories included a clear purpose (to win the space race against the Soviets, justification for reducing civil liberties and increasing government power at home and abroad). The dreadful execution of Nick Berg does not have such a purpose, although it is still early days I can't see this being used to make any significant changes that could not have been made without this video as justification.
I have as much mistrust of our governments as anyone, I feel that it is important to question the actions and motives of your government if you have any hope of continuing democracy. People can be evil and wicked, and we've seen some hard evidence recently that nationality/race/religion does not play a part in what makes a twisted human being. While I believe that there are certainly some twisted people in high positions, I would have to dismiss this as being a step too far.
is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
Yes, its possible.
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
I don't know if there are any. Your analysis is actually only a series of questions rather than conclusions.
do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
I don't know. I don't find the timing odd, since the killing was described by those who carried it out as an act of revenge for what happened in Abu Graib.
I'm not sure about whether or not the US government is capable of this sort of act. My first reaction would be to say yes, since its not hard to imagine that any one capable of ordering the mass death involved in a war would baulk at the thought of rescuing their war by the slaying of a single man.
I also find it curious that Hizbollah condemned the killing as 'anti Islamic'. This immedietly gives rise to two thoughts. The first being that if Hizbollah openly condemns this action, then I'm missing some relevant piece of information regarding Islamic morality since I was under the impression that Hizbollah were themselves a terrorist faction.
The second is the continued evasion of Osama Bin Laden. If this is some sort of conspiracy, then this might explain why people like Osama Bin Laden never seem to get caught. My thought being that Bin Laden is more usefull to the Bush adminstration at large... at least for the time being.
On the other hand, it may simply be that there are so many lies and counter lies being aired by just about every one in this mess now, that I no longer trust any of those involved.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/040512/15/p/oyu8.html
Yes, its possible.
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
I don't know if there are any. Your analysis is actually only a series of questions rather than conclusions.
do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
I don't know. I don't find the timing odd, since the killing was described by those who carried it out as an act of revenge for what happened in Abu Graib.
I'm not sure about whether or not the US government is capable of this sort of act. My first reaction would be to say yes, since its not hard to imagine that any one capable of ordering the mass death involved in a war would baulk at the thought of rescuing their war by the slaying of a single man.
I also find it curious that Hizbollah condemned the killing as 'anti Islamic'. This immedietly gives rise to two thoughts. The first being that if Hizbollah openly condemns this action, then I'm missing some relevant piece of information regarding Islamic morality since I was under the impression that Hizbollah were themselves a terrorist faction.
The second is the continued evasion of Osama Bin Laden. If this is some sort of conspiracy, then this might explain why people like Osama Bin Laden never seem to get caught. My thought being that Bin Laden is more usefull to the Bush adminstration at large... at least for the time being.
On the other hand, it may simply be that there are so many lies and counter lies being aired by just about every one in this mess now, that I no longer trust any of those involved.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/040512/15/p/oyu8.html
While Im not up for conspiracy on this yet there are some discrepancies and questions involved.
The orange suit is the least but valid.
The Uk Independant reported that several hours had transpired between the speech and the killing. On close inspection I find that between pulling out the knife and knocking him down to the actual act the timer numbers jump from 2-44-40' to 13-45-+
Thats 11 hours of missing footage. That accounts for the audio dub. There are at least two or three splices. The video initially is on a tripod also, the rest is hand held. This doesnt happen fast unless they have a quik release tripod (expensive) and the camera man is an expert photographer (obviously not). What we are seeing is not what happened in sequence.
Speculators are wondering if perhaps he was already dead for various reasons. Trying not to be too sick and gory the main ideas are that there was little struggle, the men are not holding him firmly and he would surely fight for his life simply as reaction. Although he was bound hand and foot he would have been wrenching away and trying to turn his head. Secondly, the lack of blood in cutting the carotid artery towards the camera, (spurting is inevitable and plentiful) and lack of blood on the killers knife hand , nearly impossible. This does not give any evidence of conspiracy but gives reason to believe we are not seeing the events the way they were presented.
The one thing I cannot explain is that in one of the shots showing the severed head, the video jumps back to the 2-40's again for just a second. This is totally inconsistant with the entire rest of the footage and raises suspicion of staging.
( I wondered why Drudge had blurred the numbers on this shot when the others were clearly visable) This one shot means the entire beheading part of the video makes no sense at all, though I believe it happened, I just cant explain this in any way as a photographer.
Other than that
The family says Nick was in US custody for 2 weeks after being picked up by Iraqi police near Mosul. The US denies this but says they visited him 3 times. Perhaps Nick did not know who held him, yet said he was treated fairly.
The family filed Federal suit on civil rights abuse charges and he was released the next day, to be allegedly kidnapped 3 days later. Strange enough, but then what isnt over there.
Synapsis of events:
The torture photos were released by the media April 30. Nick was not heard from after the 6th of April, his body was found on sat the 8th may. The family informed on Monday and the video found early tues morning (11th). This seems very expedient to me, from the military. I didnt know in a war zone anyone could work that fast , but I would not know about military things.
( Edit: This was wrong date wise.) The killing itself was expedient, in 6 days from the torture photos, then they must have worked over the video on the weekend to release it by early tues our time. This suggests a great amount of organization and quik decision making, especially since 11 hours of video are lost. I am also curious as to what kind of equipment these people have that allows viewing, splicing (relatively well) and audio dubbing of video, a place to do it and the knowledge. While its not particularily difficult its not something just anybody knows how to do.
The orange suit is the least but valid.
The Uk Independant reported that several hours had transpired between the speech and the killing. On close inspection I find that between pulling out the knife and knocking him down to the actual act the timer numbers jump from 2-44-40' to 13-45-+
Thats 11 hours of missing footage. That accounts for the audio dub. There are at least two or three splices. The video initially is on a tripod also, the rest is hand held. This doesnt happen fast unless they have a quik release tripod (expensive) and the camera man is an expert photographer (obviously not). What we are seeing is not what happened in sequence.
Speculators are wondering if perhaps he was already dead for various reasons. Trying not to be too sick and gory the main ideas are that there was little struggle, the men are not holding him firmly and he would surely fight for his life simply as reaction. Although he was bound hand and foot he would have been wrenching away and trying to turn his head. Secondly, the lack of blood in cutting the carotid artery towards the camera, (spurting is inevitable and plentiful) and lack of blood on the killers knife hand , nearly impossible. This does not give any evidence of conspiracy but gives reason to believe we are not seeing the events the way they were presented.
The one thing I cannot explain is that in one of the shots showing the severed head, the video jumps back to the 2-40's again for just a second. This is totally inconsistant with the entire rest of the footage and raises suspicion of staging.
( I wondered why Drudge had blurred the numbers on this shot when the others were clearly visable) This one shot means the entire beheading part of the video makes no sense at all, though I believe it happened, I just cant explain this in any way as a photographer.
Other than that
The family says Nick was in US custody for 2 weeks after being picked up by Iraqi police near Mosul. The US denies this but says they visited him 3 times. Perhaps Nick did not know who held him, yet said he was treated fairly.
The family filed Federal suit on civil rights abuse charges and he was released the next day, to be allegedly kidnapped 3 days later. Strange enough, but then what isnt over there.
Synapsis of events:
The torture photos were released by the media April 30. Nick was not heard from after the 6th of April, his body was found on sat the 8th may. The family informed on Monday and the video found early tues morning (11th). This seems very expedient to me, from the military. I didnt know in a war zone anyone could work that fast , but I would not know about military things.
( Edit: This was wrong date wise.) The killing itself was expedient, in 6 days from the torture photos, then they must have worked over the video on the weekend to release it by early tues our time. This suggests a great amount of organization and quik decision making, especially since 11 hours of video are lost. I am also curious as to what kind of equipment these people have that allows viewing, splicing (relatively well) and audio dubbing of video, a place to do it and the knowledge. While its not particularily difficult its not something just anybody knows how to do.
Artemise
Once, to my regret, I saw footage of a Russian soldier having his throat cut by Chenchyan guerilla's. His neck was opened by a single slice of a very large knife and he literally bled to death with a strong steady flow. There was no spurting of blood. The Russian, whilst in great terror hardly flinched as his throat was cut.
I believe many video's of such executions of Russian soldiers have been made by the Chechnyans and according to one report I've recently read, these are available from shops in Baghdad on a CD ROM..
QUOTE
Although he was bound hand and foot he would have been wrenching away and trying to turn his head. Secondly, the lack of blood in cutting the carotid artery towards the camera, (spurting is inevitable and plentiful) and lack of blood on the killers knife hand , nearly impossible. This does not give any evidence of conspiracy but gives reason to believe we are not seeing the events the way they were presented.
Once, to my regret, I saw footage of a Russian soldier having his throat cut by Chenchyan guerilla's. His neck was opened by a single slice of a very large knife and he literally bled to death with a strong steady flow. There was no spurting of blood. The Russian, whilst in great terror hardly flinched as his throat was cut.
I believe many video's of such executions of Russian soldiers have been made by the Chechnyans and according to one report I've recently read, these are available from shops in Baghdad on a CD ROM..
I could not bring myself to view the video, so I cannot support nor try to refute the discrepancies and hypotheses posted here.
I did hear a news commentator say that the one speaking could not be al-Zarqawi because the accent is wrong.
What is known is that this is a propaganda film. The terrorists used it; our government most certainly could be using it to counterbalance the scandal arising from the prison photographs and videos. So it served the purposes of everyone involved; is everybody (except the family of the unfortunate pawn and those who abhor violence) happy?
I can't help remembering watching the film footage of George W. Bush reading to the children when he was informed of the bombings on September 11, 2001, and his remarkably minimal response. I wonder about it, especially in light of the revelation of a PDB memo with the title saying that Bin Laden was planning to attack within the United States, or the testimony of Richard Clarke that yes, the cabinet was told that planes could be used as missiles but it was denied by Condoleezza Rice. I also remember how Colin Powell faced the UN presenting the intelligence that was supposed to win over the assembly to the idea that Iraq was an imminent threat to the U.S. and the world, and how unconvinced he himself looked at the time.
I remember how former President George H.W. Bush was at the time (of the 9/11 attacks) in a meeting with Saudis, including Osama bin Laden's kin, and how, although all domestic flights were grounded, he still managed to get the family out of the country on a jet.
And I think, my God, just how much of this stuff is engineered for our consumption in order to rationalize our Chief Executive's/government's actions? We're not talking UFO's and alien abductions here.
I don't know what to believe anymore.
More than ever, Pontius Pilate's question is relevant: What is truth?
I did hear a news commentator say that the one speaking could not be al-Zarqawi because the accent is wrong.
What is known is that this is a propaganda film. The terrorists used it; our government most certainly could be using it to counterbalance the scandal arising from the prison photographs and videos. So it served the purposes of everyone involved; is everybody (except the family of the unfortunate pawn and those who abhor violence) happy?
I can't help remembering watching the film footage of George W. Bush reading to the children when he was informed of the bombings on September 11, 2001, and his remarkably minimal response. I wonder about it, especially in light of the revelation of a PDB memo with the title saying that Bin Laden was planning to attack within the United States, or the testimony of Richard Clarke that yes, the cabinet was told that planes could be used as missiles but it was denied by Condoleezza Rice. I also remember how Colin Powell faced the UN presenting the intelligence that was supposed to win over the assembly to the idea that Iraq was an imminent threat to the U.S. and the world, and how unconvinced he himself looked at the time.
I remember how former President George H.W. Bush was at the time (of the 9/11 attacks) in a meeting with Saudis, including Osama bin Laden's kin, and how, although all domestic flights were grounded, he still managed to get the family out of the country on a jet.
And I think, my God, just how much of this stuff is engineered for our consumption in order to rationalize our Chief Executive's/government's actions? We're not talking UFO's and alien abductions here.
I don't know what to believe anymore.
More than ever, Pontius Pilate's question is relevant: What is truth?
Moif,
This video is particularily gruesome and not clean at all as far as the actual event. Its not a clean slice across, they start on left side carotid. There is some struggle too. Its probably the most gruesome thing Ive ever seen in my life. I personally believe it happened from viewing it (too many times looking for clues).
I just did want to point out what is being said as possibilities.
The thing I cant get by are the technicalities. The one second video splice from 11 hours earlier as an after event really bugs me but there may be something Im overlooking that would justify this photographically, but so far it makes no sense.
Edited to add:
Only one thing has just occurred to me and that would be two different cameras.
Yep, thats the only other possibility.
I just got it. The originals numbers 2-44's at finish on tripod are one camera and the killing another, hand held.
The numbers match with the cut in scene at 2-46 on a tripod for one shot near the end.
Damn. They spliced two different vids together, which accounts for the time loss discrepancy and the messed up audio.
This video is particularily gruesome and not clean at all as far as the actual event. Its not a clean slice across, they start on left side carotid. There is some struggle too. Its probably the most gruesome thing Ive ever seen in my life. I personally believe it happened from viewing it (too many times looking for clues).
I just did want to point out what is being said as possibilities.
The thing I cant get by are the technicalities. The one second video splice from 11 hours earlier as an after event really bugs me but there may be something Im overlooking that would justify this photographically, but so far it makes no sense.
Edited to add:
Only one thing has just occurred to me and that would be two different cameras.
Yep, thats the only other possibility.
I just got it. The originals numbers 2-44's at finish on tripod are one camera and the killing another, hand held.
The numbers match with the cut in scene at 2-46 on a tripod for one shot near the end.
Damn. They spliced two different vids together, which accounts for the time loss discrepancy and the messed up audio.
QUOTE(moif @ May 13 2004, 12:03 PM)
I believe many video's of such executions of Russian soldiers have been made by the Chechnyans and according to one report I've recently read, these are available from shops in Baghdad on a CD ROM..
Not surprising. Pretty much par for the course for those people.
Anyway, I think what we are seeing here is a classic case of conspiracy theory in the response to the inability for one to disprove a negative. No one can prove that this video was not staged. Just like no one can prove there were not little green men running around the desert in New Mexico or that there isn't a big aquatic dinosaur swimming around in Scotland.
The problem is, the burden is on the X-Files fans on here to prove that this was a conspiracy, not the other way around. You have to prove the positive. Past evidence and historical actions of these people show that this is typical of their actions. Thus, it's logical to initially assume the video, although gruesome, is valid. Thus, until evidence to the contrary (and I mean REAL evidence) comes about, then this is no different from the people who think there is a big, hairy apeman running around in the forests of Washington state.
As for the timer differences.
The two cameras, sliced to make one film makes the most sense. Years ago I videotaped a wedding (in the early days of this). I edited together the video from the two cameras that both had the dates and times on them visible (didn't work out well, but hey, it was my first attempt). One of the Cameras had the correct date and time, and the second did not.
When veiwing the completed product, whenever the angle changed, so did the time/date.
The two cameras, sliced to make one film makes the most sense. Years ago I videotaped a wedding (in the early days of this). I edited together the video from the two cameras that both had the dates and times on them visible (didn't work out well, but hey, it was my first attempt). One of the Cameras had the correct date and time, and the second did not.
When veiwing the completed product, whenever the angle changed, so did the time/date.
QUOTE
The problem is, the burden is on the X-Files fans on here to prove that this was a conspiracy, not the other way around. You have to prove the positive. Past evidence and historical actions of these people show that this is typical of their actions. Thus, it's logical to initially assume the video, although gruesome, is valid. Thus, until evidence to the contrary (and I mean REAL evidence) comes about, then this is no different from the people who think there is a big, hairy apeman running around in the forests of Washington state.
Alternatively, Irwin, the simpler explanation can always be considered. Occam's Razor, when it's cooked down, states that the simplest explanation is usually the right one.
Simply put, the Bush administration is the most incompetent one we've had, and it uses an extraordinary amount of secretiveness in an effort to conceal just how incompetent it is.
Does that sound more plausible to the Show Me crowd? If not, remember that Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
A man died wrongfully; that's what we're discussing. They found his headless body. He was an American, a non-combatant civilian. There are questions, lots of them, surrounding his death. But it seems to me that, questions or not, the fallout from the video is serving the pro-war faction of our government quite well. Swell--let's go out and kill more people. That'll fix it, right?
P.E.:
Nope, not even close:
JFK would be:
1. Got us deaply into the Vietnam conflict.
2. Bay of Pigs fiasco
Let us not forget, the reason he went to Dallas in the first place was he was trailing in the polls (probably because of #1 & #2)
GW Bush:
Won Wars in Afganistan and Iraq. (War loses to defeat a country of 25 million = less then 1K)
I'll see your two fiasco's and raise ya a Victory......
Red
Edited to add:
P.E.: Look at the Video. We are not dealing with the Germans in WW2 or even the Japanese in WW2. They did unbeleivable acts upon our men, but this sinks to a level of crap rarely seen before.
Kill a few more? Sadly, that might be the only choice. That or wait until it is us, not Nick Berg under the knife. If I am going to guess wrong, it will be on the side that assures I am not next.
QUOTE
Simply put, the Bush administration is the most incompetent one we've had
Nope, not even close:
JFK would be:
1. Got us deaply into the Vietnam conflict.
2. Bay of Pigs fiasco
Let us not forget, the reason he went to Dallas in the first place was he was trailing in the polls (probably because of #1 & #2)
GW Bush:
Won Wars in Afganistan and Iraq. (War loses to defeat a country of 25 million = less then 1K)
I'll see your two fiasco's and raise ya a Victory......
Red
Edited to add:
QUOTE
But it seems to me that, questions or not, the fallout from the video is serving the pro-war faction of our government quite well. Swell--let's go out and kill more people. That'll fix it, right?
P.E.: Look at the Video. We are not dealing with the Germans in WW2 or even the Japanese in WW2. They did unbeleivable acts upon our men, but this sinks to a level of crap rarely seen before.
Kill a few more? Sadly, that might be the only choice. That or wait until it is us, not Nick Berg under the knife. If I am going to guess wrong, it will be on the side that assures I am not next.
And if JFK had not been assassinated, what would he have done? Perhaps corrected his mistakes? I wonder if G.W. is capable of correcting his mistakes even if he were big enough to acknowledge them..... 
Kennedy was also known for the things he did RIGHT to promote civil rights.
Jimmy Carter, for all of his alleged incompetence as a President, brokered a peace agreement between Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat.
And the two victories for George W. Bush? Afghanistan--let's see--bin Laden not captured, the Taliban coming back in to set up shop, more troops being sent back there to weed the garden again...some victory. It's like bombing for cockroaches only to see them back the following month.
Iraq--now there's a victory--ever since we "won" we've been losing, especially lives. Now there is more active terrorism in the "liberated" country (not occupied, mind you) than there ever was under the rule of Saddam Hussein. Some victory.
That is George W. Bush's legacy? Heaven help us all.
Kennedy was also known for the things he did RIGHT to promote civil rights.
Jimmy Carter, for all of his alleged incompetence as a President, brokered a peace agreement between Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat.
And the two victories for George W. Bush? Afghanistan--let's see--bin Laden not captured, the Taliban coming back in to set up shop, more troops being sent back there to weed the garden again...some victory. It's like bombing for cockroaches only to see them back the following month.
Iraq--now there's a victory--ever since we "won" we've been losing, especially lives. Now there is more active terrorism in the "liberated" country (not occupied, mind you) than there ever was under the rule of Saddam Hussein. Some victory.
That is George W. Bush's legacy? Heaven help us all.
QUOTE(Paladin Elspeth @ May 13 2004, 04:50 PM)
Alternatively, Irwin, the simpler explanation can always be considered. Occam's Razor, when it's cooked down, states that the simplest explanation is usually the right one.
Simply put, the Bush administration is the most incompetent one we've had, and it uses an extraordinary amount of secretiveness in an effort to conceal just how incompetent it is.
Does that sound more plausible to the Show Me crowd? If not, remember that Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
Simply put, the Bush administration is the most incompetent one we've had, and it uses an extraordinary amount of secretiveness in an effort to conceal just how incompetent it is.
Does that sound more plausible to the Show Me crowd? If not, remember that Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
PE...do you seriously think that the conspiracy scenario is the simplest explanation here?
Breaking down just a few of Unabomber's 'inconsistencies' we have a staged decapitation of a man wearing a suit that looks "suspicious" (why, I didn't know), carried out by non-Arabs, but some lighter-skinned men, speaking supposed bad Arabic (which millions of Arabs would not pick up on, but an American might).
There were probably two cameras used, I agree with that. There was a scream coming from the back, as the knife came out. A few seconds later, the victim was screaming as he was cut. There is not much mystery there. No reason to conclude that others weren't present and watching as those five spoke into the camera. Absolutely no reason to conclude that Bush staged the whole thing, and it takes a very UNSIMPLE pattern of reasoning to come up with that.
QUOTE
And if JFK had not been assassinated, what would he have done? Perhaps corrected his mistakes? I wonder if G.W. is capable of correcting his mistakes even if he were big enough to acknowledge them.....
Funny, Vietnam, with 53,000 deaths, not a mistake. Iraq with less then 1,000 = mistake.
Did JFK admit to that Marilyn Monroe thing? Pain Killers?
GW Bush = Tax Cuts (I love the guy) Dealing with a terrorist attack that killed 3000+ (One of the photo's that will go down in History of Greatness is GWB standing on the ruble telling the world we will not be defeated)
Cuba a free nation?
That Middle East Peace thing? Hows that comin
55 mph national speed limit?
Oil Shortage?
Hostages taken in Iran, failed rescue mission.........
red - you're way off-topic.
DEBATE:
Is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
Why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
DEBATE:
Is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
Why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
QUOTE
PE...do you seriously think that the conspiracy scenario is the simplest explanation here?
I'm sorry, Mrs. P, I must not have been clear. To the contrary, the simplest explanation is that the Bush presidency is incredibly incompetent and secretive, and that while the administration is not responsible for the beheading of Mr. Berg, it is certainly making political hay while the sun is shining.
First post:
Unabomber, you do sound like a conspiracy nut
I understand what you are saying and I agree. I commend you for being willing to step forward and sound "crazy" I just sat here and repeatedly clicked the play /pause button on my media player over the last 30 or so seconds of the beheading.
First, there is a lack of blood, but that can be because the video is so grainy or because the floor and the jumpsuit just happens to be a shade of red.
Second, I didn't think about it at first but the voice is in the forefront, like some kind of cheap porn. If the splice is a difference in cameras being used as some have suggested there would have been a break in the audio, right. Well, there is not. The audio plays right over the splice continuously.
Thirdly, there are few splices but they come at very crucial times. Berg is obviously alive right before the splice where they throw him on the ground
At minute 4:38 they splice after they push him to the ground but before they start sawing in ernest
At minute 4:42-4:43 there is another splice in which 6 seconds are lost on the camera clock. Not only that there appears to be a person with Khaki pants and a blue shirt at exactly 4:43 He is on the right side and it looks like just the shirt, pants, and belt. After really looking it could just be a shadow, you tell me what you think.
At minute 5:17, and this is important to me, in the video it appears that he just pulls the head off of Bergs shoulders. Not so. There actually is another splice the body is repositioned the head of Berg is now in hand.
People need to look at this video and decide for themselves I think. When I saw it at first I was horrified, now I question the authenticity. It just seem, again, too much coincidence that here would be so many splices , overtones, good timing, and the fact the FBI was holding this guy, and his father is blaming the government. What's going on??
But you sounded like a conspiracy nut, and now so do I. But to your last question: Yes the government is capable of doing whatever necessary to continue it's agenda. I think the there is something fishy about the beheading. Berg is certainly dead, IMO. Who killed him...don't know. I don't think that I am looking at him die on the video, though. But it doesn't matter. Belief is too powerful to overcome, most people would dismiss the inconsistencies without even looking at the ones that are pointed out to them.
Droop out
Ignorance is bliss...
Unabomber, you do sound like a conspiracy nut
I understand what you are saying and I agree. I commend you for being willing to step forward and sound "crazy" I just sat here and repeatedly clicked the play /pause button on my media player over the last 30 or so seconds of the beheading. First, there is a lack of blood, but that can be because the video is so grainy or because the floor and the jumpsuit just happens to be a shade of red.
Second, I didn't think about it at first but the voice is in the forefront, like some kind of cheap porn. If the splice is a difference in cameras being used as some have suggested there would have been a break in the audio, right. Well, there is not. The audio plays right over the splice continuously.
Thirdly, there are few splices but they come at very crucial times. Berg is obviously alive right before the splice where they throw him on the ground
At minute 4:38 they splice after they push him to the ground but before they start sawing in ernest
At minute 4:42-4:43 there is another splice in which 6 seconds are lost on the camera clock. Not only that there appears to be a person with Khaki pants and a blue shirt at exactly 4:43 He is on the right side and it looks like just the shirt, pants, and belt. After really looking it could just be a shadow, you tell me what you think.
At minute 5:17, and this is important to me, in the video it appears that he just pulls the head off of Bergs shoulders. Not so. There actually is another splice the body is repositioned the head of Berg is now in hand.
People need to look at this video and decide for themselves I think. When I saw it at first I was horrified, now I question the authenticity. It just seem, again, too much coincidence that here would be so many splices , overtones, good timing, and the fact the FBI was holding this guy, and his father is blaming the government. What's going on??
But you sounded like a conspiracy nut, and now so do I. But to your last question: Yes the government is capable of doing whatever necessary to continue it's agenda. I think the there is something fishy about the beheading. Berg is certainly dead, IMO. Who killed him...don't know. I don't think that I am looking at him die on the video, though. But it doesn't matter. Belief is too powerful to overcome, most people would dismiss the inconsistencies without even looking at the ones that are pointed out to them.
Droop out
Ignorance is bliss...
I do not see anything that suggests such a thing. This isnt even a coincidence. This is like when Michael Moore wanted to link the Kosovo bombing to Columbine. Its two war time events that became public at the same time. Bush is a bad president not the antichrist. I dont think Bush would allow the slaughter of an American just to take heat off of himself. Im sorry but I find that inprobable and about as insane as a comic book plot.
Sorry droop, I have to disagree.
The audio has to be spliced. First you can hear a small thump right before the screaming starts, secondly, if it was all a production, why would the screaming start before they are done reading, an actor would have waited for the action. Either way, there has to be two recordings, hence an audio splice, horribly done timing-wise too.
I believe what you are seeing in gray is one cameraman being filmed by another, its definately a person who looks as if to be holding something and not participating.
The splice at 5:17 I believe comes from this second camera, actually the first from the speech. The six second lapse to me is because the job was not being done very effectively and they cut to make it not look like they were just doing a pathetically bad job. I mean they have to look competant, if it was taking too long it just makes them look not so tough and bad at it. It had to look like swift justice, not a botched job. Notice they all go quiet while they wait and somebody urges them to keep shouting.
I believe he is alive during, for a short time- check it out again, its a knee to chest struggle, about the only thing he can do. He is pulling down and away using the stomach muscles and causing a crunch type action in the body as his knees come up slightly but hes held at the feet also.
Ok those are the technicalities, however,
I found the story about Nicks password being stolen from him in Oklahoma. It was broken by CBS correspondent David Martin.
'U.S. officials say the FBI questioned Berg in 2002 after a computer password Berg used in college turned up in the possession of Zaccarias Moussaoui, the al Qaeda operative arrested shortly before 9/11 for his suspicious activity at a flight school in Minnesota.'
Now either Nick Berg is the unluckiest guy in the world, to have his password mistakenly stolen by an Al-Qaida suspect, too go to Iraq in the middle of a war- to be held (for 2 weeks) by noone who will admit it (Iraqi police also say they never had him) and subsequently kidnapped and killed , or there is more to this story than meets the eye.
The timeline is also strange, the reports state the body was found over the weekend, some say Monday, yet the family was notified on Monday, and the video released on tuesday, its all too fast. How they identified Bergs body and notified the family in less than 2 days, especially with time differences seems like a military miracle.
Also how they worked the videos and audio for quik release in a matter of 2 days.
We could propose he was killed earlier, but the torture story only broke 6 days before, so thats what is being worked with.
Berg also told his family, after his release that the DOD could not find him a flight out so he was going to leave Iraq overland through Jordan or Turkey, and was kidnapped instead within 3 days. The whole overland thing now sounds like a stall. Im not sure who he was working for or who he was lying to but something stinks.
Also I didnt know terrorists were so well fed as the fat guys in the vid. Youd think they'd have to be on the run. The killers hands are white as well. Its not the vid either, the guy whos holding hims' hands are brown, the comparison is stark, although this means nothing really. He just doesnt spend much time in Iraqs blazing sun, maybe an 'indoor' terrorist.
The audio has to be spliced. First you can hear a small thump right before the screaming starts, secondly, if it was all a production, why would the screaming start before they are done reading, an actor would have waited for the action. Either way, there has to be two recordings, hence an audio splice, horribly done timing-wise too.
I believe what you are seeing in gray is one cameraman being filmed by another, its definately a person who looks as if to be holding something and not participating.
The splice at 5:17 I believe comes from this second camera, actually the first from the speech. The six second lapse to me is because the job was not being done very effectively and they cut to make it not look like they were just doing a pathetically bad job. I mean they have to look competant, if it was taking too long it just makes them look not so tough and bad at it. It had to look like swift justice, not a botched job. Notice they all go quiet while they wait and somebody urges them to keep shouting.
I believe he is alive during, for a short time- check it out again, its a knee to chest struggle, about the only thing he can do. He is pulling down and away using the stomach muscles and causing a crunch type action in the body as his knees come up slightly but hes held at the feet also.
Ok those are the technicalities, however,
I found the story about Nicks password being stolen from him in Oklahoma. It was broken by CBS correspondent David Martin.
'U.S. officials say the FBI questioned Berg in 2002 after a computer password Berg used in college turned up in the possession of Zaccarias Moussaoui, the al Qaeda operative arrested shortly before 9/11 for his suspicious activity at a flight school in Minnesota.'
Now either Nick Berg is the unluckiest guy in the world, to have his password mistakenly stolen by an Al-Qaida suspect, too go to Iraq in the middle of a war- to be held (for 2 weeks) by noone who will admit it (Iraqi police also say they never had him) and subsequently kidnapped and killed , or there is more to this story than meets the eye.
The timeline is also strange, the reports state the body was found over the weekend, some say Monday, yet the family was notified on Monday, and the video released on tuesday, its all too fast. How they identified Bergs body and notified the family in less than 2 days, especially with time differences seems like a military miracle.
Also how they worked the videos and audio for quik release in a matter of 2 days.
We could propose he was killed earlier, but the torture story only broke 6 days before, so thats what is being worked with.
Berg also told his family, after his release that the DOD could not find him a flight out so he was going to leave Iraq overland through Jordan or Turkey, and was kidnapped instead within 3 days. The whole overland thing now sounds like a stall. Im not sure who he was working for or who he was lying to but something stinks.
Also I didnt know terrorists were so well fed as the fat guys in the vid. Youd think they'd have to be on the run. The killers hands are white as well. Its not the vid either, the guy whos holding hims' hands are brown, the comparison is stark, although this means nothing really. He just doesnt spend much time in Iraqs blazing sun, maybe an 'indoor' terrorist.
Now I'm really going to sound like a conspiracy nut.
In many ways, conspiracies are what they are precisely because they can't be proven. I don't think Bush is running this country any more than you or I. The coincidence in terms of timing, are there to remotivate the country to redouble our efforts in Iraq. Listen to people around you. "They're animals!!", "What happened in the prison is nothing compared to that beheading", and so on.
This is so much bigger than Bush. My opinion on the video really doesn't include Bush knowing about it or ordering the slaughter of the young man. But if some American believed in this war, would they be willing to behead a dead man to showcase the "barbaric" nature of the enemy?? I think so.
Like I said, I am not suggesting that Berg is not dead, I am questioning whether I am looking at his actual murder. How can any of us be even a little sure with that many splices and missing seconds at the very key intervals I pointed out.
I just want to clear that up before people start suggesting that I think Bush is personally responsible for the death of Berg.
In many ways, conspiracies are what they are precisely because they can't be proven. I don't think Bush is running this country any more than you or I. The coincidence in terms of timing, are there to remotivate the country to redouble our efforts in Iraq. Listen to people around you. "They're animals!!", "What happened in the prison is nothing compared to that beheading", and so on.
This is so much bigger than Bush. My opinion on the video really doesn't include Bush knowing about it or ordering the slaughter of the young man. But if some American believed in this war, would they be willing to behead a dead man to showcase the "barbaric" nature of the enemy?? I think so.
Like I said, I am not suggesting that Berg is not dead, I am questioning whether I am looking at his actual murder. How can any of us be even a little sure with that many splices and missing seconds at the very key intervals I pointed out.
I just want to clear that up before people start suggesting that I think Bush is personally responsible for the death of Berg.
QUOTE(kalabus @ May 14 2004, 05:20 AM)
I dont think Bush would allow the slaughter of an American just to take heat off of himself. Im sorry but I find that inprobable and about as insane as a comic book plot.
huh? Isn't this they guy who, as Texan governor, fried lots of criminals because that's what played well at the polls. Do we really think his personal commitment to CP (which I do not doubt is sincerely held) is such that he'd have instituted it to the same extent if he hadn't thought it would get him re-elected?
I don't believe that this was anything other than cold-blooded murder by Islamic extremists - and I hope that Mr Berg haunts every man in that room every night until the day they die spitting their own blood the way he haunted me last night after watching that damned video footage.
But I don't think that Bush's unwillingess to sacrifice the lives of American citizens for what he thinks is important (be that a matter of principle or his own political skin) is a reason to think that there is no conspiracy here.
As for discrepancies in the video, I really don't want to watch it again to see if I can spot them. Maybe that's me playing into the hands of the mysterious deceivers - I can live with that. Maybe if I thought it was my government doing this in my name, I'd feel more willing to put myself through the gruesome task of watching and rewatching it.
But then, maybe the people apparently killing Nick Berg in the video are murders and terrorists and not VTR editors?
Maybe Berg didn't react the way he is "supposed" to react because he was drugged? Or just terrified?
Do we even know if he understood Arabic? To me, he didn't look like he expected anything much except to be sat in front of a camera. Until he started to fidget a bit during the interminable statement reading, I thought he was asleep (or already dead?).
As with all conspiracy theories, my default setting is Hanlon's Razor (as in my sig).
QUOTE(Paladin Elspeth @ May 14 2004, 12:58 AM)
I'm sorry, Mrs. P, I must not have been clear. To the contrary, the simplest explanation is that the Bush presidency is incredibly incompetent and secretive, and that while the administration is not responsible for the beheading of Mr. Berg, it is certainly making political hay while the sun is shining.
Huh? How does the incompetent behavior of the Bush administration have anything to do with this? Did the administration's incompetent behavior have something to do with the murder of Danny Pearl in your mind?
No, I think the main person (at least on here) trying to attempt to make political hay out of the brutal murder of this young man is you.....and it's a pretty bad attempt at that.
QUOTE(Irwin @ May 14 2004, 09:39 AM)
QUOTE(Paladin Elspeth @ May 14 2004, 12:58 AM)
I'm sorry, Mrs. P, I must not have been clear. To the contrary, the simplest explanation is that the Bush presidency is incredibly incompetent and secretive, and that while the administration is not responsible for the beheading of Mr. Berg, it is certainly making political hay while the sun is shining.
Huh? How does the incompetent behavior of the Bush administration have anything to do with this? Did the administration's incompetent behavior have something to do with the murder of Danny Pearl in your mind?
No, I think the main person (at least on here) trying to attempt to make political hay out of the brutal murder of this young man is you.....and it's a pretty bad attempt at that.
Pardon me, Irwin, but it was under Bush's watch that the abu Ghraib prison was reopened by the Americans, under Bush's watch that the terrorists were invited (remember that masterful statement of er, diplomacy, "Bring it on") to come in fight our troops who had enough on their plate, thank you very much, under Bush's watch that soldiers brought down a year of good work "to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis" by abusing prisoners in Saddam's old haunt.
The beheading of Nicholas Berg did not occur in a vacuum. At a time when Americans and people all over the world are shaming the administration and our country for the actions of the unsupervised soldiers under Bush's watch, can you honestly say that this outrage on the part of the terrorists was not timely to provide a counterbalance?
If so, check postings in other threads where prisoner abuse is compared to beheadings favorably and hence, the abuse was somehow justified! I'm angry too, Irwin.
there is another MAJOR inconsitancy that has developed in the past few days with the Islamist extremists killed berg theory:
a real fundamentalist muslim would NOT be wearing gold.
I think I should also point out Prometheus Methods Tower Services Inc. has no records with the Pennsylvania Department of State. this doesn't mean there is no such company as Prometheus Methods Tower Services Inc., but as Brian McDonald, spokesman for the state department, points out "You’d be very foolish not to register your business with the department," he said. "It is nearly impossible to exist without doing it."
to me, it sounds like prometheus methods was a cover. take into account his trip to israel (which I suppose could be explained of as he was in the area, and being a jew decided to visit the wailing wall or some other holy site) the reports he was carrying a quran, anti-semitic book, had contact at the University of Oklahoma with someone that has possible ties to 9/11, (http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/breaking_news/8654371.htm?1c) and that he INSISTED on going home through kuwait, and I almost seems like he was a spy trying to infiltrate terrorist groups. (not saying he WAS, just that it's kindof suspicious) notice also how on the video he was wearing a beard similar to what islamic militants wear?
there are simply to many holes in the theory he was killed by AQ for it to hold any water. by the way, while proponets of the official story denounce these arguments (inclding my first) as conspiracy theory, I would like them to think about something: there is NO way they know who the man in the middle was.
(there is little to no evidence to support it was al-zarqawi, in fact most of the evidence supports the theory that it WASN'T him.
first, he was supposed to have had a leg amputated:
yet the man in the video is obviously not disabled.
second, he is seen wearing a golden ring, which islam forbids. no fundamentalist muslim would wear gold, kinda like catholics are forbidden to have homosexual rela...
bad example.
third he is reported to be dead, Iraq militants claim al-Zarqawi is dead so unless he is jesus, he could NOT have killed berg)
in reality the official story of what happened to Berg is actually nothing more then an "official" conspiracy theory. but I suppose because it's th GOVERNMENT that says it is so, it automatically is. how people can think that a politician is lying when his lips are moving yet believe what happened with something like the berg inciden is beyond me!!
I guess if the government says something it is automatically true
QUOTE
A close examination of the tape shows none of the five masked men is wearing gloves, so federal officials are trying to determine if there are any tell-tale tattoos on their hands. One of the clues the FBI and CIA is studying is the large gold ring "Zarqawi" is wearing on his right hand, giving off a glare several times during the six-minute tape. (Behind the Masks
a real fundamentalist muslim would NOT be wearing gold.
QUOTE
(http://ssmu.mcgill.ca/icn/merits.html - 3/4 or so down)
In the area of clothing and adornment, men are forbidden the extravagance of wearing gold.
In the area of clothing and adornment, men are forbidden the extravagance of wearing gold.
QUOTE
( http://www.ourdialogue.com/s12.htm )
This is due to the fact that when the Prophet wanted to make the ruling concerning silk clear, he took silk in one hand and gold in the other and said: "These two are forbidden for the men of any nation, permissible for women."
This is due to the fact that when the Prophet wanted to make the ruling concerning silk clear, he took silk in one hand and gold in the other and said: "These two are forbidden for the men of any nation, permissible for women."
I think I should also point out Prometheus Methods Tower Services Inc. has no records with the Pennsylvania Department of State. this doesn't mean there is no such company as Prometheus Methods Tower Services Inc., but as Brian McDonald, spokesman for the state department, points out "You’d be very foolish not to register your business with the department," he said. "It is nearly impossible to exist without doing it."
to me, it sounds like prometheus methods was a cover. take into account his trip to israel (which I suppose could be explained of as he was in the area, and being a jew decided to visit the wailing wall or some other holy site) the reports he was carrying a quran, anti-semitic book, had contact at the University of Oklahoma with someone that has possible ties to 9/11, (http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/breaking_news/8654371.htm?1c) and that he INSISTED on going home through kuwait, and I almost seems like he was a spy trying to infiltrate terrorist groups. (not saying he WAS, just that it's kindof suspicious) notice also how on the video he was wearing a beard similar to what islamic militants wear?
there are simply to many holes in the theory he was killed by AQ for it to hold any water. by the way, while proponets of the official story denounce these arguments (inclding my first) as conspiracy theory, I would like them to think about something: there is NO way they know who the man in the middle was.
(there is little to no evidence to support it was al-zarqawi, in fact most of the evidence supports the theory that it WASN'T him.
first, he was supposed to have had a leg amputated:
QUOTE(http://www.emergency.com/2004/abu_Musab_Zarqawi.htm)
When Zarqawi was 20, he went to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, according to The Wall Street Journal. He was jailed after returning to Jordan in a round-up of Afghanistan veterans whom authorities feared would spark unrest.
Following his release in 1999, he returned to Afghanistan to meet with Qaeda leaders and began recruiting his own followers, the Journal reported. He was reportedly wounded in Afghanistan during the 2001 U.S.-led war and fled to Baghdad, where his injured leg was amputated.
and Following his release in 1999, he returned to Afghanistan to meet with Qaeda leaders and began recruiting his own followers, the Journal reported. He was reportedly wounded in Afghanistan during the 2001 U.S.-led war and fled to Baghdad, where his injured leg was amputated.
QUOTE(http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/06/us.zarqawi/)
Before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, President Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell and other administration officials pointed to intelligence that they said suggested al-Zarqawi had had his leg amputated in Baghdad.
yet the man in the video is obviously not disabled.
second, he is seen wearing a golden ring, which islam forbids. no fundamentalist muslim would wear gold, kinda like catholics are forbidden to have homosexual rela...
bad example. third he is reported to be dead, Iraq militants claim al-Zarqawi is dead so unless he is jesus, he could NOT have killed berg)
in reality the official story of what happened to Berg is actually nothing more then an "official" conspiracy theory. but I suppose because it's th GOVERNMENT that says it is so, it automatically is. how people can think that a politician is lying when his lips are moving yet believe what happened with something like the berg inciden is beyond me!!
I guess if the government says something it is automatically true
At this point- I am not really buying a conspiracy as much as a tragically stupid man. He should definately be up for a Darwin award- and I am sorry, but not one iota of our time should be wasted on avenging the stupid.
This man was beheaded. His corpse was found without a head. I think it is being returned to his parents sometime soon (the corpse, not the head).
Some time back, a US military plane crashed into a mountain. The Commerce Secretary (Ron Brown) was killed in the crash. Republicans jumped on this as a conspiracy by Clinton to murder him. Books were written and the talk shows talked of nothing else for a while.
Now, a previously unknown American citizen was killed in Iraq. Some Democrat supporters are saying that he was killed by the Bush Admistration. Why? Because his killing has evoked anger and passion that may help Bush's standings in the polls.
If something terrible happens, that may dent your party's chance of election, then you must call it to be untrue and administered by your political enemy. Well, if you are dishonest that is. Anyone who believes this nonsense should (and probably does already) listen to the Art Bell radio show. He has fascinating guests who tell you how the Aliens towed the moon here. He also often interviews a guy who is frequently visited by the Founding Fathers, who are really time-travelers from the future. Oh, BTW, he also has live interviews with humans who are the children of Aliens.
Does it matter if they faked the video to scare us? Does it matter if he was probably dead already and they cut off his head later? They killed the man, and if you believe that the George Bush ordered it, then you must believe that Clinton killed Ron Brown.
Some time back, a US military plane crashed into a mountain. The Commerce Secretary (Ron Brown) was killed in the crash. Republicans jumped on this as a conspiracy by Clinton to murder him. Books were written and the talk shows talked of nothing else for a while.
Now, a previously unknown American citizen was killed in Iraq. Some Democrat supporters are saying that he was killed by the Bush Admistration. Why? Because his killing has evoked anger and passion that may help Bush's standings in the polls.
If something terrible happens, that may dent your party's chance of election, then you must call it to be untrue and administered by your political enemy. Well, if you are dishonest that is. Anyone who believes this nonsense should (and probably does already) listen to the Art Bell radio show. He has fascinating guests who tell you how the Aliens towed the moon here. He also often interviews a guy who is frequently visited by the Founding Fathers, who are really time-travelers from the future. Oh, BTW, he also has live interviews with humans who are the children of Aliens.
Does it matter if they faked the video to scare us? Does it matter if he was probably dead already and they cut off his head later? They killed the man, and if you believe that the George Bush ordered it, then you must believe that Clinton killed Ron Brown.
Confused.
I dont think anyone here is actually saying such a thing The case is really interesting...full of wierd twists, the video is rife with inconsistancies, from the way they look to what they are wearing, changing from beginning to end, to the killing itself, besides all of Nick Bergs peculiar actions and a series of very unlucky questionings and detainments, starting with his password being used by a terrorist suspect in 911. You have to admit, its a bit of a strange string of coincidences at least?
I think this thread has served some of us who are curious about what really happened and why, to hash out what we know and share what we have seen that others may not have found. In a way to bring together the details of the case and inspect them as a whole.
I dont think anyone here has come to any hard conclusions, and noone is blaming anyone and the question for debate never pointed to Bush.
The question for me is, was this someone other than Al-Qaida? And was it real?
The US claimed that the speech names Al-Qaida. Translators have said this is untrue, Al -Qaeda is never mentioned in the speech. The claim that it is Zarqawi has also been debunked by those that know him, by the fact that he has an artificial leg, that the accent of the speech maker is not Jordanian.
A person with white hands, with a gold ring supposedly did the killing. This is completely inconsistant with Muslim culture. The man to the far right especially is too white, with a western, not mid-eastern stance. Iraqi's and certainly terrorists are not either as tall nor stocky and well-fed as all participants who are almost all too white.
At least two of the 5 fidget with their headresses constantly. Some of the clothing is inconsistant from the beginning of the film to the end. You can notice that several have white markings on thier clothing, said to be maybe bullet proof vests that are not on them at the end, especially the guy in a white scarf who was the really tall one, who holds the head at the end, suddenly the camera man is taller than the head bearer... who is not the original cutter who was in a black ski mask. Doctors have said the film has to be a fake, as if you are terrified your heart is beating miles a minute, the blood loss is too minimal as well as the final head shots make no sense by lack of dripping. There is virtually no blood spatter, not even on the hands of the knife wielder.
Muslim Professors have said that a beheading is condemmed by Islam , but if you were to slaughter someone that a prayer would be said for the victim, even in the case of revenge which was not done. Some claim the Saudis who often behead, do it differently, cleaner and from the back in one fell swoop.
The orange suit is a big problem, since a prisoner would be held in Arab attire not to attract attention, remember Nick Berg was held for a month. And where did the US issue orange suit come from?
Then I notice that the US government has not said a peep besides the initial condemnation. Perhaps a 'wag the dog' scenario was too evident, (because a few news agencies, EVEN in Texas stated that it was all too convenient), and the Berg family has caused many problems for the Admin over this case.
There is the latest of news, that the posting of the video was based in England and Denmark, now servers what they are...however, remember we are dealing with only 1 and 1/2 days from the killing to the heavily spliced and edited tape to release...
Confused, now you say the corpse was found without a head. I have no confirmation for that, however, the body was found on Sat the 8th. Identified by the US, and the family notified by Monday the 10th. How is this possible? Thats 1 and 1/2 days?
I have yet to hear from military people on this ( strangley! who are always quik to point out other discrepancies in my posts), but it seems unrealistically expedient, especially when you find a decapitated body on the side of the road, it took only a minimal time to identify and inform the family? Why was the Berg family so important to be notified so soon?
Youd think to know more before you tell the family their son has been beheaded but dont have a clue how or by whom. And in a war zone why would they give so much attention to this case?
The whole thing is messy, and there is a lot to discuss about it. Im glad we have been able to do that here, without people going wild about anyone who wants to know being nutters who think the moon landing was fake. Thats a way of deciding to be uninformed and dismiss for the sake of it.
QUOTE
They killed the man, and if you believe that the George Bush ordered it, then you must believe that Clinton killed Ron Brown.
I dont think anyone here is actually saying such a thing The case is really interesting...full of wierd twists, the video is rife with inconsistancies, from the way they look to what they are wearing, changing from beginning to end, to the killing itself, besides all of Nick Bergs peculiar actions and a series of very unlucky questionings and detainments, starting with his password being used by a terrorist suspect in 911. You have to admit, its a bit of a strange string of coincidences at least?
I think this thread has served some of us who are curious about what really happened and why, to hash out what we know and share what we have seen that others may not have found. In a way to bring together the details of the case and inspect them as a whole.
I dont think anyone here has come to any hard conclusions, and noone is blaming anyone and the question for debate never pointed to Bush.
The question for me is, was this someone other than Al-Qaida? And was it real?
The US claimed that the speech names Al-Qaida. Translators have said this is untrue, Al -Qaeda is never mentioned in the speech. The claim that it is Zarqawi has also been debunked by those that know him, by the fact that he has an artificial leg, that the accent of the speech maker is not Jordanian.
A person with white hands, with a gold ring supposedly did the killing. This is completely inconsistant with Muslim culture. The man to the far right especially is too white, with a western, not mid-eastern stance. Iraqi's and certainly terrorists are not either as tall nor stocky and well-fed as all participants who are almost all too white.
At least two of the 5 fidget with their headresses constantly. Some of the clothing is inconsistant from the beginning of the film to the end. You can notice that several have white markings on thier clothing, said to be maybe bullet proof vests that are not on them at the end, especially the guy in a white scarf who was the really tall one, who holds the head at the end, suddenly the camera man is taller than the head bearer... who is not the original cutter who was in a black ski mask. Doctors have said the film has to be a fake, as if you are terrified your heart is beating miles a minute, the blood loss is too minimal as well as the final head shots make no sense by lack of dripping. There is virtually no blood spatter, not even on the hands of the knife wielder.
Muslim Professors have said that a beheading is condemmed by Islam , but if you were to slaughter someone that a prayer would be said for the victim, even in the case of revenge which was not done. Some claim the Saudis who often behead, do it differently, cleaner and from the back in one fell swoop.
The orange suit is a big problem, since a prisoner would be held in Arab attire not to attract attention, remember Nick Berg was held for a month. And where did the US issue orange suit come from?
Then I notice that the US government has not said a peep besides the initial condemnation. Perhaps a 'wag the dog' scenario was too evident, (because a few news agencies, EVEN in Texas stated that it was all too convenient), and the Berg family has caused many problems for the Admin over this case.
There is the latest of news, that the posting of the video was based in England and Denmark, now servers what they are...however, remember we are dealing with only 1 and 1/2 days from the killing to the heavily spliced and edited tape to release...
Confused, now you say the corpse was found without a head. I have no confirmation for that, however, the body was found on Sat the 8th. Identified by the US, and the family notified by Monday the 10th. How is this possible? Thats 1 and 1/2 days?
I have yet to hear from military people on this ( strangley! who are always quik to point out other discrepancies in my posts), but it seems unrealistically expedient, especially when you find a decapitated body on the side of the road, it took only a minimal time to identify and inform the family? Why was the Berg family so important to be notified so soon?
Youd think to know more before you tell the family their son has been beheaded but dont have a clue how or by whom. And in a war zone why would they give so much attention to this case?
The whole thing is messy, and there is a lot to discuss about it. Im glad we have been able to do that here, without people going wild about anyone who wants to know being nutters who think the moon landing was fake. Thats a way of deciding to be uninformed and dismiss for the sake of it.
QUOTE
Now, a previously unknown American citizen was killed in Iraq. Some Democrat supporters are saying that he was killed by the Bush Admistration. Why? Because his killing has evoked anger and passion that may help Bush's standings in the polls.
Who said the Bush administration did it? I must not be reading the postings carefully enough.
QUOTE
Then I notice that the US government has not said a peep besides the initial condemnation. Perhaps a 'wag the dog' scenario was too evident, (because a few news agencies, EVEN in Texas stated that it was all too convenient), and the Berg family has caused many problems for the Admin over this case.
As far as the administration goes, it was John Ashcroft who, when commenting about the horrible murder, intoned that this was why the troops are over there fighting. And that is what I mean by making political hay.
Confused,
I don't think I can add too much to what was said by Artemise and P. Elspeth, but I want to say that while I don't think Bush ordered any fake video personally, I do not doubt that he would exploit a tape of a beheading to further his agenda. I am speaking from viewing his previous experiences of molding people's fears and angers to galvanize support for his cause.
I don't think I can add too much to what was said by Artemise and P. Elspeth, but I want to say that while I don't think Bush ordered any fake video personally, I do not doubt that he would exploit a tape of a beheading to further his agenda. I am speaking from viewing his previous experiences of molding people's fears and angers to galvanize support for his cause.
OK, technically, nobody is saying Bush ordred the killing. But, from the opening post, I read that it is being implied in stronger terms than an inuendo. Ok, they don't name Bush, but who else is is in charge of this Irag occupancy? I'll leave you with some quotes from the opening post. You decide in which direction these opinions are attempting to direct you.
******
…the timing of the release of the video. it conviently coincides with the abu ghraib torture scandel. most media is now focusing on the beheading and not the torture. (though it still comes up) this is of paticular advantage to bush. people are now focused on the beheading instead of the torture. I find it strange this video came out JUST as bush needed it….
…third, what's up with that jumpsuit? out of the hostage/pow photos I have seen, non had any with coalition pows/hostages in jumpsuits. there are however photos of prisoners in the same type of jump suit: such as this one, this one, this one and this one.…
The links lead you to prisoners held by the US. (Confused’s comment)
…fourth, if you look at the hands of the people responsible, their skin is fair light colored, not like you would expect to see on an arab…
…some of the voices sound rather western…
…both weapons are western and very expensive…
…this one is rather ominous. prior to be "kidnapped", mr Berg was being held by iraq and US authorities
…do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)…
******
…the timing of the release of the video. it conviently coincides with the abu ghraib torture scandel. most media is now focusing on the beheading and not the torture. (though it still comes up) this is of paticular advantage to bush. people are now focused on the beheading instead of the torture. I find it strange this video came out JUST as bush needed it….
…third, what's up with that jumpsuit? out of the hostage/pow photos I have seen, non had any with coalition pows/hostages in jumpsuits. there are however photos of prisoners in the same type of jump suit: such as this one, this one, this one and this one.…
The links lead you to prisoners held by the US. (Confused’s comment)
…fourth, if you look at the hands of the people responsible, their skin is fair light colored, not like you would expect to see on an arab…
…some of the voices sound rather western…
…both weapons are western and very expensive…
…this one is rather ominous. prior to be "kidnapped", mr Berg was being held by iraq and US authorities
…do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)…
Well confused, youve just made my argument for me without my ever having to have said so.
The points were valid. You might consider them as you re-wrote them.
There is a cover-up in the Nick Berg case, even if its only about what he was really doing in Iraq.
The points were valid. You might consider them as you re-wrote them.
There is a cover-up in the Nick Berg case, even if its only about what he was really doing in Iraq.
QUOTE(Confused @ May 16 2004, 10:15 PM)
OK, technically, nobody is saying Bush ordred the killing.
Actually, yes. The questions to be debated are:
1) is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
2) why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
3) do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
One and three suggest that Bush (or "the government") ordered this. Apparently, the administration is so inept they aren't even able to obtain a real Arab to do the dirty work. We don't have any of those in America. Guess they should've used mystic tan to make themselves look more authentic.
QUOTE
We don't have any of those in America. Guess they should've used mystic tan to make themselves look more authentic.
Well, maybe they couldnt get it all together in just 6 days. No need for mystic tan in Iraq, so it would have had to be flown in from the states.
If you want to be sarcastic, perhaps you can explain to us why' Zarqawi' is wearing a gold ring?
Or the 1 and 1/2 days from finding the body to identifying it and notifying the family?
Or any of the other points being made here. Or perhaps you prefer we just dont ask, dont tell?
QUOTE(Artemise @ May 17 2004, 03:00 PM)
[
If you want to be sarcastic, perhaps you can explain to us why' Zarqawi' is wearing a gold ring?
Or the 1 and 1/2 days from finding the body to identifying it and notifying the family?
Or any of the other points being made here. Or perhaps you prefer we just dont ask, dont tell?
If you want to be sarcastic, perhaps you can explain to us why' Zarqawi' is wearing a gold ring?
Or the 1 and 1/2 days from finding the body to identifying it and notifying the family?
Or any of the other points being made here. Or perhaps you prefer we just dont ask, dont tell?
An Islamic website broadcasted the killing and said Zarqawi was the man who cut off Berg's head. The statement in the video was signed off with his name. The CIA says they think he was responsible for the killing. It might not be Zarqawi, but he was responsible for many deaths, has a history in Iraq, and seems to fit the profile. Either way, if Bush had planned this, I think they would have been aware of that detail. More importantly, the CIA is carefully scrutinizing the ring. If this were a government conspiracy, why would they draw it to the public's attention?
I’ve seen many Muslim men wearing gold jewelry, so it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that a terrorist absolutely wouldn’t. Supposedly, Islam is a peaceful religion, but we have a Daniel Pearl, Berg, and many bombings as examples. Zarqawi doesn't always have facial hair. Isn't that a part of the fundamentalist Islamic tradition too?
The gold ring thing is a ploy by people on here trying to add doubts for some reason.....if you want to play the speculation game, one could reasonably suppose you are trying to limit the blame on Bin Ladin and his gang of terrorists. 
The terrorists who smashed the planes into the WTC were seen drinking at bars numerous times...didn't seem to effect their sensibilities when they killed thousands of Americans in the name of Islam. Guess the religion of peace is pretty forgiving as long as you are killing infidels or beheading Jews.
The terrorists who smashed the planes into the WTC were seen drinking at bars numerous times...didn't seem to effect their sensibilities when they killed thousands of Americans in the name of Islam. Guess the religion of peace is pretty forgiving as long as you are killing infidels or beheading Jews.
QUOTE(Irwin @ May 17 2004, 09:56 PM)
Guess the religion of peace is pretty forgiving as long as you are killing infidels or beheading Jews.
Didn't Christians do the same thing during Crusades and the Holy Inquisition? What about burning Jews at the cross and Witch-Hunting? Since Islam is the youngest of the world's major religions, is it possible that it goes through the same gyrations now the Christianity went through a few centuries ago? I don't want to defend muslim fanatics but I think statements like this one seem like a sweeping generalization.
QUOTE(English Horn @ May 18 2004, 02:22 AM)
Didn't Christians do the same thing during Crusades and the Holy Inquisition? What about burning Jews at the cross and Witch-Hunting?
Yea.....a 1,000 years ago. Islam started in what, 400 AD? So its 400 hundred years younger then Christianity, yet they are still doing things done 1,000 by Christians? Yea, that's equal.
I'm talking about now, not a millennium ago. A 1,000 years ago European Christians crushed stones on homosexuals and killed women who had sex out of marriage.....Islam does this today.
FINAL WARNING BEFORE CLOSURE. We're WAY off-topic and the flame wars have GOT to stop on this forum or strikes will be issued.
TOPICS TO DEBATE:
is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
Do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
TOPICS TO DEBATE:
is it possible (even theoretically) that this was all staged to take attention away from the torture scandel (ala wag the dog)?
why are there so many inconsistencies and discrepancies in this whole thing?
Do you think are government is not above doing something like this in order to keep something under wraps? (there is speculation he might have known something quite embarrassing to the coalition)
QUOTE
Either way, if Bush had planned this, I think they would have been aware of that detail. More importantly, the CIA is carefully scrutinizing the ring. If this were a government conspiracy, why would they draw it to the public's attention?
I never said Bush planned this, I have my own theories I have not said anything about here. Bush didnt have time to plan this. Somebody did though and the profiles do not fit. A lot of things do not fit.
I havent seen anything on Berg, except the Memorial service in the mainstream news lately, I didnt know the CIA had mentioned the ring. In fact I thought it strange that the video hasn been mentioned since the first day, but guess I have missed something.
QUOTE
The gold ring thing is a ploy by people on here trying to add doubts for some reason...
Well, if the CIA is discussing the ring as Mrs P. says, what to you think we should do, ignore it like it isnt a factor? Nick Berg had quite a few strange coincidences in his life the last 2 years. The case is interesting to say the least, for the curious. Is it wrong to be curious about it? Its not just the ring, this thread has much more.
QUOTE
The terrorists who smashed the planes into the WTC were seen drinking at bars numerous times...
Actually they were supposedly drinking the night before, which also caused speculation. If you had so carefully and secretly planned such an event, why take such a huge chance of drawing atention to yourselves or getting into trouble, or having a fuzzy head the next day, hence the possible failure of a devastatingly important and meticulously planned mission at the last minute? If you are Muslim enough to commit suicide for your beliefs, chances are your not going to be drinking in public on the eve of the biggest mission your god ever sent you on. Supposedly the terrorists tried to get away with not paying a restaurant bill also that night, and started an arguement with the owner, which makes no sense either. Why care about a stupid food bill if you are going to be dead tomarrow? These details also were not consistant.
Playing detective is interesting for me, or I wouldnt have had the stomach to view the video over and over finding so many things odd about it.
I have written anther site which lends itself to conspiracy, debunking the speculations they are claiming as well. There are people assuming things about this video that are patently false: Such as one camera being on military time (some speculators dont know that most of the world exists on 24 hr time, not our 12 x 12 clock, European cameras would be set to this by default, if not all video cameras), plus that the two videos have different time references, which is based on how long the film was running not 'actual time of day' and the first camera is probably set at 24hr clock as well, but we dont know this because it starts at 2-20+sec--- and the so called Abu Graib issue white chair, wrong. These plastic chairs can be found all over the world.
Many are thinking the event took place at Abu Graib because of the similar yellow walls, this is also a stretch, the floors of Abu Graib are concrete in all other photos, here they are red. Yellow wall paint would be common in Iraq, in fact everywhere in the Mid-east, as well horrendous green and a slew of other off colors.
My point is, I did not look at this video so closely to determine blame, which is impossible. I looked at it to determine if what happened on tape is actually what happened, which is my natural curiosity. It was not hard to find problems with it.
What happened for me to get involved in this thread was that I pm'ed Unabomber with some of my questions about the inconsistancies from watching the video, as a private tete-a-tete, I had not expected to go public (for the sake of smearing the admin or anything else, which I am still not). It was clear to me there were things that didnt match. He told me he was working on the inconsistancies and would post it.
Im not sure what you both want here, that noone look at the situation carefully or raise questions of validity or inconsistancies?
Some of us have taken the time, and response has been--- not of looking yourself and noticing what we have seen, just all out condemnation that we would even question what we have seen, when you are not willing to do it yourselves.
Are you saying the inconsistancies are not there? Or that they dont matter? Or did you even look? Or that we shouldnt look and decifer, just swallow? How can we do that when these things are right in your face?
I realize that noone would think for a minute that the US government, the CIA or the Isreali Mossad, intelligence agencies or simply a band of sicko sadistic rouges would EVER do anything heinous. I know its only Muslims that have this capability, because 'they are animals'. I know that Christianity is a religion of peace and love and Christian/Judaiic nations are always 'good' and that Muslims are intrinsically horrible barbarous killers. That America is always right and pure , we dont do anything bad, and collateral damage is just a sad but unfortunate consequence of our good intentions in the spread of freedom and democracy, and that the 'evil seven' were just an anomoly, not a seed problem of an anti-Arabization which condones the idea, presented here in pretty interesting condescention, that Muslims are just worthless killers and terrorists, all, because of their religion.
I guess noone has read the Bible lately.
I apologize for not carrying the party line. I apologize for looking deeper and for questioning things that dont make sense, I should have known better.
Motive and timing
Timing played an important factor in any case. Madrid bombing took place three days before election, the motive obviously was aimed to help Aznar to win the election although it failed.
Beheading was thrown out at the peak of scandal of abusing Iraqi prisoners. Obviously used to turn round the tides of criticisms against Bush and Rumsfeld.
Berg's father and firm is on "enemyies" list of a right wing group. Is this administration left wing or right wing? Who's the enemy of Berg?
Quote, "Berg's Father and Firm Were On A Right-Wing
'Enemies' List
The family firm of beheaded American Nick Berg, was named by a conservative website in a list of 'enemies' of the Iraq occupation. That could explain his arrest by Iraqi police --a detention which fatally delayed his planned return from Iraq and may have led directly to his death."
http://www.BreakForNews.com/NickBergEnemiesList.htm
Timing played an important factor in any case. Madrid bombing took place three days before election, the motive obviously was aimed to help Aznar to win the election although it failed.
Beheading was thrown out at the peak of scandal of abusing Iraqi prisoners. Obviously used to turn round the tides of criticisms against Bush and Rumsfeld.
Berg's father and firm is on "enemyies" list of a right wing group. Is this administration left wing or right wing? Who's the enemy of Berg?
Quote, "Berg's Father and Firm Were On A Right-Wing
'Enemies' List
The family firm of beheaded American Nick Berg, was named by a conservative website in a list of 'enemies' of the Iraq occupation. That could explain his arrest by Iraqi police --a detention which fatally delayed his planned return from Iraq and may have led directly to his death."
http://www.BreakForNews.com/NickBergEnemiesList.htm
Err... I hate to interfere, but several of the "inconsistencies" might not be what you're making them out to be...
Many news sites and other discussion groups are claiming that Muslims are not allowed to wear gold... So? Who says the ring seen in the video is gold, and not brass or any other yellow metal alloy? Well, being in a yellow room, the ring could be silver or platinum or many other metals and just reflecting yellow walls and yellow lights... a yellow (or gold-coloured) ring isn't very convincing, especially when people all over the world pick and choose what tenets of their religion to adhere to.
As mentioned, the times and the editing are conclusive of nothing, other than that the tape *was* edited... I'm sure that terrorist organizations know who to go to for propaganda films... the audio may or may not be dubbed in, depending on who you listen to, but that doesn't *make* it separately recorded audio... the editors could have saved the audio from the beheading, and then added it back in as they pieced together footage of it... the video and audio editing don't *make* the video "staged", neither by terrorists nor black-ops personnel.
TV uses careful lighting and makeup... why? Because skin tones get washed out even on multi-thousand dollar equipment, let alone cheap camcorders... I've known "white" people to come in many different shades... I've known "black" people to come in many different shades... I've even known many middle-eastern people, and their skin tones have ranged from very light to quite dark... Skin that "looks" white on cheap footage doesn't make the person belong to any particular race.
However, there *are* a few inconsistencies in both the story itself, and the video... Some have already been mentioned, so I won't keep bringing them up over and over, but one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that the original reports (as I read them) were that the body was found "on Monday" and "over the weekend" in the *same* sentence... allowing for time changes, how do you find a *headless* body in the desert on Monday, identify it, and notify the family on the same day? Or not be sure what day you found it? For that matter, how do you find a headless body in the desert on Saturday and inform the family by Monday? Even if the body had been disposed with ID on it, that's inconclusive... without a face or dental records (even tattoos and prosthetics could conceivably be faked) it would seem that it would take weeks to fly samples back and forth to compare and make a definitive identification. There is a world of difference between "we found a body that we think is... " and "we found..."
Anyway, sorry to be so long-winded... I'll sit back and watch as you fight this one out
Many news sites and other discussion groups are claiming that Muslims are not allowed to wear gold... So? Who says the ring seen in the video is gold, and not brass or any other yellow metal alloy? Well, being in a yellow room, the ring could be silver or platinum or many other metals and just reflecting yellow walls and yellow lights... a yellow (or gold-coloured) ring isn't very convincing, especially when people all over the world pick and choose what tenets of their religion to adhere to.
As mentioned, the times and the editing are conclusive of nothing, other than that the tape *was* edited... I'm sure that terrorist organizations know who to go to for propaganda films... the audio may or may not be dubbed in, depending on who you listen to, but that doesn't *make* it separately recorded audio... the editors could have saved the audio from the beheading, and then added it back in as they pieced together footage of it... the video and audio editing don't *make* the video "staged", neither by terrorists nor black-ops personnel.
TV uses careful lighting and makeup... why? Because skin tones get washed out even on multi-thousand dollar equipment, let alone cheap camcorders... I've known "white" people to come in many different shades... I've known "black" people to come in many different shades... I've even known many middle-eastern people, and their skin tones have ranged from very light to quite dark... Skin that "looks" white on cheap footage doesn't make the person belong to any particular race.
However, there *are* a few inconsistencies in both the story itself, and the video... Some have already been mentioned, so I won't keep bringing them up over and over, but one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that the original reports (as I read them) were that the body was found "on Monday" and "over the weekend" in the *same* sentence... allowing for time changes, how do you find a *headless* body in the desert on Monday, identify it, and notify the family on the same day? Or not be sure what day you found it? For that matter, how do you find a headless body in the desert on Saturday and inform the family by Monday? Even if the body had been disposed with ID on it, that's inconclusive... without a face or dental records (even tattoos and prosthetics could conceivably be faked) it would seem that it would take weeks to fly samples back and forth to compare and make a definitive identification. There is a world of difference between "we found a body that we think is... " and "we found..."
Anyway, sorry to be so long-winded... I'll sit back and watch as you fight this one out
Ive mentioned this last part several times. Noone, not even the military here offer any clues as to how it could be. Also, I have confirmed the body was found headless, which adds to the difficulty of identification.
Ill go with you on white skin, and many people having different shades. Like I said, the killer must have been an' indoor' terrorist, because sun, no matter what shade you are makes your hands dark. Camera wash out is not valid since the hands of the guy who holds him are brown, right next to the other. Hollywood uses artificial lighting, which causes wash out. This was natural lighting. (no shadows)
As to Al Zarqawi as the killer:
"Last year, Secretary of State Colin Powell used al-Zarqawi as an example of Al Qaeda ties to Saddam's regime, saying al-Zarqawi received hospital treatment in Baghdad after fleeing Afghanistan. Intelligence sources said he apparently was fitted with an artificial leg."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,111157,00.html
Yet:
"The CIA source said a voice analysis has determined "with high probability" that the speaker is al-Zarqawi. The video bore the title "Abu Musab al-Zarqawi shown slaughtering an American."
http://www.click2houston.com/news/3300057/detail.html
Any moron can see that the killer does not have an artificial leg, he moves with complete agility in the video. And:
Now, this is interesting, as the US begins to paint Zarqawi as Iraqs biggest terrorist:
"But Zarqawi's rise to the top didn't have to happen, according to a report aired by NBC news in early March. During a seven month period leading up to the invasion of Iraq, the US had at least three very good chances to kill Zarqawi while he was at a terrorist camp in northern Iraq. Although the Pentagon favored the attacks, the White House decided against going after Zarqawi for fear it would undercut its case for the war. (!!) Zarqawi's presence in Iraq was the only evidence of any kind that the Bush administration had to prove its claim that Al Qaeda and Iraq were working together."
""People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president's policy of preemption against terrorists," according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey."
http://search.csmonitor.com/search_content...ailyUpdate.html
That tells us a little bit about Bush's dedication to eliminating terrorists, and his personal agenda with Iraq.
However, do I think the 'Whitehouse' ordered this? No.
I think Nick Berg was in somewhere over his head. There are a lot of competing factions right now in Iraq, including the CIA , Mossad, and varying rouges, and our own soldiers have not been above reproach, even a few reservists, who I believe were ordered to do what they did.
Who knows if a damage control scenario was not set up? Who knows if Nick Berg was considered expendable to any of these factions, including insurgents in Iraq.
Its strange that 'they' would sign it to Zarqawi who they had pronounced dead in an open statement on March 4, 2004, released in Fallujah as "having been killed in the Sulaimaniyah mountains of northern Iraq during the American bombing there". (Reports are he could not get out hindered by an artificial leg).
'We' on the other hand are claiming Zarqawi is part of the reason we have continued fighting in Iraq, and the reason for the Saddam Al-Qaida link, and the reason behind recent bombings. 'We' are making Zarqawi Iraqs Osama bin Laden. Yet the FBI most wanted archives cannot list even his height and weight, yet they have pronounced a hooded, agile, speaker and killer, the 'probable' leader in the Berg murder.
Ill go with you on white skin, and many people having different shades. Like I said, the killer must have been an' indoor' terrorist, because sun, no matter what shade you are makes your hands dark. Camera wash out is not valid since the hands of the guy who holds him are brown, right next to the other. Hollywood uses artificial lighting, which causes wash out. This was natural lighting. (no shadows)
As to Al Zarqawi as the killer:
"Last year, Secretary of State Colin Powell used al-Zarqawi as an example of Al Qaeda ties to Saddam's regime, saying al-Zarqawi received hospital treatment in Baghdad after fleeing Afghanistan. Intelligence sources said he apparently was fitted with an artificial leg."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,111157,00.html
Yet:
"The CIA source said a voice analysis has determined "with high probability" that the speaker is al-Zarqawi. The video bore the title "Abu Musab al-Zarqawi shown slaughtering an American."
http://www.click2houston.com/news/3300057/detail.html
Any moron can see that the killer does not have an artificial leg, he moves with complete agility in the video. And:
QUOTE
The voice on the tape could not be verified as that of al-Zarqawi. CNN staff members familiar with al-Zarqawi's voice said the voice on the tape did not sound like him.
Now, this is interesting, as the US begins to paint Zarqawi as Iraqs biggest terrorist:
"But Zarqawi's rise to the top didn't have to happen, according to a report aired by NBC news in early March. During a seven month period leading up to the invasion of Iraq, the US had at least three very good chances to kill Zarqawi while he was at a terrorist camp in northern Iraq. Although the Pentagon favored the attacks, the White House decided against going after Zarqawi for fear it would undercut its case for the war. (!!) Zarqawi's presence in Iraq was the only evidence of any kind that the Bush administration had to prove its claim that Al Qaeda and Iraq were working together."
""People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president's policy of preemption against terrorists," according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey."
http://search.csmonitor.com/search_content...ailyUpdate.html
That tells us a little bit about Bush's dedication to eliminating terrorists, and his personal agenda with Iraq.
However, do I think the 'Whitehouse' ordered this? No.
I think Nick Berg was in somewhere over his head. There are a lot of competing factions right now in Iraq, including the CIA , Mossad, and varying rouges, and our own soldiers have not been above reproach, even a few reservists, who I believe were ordered to do what they did.
Who knows if a damage control scenario was not set up? Who knows if Nick Berg was considered expendable to any of these factions, including insurgents in Iraq.
Its strange that 'they' would sign it to Zarqawi who they had pronounced dead in an open statement on March 4, 2004, released in Fallujah as "having been killed in the Sulaimaniyah mountains of northern Iraq during the American bombing there". (Reports are he could not get out hindered by an artificial leg).
'We' on the other hand are claiming Zarqawi is part of the reason we have continued fighting in Iraq, and the reason for the Saddam Al-Qaida link, and the reason behind recent bombings. 'We' are making Zarqawi Iraqs Osama bin Laden. Yet the FBI most wanted archives cannot list even his height and weight, yet they have pronounced a hooded, agile, speaker and killer, the 'probable' leader in the Berg murder.
QUOTE(Artemise)
The man to the far right especially is too white, with a western, not mid-eastern stance.
What, pray, characterises a Western or a Mid-Eastern stance?
On skin colour, video bleaching isn't invalidated by one of the guys having "brown" hands in the video. His hands could be bleached to that colour - there are some very dark-skinned Muslims in the world - even some black ones.
It seem to me that there is an unspoken assumption here that Muslim = Arab. Well, I hate to break this to you, but there are white Muslims, yellow Muslims, brown ones, black ones, and Muslims of practically every other colour and race. Even within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia there are sandy-haired, blue or green-eyed people. (I've read that there is a blond blue-eyed tribe that lives deep in the desert.)
Since we already think that al-Quaeda is an Islamicist organisation that draws it's support more from Islamic extremist organisations and is not exclusive Arabist, and their senior operatives are thought to have been hiding in caves and/or in Western cities, what's the surprise that some of the people in the room are less than bronzed and have a "western" stance, whatever that might be.
I go back to my original point, which is that no AQ footage released to date is going to win any Oscars for cinematography, and the fact that this particular tape is poorly edited and dubbed does not mean that anyone other than AQ was involved in the brutal murder depicted in it, nor that said brutal murder did not take place more or less as depicted.
QUOTE
I've mentioned this last part several times. No one, not even the military here offer any clues as to how it could be. Also, I have confirmed the body was found headless, which adds to the difficulty of identification.
-- Artemise
-- Artemise
Because it's hard to say.
Service members donate a small amount of blood for DNA identification in case your exit in this world is a stain on the wall. Nick doesn't, as far as I know, mention anything about giving blood or hair samples in his emails. Even if the FBI took DNA samples without his consent they had what, 2-3 weeks to catalog Nick before his murder? I don't think this is a possible explanation for two reasons. 1) I don't know if we have that field capability and, 2) if we do and used it in Nick's case you run the risk of exposure by involving more people in a conspiracy.
The only explanation I have for identifying the body as quickly as it was is whoever was able to identify Nick was familiar with the way he looked (height, body dimensions, skin tone). That opens another slew of questions.
BTW does the orange suit have any pockets?
Edit: May open a slew of other questions. How many white guys are running around in Iraq not in uniform?
QUOTE
What, pray, characterises a Western or a Mid-Eastern stance?
Julian, you being European, have you ever been able to tell an american walking down the street or in a restaurant just by mannerisms without even hearing him?
Can you see the difference between an Italian in your country, so easily, from an Englishman? How about an Irishman, so close to your own. An indian from an arab?
You see here in the states, I can spot a european male or female at a distance. I can tell if the are from northern europe or the Med, French, English, German or Italian. I can even tell the difference between a Korean and a Japanese person, because all people have particular mannerisms that define them in their culture. European males for example cross their legs when sitting, while american males generally sit legs wide open. This is seen a effeminate here, but is normal in Europe.
Americans are very distinct, they are not trained to watch their mannerisms or control their face or body. They use up a lot of space. They sit and stand sloppily. Middle eastern people are much closer to Europeans in their use of space. They are not flopping all around like americans do, they are concious of their personal mannerisms, in control of their bodies. A look at the way the way they sit and stand together, its very reserved. Yet, a person from the Mid-east has a very uneasy way of getting closer to you than we as westerners are used to. When they talk to you face to face they are so close you can smell their breath and body odor, yet they keep their body under control.
This is what I mean by a western, ( I should have said american) stance. Three of these guys are sloppy and not aware of their fidgeting, especially the one on the far right. They stand with legs spread wide, feet out like fat guys or body builders. Im not saying it concludes anything but is part of the uneasiness about this video, for many as an intuitional thing.
Its been said that these may have been russians because of the accents. Chechneyans also slit throats from side to front, not like Saudis that go from the back. Eastern Europeans could have this body builder like stance.
As to skin colors, Ive already adressed that, and much more. Have you actually watched the video?
Its easy to pick to death one detail. How about all of them together? Its the whole that we are dealing with. Ive tried to debunk a bunch of things which are not valid, but some of this story is. There is a reason that so many are crying foul.
Lesly, is impossible to see if there are any pockets on Nick Bergs suit.
Artemise my point was less to do with the nuances of national "stance" (and most of the cues that give away Americans here are sartorial anyway 
) and more that it is not unheard of for Muslim extremists to spend a lot of time in, or to actually be from, "the West".
So it need not be so surprising that a masked someone who is clearly behaving in a way that perhaps we westerners expect form Muslim extremists to also stand with a slouch. Perhaps also there are middle-Eastern Muslims of Arab extraction that also slouch, and that your generalisations on stance are just that?
And yes, I have watched the video, as I have already made clear. I saw a man being butchered by terrorists in a bad home-made-quality video.
The simplest explanation of the continuity glitches is that it was a bad home-made-quality video. There is no need to invent more elaborate explanations, however credible they might seem to the credulous.
Occam's Razor suggests to me that unless someone can come up with any real evidence that not everything to do with this murder is as it seems, we should take it at face value.
For all we know the time inconsistencies were caused by the camera operator running to the bathroom to throw up.
) and more that it is not unheard of for Muslim extremists to spend a lot of time in, or to actually be from, "the West". So it need not be so surprising that a masked someone who is clearly behaving in a way that perhaps we westerners expect form Muslim extremists to also stand with a slouch. Perhaps also there are middle-Eastern Muslims of Arab extraction that also slouch, and that your generalisations on stance are just that?
And yes, I have watched the video, as I have already made clear. I saw a man being butchered by terrorists in a bad home-made-quality video.
The simplest explanation of the continuity glitches is that it was a bad home-made-quality video. There is no need to invent more elaborate explanations, however credible they might seem to the credulous.
Occam's Razor suggests to me that unless someone can come up with any real evidence that not everything to do with this murder is as it seems, we should take it at face value.
For all we know the time inconsistencies were caused by the camera operator running to the bathroom to throw up.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.