Topic awaiting preservation: " The Iraqi Video " have they given us ALL the facts ?

I'm sure we are all aware of the sick and twisted Iraqi Video that has been touted around the net, but is it what we have been told it is ?

Was alerted to this and thought it opened up another avenue of possibility ?

Some close observations

I would not have a hard time beleiveing that this is something other than, or more than, the US government is portraying it as.

I would certainly need more credible sources and more actual information to make any sort of decision about it though...

Its worth pointing out that Rense shouldn't really be considered a reliable source as they are well know for pretty credulous UFO reporting and I'm concerned about the borderline (and beyond?) anti-semitic nature of some of the content on the site.

Interesting if only as a reflection of what some people out there are thinking rather than an accurate portrayl of 'The Truth'.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

I'm just wondering how the Berg snuff film premiered on an Al Qaeda related web site it if were not genuine. Why would they feature it?

I make no claims as to the accuracy of this, but from Aljazeera.net -

quote:

---

the circumstances of the video release are also strange. A Reuters journalist in Dubai first named the Muntada al-Ansar al-Islami website as the source for the video ? at www.al-ansar.biz.

Although the site has now been shut down, Aljazeera.net looked at the site within 90 minutes of the story breaking ? and could find no such video footage.

---

One point that puzzles me is the fact the video "is" from Al Qaeda and the 5 men ( including Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, lead member of Al Qaeda in Iraq ) hide their face though usually Al Qaeda's members ( and especially leaders ) do not hesitate to show their face in their videos. But honestly, and as DL-44 and Emperor mentionned the lack of credibility of rense.com, I don't know what to think of the video. It looks like another can of worms.

The time difference between the 2 videos? - all it means is that the time was not set properly on one of the two camcorders, let's face it, how many terrorists know how to change the clock on a VCR?

The only thing that makes me curious is why is Berg wearing the orange jumpsuit? obviously the CIA would not be stupid enough to keep Berg wearing it if they had him detained. or are they that stupid?

If you want to take the conspiracy further, and i'm just kidding here, what if the murder was conducted by Al Qaeda (spelling?) but purposely doctored to make it look like U.S. covert ops had actually done it? This would be bad propaganda for Bush - as if he needs any help.

I assumed the orange jumpsuit was a deliberate attempt to remind everyone of the images we get from Guantanamo.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

I think the orange jumpsuit refers to their claims that he was imprisoned by the US at some point when he was in Iraq.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

Another story considering the film a fake

Although I have to disagree with their statement number 7, about the amount of blood in the video:

quote:

---

A human head contains 1.5 gallons of blood yet the freshly decapitated head shown in the video is leaking none. Neck artery would squirt a foot long geyser of blood. There is no evidence of that either. Only one answer lends itself here: the video was doctored.

---

I doubt that it would squirt a "foot long geyser of blood". Especially considering that it wasn't a quick Jason Vorheese-style single slash that did it, there was a fair amount of sawing involved. And there was indeed blood, quite the pool of it I might add. Since the video quality was shoddy at best and the actual beheadding was done against a dark colored floor, its a little hard to spot gushes of blood and whatnot.

Besides, while a human body does contain a fair amount of blood in it, it certainly isn't under pressure, or enough of it to make it violently "gush" out all Hollywood like they proclaim it should have. But hey, I'm no doctor.

Further still, I did find the fact that he didn't struggle as much as I'd think someone about to get his head lobbed off would, well, a little odd.

Horrible thing to happen to another human being, regardless of circumstance.

Why are people so quick to question the veracity of this tape, yet not once has anyone given thought that the abuse photos could be faked? Just a thought, although I believe them all to be real, although I think a lot of the media hubbub has made the abuse thing much worse than it really is. All I have seen there thusfar is some photos which appear to look like fraternity hazings. All the rest is heresay, mainly from democrats in an election year. A very imprtant fact to consider IMO considering the intense contempt held for the Bush administration in many circles.

About the Berg video, I made the mistake of watching it and it is probably one of the most grusome things I have ever seen. I only have one question: Do we really have any reason to doubt that Islamic Jihadists would commit such an act considering their past transgressions?

Ramasax: I don't doubt they are capable - the point is did they? I believe they did but you can see a conspircy theory developing already.

And on this:

quote:

---

Why are people so quick to question the veracity of this tape, yet not once has anyone given thought that the abuse photos could be faked?

---

You must have missed the news about the British abuse photos which have been shown to have been faked and have resulted in the sacking of the editor of one of the biggest British newspapers.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

Ramasax: And the veracity of the pictures of British abuse have been questionned since the first days of their publication. There was some clear evidendece that they were some hoax ( the shirts of the military, their weapons, ... ) which is not the case with the picture of the American abuses for which one military ( the woman on the pictures ) have even given an interview explained that she was given orders to take the pose on the pictures.

Should this topic not be in the philosophy ant other sillines section?

------------------------------
Do something usefull: support Justice for Pat Richard

Rinswind 2th: Good point.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

Well sure I can see a conspiracy theory developing, you actually grow to expect them in times like these do you not? Propaganda is a powerful tool. The only thing the above article left out was the tin-foil hats.

As far as Al-Jazeera is concerned: During WW2, did we believe everything the German Nazi controlled papers had to say? To me Al-Jazeera is not at all credible. They hardly covered the event, and many of the Arab media did not cover it at all. Those who did cover it started with headlines like "Internet Bloggers say video was faked!" I mean, since when do credible journalists get their information from Internet Blogs? This IMO is the problem with the Arab society, and what separates them from the western world. When the abuse photos came out, everyone in the world was appalled, but we accepted the responsibility and work at fixing our faults. I do not think the US ever claimed to be a perfect society, there is no such thing. But the fact that we can actually admit and deal with our faults is the important thing. Correct me if I am wrong, but Arab society seems to have a little trouble in this area.

I am aware of the British photos being disproven and Piers Morgan being fired. I think the situation there proves just how far and how low the media will go to make a buck and further an agenda. I was referring to the US photos, sorry for not being clear about that. And while I do not believe they are faked, any capable Photoshop user could manipulate the photos. All evidence indicates otherwise of course, it was simply a passing thought.

I really don't go for how horrible they are being portrayed as, I know it is rare, but I have a little more faith in my country than that. Saying that Rumsfeld knew about this and actually condoned it seems a little far-fetched to me. I still believe this to be an isolated incident involving a few misguided individuals. I mean, if the military really was using this as policy, why would they document it so thoroughly with condemning evidence? Only time will tell though.

Here is an interesting Tidbit, seems that a few DJs in Oregon thought it would be funny to make a joke out of the whole Berg thing. Unbelievable how low people will go. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4980784/

quote:

---

I mean, if the military really was using this as policy, why would they document it so thoroughly with condemning evidence?

---

my theory on that is: in a culture where honor and propriety are huge, (especially concerning public nudity, sex and sexuality) it would make sense to take pictures and use them as 'threats' of sorts. i'm sure they had no intentions of letting them hitting the world stage.

as for the berg video, i haven't seen it...thankfully

(Edited by Lacuna on 05-17-2004 00:30)

quote:

---

Do we really have any reason to doubt that Islamic Jihadists would commit such an act considering their past transgressions?

---

No. Not in the slightest.

But does that mean this video is the real deal? Of course not. I'm not prepared to say it's not, but I'm also not willing to say for sure it is at this point.

As far as the propaganda - well, shit, that's what this is all about, afterall.

quote:

---

but we accepted the responsibility and work at fixing our faults.

---

Really? when was that? I'm waiting for that to happen still (and these abuses were reported well over a year ago).

As I've said before - be careful how strongly you condemn one side's propaganda while at the same time embracing the other side's....

I'm just curious, how many people have actually seen the beheading?

I've got the Daniel Pearl video but I've been reluctant to watch this most recent one. I have not seen it. I've read the details and they are enough for me to go on at this point. There was a time when I felt a duty to watch... now I've gotten squeamish about it. I keep running through my mind what it must have been like to be him as they begun and once he realized they were really going to kill him.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

InSiDeR: I haven't seen it - I saw the daniel Pearl video when krets posted a link here and that was enough for me. I know what the Berg beheading involves and I don't think it would add anything to my understanding to see someone butchered like that so I'm not planning on watching it. I may get curious and sneak a peek later but not at the moment.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

InSiDeR: you mean the whole video ? The French news did not show the beheading itself, but just the "introduction" made by N. Berg and the 5 men in black until the one in the middle shows his knife and pushes N. Berg on the floor. They couldn't really show the whole video at a time where families and children watch the TV.

When I heard that news for the first time, I knew I would have felt sick after that but I thought I had to watch the TV screen. I think I was watching the news and decided to ( try to ) "assume" even the most disgusting ones as they were broadcasted. Now, I don't feel the need to search on the web to see the whole thing, maybe in the future if it's prooved to be an hoax. I know the content of that video and can guess the horror of seeing and hearing the scene.

[LINK REMOVED] but over the past few days it's been getting mighty slow. Fair warning, it's the real deal if you get it to choke through the already traffic heavy pipe.

Bugs: It's a bit more... real than the Pearl video, though I'm not quite sure that's the correct word for it. Pearl's video, while certainly gruesome in and of itself, lost a bit of the shock value over a second or third viewing, it seemed easy to subconsciously deem it 'fiction' (not fake, there's a difference). This one, it's... right there. Nothing else about it, you're seeing the real deal. :|

(Edited by njuice42 on 05-17-2004 06:00)

(Edited by Emperor on 05-17-2004 13:37)

quote:

---

DL: Really? when was that? I'm waiting for that to happen still (and these abuses were reported well over a year ago).

---

Sure, they knew. Are you suggesting that simply because it wasn't released to the public it was not being investigated? Do you believe the military should have run straight to the media as soon as they found out knowing full well how out of proportion they would blow it? I mean, how can you fight and win a war without some sense of secrecy. Did it ever occur to anyone that it may have been kept quiet so as not to cause the type of execution that has recently been commited? All because of the actions of a few idiots.

Everyone is so quick to embrace conspiracy theories these days. Does anyone ever think that maybe things are actually what they seem to be? That we are at war and doing our best to bring about a peaceful and democratic Iraq and that the transgressions of these few soldiers are just that? The simplest answer is more often than not the correct answer IMO.

I don't know, seems to me most of you WANT this type of thing to happen and to have it proven that the military dictated a policy for it simply so you can complain some more about how horrible the US or Bush or Rumsfeld is.

quote:

---

As I've said before - be careful how strongly you condemn one side's propaganda while at the same time embracing the other side's....

---

I guess I should watch more Al-jazeera and listen to more liberal radio... Come one man, like you never condemn any propaganda. Hmm, was it you who used the statement "Right Wing Rhetoric?" You seem very quick to condemn anything from the right.

And in any case, if it is all propagranda on both sides, then what exactly are "credible sources" to you as you mentioned up above? Is there really such a thing as a credible source?

(Edited by Ramasax on 05-17-2004 06:00)

Yep. I just viewed it, and I agree it is far more explicit than the Pearl video. There is nothing about it that looks faked to me whatsoever. But as it seems a conspiracy theory is in the works, no amount of investigation will disuade some from believing what they desperately want the truth to be.

[edit] Ram, we posted at the same time.

I actually think we are not putting enough effort into propaganda for our side. When the Iraqis turn on their TVs and radios what do they get? Basically a choice of Iranian programming and Iranian programming. Why are we not pumping the airwaves full of our propoganda? I don't understand that at all.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

(Edited by Bugimus on 05-17-2004 06:05)

quote:

---

But as it seems a conspiracy theory is in the works, no amount of investigation will disuade some from believing what they desperately want the truth to be.

---

Ain't that the sorry truth. The key word that struck me was "desperately."

I think everyone should watch this video; remind yourselves that we are in a war, and that there is a detestable, bloodthirsty enemy whose stated goal is to do to all of us exactly what they have shown themselves doing to Nick Berg.

Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 05-17-2004 06:11)

I agree, this video is an important one to watch, if you want to see more than just one side of the story. I find that a lot of those around me forget that this isn't just some simple little mission over to the 7-11 and back.

here's yet another page showing the video and giving a bunch of reasons why it may be fake:
[LINK REMOVED]

(Edited by Emperor on 05-17-2004 18:04)

I'm in a quandry as we made krets take down the link to the Daniel Pearl video and I'm unsure why this should be any different. However, it may b an important moment in history so...........

In the meanime I have removed the link from njuice's post as it was to a site with strong adult content.

[edit: And yes I watched it - I suppose we shouldn't back away from such things. I'm not sure it really told me anything I didn't already know.]

[edit2: Both links removed - they go way beyond the general Asylum remit of keeping the Asylum child friendly. If you want the links Google them or Q me.]

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

(Edited by Emperor on 05-17-2004 18:06)

Ramasax - easy there buddy.

I've never said that I buy all the shit being spread around the net, and I pointed out very clearly that I made no claims as to the accuracy of the info from Aljezeera.

I am very much of the mind that the propaganda spreading around the world these days is very dangerous and usually quite absurd.
The point is that both sides are doing the same thing, and you seem to be very comfortable with the pro-bush propaganda while very condemning of the any other.

It's just plain silly - both sides are full of shit at this point. It has nothing to do with "liberal" vs. "right-wing". Confining things to those labels and judging the world accordingly is the whole problem here.

Jumping to some pretty far-fetched conclusions about my opinion isn't going to help any either.

But to answer one question, yes, you should read more from Aljezeera. You should read from a variety of sources, and they shouldn't be confined to sources who share your outlook and carry your biases.

That's the only way to get a balanced view and the only way to get any sort of "truth".

I am in no hurry to pass this video off as a government conspiracy. Many of these websites have ridiculous criteria on which they base their claims of it being faked.

But there is enough that seems a little wrong, and a little too convenient with the whole thing that I am not ready to blindly accept that this is what the gov. says it is either.
I'm not ready to get into a blind patriotic rage against the whole middle-east because of it.

quote:

---

Why are people so quick to question the veracity of this tape, yet not once has anyone given thought that the abuse photos could be faked?

---

For starters, the Dept. of Defense, the President of the United States, and those involved have acknowledged that the atrocities did take place. As its been said above, the accuracy of those pictures concerning the US military had been questioned many times over. There doesn't appear to be the same discrepancies in the US photos as there is in the Al Quada photos.

quote:

---

When the abuse photos came out, everyone in the world was appalled, but we accepted the responsibility and work at fixing our faults.

---

I think this is our real problem. As much as people are pushing the "we accepted the responsibility" bit, we only accepted it after the photographs were printed in every newspaper around the globe. Our government knew about it months ago. Sec. of State Donald Rumsfeld acknowledges that after he investigated the matter he never bothered to read the actual report. It seems rather unlikely that had our abuses not have become public knowledge we would have "accepted the responsibility".



As far as the tape goes, I'm not real big on conspiracy theories but there does seem to be a few discrepancies that don't add up. I don't know why the Bush Administration would claim Berg was never detained by the US military when it seems clear he was. I don't understand why he would still be wearing his prison jump suit. It certainly does seem convienent and it was a big boost for the Bush Administration. I don't know enough about military training to comment on the executioners posture.

Personally, I don't know what to think. I'd like to think the US government is above lying to the public and putting peoples lives at risk to accomplish a political objective, but as we've seen w/ the WMD in Iraq, they clearly aren't above that.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

I think that perhaps an undertone of most conspiracy theorists on this particular video lies with denial. No one denies that we walked Iraqi prisoners around the yards on leashes or made them form nekkid pyramids, because that's really not that bad in the grand scale of things. But this, maybe a few of us don't want to believe that we just saw an innocent (?) man get beheaded.

And there was a bit of this kind of murmur about the Pearl video as well, I remember.

I believe it's completely human to see something like this and have it enact the 'bullshit' reaction automatically.

That could be njuice. I think its difficult to accept that a person could do this to another person but the reality is terrible crimes like this happen all the time. I haven't been convinced that the video was a fake but I don't know if I'm reading to believe it as being truth.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

quote:

---

...we only accepted it after the photographs were printed in every newspaper around the globe.

---

Umm... then why had a military investigation already taken place and reprimands were already in the works before it broke in the media? Now I doubt the military and/or the administration wanted to broadcast these abuses but I also think the evidence so far shows that actions were already beginning to take place to correct this problem.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

njuice - I honestly doubt that is the case. In most cases, people simply become irate and are ready to blow up the entire middle easst after seeing such a thing.

I have seen very few people react in the way you describe, and I persoanlly have no illusions that human beings are not capable of comitting such acts.

As far as the government investigating and issuing "reprimands".....I mean....come on. Reprimands? Is that what we consider to be sufficient in such a case?

What did you have in mind? Seriously, what do you think is appropriate for what they did? It seems some are facing court martials, reprimands, and/or jail time for these actions.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

DL - Nor do I, we are certainly capable of so much worse. Anyone wandering around the more macabre sections of the net would agree. I just think that it could be an underlined automatic response to something as shocking as this, people immediately dismissing it as fake.

Though anything could be debated over the validity of it actually happening. Conspiracy Theorists often don't give apt thought to whether or not its actually true, I've noticed, instead they focus all their energy into disproving it. I hope that makes sense, because it does in my head anyways.

quote:

---

Umm... then why had a military investigation already taken place and reprimands were already in the works before it broke in the media? Now I doubt the military and/or the administration wanted to broadcast these abuses but I also think the evidence so far shows that actions were already beginning to take place to correct this problem.

---

I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about Bugimus. As far as I've read in the newspapers, it was only after the public learned about the US Rape Rooms that reprimands were enforced. In fact, a significant number of those involved have claimed that they were doing as instructed by commanding officers.

Also, Donald Rumsfeld has publicly acknowledged that after allowing an investigation he didn't bother to read the report. This is like a college student claiming he deserves an A on a paper that he didn't hand in because he went to the library and picked up a few books on the subject.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

quote:

---

Bugs: I actually think we are not putting enough effort into propaganda for our side. When the Iraqis turn on their TVs and radios what do they get? Basically a choice of Iranian programming and Iranian programming. Why are we not pumping the airwaves full of our propoganda? I don't understand that at all.

---

Well I agree to some extent, but a lot of loud mouth people out there like Michael Moore, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and the nasty media types seem to upset the balance. The right can hardly keep up because the left has a louder voice, especially on the Internet, where more and more are coming to get their news. As we can see from this site and the opinions expressed here, most of the Asylum is leftish. What is this board dedicated to? Web design and photoshop primarily. Computer arts. So esentially, if Asylum is any indicator, most of the Internet is built by mainly tech-savvy anti-war semi-liberal types. Notice all the leftish sites look nice, and the conservative sites are always crappy. I am reaching here aren't I? heh

I think the only propaganda we need is to tell people the truth, and spread the word and concept of freedom. They really do not understand that freedom is so close within their grasp and how it will affect their quality of life. All that this anti-US propaganda does is slow the progression toward a free and democratic Iraq and prolongs the suffering of both our troops and the Iraqi people. Let them do their job, and when something happens like the abuse scandal, deal with it, but do it quietly. The media and the world does not need to know everything. Anything in a war is going to appear grisly to us here at home in comfort IMO. We all know full well that people like the accused exist in all societies and blowing it up into a huge conspiracy does nothing but harm everyone. We don't want our troops, who have sacrificed everything, to come home to people spitting on them simply because of a few riff-raff, do we? And we do not want to make the Iraqi people believe that it is indicitive of our society to humiliate people, anyone who believes that is seeing far too much false-evil in the midst.

quote:

---

DL: Ramasax - easy there buddy.

---

You mis-judge my tone. Sorry if I came across as angry or something.

quote:

---

DL: I've never said that I buy all the shit being spread around the net, and I pointed out very clearly that I made no claims as to the accuracy of the info from Aljezeera.

---

I didn't mean to insinuate that you did.

quote:

---

DL: The point is that both sides are doing the same thing, and you seem to be very comfortable with the pro-bush propaganda while very condemning of the any other.

---

The other side, in this particular instance, is silly. I could have found more truth here. As for my other condemnations, read on.

quote:

---

DL: It's just plain silly - both sides are full of shit at this point. It has nothing to do with "liberal" vs. "right-wing". Confining things to those labels and judging the world accordingly is the whole problem here.

---

I disagree. It has everything to do with Liberal vs. Right Wing. Where I stand has to do with the morals, values, and ideals of the right, which I mainly agree with. If I was pro-abortion, pro-gay-marriage, anti-God, pro-peace at any cost even if it means a dangerous future, I would side with Liberals. I see the Liberals as a destructive force to the traditional American way of life and the core values which shaped this nation and made it great. I also see their views as a threat to our future national security.

Where we stand really comes down to each individual, their view on life, and the experiences that have made them who they are. To some extent I think you are right, both sides are full of shit, we each simply choose the shit that tastes the best to us and our particular brand of "common sense." What makes sense and seems perfectly logical to one person will be BS to another.

quote:

---

Jumping to some pretty far-fetched conclusions about my opinion isn't going to help any either.

---

To be quite honest DL, sometimes it is very hard to discern where you stand. It always seems as though you are against almost everything I have to say though, so more to the left I have assumed. I never categorized you as an ultra-liberal or anything extreme though, you seem far too intelligent for that. Once again, I apologize, I guess I just came off the wrong way.

quote:

---

But to answer one question, yes, you should read more from Aljezeera. You should read from a variety of sources, and they shouldn't be confined to sources who share your outlook and carry your biases.

---

To be quite honest I do check on Al-jazeera frequently. I have even listened to Air America Radio a few times for fun. I simply disagree. It doesn't always have to do with the "facts" becuase "facts" are spun from many different angles, but in the end they are still the same "facts", you simply agree with the views that you as an individual hold. I do not blindly follow the right, I simply relate more to the right's way of presenting said "facts."

For instance, it is fact that one of the stated reasons we went to Iraq is WMDs. Some believe we were lied to becuase we have not found any. They believe there are none to be found whereas I believe Iraq is a large country and they may well still be there buried underground like the many bodies we have found in the mass-graves, OR the fact Hussein had ample time to smuggle them out of the country. Syria perhaps? I am not jumping to the quick conclusion of crying "conspiracy" at every turn.

No WMDs yet... The left cries "Bush lied, he decieved this country." Abuse prison scandal... The left cries "Rumsfeld knew, it was policy, or they are not telling us everything." See a trend here? All the left is going on is conjecture and speculation.

And then there are those who are less opinionated and can simply sit on the fence, I simply am not that type of person. I am what I is.

quote:

---

But there is enough that seems a little wrong, and a little too convenient with the whole thing that I am not ready to blindly accept that this is what the gov. says it is either.
I'm not ready to get into a blind patriotic rage against the whole middle-east because of it.

---

Well I agree, there are plenty of things surrounding the man that are a mystery. It can all be explained away with a little common sense. Of course, again, what is common sense to one is BS to another Here is an interesting read. I am not saying that anyone who doesn't believe what I believe doesn't have common sense, just that they have a different common sense.

As far as blind patriotic rage. Not really. After seeing the video I went outside and stared at the grass for a while, thinking nothing. I do harbor rage for terrorist types, but I would hardly classify that as being directed toward the entire Middle-East or blind or patriotic.

Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 05-18-2004 10:21)

quote:

---

You mis-judge my tone. Sorry if I came across as angry or something.

---

Not really, you just seemed in a hurry to slot me into a certain profile. As you've noted, I don't really fit into many preset political profiles

I'm not going to attempt to carry the liberal torch, by any means, but the same things you say about the left can easily be said (in different ways) about the right. Thus the problem with settling into such silly notions as "left vs right". I do tend to side with the left, generally speaking. But there's nothing I hate more than the way issues are decided based more on which party brought it up than on the actual issue at hand. And I detest seeing many so called "liberals" speak publicly, in much the way as I have always hated seeing Rush Limbaugh speak. Many people are far too eager to go overboard with things and lose any point they may have had.

As to that article - it is as rife with baseless conjecture as any of the sites claiming the video is a fake. I have yet to read any of the articles it links to, but the content on that page is filled with the very conjecture it condemns.....

(Edited by DL-44 on 05-18-2004 14:06)

http://cnn.aimtoday.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0002%2F20040513%2F1505162354.htm&sc=rontz&photoid=20040512PHW01D

Pity.

I agree. Blaming someone else for the death of his son is very sad.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

Well, obviously the guy is distressed. Secondly, he was totally anti-Bush to begin with. Now he is using his son's death as a platform to express his pre-disposed political views. How convenient for a man who hated the administration to begin with to be able to channel all the anger about his son's death in the same direction.

quote:

---

"Nicholas Berg died for the sins of George Bush and (Defense Secretary) Donald Rumsfeld," Michael Berg, visibly upset, told ABC television.

"The al-Qaeda people are probably just as bad as they are, but this administration did this," he said.

---

Probably just as bad? Come on Mike, wake up. I feel your pain and anger, as I think 99% of Americans do, but damn. You have got to be kidding me. All that besides, your son was riding around by himself in a WAR ZONE!!!

quote:

---

"The al-Qaeda that killed my son didn't know what they were doing," Berg's father, Michael, told reporters camped outside his house Thursday. "They killed their best friend. Nick was there to build Iraq, not to tear it down. He was there to help people, not to hurt anyone."

---

He obviously doesn't understand the terrorist mindset very well. I suppose the terrorists who flew planes into the WTC didn't know what they were doing either. And as if the terrorists give a damn about a westerner, and a Jewish man, there to help when they wish us all dead, period. I fear for the future of this country when there are people out there who have views like this and have a channel through which to express them.

Ramasax

quote:

---

njuice42 said:

But this, maybe a few of us don't want to believe that we just saw an innocent (?) man get beheaded.

---

Innocent? Well, innocence is the eye of the beholder. I personally think this a destestable act, but we all know my stance on war by now, don't we? Bad things happen in war, that's all these is to it, and they're getting worse now that we live in a media-driven world where bad things are shown all the time, so I'm sure groups feel that to get their message across they have to do really bad things. Now, I haven't seen this movie, and I nether need nor want to. I believe you were correct in removing the links emps, since we don't discriminate by age here, we do have ot be careful what we allow to be put up without prior warning.

And as for the 'missing' gushes of blood, you've got to consider that, when you cut someone's head off the nerve signals to the muscles, including the heart, cease to be, so there's nothing to make the heart perform the two contractions and numberous valves motions it has to make in order to send a pressurised squirt of blood up the carotid artery to the brain (or the hole now occupying the area). The person who decided to use that for evidence that the video was fake obviously has a) a great love of hollywood films; b) no idea about basic physiology; and c) a very gullible nature.


Justice 4 Pat Richard

If you cut someone's head off with one swift skillful stroke, you will get a pressurized squirt like you see in movies. Nick Berg's beheading was anything but swift and I would think that is why that was not seen.

quote:

---

He obviously doesn't understand the terrorist mindset very well.

---

I completely agree. I think he believes that if the terrorists knew that Mr. Berg had benevolent motives for being in Iraq that they would never have killed him. To believe that proves he does not understand their motives. One should study a bit into the faction of Islam they adhere to. It is a very extreme version of Islam, as if Islam has ever been a moderate religion, but their particular brand does not discriminate between nice and not-nice infidels, we are all infidels and valid targets of their particular jihad.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

Skaarjj: Hense the (?) after innocent. I have no idea what he was actually doing over there (though I know the official story), I don't know his exact relationship with either the Iraqi government or our own. Thing is, no one really knows, and those that do aren't willing to talk about it. Too busy trying to deny. Innocent, who knows. It's presumed, and that's what might make some people react.

And I couldn't agree with you more about the blood issue, as I defended in an earlier post in this thread.

For what it's worth, I agreed with Emps' decision to remove the links. Perhaps I should have thought a bit longer on whether it was appropriate or not, but it's (in the end) not that big of a deal. People wanted to see the movie, I knew where it was. My impact was done, links were no longer needed.

njuice42, there are execution photographs on the web that show geysers as a result of beheading. I will not link them here, but if you're interested just let me know.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

DL said:

quote:

---

As far as the government investigating and issuing "reprimands".....I mean....come on. Reprimands? Is that what we consider to be sufficient in such a case?

---

This just in today:

quote:

---

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A tearful U.S. soldier was sentenced to a year in jail Wednesday after confessing he and colleagues abused Iraqi prisoners in a scandal that threatens to undermine President Bush's re-election chances.

-------

"It's a kangaroo court, set up just to placate Iraqis," said Hala Azzawi, mother of one of some 3,000 Iraqis held at the jail near Baghdad, notorious as Sadam Hussein's torture center.

"I wish they would get death, it's less than they deserve."

Full article here

---

So we see what one of the soldiers received by way of punishment, a year in jail and a court martial I assume. One of the victim's mothers thinks the death penalty would be letting him off easy. I tend to think the year in jail and court martial are "about right". What do you all think?


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

I'm not so sure...what's the normal jail term for sexual abuse and/or grevious assault in the US? these crimes amount to the same thing, so shouldn't the punishment be the same?

quote:

---

So we see what one of the soldiers received by way of punishment, a year in jail and a court martial I assume. One of the victim's mothers thinks the death penalty would be letting him off easy. I tend to think the year in jail and court martial are "about right". What do you all think?

---

People were raped, murdered, and tortured. I'd say a year in jail is a pretty light sentence. If someone raped your mother and then rode her around like a horse, do you think 1 year would be sufficient? I'm honestly curious.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

I have to agree, for the most part.

People were abused in some pretty outrageous ways. If that happened here in the US, there would be pure outrage.

Things are obviously a little different given the full circumstances, but not so much that these people should only get a slap on the wrist.

Of course, I am much more concerned about the people in charge, and I think it is imperative that this gets followed up the chain, and that the punishments get stiffer the further up it goes...

My concern is our image in the outside world. A new poll conducted by the Iraq Center for Research and Strategic Studies shows 9 out of 10 Iraqis see US troops as occupiers and not liberators or peacekeepers. It also shows large support for Moqtada al-Sadr. While Pres. Bush and his supporters talk tough that our image in the outside world doesn't matter, its real difficult to fight a war when 90 of the country doesn't want you there. It seems as though everyone in the world hates the US. I found out a long time ago that if you're standing in a room with lots of people and everyone thinks you're an asshole, you're the asshole.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

I don't think *this* soldier was guilty of murder, at least I don't think that he was charged with that. I actually don't know what the normal penalty is for humiliation and psychological torture. But I do think that this guy was able to get a reduced sentence because he was ratting out some of his cohorts.

I'm not entirely sure this is out of line with what he would get here in the states had it happened here. To take just one example, I just saw in the news that a man that killed a 2 year old child was only given 5 years in prison. That seems light to me.

If any of the soldiers are found guilty of murder then I agree the sentence should be much harsher.

On a side note. Jestah, I have heard this a lot from you, WebShaman, and a few others:

quote:

---

My concern is our image in the outside world.

---

Now of course everyone wants to be liked but there is something about this comment that really bothers me:

quote:

---

I found out a long time ago that if you're standing in a room with lots of people and everyone thinks you're an asshole, you're the asshole.

---

I completely agree that when you have problems in a group and the problem keeps pointing back to one individual that as a rule of thumb that person has the problem. But this is not always the case and what bothers me is that I really don't think you know how to discern the difference. I am not attacking you on this please understand. I am really trying to point out a key difference in our two points of view that I've noticed come up time and time again.

I said quite a while ago when the topic of what the world would think of us if we go to war came up that, it matters more that we are doing what is right than whether people like us. IMO, we should do what we think is right in spite of what others are going to think. I know we are going to disagree on whether going to war was the right thing to do but I would feel much better if I thought you were more interested in doing what was right as opposed to what is popular.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

Bugs: Yes, the main arteries in the neck would most certainly 'gush' blood up into the air, however only if the artery is exposed open in a sudden, quick move. Nick's head was more or less carved off, there was definite sawing movement. So, in my personal opinion, there's no reason blood would exactly gush out in the video. But yeah, there's some gross stuff on that thar internet.

Considering the punishment the soldiers got, while it's dissapointing, is it really all that shocking? C'mon, our troops walked away from this, we'll walk away from just about anything. Goddam sick sometimes.

quote:

---

I completely agree that when you have problems in a group and the problem keeps pointing back to one individual that as a rule of thumb that person has the problem. But this is not always the case and what bothers me is that I really don't think you know how to discern the difference. I am not attacking you on this please understand. I am really trying to point out a key difference in our two points of view that I've noticed come up time and time again.

---

Of course its a key difference, Bugimus. You're the ultimate Bush cheerleader. With all of the political threads that have sprouted since Bush was inaugarated, I don't recall a single time when you even SLIGHTLY thought he made a mistake or was wrong. Even when he was clearly lying about WMD you went as far to say he deserved an apology. I just don't understand this type of mindless support. I'll agree with him when he does something right and disagree with him when he does something wrong. This is a difference between us that will likely never be fixed.

quote:

---

I said quite a while ago when the topic of what the world would think of us if we go to war came up that, it matters more that we are doing what is right than whether people like us. IMO, we should do what we think is right in spite of what others are going to think. I know we are going to disagree on whether going to war was the right thing to do but I would feel much better if I thought you were more interested in doing what was right as opposed to what is popular.

---

Right is a very subjective word. What is right for you is not right for me and is certainly not right for people on the other side of the planet with a completely different lifestyle. As I posted above, a new poll is set to come out stating 9 out of 10 Iraqis believe Americans to be invaders and not liberators. If you turn off Rush Limbaugh and FOXNews for a few minutes you'll realize we're not fighting a war against the Iraqi Army - in fact we've actually allied with them - we're fighting a war against the Iraqi people. With your support, Pres. Bush is attempting to force a lifestyle down their throats. It's a lifestyle they don't want.

As far as popularity goes, how do you expect to get anything done when 90% of the country views the US as invaders? I know you're a big "go it alone" guy, but have you ever given consideration to the fact that we DO have to turn this country over eventually? If 90% of the people in that country abhor us and support al Sadyr, honestly, what do you expect to happen with the politcal structure we're setting up? Are you really under the impression that its going to last more then a year without US military intervention? I just have a hard time believing that anyone who could come off as being so intelligent could be so stupid.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

I asked you once about how many openly conservative professors you had at your college compared to openly liberal. I never got a reply. I have always been under the impression you were the one who was the mindless follower. Care to enlighten me on that? Since I'm already mindless and stupid in your eyes, I don't really have much to lose now do I?

I have always responded to you with a relative amount of courtesy and I don't believe I've ever outright called you stupid, but this is the second time you have attacked me personally. In all candor, I give you a hard time in some of these posts in the hopes of making you *think*. I do that with people from all walks of life. If I'm around a bunch of Xian friends, you will find me playing the devil's advocate and when I'm around a mixed bunch in here I tend to go after those who are politically left wing.


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

Explaining Liberal anger.

quote:

---

First, the liberal imagines that the belief in question is rooted in ignorance. Opponents of the liberal program simply don't know the facts about responsibility and desert. But when liberals try to convey these "facts," they get no uptake. Indeed, they get denial. This leads to the stupidity hypothesis. Opponents of the liberal program aren't so much ignorant of facts as incapable of reasoning from and about them. In other words, they're stupid or unintelligent. They're incapable of thinking clearly or carefully, even about important matters such as equality, justice, and fairness. This explains the liberal mantra that conservatives, such as Presidents Reagan and Bush, are stupid. Note that if conservatives are stupid, liberals, by contrast, are intelligent. It's all very self-serving.

---

(Edited by Ramasax on 05-20-2004 09:35)

quote:

---

I asked you once about how many openly conservative professors you had at your college compared to openly liberal. I never got a reply. I have always been under the impression you were the one who was the mindless follower. Care to enlighten me on that? Since I'm already mindless and stupid in your eyes, I don't really have much to lose now do I?

I have always responded to you with a relative amount of courtesy and I don't believe I've ever outright called you stupid, but this is the second time you have attacked me personally. In all candor, I give you a hard time in some of these posts in the hopes of making you *think*. I do that with people from all walks of life. If I'm around a bunch of Xian friends, you will find me playing the devil's advocate and when I'm around a mixed bunch in here I tend to go after those who are politically left wing.

---

So in other words you won't be answering those questions. Gotcha.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

You know I can and usually do

But every time I do it with you

Things begin to smell like poo



Jestah, I will answer answer them, but I would still very much love to hear your answer to the question I have about your profs. How many openly conservative profs do you have compared to openly liberal?


. . : DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

quote:

---

Q #1. As far as popularity goes, how do you expect to get anything done when 90% of the country views the US as invaders?

---

I don't dispute that a majority of Iraqis view us as invaders, in fact, that is precisely what we have done. We have invaded their country. I don't believe for a second the Iraqi people are stupid, and every poll I have heard makes me think they are very astute.

When asked if they view us as invaders, the answer is yes. When asked if they want us to leave the country the answer is no.

How can this be?

They don't want us to become their new masters now that their old master is deposed. But they don't want us to leave them without establishing a secure government to take his place. What they need to understand is that we want exactly the same thing. We wanted Hussein out of the picture and a new Iraq formed that is more democratic, more stable, less likely to be a base of operations against us or our allies, and an example to rest of the Arab world.

Look at all the wars of the last century. You will find that Democracies rarely attacked other Democracies. We believe that world peace is far better served by having more proserous democratic countries than fewer.

As far as how do I expect anything to get done under the current circumstances? I suggest you do some research in exactly what has been achieved so far in Iraq by way of rebuilding schools, hospitals, infrastructure, etc. And also take a look at how many cases there are where our soldiers spend their free time doing this type of work often at risk to their own lives but they do it out of a sense of true friendship to the Iraqi people. So I don't have to point to some imaginary progress but to real progress that has *already* been accomplished.

If you are unaware of these positive stories, then perhaps I'm not the only one you should be recommending to take in a few extra sources of news.

quote:

---

Q #2. I know you're a big "go it alone" guy, but have you ever given consideration to the fact that we DO have to turn this country over eventually?

---

I have said since we began these discussions that we will be there at least 5 years but more probably 10 years. Of course I have considered the fact that we need to get Iraq back under Iraqi control. We have to do it as soon as we possibly can while ensuring it has a high probability of sustaining itself. This is a progressive approach that decreases our control as the new Iraqi government picks up more and this is to be done at steady reasonable rate. If it takes longer to do it right, then I believe are obligated to that task. We owe it to the Iraqi people to see this through and not to abandon them like we've done in several cases before, I'm specifically thinking about my friends just down the street who live in Little Saigon when I point that out.

quote:

---

Q #3. If 90% of the people in that country abhor us and support al Sadyr, honestly, what do you expect to happen with the politcal structure we're setting up?

---

I don't believe your information on this one. al Sadyr is *losing* support right now. Even the Iranians view him as an embarrassment which should really tell you something. He will fail and in a little while, you won't even remember his name and we and the Iraqis will have moved onto more important matters.

As far as the political structure. That is not solely for us to set up. The political and ethnic realities of Iraq were there long before we took down Hussein. It is our job to work the best solution in spite of the political difficutlties we face there, and believe me I am not suggesting they are trivial. There are HUGE hurdles that have to be cleared in this process. I just don't want to cut and run like some are suggesting. I seriously hope that is not your position because if it is, it would seem to me that would indicate you don't care anything about the Iraqi people and their future. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt on that until I hear otherwise from you.

quote:

---

Q #4. Are you really under the impression that its going to last more then a year without US military intervention?

---

See my answer to Q #2.

I've answered your questions, I would very much like an answer to mine.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

quote:

---

Jestah, I will answer answer them, but I would still very much love to hear your answer to the question I have about your profs. How many openly conservative profs do you have compared to openly liberal?

---

None. Its department policy for professors to avoid disclosing political affiliations. I have some professors who support the war and I have some who don't. Obviously current events come up in political science courses but the bulk of my courses deal with the actual science of politics. Profs leave the discussion up to the students.

So, none is your answer.

quote:

---

When asked if they view us as invaders, the answer is yes. When asked if they want us to leave the country the answer is no.

How can this be?

---

I don't know how to respond to your replies because we're clearly looking at different polls. All the polls I've been looking at show the vast majority of Iraqis wanting the Americans off Iraqi soil. These same polls show al Sadyr as gaining tons of ground. The article I linked to you above I believe shows approx. 60% of the country supporting him.

Bandwagon American Since 9/11/01

Polls? You linked only one. Like I said, most poll(S) I have seen since the war began have a consistent thread which is that they don't like the idea that we're there but they want us to remain until such time that order has been restored. If you've got more than one poll that shows otherwise, then please link.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

An interesting take on the video:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FE22Ak03.html

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

I'm know I'm a bit late for this, but please:

If you haven't seen the video and are contemplating whether to watch it or not, DON'T... I considered myself pretty de-sensitized to grue, but the content of this video haunted my mind for a week. Not the gore in particular, but the act of beheading and being decapitated... All I could think of was what must have been going through this poor bastard's mind at the time, and how a human being could do this to another...

If by watching the video I've stopped someone else from seeing it, then you can call me a martyr. Please don't watch it.

"Nothin' like a pro-stabbin' from a pro." -Weadah

It is very disturbing. But it is what a certain group of people would like to do to you and to me. Perhaps people *should* see it to get a better idea of just what we're up against. And to also realize that the argument that we brought this on ourselves makes so much less sense when innocent civilians are treated in this manner.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . . : Justice 4 Pat Richard : . .

A minor interjection:

http://www.talkaboutgovernment.com/group/alt.politics.liberalism/messages/762176.html

And on beheadings:

quote:

---

Skaarjj:

...there's nothing to make the heart perform the two contractions and numberous valves motions it has to make in order to send a pressurised squirt of blood up the carotid artery to the brain (or the hole now occupying the area). The person who decided to use that for evidence that the video was fake obviously has a) a great love of hollywood films; b) no idea about basic physiology; and c) a very gullible nature.

---

Sorry Skaarjj, but Bugimus is correct - beheadings are gruesome and bloody. The heart does not stop pumping immediately (and as is evident in the footage, it took quite some hacking through the throat to remove the head completely, before any nerves were severed - my apologies for such plain speaking).

In fact, beheadings do tend to produce dramatic geysers akin to Hollywood uber-gore. The blood, under pressure and suddenly released in such a manner, can spray as much as six or seven feet from the body - something which Hollywood tends to ignore in cut-throat scenes. In the movies, a quick slice sees the victim drop silently to the ground. In the millitary, they teach you two main methods of cutting a throat (which is actually considered a less than favorable way of killing, simply because it is so damn messy):

Clamping your hand tightly over their mouth (either grounding them, or pulling them off balance)...

1) ...keep sawing until the head is barely attached and the target stops struggling (which they will do for what seems like ages).

or

2) ...insert the blade into the neck, aligned vertically, then twist the balde outwards and forwards, severing everything on the way through. This is a quicker method, but probably even messier.


Not that I've ever slashed somebody's throat, or beheaded a man, but it is considered to be one of the messiest ways to go.

I am in no way suggesting that this film is faked, but if you wish to argue it either way, at least brush up on your own physiological knowledge..!

quote:

---

In the millitary, they teach you two main methods of cutting a throat (which is actually considered a less than favorable way of killing, simply because it is so damn messy):

Clamping your hand tightly over their mouth (either grounding them, or pulling them off balance)...

1) ...keep sawing until the head is barely attached and the target stops struggling (which they will do for what seems like ages).

or

2) ...insert the blade into the neck, aligned vertically, then twist the balde outwards and forwards, severing everything on the way through. This is a quicker method, but probably even messier.

---

Hmmm...these were not the methods I was taught. In fact, it was never taught that one should slit the throat. Instead, one clamps a hand over the mouth, and then one inserts the knife along the spine base of the skull, direct up into the brain. Much less blood, and much, much quicker.

WebShaman | Asylum D & D | D & D Min Page

Exactly the point, Webshaman - but when needs must (sometimes, it isn't so easy to get to the back of the skull, and scrambling the brain can be pretty hard with a fit, trained, struggling soldier fighting for his life).

Another quick and less messy method is to clamp your hand over their mouth and insert the blade downwards, behind the collar-bone. Apparently, this is extremely quick and effective...

...but what this has to do with anything, I don't know. The whole point was to high-light how messy even cutting a throat could be (as this is technically what they do in the footage), let alone complete decapitation.

Webshaman - I won't presume one way or the other about your experiences - but perhaps you could shed some light on the issue with your views on the geyser argument?

(Edited by White Hawk on 06-10-2004 14:22)

I believe that certain things do raise some questions regarding the authenticity of the video. I have no doubt that the man was killed. However, I don't think that we are seeing him killed on the video. I think he was already dead before they cut off his head. I do think the video is real, but I don't think that the victim was actually killed on the video.

You see, actually showing the death, would invoke sympathy, and aversion (as the body jerked around in its death throes, possible spurting blood all over, etc). That would defeat the purpose of the video, I think. One has to take into consideration, of who the intended audience was. Many assume it was the West, but I am not so certain. I believe that it was aimed at audiences in the ME. As such, it is important that they show themselves as avenging Sons of God, and not bloodthirsty, inhuman killers.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.

WebShaman | Asylum D & D | D & D Min Page

I didn't think of that - it's nice to have one's eyes opened to another possibility.

The idea that the video is real, but that he was already dead strikes me as plausible - and it could be one reason why there was so little observable blood.

Having watched the footage, I found it hard to tell quite what was going on - and seeing it, for me, has actually made the arguments more compelling.