Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Gank on May 26, 2004, 04:31:03 pm
-
http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=2020
look at point 4.
-
"His left head"
It's not Zaphod, is it?
-
Interesting indeed..... Though not condemning evidence, it certainly makes one pause for thought, especially those bright orange overalls...........
-
Sounds a bit iffy to me.... i mean, based upon (largely) a white picnic chair and yellow walls? I have a chair like that in my back garden,it's not exactly custom decor.
It just seems pretty damn unlikely to me.... I haven't (I'm glad to say) seen the video, but there's nothing they say which can be considered particularly daming - in particular, the orange jumpsuit could be an intentional reference to the Iraqi prisoners.
The US military cap, I couldn;t see - and it's not beyone reason that a) it isn't a Us military cap or that b) it is, and it's a 'trophy' from some battle or otherwise. In terms of the bloke not moving (which again, I haven;t seen), it's plausible and even likely he was heavily drugged beforehand.
As for the blood - i can't say (not seen the video and have no intention of seeking it out)
-
It's real, if you don't think it isn't, you are stupid.
-
seriously, its not that gory. I watched it (though with the sound off, it was like 2am and I don't want to wake anyone), but it not terribly frightening. Probably I have been desensetized to violence, but I don't know why everyone is claiming the most horrific thing ever.
I admit, any of those pieces of evidence alone would not be a convincing case. But all of them together do make it seem like quite a coincidence. Same jumpsuit, same walls, same chair, and the military cap that pokes in.
There are some people out there who will claim that such an act is beyond the US military, that they could never commit such a thing. I'm not one of them. And I'm sure that these claims will be refuted by some people on that alone.
Two more things that I saw on another website regardnig the peculiarities is that one of the killers appears to be wearing very clean white sneakers, and another claim is that part of a US military uniform pokes in at one point, much like the cap.
Originally posted by adwight
It's real, if you don't think it isn't, you are stupid.
your logic is simply outstanding, sir. I applaud you. Irrefutable evidence, to be sure.
-
I personally saw no cap, I saw a hand and that was about it.
-
The video did seem rather odd. Admittedly, I saw a very low bandwidth version. But it did look rather odd.
-
It should also be noted that apparently, the captors offered Berh in exchange for prisoners. The US refused, and well, you know what happened next. That is, if we are indeed talking about two different groups of people.
-
here it is, the website with the military jacket stuff:
http://www.aztlan.net/berg_abu_ghraib_video.htm
edit: image removed, not everyone might be OK with it...
-
Originally posted by adwight
It's real, if you don't think it isn't, you are stupid.
double negative.
-
Uhum, Rictor that image might be considered a tad... out of place. I reckon ye should keep yer link up but loose that image from ur post.
-
I think the problem is that this whole war is being fought in peoples minds, in both the West and the East.
I can accept that there are American Soldiers who believe enough that doing something like this would be 'for the good of America' that they could justify it to themselves.
I can equally accept that such things were deliberately and silently put into this video by the Al Quaida fighters so that they could be 'found' at a later date.
It's mind games on all of us, that's what truly disgusts me about the behaviour of all our governments, I don't like my head being screwed with :(
-
Even if he was drugged, once a person has their head removed, they're nerves left to the rest of the body go off like crazy... so legs should be twitching, as well as his arms and what not. That's why they say that after you cut off a chicken's head, it'll keep running for a few seconds before it dies. And If you've ever cut your head, it gets pretty damn bloody around you. If you cut your head off, I would expect it to be alot worse, and with far more blood than the video showed.
However, with all that said, I can't believe that it was completely fake. The chair is common. Everyone has seen those chairs or has them. My neighbour has a set, I don't think he imported them from Abu-Ghraib. And alot of prisoners have escaped from Abu-Ghraib because of the lax secuirty and horrible roll counting. So it's quite possible that they got those prison jumpsuits from one of their guys that escaped. Alot of the evidence is circumstancial.
Perhaps the most damning would be the hat though. As we can see from all the flag burning going on, they don't hold too much value for American symbols. I find it highly doubtful they'll keep a beret as a souvenir.
-
I'm dubious. Highly common chair, highly common color wall. Like Reez said, the orange uniform could've come from an escaped prisoner. I didn't see a hat though...
And honestly, if the U.S. military had done this video, you think they would've kept in an army guy poking his head into the video for a second? I don't think so. Editing videos isn't all that hard...
-
But then again, U.S. Military aren't really smart.
Now if it were indeed fake, that would make a lot of sense in a worrying way.
-
yeah, suddenly all those people yelling "barbaric" would have to direct that rage against their own camp. Quite inconvenient..
-
not really. remember the lack of twitching and blood. if we're going to go with the conspiracy theories, then he's probably not even dead. I doubt the Americans would be willing to kill one of their own, cuz they do see themselves as superior.
-
I like how some people are willing to beleive that we decapatated a man just so we could make propaganda against Al Qeta, but if someone sais something like "the US military does not intentionaly kill unarmed civilians" they go nuts.
if for just once, JUST ONCE, I could click on a "hey this is funny" or "isn't this interesting" thread, that had evedence that the US may NOT be the most concentrated source of evil, maybe I could posably consider not thinking that some people are just ****ing brain washed morons!
-
You think you can take the worst speller spot from me that easy? You don't know who you're messing with, I was bastardizing the english language while you were still in diapers boy.
but seriously, I'm a skeptic. I try to go on proof as much as possible. So, for this, there seems to be a certain amount of proof (in addition to several peculiarities regarding Berg himself), so I have reason to doubt the official story.
If there is proof that 9/11 didn't happen exactly as certain people would like the world to believe, I'll look into that. If there is evidence that casts doubt on theories or conclusions, thats worth looking into.
This works both ways, in that I will doubt a particular story if there is evidence to justify that doubt, even if it would vindicate Americans and indict someone else. If evidence came to light that indicates the Abu Ghraib photos were faked by insurgents as propaganda (just as an example), I would look into that.
But I admit, I do have a certain bias. While most people here can agree that Osama & Co are barbarians (in their methods at least), some people do not regard the other side, the US troops, as harshly. In this, I will admit a bias, in that I do regard the troops as equally savage and equally brutal. I could argue that this is not a bias at all, but rather a lack of hypocrisy, but it is a bias from the norm, thats much is true.
The thing is, I always assume that there is more to a story than meets the eye. If someone says "incompetence", I see "plausible deniability". If someone says "accident", I see "pre-meditated". If someone says "isolated", I see "systemic".
But this does not make me a tinfoil hatted nutter. Just think back to a year ago. How many stories were exposed as false? As lies? As cover-ups?I can think of at least half a dozen*, and I assume that if someone has lied before, they are likely to do it again. Doesn't that make sense.
* Jessica Lynch, Saddam's capture, pre-war WMD "proof", a missle attack during the opening invasion - debunked by Robert Fisk, the "decapitation strike" on Saddam during the first day of the bombing, the Abu Ghraib coverup, the toppling of Saddam's statue, various civilian killings of dubious intent, the helium vans...and thats just off the top of my head.
-
OT, but worth looking at. There are like 2-3 articles a day which I consider worthy of posting, so I just try to throw it in the latest political thread. Sorry if this inconveniences anybody.
Trrops hold Iraqis as bargaining chips... (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-woabus263819545may26,0,4004730.story?coll=ny-worldnews-headlines)
-
hmm, well at least now the whole "99.99% of the people imprisoned are inocent" makes some degree of sence, but why would it take this long for that sort of story to come out?
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
hmm, well at least now the whole "99.99% of the people imprisoned are inocent" makes some degree of sence, but why would it take this long for that sort of story to come out?
On the one hand, because it's as pointless to debate the authenticity of that tape as it is to argue over the 'faked' moon landings. pure coffeehouse intellectualism.
If someone truly wants to believe that either the tape is faked or it was a concoction by some shadowy group in the US Military, there's absolutely nothing you can do to convince them otherwise.
On the other hand, anything is worth arguing.
Except perhaps the idiocy that chose Britney's Hot Dance Game over Freespace 3....
-
auhm, were you trying to quote me or someone else, I was responding to the other artcicle Rictor posted, the one that didn't have anything to do with the topic.
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
I like how some people are willing to beleive that we decapatated a man just so we could make propaganda against Al Qeta, but if someone sais something like "the US military does not intentionaly kill unarmed civilians" they go nuts.
if for just once, JUST ONCE, I could click on a "hey this is funny" or "isn't this interesting" thread, that had evedence that the US may NOT be the most concentrated source of evil, maybe I could posably consider not thinking that some people are just ****ing brain washed morons!
You completly refuse to even consider the fact that your countrymen could do anything wrong or evil and call people who believe they could and do brainwashed? Btw your first statement makes no sense.
Corsair, watch the video, its very badly edited. Shot by two camera whos timestamps dont match up at all, and the sound jumps right out of synch just before they attack Berg.
The hats not damning by itself, its every other little thing about the whole episode, the fact that Berg was detained for an couple of weeks by the US in Iraq, the fact that he was detained in the US by the FBI for suspected al-queda links, the fact that he was on a right-wing hate list, and the orange jumpsuit. Theres also Zarqawi who wears a mask and then tells us who he is :rolleyes: He also moves quite well for a man with one leg.
-
also, Zarqawi was reported to have been killed recently, according to a pamphlet circulated by certain Islamic groups. Or am I mixing him up with someone else?
-
NB: consider this though - what would the consequences be if the video if the video was fake? And, given that, would they really have been stupid enough to shoot it in Abu-Graib and inadvertantly video themselves?
That's what makes me skeptical over this whole 'fake' thing.
-
Posted this before, go read it:
http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/news/20010430/
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
NB: consider this though - what would the consequences be if the video if the video was fake? And, given that, would they really have been stupid enough to shoot it in Abu-Graib and inadvertantly video themselves?
That's what makes me skeptical over this whole 'fake' thing.
The magic bullet theory was pretty stupid too. No one ever seemed to care enough to take any serious effort to discredit it though.
The CIA's plan to kill John Glenn and blame it on the russians was pretty stupid but that didn't stop them from writing it down.
The american public (in fact the public of any western democracy) are so used to being lied to that we never really do anything no matter how hideous the crime.
Even if this video was proved to be fake I'd bet it wouldn't alter Bush's relection chances by anything more than a few tenths of a percent.
-
The problem is, after the 'Mirror affair' our papers are very very very reluctant to even bring this to the public's attention.
'Telling you the truth, unless the truth may make you question our motives, or might make you too uneasy'. It's always been the same.
I agree that if the US were really going to do this, they would not be unsubtle enough to make those mistakes. it's just too sloppy.
Both sides here are playing a phsycological game with the public, and I'd be perfectly prepared to accept that Terrorists are smart enough to deliberately insert this stuff, so that it can be discovered by a completely innocent person later, it's a very clever tactic, and it's been used before.
Or, of course, it could all be co-incidence, I see a green hat, but that's all, not army, just green. But if our press were truly free, they would be drawing this to peoples attention, even if it's in the guise of 'making the government aware' so that it can be disputed and, hopefully, refuted.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
I agree that if the US were really going to do this, they would not be unsubtle enough to make those mistakes. it's just too sloppy.
Fair point but who says that this was an official policy? It's quite possible that if this is a fake, someone in Iraq came up with the idea to get the attention off of the whole torture issue. Probably someone involved in the whole torture scandal.
The government would be forced to then clean up afterwards, once the damage had been done. And they couldn't possibly let the truth get out cause this would be worse than the whole torture scandal was.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
I agree that if the US were really going to do this, they would not be unsubtle enough to make those mistakes. it's just too sloppy.
No they're not. Look at the US's track record in Iraq for the last year, subtle is not a word which springs to mind.
Originally posted by Flipside
Both sides here are playing a phsycological game with the public, and I'd be perfectly prepared to accept that Terrorists are smart enough to deliberately insert this stuff, so that it can be discovered by a completely innocent person later, it's a very clever tactic, and it's been used before.
Read up on some of the things Zarqawi has taken credit for, the man supposedly issued a statement claiming responsibility for a carbombing which killed 200 Iraqi shias and claimed to be trying to start a civil war between Sunnis and Shias right after a general uprising against the americans started in the shia south. if hes trying to finger americans for things, hes pretty hopeless at it.
Originally posted by Flipside
Or, of course, it could all be co-incidence, I see a green hat, but that's all, not army, just green. But if our press were truly free, they would be drawing this to peoples attention, even if it's in the guise of 'making the government aware' so that it can be disputed and, hopefully, refuted.
It wont be disputed or refuted, it'll just fall under the you're just saying this because you hate america catagory, like all the unanswered questions about the wtc attacks.
-
i've only seem the clips from the site that was posted, I haven't seen the actual video as of yet. But there would be no point for Zarqawri to wear a mask when he announces his name, since almost everyone already knows what he looks like.
The more times you see the video, the less it makes sense for radical Muslims to do it. There's more efficient ways to kill someone than cut their head off.
-
Well, beheading is the official method of execution in Saudi Arabia, IIRC.
-
With a sword, not sawing it off with a knife. Its only practised in Saudi though, a wahabbi country and zarqawi's a jordanian sunni iirc.
This site has a good rundown of the discrepancys.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/5/15/22827/0477
one other thing that bothered me about it, why not kill Maupin, the US soldier that the Iraqis have, makes more sense than killing a civvie if this was done in revenge for the torture photos.
-
...and what is this? a voice in Enlgish saying "how will it be done".
touche (http://www.aztlan.net/nick_berg_how_done.htm)
from Gank's article:
33) Western body posture and mannerisms of "terrorists"
The "terrorists" have Western-style body posture and mannerisms. They seem to be at parade rest at times.
34) "Terrorists" were fat
Several of the men in the film were fat by Iraqi standards. If they were Feyadeen or Mujahadeen, they probably have been living underground since the first days of the occupation. Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been shown on news stories as they have marched and demonstrated. One would be hard pressed to point out a single fat man among these thousands.
35) White hands of "terrorists"
Some of the "Arab terrorists" have pasty-white hands and (other exposed) skin. One would be hard pressed to find Arab men with pasty-white hands. (See: Nick Berg Conspiracy Theories Abound.)
36) Wrong accent
Al-Zarqawi is/was Jordinian. Arab linguists have said the man posing as Al-Zarqawi did not speak with a Jordanian dialect. Others have suggested the man reading the written statement may not have been a native speaker of Arabic.
37) Change in masks by beheader
To quote a K5 comment:
"The guy who holds up the head at the end has a white mask and no vest. The guy who pulls out the knife and starts cutting is in a black mask. The only guy with a white mask is wearing a green vest"
38) Voice id
Al-Zarqawi's identification by the CIA was based on "probable" voice id of the videotape.
39) Al-Zarqawi's missing leg
Al-Zarqawi was missing one leg. Al-Zarqawi allegedly wears a prosthetic device, according to previous CIA reports. (See: IHT Protrait of Al-Zarqawi.) There is no evidence that the killer wore a prosthetic device. Further, Al-Zarqawi had been outfitted with an artificial leg that did not fit or function properly. He was unable to walk or stand normally. No man in the group showed evidence of such infirmity.
40) Missing tattoos?
Large green tattooed "dots" are known to be on the back of Abu Musab Zarqawi's left hand. These tattoos cannot be seen in the close up video of the execution, though the back of his hand is fairly visible. (See: IHT Protrait of Al-Zarqawi.)
41) Al-Zarqawi dead?
Numerous indigenous sources have said Al-Zarqawi was killed by a US helicopter attack months ago when he was unable to move quickly enough to escape the targeted house. While others managed to exit the house in time to survive, he died in the collapsed building.
42) Gold ring on killer's hand
The man in the videotape who is purported to be Zarqawi seems to be wearing a gold ring. Note: This is a questionable point. To quote Healing Iraq (healingiraq.blogspot.com) as quoted at this angryfinger.org post (Nick Berg Conspiracy Theories Abound): "Islam does not specifically forbid that men wear gold, in fact the Quran and the Hadith have encouraged men to 'adorn' and 'embellish' themselves (dying hair, perfume, etc.) .... the practice of wearing gold ornaments is discouraged by Muslim clerics, "Gold is the ornament of women". Socially it is not acceptable in the Arab world for men to wear gold, although this has changed lately and many young men do (engagement and wedding rings are mostly gold)."
43) Why anonymous?
Al-Zarqawi's face is very well-known. If Al-Zarqawi was the perpetrator, why did he bother to cover it the whole time? If Al-Zarqawi is trying to build a resistance movement, why did he not uncover his face at some point? (If it was another terrorist impersonating Al-Zarqawi, why is the CIA identifying the voice as Al-Zarqawi's?)
44) Iraqi denial of "terrorists"
Iraqis who have seen the videotape on Arabic news broadcasts are universally saying the men in the film are not Iraqis. Are they saying this partly because the speaker does not employ an Iraqi dialect? Where does their certainty come from?
45) Firearms Israeli, not AK-47s
Firearms experts have stated the AK-47 carried by one man was a "Galil." This actually is an Israeli-made weapon that improves on the famous AK- 47. Feyadeen and other insurgents use AK-47s.
that about does it for me, too many inconsistancies. it clearly wasn't Zarqawi & Co. If it was another Islamic faction, they would have taken the credit themselves instead of giving credit to Zarqawi. Which leaves one plausible option, and the evidence seems to point in that directions.
-
I find it hard to believe that the Americans would make a con that was so transparent though. I'm sure they can get some used AK-47s, find a gimp, and someone who's a Jordinian in a very short amount of time. Not to mention actual Iraqis, there are quite a few who do side with them still. And they definitely could find some that weren't fatasses either. It seems too raw, unsophisticated, and flimsy to be an American con. This is a country that managed to convince the public for 30 years that they were doing well in Vietnam, and seen as heroes. I think they could come up with some better stuff than this, especially with all the technological advances, such as voice modularity. And hell, Robin Williams can sound pretty damn Arab when he wants to, the US Army must have some linguists who can too.
-
I would not be suprised at all if the government staged this.
-
Originally posted by Reez
I find it hard to believe that the Americans would make a con that was so transparent though. I'm sure they can get some used AK-47s, find a gimp, and someone who's a Jordinian in a very short amount of time. Not to mention actual Iraqis, there are quite a few who do side with them still. And they definitely could find some that weren't fatasses either. It seems too raw, unsophisticated, and flimsy to be an American con. This is a country that managed to convince the public for 30 years that they were doing well in Vietnam, and seen as heroes. I think they could come up with some better stuff than this, especially with all the technological advances, such as voice modularity. And hell, Robin Williams can sound pretty damn Arab when he wants to, the US Army must have some linguists who can too.
As I said before it's quite possible that this con didn't come right from the top. It's also possible that based on Kennedy the US governement think that the electorate are a bunch of credible fools who''ll believe any half-assed explaination no matter how stupid and illogical it is. Guess what? They're right.
People are saying that the media are ignoring this because the government want it covered up. That's nonsense. If that were the case why has no one in France or Germany etc picked it?
No one has picked it up cause it's a conspiracy theory and conspiracy theories are non-stories even if they are true.
Give it another 3-4 years and it will show up in documanetaries when it starts to pick up value in that sphere rather than as news.
-
no, its a conpiracy theory if and only if you can plausibly explain away all of the above stated inconsistancies. Until you can, its an open question.
What the media should be doing is informing people of these discrepancies, and maybe even *gasp* doing their own investigation. People have a right to know that there is something other than the official story, and that its has some pretty solid backing. You know, the good old two sides of the story.
Have we realy slipped so far in our expectations of the media, that we can now accept that their job is simply to tote the party line? The media, as an institution, is immensly important, their job is to question the status quo. But these days, its like the government and media are hardly seperate entities.
Keep in mind, that media corporations have hardly any national ties, so you shouldn't expect private news outlets in France to be owned by a Frenchman, or to reflect the mentality of the French people. For example, Rupert Murdoch, the US media tycoon (and staunch Republican) controls pretty much all of Australia's media. I don't have the exact figures, but he has most of the daily newspapers, and large chunks of TV and radio. So, Australians get the same news as Americans, with the same spin. I don't see why the same could not apply in France of Germany.
There is simply too much thats wrong with the official story of Nick Berg's death to accept it on blind faith. So, there should now be an investigation (not governmental obviously) in to these claims. That has traditionally been the role of the media, but..well....
-
Rictor. It's a consipiracy theory cause it's a theory about the conspiracy to hide the truth about what really happened from the public. Just cause it's a conspiracy theory doesn't make it untrue.
If you could "plausibly explain away all of the above stated inconsistancies" as you say it wouldn't be a conspiracy theory anymore. It would be a hoax.
That's why I keep mentioning Kennedy. I doubt there is anyone with two braincells to rub together who actually believes the party line on that one. Doesn't mean that a grassy knoll explaination isn't a conspiracy theory.
As for the media. Are you trying to claim that every single media outlet in the world is controlled by pro-americans? I doubt it. It's just laziness that is stopping a proper investigation happening in other counties. Laziness and the fact that they doubt the public would care that much.
-
[color=66ff00]Not 100% on topic but close enough to post in a thread of this subject.
http://www.little-gamers.com/index.php?strip_id=852
Read the rants too.
[/color]
-
I read these threads and the articles posted, and all I can think of is the newspapers and whatnot you pick up and read in Deus Ex
-
well, the word conspiracy theory has very negative conotations for me, and pretty much everyone else. I get what you're saying, and by your defintion (probably the correct one) it is. But the second you say those two magic words, no one will ever believe that it can possibly be true.
The media is, I think, more than just lazy. There is in many cases a conscious effort of suppress the truth. There are 6 media corporations in the US that dominate the martket. And all of those are pro-government, some even being owned by Republicans (eg Murdoch). I'm not saying that there is NO other source of information, especially outside the States, but I am saying that Western media is, some more than other, skewed towards toting the party line. I am also saying that just because a TV station is in Germany, does not guarantee that its owned by a German.
Already one or two major websites have picked up the story, and I hope we'll be seeing more of that in the future.
-
Originally posted by diamondgeezer
I read these threads and the articles posted, and all I can think of is the newspapers and whatnot you pick up and read in Deus Ex
oh you mean how the Rothschilds control the world economy? or how every US President in the past X years (X being a high number) has been a member of the Skull and Bones and/or the Trilateral Commision? or how John Ashcroft is building the Total Information Awareness program, the succesor or Echelon?
yeah man, the truth is stranger than fiction.
:nervous: :nervous:
-
Originally posted by Rictor
well, the word conspiracy theory has very negative conotations for me, and pretty much everyone else. I get what you're saying, and by your defintion (probably the correct one) it is. But the second you say those two magic words, no one will ever believe that it can possibly be true.
That's my basic point Rictor. People look at it and think "This must be a conspiracy theory" and then don't think about it at all again.
Originally posted by Rictor
The media is, I think, more than just lazy. There is in many cases a conscious effort of suppress the truth. There are 6 media corporations in the US that dominate the martket. And all of those are pro-government, some even being owned by Republicans (eg Murdoch).
Of course there are corporations that want to hide the truth but I don't think it's all down to that. Laziness and a lack of interest is the other half of the equasion. Let me put it this way. How much would the average French man care that the Americans lied about Bergs death? Maybe a bit but most of them already know that American politicians are liars so I doubt they'd be the interest to make it worth it.
It's the countries with troops inside Iraq that have a lot of interest in this story. Which does make me wonder why the BBC haven't jumped all over it. Probably scared to after the whitewash that was the Hutton Report.
Originally posted by Rictor
I'm not saying that there is NO other source of information, especially outside the States, but I am saying that Western media is, some more than other, skewed towards toting the party line. I am also saying that just because a TV station is in Germany, does not guarantee that its owned by a German.
I got you the first time you said it. But there are stations and newspapers who don't have anything to do with this all over the world. You do have to wonder why Al-Jeezera aren't looking into it too.
-
The link I posted when I started this thread was from al-jazeera kara.
-
Fair enough. I was wondering :D
-
also, and Aussie website had the story a day or two ago, I'm trying to find it...
here it is:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/28/1085641717320.html
I can't confirm if the paper version had the story as well, for obvious reasons.