qed
Senior Member
I, for one, never doubted it, until I saw the footage.Yes, apparently.
But NOW, I am yelling "err...".
I, for one, never doubted it, until I saw the footage.Yes, apparently.
The video that Mick was talking about is the last one on that link. I have to be honest here, I've seen several American and EU captives having to forcefully give a speech for their captors, and James Foley didn't appear to be under stress, and even the way he was talking to his brother seemed oddly strange. For someone that is about to have their head cut off, why would they denounce America and blame America for their wrong doings in Iraq. At one point it even appeared as if he was smiling or smirking. Granted, having the sun in your eyes could've had the same effect from squinting. You're head is coming off anyway, and it's not like he chose a nice way to behead you (6" blade).. His farewell message just seems a bit strange to me.Do you think James Foley was beheaded?
Be careful though.The video that Mick was talking about is the last one on that link. I have to be honest here, I've seen several American and EU captives having to forcefully give a speech for their captors, and James Foley didn't appear to be under stress, and even the way he was talking to his brother seemed oddly strange. For someone that is about to have their head cut off, why would they denounce America and blame America for their wrong doings in Iraq. At one point it even appeared as if he was smiling or smirking. Granted, having the sun in your eyes could've had the same effect from squinting. You're head is coming off anyway, and it's not like he chose a nice way to behead you (6" blade).. His farewell message just seems a bit strange to me.
I have no desire to watch it - it's a claim, it's a pattern of behaviour consistent with their past actions, and I see no real reason to doubt it, this 'staged' information included.I, for one, never doubted it, until I saw the footage.
But NOW, I am yelling "err...".
Don't worry!I have no desire to watch it
'Error level analysis' - a way to detect digital manipulation. I'm not knowledgeable on the subject which is why I keep mentioning a split off thread. The video on liveleak seems compelling that the image of the beheaded was fake, proven using 'ELA'. I figured with the minds at this site, someone could shed some light on the subject.What's ELA?
And that's a problem! You're saying you really don't care; you're willing to accept whatever you've initially read, even if this situation is not what it seems.I have no desire to watch it - it's a claim, it's a pattern of behaviour consistent with their past actions, and I see no real reason to doubt it, this 'staged' information included.
It's not an event I feel needs me personally engaging in forensically investigating, it's just more evidence of the horror of political and religious fanaticism which is something I already don't have trouble accepting.
Make no mistake who created this horror.just more evidence of the horror of political and religious fanaticism which is something I already don't have trouble accepting.
Like @qed said:Other people are welcome to change my opinion with their analysis - I have read what has been said and see no reason not to conclude he was beheaded.
We have a staged video...why believe the stories behind it? It's like watching a Hollywood movie and believing something they claim happened at the end.qed said:Consider a conspiracy theorist offering that video of evidence that someone was beheaded. We would all say "err..."
Let us avoid semantics. "Staged" is henceforth, in this thread, taken to mean "purposely false"?How is beheading someone in front of a camera not a staged video anyway? The whole thing was a production for a purpose. I don't see why that is startling information.
And, the error level analysis of the photo? I linked to a video on liveleak earlier in this thread where someone claims ELA was done on that photo and have shown it to be manipulated. Meaning the video was staged, and the photo was faked as well. If that's true that should make anyone scratch their head about the situation.
I'll mention again, perhaps a split off thread to debunk that claim (if it is debunkable or at least explainable?).
Make no mistake who created this horror.
Let us avoid semantics. "Staged" is henceforth, in this thread, taken to mean "purposely false"?
And what does "false" mean? He's still alive? That's someone else? It's all CG? You don't get to dictate what word mean.
Instead of worrying about the meaning of words, just clearly say what can be verified.
That was all I was trying to say. Sorry?Let us avoid semantics. "Staged" is henceforth, in this thread, taken to mean "purposely false"?
And what does "false" mean? He's still alive? That's someone else? It's all CG? You don't get to dictate what word mean.
What can be clearly verified?just clearly say what can be verified.
What can be clearly verified?
It "appears" to be his head. This might seem gross, but does anyone know (in the medical profession) if it's even possible to sever a head using a 6" knife.Can we not establish that there is clearly a head at the end (of the footage) that is disjoint from the body, and that this head is the head of the person at the beginning?
Anyone doubt this?
But the ELA does not focus on the background. It focuses on the body, which has been covered up in this shot (for viewer discretion).There is no photo, there's a video. Photos are stills from the video. The original video shows no signs of digital fakery that I can see.
Is that what the investigators conclude? The meaning must comply with what they mean.Let us avoid semantics. "Staged" is henceforth, in this thread, taken to mean "purposely false"?
I would like to mention that the US government has authenticated the video.That there is a video, it looks like Foley talking in it. It looks like a guy was sawing at his head. It then cuts to what looks like his body and severed head. The video all appears to be actual video with no still frames. There was some editing. The error level analysis is bunk as they are not looking at the actual frames of the video, and any similar photo gives the same result.
Whether that means the details within the video are authentic or that this is from ISIS is unclear.After analyzing the footage, National Security Council spokesperson Caitlin Hayden says, "We have reached the judgment that this video is authentic." http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...show-beheading-of-u-s-journalist-by-militants
This is exactly the type of things you say not to do! You're speculating quite a bit.That there is a video, it looks like Foley talking in it. It looks like a guy was sawing at his head. It then cuts to what looks like his body and severed head. The video all appears to be actual video with no still frames. There was some editing. The error level analysis is bunk as they are not looking at the actual frames of the video, and any similar photo gives the same result.
James Foley didn't appear to be under stress, and even the way he was talking to his brother seemed oddly strange. For someone that is about to have their head cut off, why would they denounce America and blame America for their wrong doings in Iraq. At one point it even appeared as if he was smiling or smirking. Granted, having the sun in your eyes could've had the same effect from squinting. You're head is coming off anyway, and it's not like he chose a nice way to behead you (6" blade).. His farewell message just seems a bit strange to me.
I ask because I remembered reading the spinal cord is pretty durable and hard to cut through, not to mention back during the days of beheadings in the spread of religion it was known that axe-wielding executioners would often have to repeatedly hack, in order to decapitate a person's head.This might seem gross, but does anyone know (in the medical profession) if it's even possible to sever a head using a 6" knife
Sounds like hoo-ha. It's so easy to say 'we attempted a rescue mission, but it was secret... We can't say anything about it.'I hesitate to comment on this thread given the semantic legacy of the word "staged" at MB...but...
I am not sure we should really conjecture about his state of mind. Do you know how Foley appeared when he wasnt under stress? His relatives clearly thought he was under a great deal of stress. He looks stressed to me. He is gritting his teeth and grimacing when not speaking and his words seemed hesitant and forced.
I, too, wondered why- if he thought they were going to kill him- why say the words? why not die resisting? But we do not see what is happening behind the camera- they could be threatening to kill the other guy (soklof?) if he doesn't say the words...
...and because I am a troublemaker...too bad this rescue mission the US "staged" was unsuccessful:
National Security
U.S. staged secret operation into Syria in failed bid to rescue Americans
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...3558a8-287d-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html
This is exactly the type of things you say not to do! You're speculating quite a bit.
Is there a way to check this out? Mission status or log books, just asking?How do we know they really did? Their word? Where's the slightest shred of evidence they even attempted it? Could be more propaganda.
But the ELA does not focus on the background. It focuses on the body, which has been covered up in this shot (for viewer discretion).
He's explaining a video that has been staged.Thats NOT conjecture or speculation.. when you're talking about a moving video its an apt description. How else would it be described? It felt? It sounded? It appeared? The ONLY evidence anyone has at this point, IS that video, so until a counter claim of evidence becomes available or the body comes home and can be confirmed 100% then its not speculation or conjecture. Its statement based on available facts.. there's a HUGE difference Josh, and you know it.
OT: What if the video pertained to something else then, like a UFO for instance? Would the conjecture or speculation be warranted?Thats NOT conjecture or speculation.. when you're talking about a moving video its an apt description. How else would it be described? It felt? It sounded? It appeared?
So then it couldn't have been manipulated? I'm not savvy on that whole subject.This is not showing ELA, it's showing the scene is 3D.
Sounds like hoo-ha. It's so easy to say 'we attempted a rescue mission, but it was secret... We can't say anything about it.'
How do we know they really did? Their word? Where's the slightest shred of evidence they even attempted it? Could be more propaganda.
This is exactly the type of things you say not to do! You're speculating quite a bit.
So then it couldn't have been manipulated? I'm not savvy on that whole subject.