Thank you folks for preserving what little faith I have left in humanity.
I’ve never seen a more appropriately named reference-misser…
I have no opinion on the subject of this thread and have no intention of offering one, but as tangential as this is, I can’t let it pass. Your statement that U. S. Intelligence said Iraq had WMDs is incorrect. U. S. Intelligence tried very hard to tell the Bush Administration that it was highly unlikely that Iraq still had WMDs but were pointedly and deliberately ignored. One of the greatest injustices of the whole Iraq debacle was that U. S. Intelligence was made to take the fall for that.
Selective Intelligence May 2003
This was the best reporting that was going on re the issue at the time. I just thought you might like to be better informed on your statement.
Apologies to the OP for the thread highjack.
Whoops, missed an important one:
Again, apologies for the highjack. We can of course start a different thread if further discussion is desired.
Errr… I may be a jerk, but I’m no WONJCT. 
In my post I’m poo-pooing the whole idea of a fake video etc etc by mocking it. As was explained to me by Ambivalid, PlainJanes problem with me was the whole “Regards, -Bouncer-” signature I’ve been using since sometime in the middle 90’s. Back when we had things like ISDN or a fractional T1 if you were like, really rich.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
I missed the part where the other poster was referring to you. I meant the OP. Sorry.
And you’re completely correct about the mocking: that’s the proper response for every WONJCT on the planet, if not in the entire universe.
Please stop trying to make “WONJCT” happen. You’re the only person on the planet who uses this ridiculous acronym and it hasn’t caught on in the the five years since you apparently coined it. Also, the word fetch.
Googled it 'cause I didn’t know what it was, first up was here. So yes, spreading like mildfire.
I don’t use the word “fetch” unless I’m ordering a dog to retrieve a stick. And I don’t particularly care if you, or anyone else for that matter, gets on board with using the dismissive initialism for those jackasses that tout their so-called theories. It’s just so much easier than typing out the entire thing.
Somehow, I could sense you weren’t a Mean Girls fan. However, you are Mormon, so the fetch works regardless.
Never followed them. I was (am) into Cat Stevens, Alice Cooper, Heart, Yes, and a few others.
I’m supposed to stop saying something I don’t say because of…a stereotype?
I know I’m coming in late, and this is ridiculously off topic, but what does “WONJCT” mean? I’m assuming the “J” is Jesus, but that’s all I can decipher of it.
To me it looks like Wyoming New Jersey Connecticut.
Not that I really care, but it’s probably easier for you only. I had to Google it (I found the answer in a thread you started). It’s not like it’s a huge problem, but there is a bit of a trend to use “made up” initialisms that force you to work them out, or Google them, on this board, which doesn’t exactly improve communication, which I assume is the purpose of posting in the first place.
ETA: It means “Whacked-Out Nut-Job Conspiracy Theorist”, apparently.
Correct me if I am wrong, is this WONJM pot calling this WONJCT kettle black?
Would somebody please tell me what WONJM and WONJT stand for? Google’s fucking helpless here.
I don’t know why everyone is so quick to dismiss this as more conspiratorial hogwash. Perhaps the actual execution was botched in some way, or Foley pulled some Fabrizio Quattrocchi type stunt. Foley’s own brother has suggested that James would have volunteered to be executed first (among the Americans), and with that type of courage, who knows what could have happened.
Did you try this thread?
Because the claim isn’t just that the murder was not depicted on camera, it’s that the video is “fake” and there’s even “a really badly Photoshopped STILL IMAGE of his supposedly beheaded head resting on his supposedly beheaded body”.
Why would this be the case? The moments before the murder is assumed to have occurred may have been staged, but that’s not the only claim, and even if it’s true, so what? It’s a propaganda video, not a documentary. If Foley was never really beheaded (somewhat implied by the use of “supposedly”), why would anyone pretend he was?
How would US intelligence get this wrong, or why would they lie about it?
Another quote from the OP:
This strongly implies that people people are wrong to want to bomb IS as a result of this murder because their assumptions about the video are wrong. Why would you argue this if you simply believe part of the video was staged, but Foley was really murdered by IS? Who would say “I wanted to bomb IS, but now I see Foley was actually killed 10 minutes later than this video suggested, I’ve changed my mind”? The implication is that it wasn’t IS or that Foley isn’t dead (or at least wasn’t decapitated). The “it’s actually on the news” comment implies it’s not newsworthy, and I wonder how wrong everyone must be about this video that it should never have been in the news at all.
Fuck off. That’s to let folks really know I don’t use the “fake curse word” fetch.
So I was right?