As more expert eyes begin to critically look at and evaluate this video, you may be surprised by the findings.
That this shit was dealt with on page one?
‘I got you to watch a video of a guy being murdered.’ This is one of the most wretchedly pathetic things I’ve ever read.
How do you know he’s dead? The video is fake/staged, where’s the evidence of his death? This video was supposed to be that evidence.
This is dumb, anyone with a brain now knows he wasn’t murdered on this video. Snap out of that trance already.
Where do you get from him saying it’s not meaningful to him to the notion that his posts don’t represent his views on the subject? These are two completely unrelated matters.
ISTM that you have seriously distorted EasyPhil’s words here.
I beleive the word you are looking for is ‘sheeple’.
Anyway, one more time: if Foley wasn’t killed on camera, what difference does it make?
If the video is the source and confirmation of his death and that is fake/staged, it is possible he wasn’t killed.
You know what’s dumb? Watching a torture video so you can argue about whether a hostage was murdered on- or off-camera.
Because [mumble].
It’s not a torture video. Experts, meaning not you, have concluded that it was staged/fake.
Yes, I might. My question, however, for the nth time, is what specific elements of the still image shown at the end led you, EasyPhil, to conclude that it is not a photo of Foley’s decapitated body?
So his family etc. are in on it?
What is your end-game here? Stop JAQ’ing off and get down to brass tacks.
Is the government teh evilz? Let’s bring your actual inference into focus here.
nm, asked and answered
nm
A fake execution would absolutely be torture. This is yet another point that was discussed upthread.
And I concluded days ago - as did everyone who’s less nutty than you - that unless the guy is alive, it’s unimportant. Your experts agree he’s dead. Now what?
It doesn’t have to be that complicated. If all of the outrage, etc, is based on this video and the video is staged aka faked, it could be a simple matter of gullible people buying into a lie. This happens all of the time, in the absence of facts, people fill in the blanks with their own notion of reality. This thread illustrates that, look at all of the theories about what took place “off camera”. Of course nobody knows what happened “off camera” because they weren’t there.
Keep in mind this video was played up as being “real” and so horribly gory that it would make you head explode just looking at it. This resulted in people that haven’t seen it, buying into the narrative 110% and now we know it’s staged/fake.
This is common among your ilk, but you’re gradually overstating your cite. You linked to an article called “Foley murder video may have been staged,” and now you’re saying we know it’s a fake. We don’t. One company says the killing may have taken place off-camera. And they could certainly be right, but you can’t jump from ‘one firm says it may be fake’ - are they the best company in their industry or the worst? is there a broader consensus? are they agreeing or disagreeing with that consensus? - to ‘we know it’s fake.’
It would be, but I think water boarding would be worse, and we all know that’s not torture.
They aren’t my experts, and keep in mind experts were wrong about the video being “real” and the current crop of experts could be wrong about him being dead. Where’s the proof?
You don’t need an expert to tell you that the video is staged/fake, if your brain is working correctly you can clearly deduce that yourself. This is the reason the “experts” are now coming out and saying such.
Still waiting.
This is why stupid people shouldn’t play dumb. They can’t even do it right.
Again, you are overstating your cite. And now you’re casting doubt on your own experts by saying they are definitely right about the video (you’re more certain than they are) and possibly wrong about Foley’s death.
I love the self-contradictory idiocy of these two statements. ‘We don’t need experts. That’s why the experts say I’m right.’