I thought it was odd that for 2 days, the news media kept referring to the film as evidence of an “alleged” murder. I don’t remember that kind of uncertainty following Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl’s videos, though it’s possible that it was lost in the uproar from people who were sickened by it.
So while I haven’t watched it, I did dig a little further to see why it was uncertain. And only then did I learn that the execution itself wasn’t filmed, but rather that the camera faded to black and was followed by an image of a body with a detached head.
While that explains the uncertainty, I do think that the media could have made this clearer for people who didn’t actually watch the video.
Nonetheless, the fact that experts are universal in their certainty that Foley is, indeed, dead, leads me to believe that the image of his body has been scrutinized by people who have medical and forensic training, and they agree that the dead body is Foley’s. However, I admit that a still image still leaves room for some cynics to doubt that he’s actually dead. (Though what would ISIS’ purpose in that be?)
Personally, the expert testimony is good enough for me, and certainly enough to denounce the “incredibly fake” claims. There is a huge difference between “fake” and “heavily edited.”
I’ve pretty much been coasting along in this thread but this reply to VT just jumped the shark. “Sure there’s a picture of him with his head head lopped off but how do we know he’s really dead!?”
So now your theory is that the terrorists are Hollywood-grade makeup experts. Yes, that’s way more plausible than the theory that they murdered one more person.
Now we’re getting somewhere! We have dissension within our team of experts! Rigamarole believes the photo is Photoshopped, without of course producing any evidence; while Phil believes it is an actual photo of an extremely sophisticated dummy (although previously he thought it might be a CPR dummy, not evidently ever having seen one). How to decide!
This is what I was thinking when I posted earlier in this thread. I’m convinced that video is NOT his execution, but a rehearsed one. I still am quite amused by the two camera angles they used. What was that purpose? Why use angles that give you shots of wide-open spaces? Something that could give your terror group away could end up on the tape and give away your location.
As far as the still shot goes, I don’t think the body is real, or necessarily his body. This is due to the heavy editing including the fade to black in this video. Who the hell knows what happened? Maybe they were chased and had to leave the body. Or, like I said before, someone had the lens cap on and they had to refilm the body portion at a different time or day. The head, however, is his so I’m sure he’s dead.
After looking into this, I’d like to point out that these “beheadings” aren’t beheadings like we’re used to. They’re sawing through your neck 30-40 times to tear your head off. Saw it too many times on that gore site that was mentioned. Certainly a slow and hideous way to execute. Is there another word for this method?
I’m pretty sure he’s never seeing the inside of a courtroom unless he is smart enough to publicly show up with a news crew and turn himself in at the nearest US/UK etc type Embassy while being recorded walking in the door alive and well. That’s about his ONLY chance at survival.
The UK has indicated they’re sending the SAS after him, and they already think it’s a man named Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary, who is 23 and apparently has wealthy family in the UK.
Since they do not want him to have any kind of a pulpit for any reason at any time ever, they’ll either whack him in person, or locate him and bring in a JDAM or some ridiculous munition to vaporize him and anyone within 500yds. I suspect they’ll do it in person if possible since they’ll want to pick up a doggie bag of DNA.
They’d rather do it themselves than have the Americans do it for them (though if they go for a targeted munition the US may be providing the actual guided weapon while the Brits lase the target). It’s kinda a Brit thing to clean up their own, generally.
My reluctance to watch the video was not just because I didn’t care to see a person beheaded, although that is part of it. I’ve seen plenty of gore— used to look at shit on Rotten.com out of morbid curiosity, and never once did my head explode. But I’m older now, and running out of room in my brain, and thus more selective about what I choose to store in it.
More significantly, an audience is the one thing these pinhead lunatics want more than anything else, and the one thing I’m personally empowered to deprive them of.
[ul][li]Video shows ISIS beheading U.S. journalist James Foley (CNN)[/li][li]James Foley, missing journalist, beheaded in video; militants threaten to kill 2nd captive (San Jose Mercury News)[/li][li]ISIS Posts Graphic Beheading Video of US Journalist James Foley (International Business Times AU)[/li][/ul]
…to headlines like these…
[ul][li]James Foley’s beheading video may have been staged separately from his death: expert (New York Daily News)[/li][li]Experts: James Foley beheading video likely fake (InfoWars)[/li][li]James Foley murder video ‘may not have been how he died,’ expert says (Huffington Post UK)[/ul][/li]
Rigamarole was on point with this one.
I honestly wonder how many people who reported on the video took the time to view it before posting it, along with an attention-grabbing headline. I mean, in this “information age,” the speed in which something is delivered is becoming valued over the veracity of the material. (KFC Grandma, anyone?)
I’m also growing increasingly disillusioned with how hard it is to distinguish between the media and tabloids. When shock = increased viewers, it gives even legitimate news agencies an incentive to embellish and dramatize. I’m sure many people were dismayed that the Foley video wasn’t more gory and shocking. And sadly, I’m not talking about just the terrorists.
I quoted several headlines from the day the story broke that said the video appeared to show Foley’s death. Can you tell me why this is so important to Rigamarole? Obviously he can’t, for some fucking reason.
I agree and it’s becoming more and more commonplace, unfortunately. It’s as if those who are supposed to report the news in a credible fashion are just getting lazy because there is this race to see who breaks what news first. This is what happens when we live in a 24/7 news cycle with social media sprinkled in, I guess.
On a side note, I can’t even watch the regular 12 o’clock news without seeing nonsense on it that’s not even real news. How are last night’s results to Dancing with the Stars news? Granted, I’m watching this 12 o’clock news on ABC and this show is on ABC, but it really annoys me that, in between the report of a shooting and the weather forecast, the Dancing with the Stars results are given airtime. I didn’t tune in to Entertainment Tonight, I tuned in to watch actual news!
