There’s only one way a Rolex can be authentic. Saying a video is authentic can mean a number of things, including:
[ul]
[li]It is not a hoax[/li][li]The people in it are actually who they appear to be[/li][li]It was actually created by who claimed to create it[/li][li]It does not use camera trickery or special effects[/li][/ul]
Indeed, that’s been a topic of discussion since early in this thread. EasyPhil, mercifully, seems to have suddenly developed amnesia and has probably forgotten some of the oral dogshit he and Rigamarole have expelled since then.
Sure, but that’s a simplistic comparison, innit?
If someone says to me “that ISIS beheading video is authentic,” it could mean that it was actually taken by ISIS, that it was shot in the desert, that it actually depicts a terrorist, that it actually depicts James Foley. And of course, it could mean that it actually depicts a beheading.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable that “we determined it to be authentic” could mean “we determined that it’s actually ISIS, actually Foley and actually shot in the desert this week.”
I agree completely that “it’s authentic” implies “it depicts an actual execution.” You seem to be of the opinion that the US Government deliberately intended to communicate that. (I guess?)
I don’t think there’s enough evidence to reach that conclusion, without knowing the full context of the assessments done by the various US intelligence agencies involved, their conclusions, and how those conclusions were presented. It would not shock me one little bit if the media heard “authentic” and ran with it devoid of nuance or caveat.
So you’re suggesting that the U.S. knows everything there is to know about them so they don’t need to evaluate and scrutinize all the details of a supposed beheading or any other piece of evidence regarding ISIS? That’s just pure ignorance.
“Wait, what? A new ISIS video? Gosh darnit, we know everything about 'em, those animals! Throw that video in the trash, we’re good!” I’m glad you don’t work for the FBI, CIA, etc.
We agree on one thing, though: ISIS should be wiped off the face of the planet.
I guess you didn’t really want that much insight into the group. If you have even a vague familiarity with what they do, it’s not hard to accept that they cut a guy’s head off. It’s kind of their thing, apparently. What’s hard to accept is that they went to the trouble of faking a murder for no particular reason.
It made Rigamarole “angry” that people were acting like the video was real and calls these people “morons.” That’s Rigamarole’s opinion. When I said Rigamarole was on point, I didn’t mean Rigamarole was on point calling people morons. He was on point about this…
Rigamarole asked why major news outlets reported the video to be “real.” The video portrays a beheading. No actual beheading took place in the video. Rigamarole was on point with this one and the fact that certain media outlets reported the video to be a beheading when we all know that’s not the case.
Now, I don’t know if the still image was Photoshopped, so can’t say he’s on point with that, but the still image can lend to the argument that the rest of the video has various staged aspects to it.
Agreed, as I said that some were paying attention more to how he said it rather than what he said, but again, he made his point and he was right.
Most experts, even the ones saying various portions of the video were probably staged, agree that he was probably killed off camera. I won’t pretend to know whether it was by decapitation or not because a still image in and of itself doesn’t prove or disprove it happened.
And I didn’t jump to any conclusions that this was a conspiracy. Not once have I said it was a conspiracy. To label it that or suggest someone is alluding to that is lazy.
The video was obviously staged, from Foley’s scripted speech down to the start of his supposed beheading, and I agree with various explanations (none of which have been proven thus far to be true) as to why the video ended up looking the way it did: maybe Foley fought back when a beheading started; maybe the decapitation took longer than expected; ISIS edited the video for Western audiences; specific camera tricks were deployed to streamline the video, etc.
I don’t know if I’ve ever seen meta-pedantry before. This is kind of fascinating in an incredibly boring way.
I’ve accepted that these people (and I’m reluctant to call them that) are capable of beheading. You have to know your enemy to learn how to defeat them. That’s why the video should be (and is) being scrutinized. The video being staged or not (along with everything else in the video) gives one even more insight on ISIS, perhaps their specific whereabouts in case it helps intelligence zero in on them even more, capability now compared to before, the list goes on, etc. Not sure how this point is even debatable.
It is hard for some to accept (and apparently to understand) why ISIS might have went to the trouble of staging the video, but various explanations have already been posted (none of which have been proven thus far to be true) as to why. And let me repeat: suggesting someone is alluding to this being a conspiracy is one in a long line of lazy retorts.
Sure you have… a certain person’s nitpicking posts that failed miserably at hiding that person’s inability to make more concrete rebuttals.
A point that never should’ve been in dispute, by the way - I say that less about you and more about Rigamarole and EasyPhil. They’ve been advertising their brutality from the beginning, and it’s why a lot of people turn and run when they come to town.
It’s cute that you think I give a fuck. The behavior that is best described as lazy here is Rigamarole and EasyPhil, who have gone to the trouble of making extreme claims and not bothered to substantiate them or explain their significance. Except of course they’re not really being lazy; they’re dodging these issues because they are unable to answer them and are trying to do a victory dance instead.
I’m reporting this because your inserted word changes the meaning of my post. I did not say I’ve never seen anyone as “meta-pedantic” as you are being. I’m saying I’ve never seen anyone do it at all. Rigamarole’s entire argument is pedantic, and you are pedantically explaining the entire thing for him since he is no longer willing to do so.
[Moderating]
Darth Davidius, changing another poster’s posts inside the quote tags is a violation of the SDMB rules. Please avoid this in the future.
No warning issued.
[/Moderating]
Oops, sorry, I was unaware. Lesson learned and thanks for the quick clean up on aisle six. 
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Hey! EasyPhil is back from the Bürgerbräukeller or Klan rally or whatever hate group he’s been hiding in since the days he was claiming that Jews were told by the Elders of Zion to avoid the WTC on 9/11!
What with him back, The Second Stone, and one or two others, we’ve got the start of the SDMB’s very own Stormfront contingent! Maybe they can recreate Krystalnacht by throwing rocks at their monitors.
Nope, you suggested we needed to watch more murder porn to see how ISIS works. I rebutted that ridiculous assertion because hey guess what, watching another forty men get slaughtered is of no tactical or strategic value whatsoever and teaches us nothing.
It’s not real time, and it doesn’t disclose any of their planning, logistics, finances, leadership structure, methods of internal communication, or internal politics. It’s people being slaughtered. But you go ahead and renew your subscription to ogrish/liveleak or whatever-the-hell while you tell us it’s all about your personal intel gathering operations.
The real Gray Fox/ISA types will be using real tools like Analysts Notebook, not your pay-per-view account at murderporn(dot)com, to hunt these animals down. We, as a people, do not need to view these, and our intel activities do not generally bother to watch them more than once, because they have almost no value besides confirming that yep, ISIS is still murdering people.
For the record, we watch the bejesus out of Al-Baghdadi’s tapes for every scrap of useable material. So it’s not that we don’t scrape the jihadist material for everything we can find, it’s that there’s no intel value in almost all of the murderporn tapes because hey, * it’s propaganda *.
That’s the point.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Could EasyPhil be even stupider than I thought? That’d be fucking impressive in its own way.
Since you have such a brilliant and fine mine, perhaps you or others can tell me or provide a link to the name of the hostage that memorized James Foley’s letter?
You misspelled “mime”.
No, I think it was just a typo. He meant “Nîmes.”
Gee, that was was hard. I had to type “James Foley letter” into Google and click the first link.
Your turn: what do you think happened in the video - do you still believe your dummy/costume head with makeup theory? Do you still think a Jewish cabal told WTC workers not to go to work on September 11, 2001?
I thought it was “mink.” I hear Marley’s pretty natty.
James Foley was not murdered or beheaded in that video. Experts have determined that the video was staged.
Jewish cabal? You mean Israeli, right?