There's plenty of blood, and right where it should be.

There are two cameras. The camera that counts 2:xx:xx has something of a bad tracking artifact in the bottom portion of it's footage, the other does not.

The edit right before they hold up the head seems very plausible to me...they were having difficulty getting done what they wanted...maybe they didn't want to look incompetent.

As for the question about them having two cameras, but still having crappy quality...they obviously couldn't afford a sharp knife, so there's nothing suspicious there.

Originally posted by Valhall
As for the question about them having two cameras, but still having crappy quality...they obviously couldn't afford a sharp knife, so there's nothing suspicious there.

Well you only actually bothered to address on cut at the end, there's another 2 in that portion of the tape.

Ok, so they can only obtain crappy cameras and a crappy knife but can still get at least a computer with an editing program on it? If they can afford that (or rob them) then they can afford/rob good cameras as well.

I'm just wondering about the knife used. Does it not seem a little small for the job? After all you have a spine and spinel cord to cut through as well as muscle and sinue.

I remember from my history leasons that when people where be-headed by axe, it very rarely took one go. Some took 20+ blows of the axe before the head finally seperated from the body.

So for these guy's to do it with what could be a kitchen knife just seems odd.

Originally posted by John Nada

Ok, so they can only obtain crappy cameras and a crappy knife but can still get at least a computer with an editing program on it? If they can afford that (or rob them) then they can afford/rob good cameras as well.

Have you ever considered that they didn't do the editing at all? Have you considered that the raw tapes were supplied to Al Jazeera, or whatever mid-east news agency and that they are the ones who edited/spliced?

I'm thinking this footage was probably on nothing more than a VHS while they had it. But, yeah, I bet they know somebody who has a computer!

Originally posted by Valhall
Have you ever considered that they didn't do the editing at all? Have you considered that the raw tapes were supplied to Al Jazeera, or whatever mid-east news agency and that they are the ones who edited/spliced?

Obviously you haven't actually bothered reading the thread. WorldWatcher and myself have already addressed that issue and similiar scenarios.
It's being looked into.
You might want to actually read the thread before trying to insult my intelligence.

John,

You won't be dragging me into a made up argument okay? If you're having confidence problems, don't blame them on me.

I have not one time said anything that would "insult your intelligence". And I am not required to read every word you usher before I can comment on a thread. If you have thought of this as well, then why the heck did you even re-ask the question to me...

let's make a deal, when you're talking at least one of us needs to pay attention.

Originally posted by Valhall

As for the question about them having two cameras, but still having crappy quality...they obviously couldn't afford a sharp knife, so there's nothing suspicious there.

Im sorry val but do you know how hard it is to cut through a spinal cord with any knife ????
I used to be a hunter and i can tell you with the sharpest knife its very hard to cut a head off .....try cutting a head off a deer with the sharpest knife and youll find out.......I also want everyone to know the knife used here is the kind Indian gurkas would carry in service to the indian military.....its a standard issue knife gurkas would carry...

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by watcheroftheskies]

Oh, I know that! And I know that is what happened in that last big cut of the film as well...but I was referring to before that, ok?

Not to the part you're referring to. (I don't want to say it, ok?)

But, yes, I believe the problems encountered then is why the film was edited at that last spot.

Originally posted by Valhall
John,

You won't be dragging me into a made up argument okay? If you're having confidence problems, don't blame them on me.

There's no argument to have, I pointed out a simple fact to you and that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned. You can either take it or leave it. Oh, and there are no confidence problems, I just don't appreciate an idea I put forward for discussion being taken by someone as a fact I believe 100%. The tone of your posts were very *roll the eye balls - what's this guy on?* and I didn't appreciate it.

I have not one time said anything that would "insult your intelligence". And I am not required to read every word you usher before I can comment on a thread. If you have thought of this as well, then why the heck did you even re-ask the question to me...

I didn't.
That has not been proved yet so the discussion continues with what we have got until we get new information. This is a discussion board right? Have I walked into the wrong place?

let's make a deal, when you're talking at least one of us needs to pay attention.

Not getting getting into arguments eh?

[Edited for typos]

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by John Nada]

Oh, and by the way Val. The last cut is 13 seconds, it hardly makes a difference to whether it's a botch job or not.
That's been done for pacing reasons.

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by John Nada]

I must say that reading this thread is supremely sad. There are some people here that are well and truly sick and delusional. There's no other way to put it. If we are to believe what some people here claim we would be forced to believe that the world is a 100% peaceful, honest, and humane place and only the U.S. government tarnishes what would otherwise be a perfect utopia.

The slogan of this site apparently is "Deny ignorance" yet many people are actively practicing it with their airmchair video forensics. Not everything is a conspiracy--in reality, very few things are. "Stuff" happens in this world, evil stuff, and it's because there are many evil and crazy people out there. Reality is not a carefully organized "PsyOp" by our evil government.

Come on people... this video was posted on an Al Qaeda website that has released Al Qaeda material in the past. Al Qaeda is not denying it nor has it denied past material released in their name on this website. You people are in serious denial if you think this horrific video is anything but the real thing. Wake up! There is serious stuff going on in the world and you are not getting any closer to the truth by turning everything into a Hollywood-style suspense conspiracy movie and, in fact, in my opinion you are completely disrepecting the people that are dying by turning everything into a sick, deluded conspiracy story.

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by letxa2000]

There lies my major problem WW. This is meant to be an amateur job, they've got one of their guys to come in and film it. ...

However this is what bothers me. If it was as you say one of the terrorists who was an "amateur videographer" filming it for his fellow terrorists, why have they used such a professional set up? They have decided to use a two camera angle set up which means that they've edited it afterwards.

Of course they could do this editing on a computer, they wouldn't need a professional editing system but how would a terrorist thug think of using these techniques? It isn't the usual stop and start on your camera when something interesting isn't going on, they've actually done it afterwards for pacing.

This would have to be people with media experience and know what they're doing. Now, if they're professionals and they know what they're doing by deciding to get multiple angles and use editing techniques, why use such poor quality video camera? It just doesn't make sense to me, you might as well go all out.

When I read this...it made me think of this excerpt I saw in the Yahoo story about Nick Berg tonight. These people would have had that kind of media experience.

"However, in a Jan. 18 e-mail, Berg said his company had been announced as an approved subcontractor for a broadcast consortium awarded a contract for the U.S.-controlled Iraqi Media Network. "Practically, this means we should be involved with quite a bit of tower work as part of the reconstruction, repair and new construction of the Iraqi Media Network," he wrote, referring to the network as "something like NPR in the U.S." It was unclear whether the contract was revoked."

hmmm...you know letxa2000 I told someone that I had reservations about posting what I did (which by the way made no claims that the tape was a hoax), but then it hit me.

For me not to study this footage and try my utmost to ensure that it was 100% genuine would not be denying ignorance. I don't really doubt that the footage is genuine and truly horrific. I've never doubted for a second that people out there do sick crap like this, in fact far worse.

However, watching the footage there were things that did not sit right with me about it so I felt it best to write about my concerns and put it up on this conspiracy discussion board (why some people are using conspiracy on this thread lik it's a dirty word really confuses me).
Now if I didn't do this I wouldn't see the point in me coming to this board, nor anyone else.

I would never come straight out and say "This footage is a hoax", although certain members have all but accused of this already. I actually put in the initial post I doubted it was a fake and people still assumed that was what I was getting at, amazing really when it wasn't even the point of my post.

There is little doubt that the footage is real, but to simply buy that as fact without investigating it for myself would not be denying ignorance, it would be embracing it.

Good day to you sir.

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by John Nada]

Thanks for that Losonczy that's interesting and could possibly explain a few things. I'll look into it. Cheers.

wow... well done They See All... I mean... I didn't even give much thought to the idea that such an operation could be faked, but I believe you are right. Both the timing, the oddities, and the incidents within the video are all quite... well... typical of saving Bush of bad publicity. His PR is the best; they do this ALL of the time when he's in trouble. And he is in trouble a lot, it seems.


Oh, by the way, the one absolutely valid thing that I can fully confirm is the blood thing. Firstly, everyone, please do me a favor and place your hand on the right side of your necks. Feel that vein? It's called the jugular vein, and is a major artery and supplier of blood to the brain. If it is even sliced, superficially, it will literally spray blood in all kinds of directions.

If the entire head is severed from the body, one would have to think that the blood would have to spatter quite messily. This video was probably doctored, and its timing and degree of inconsistencies with reality is prevalent towards the video being a manifestation of manipulating the general population.

Oh, and another thing. Al-Qaeda was and still is an asset of the CIA. This is why in Afghanistan, Helicopter transports picked up and delivered the top bosses of Al-Qaeda to Pakistan. They didn't detain them; they let the big fish get away and try again.

I would like to point out the purportedly suspicious things that have been misrepresented by infowars, and are either obvious lies on their behalf, or simple misunderstandings.

4) Berg shown in video wearing orange jumpsuit known to be of U.S. issue
(compare with pictures at Guantanamo).

This is not a one-piece jumpsuit, but a two-piece garb. I forget what the name for it is, although the color is a bit odd.

5) Berg mysteriously captured by Al-Quaeda (still wearing jumpsuit). Either
he escaped from U.S. captors or U.S. let him out -- with orange suit and
all -- to be immediately apprehended by Al-Quaeda (before he had a chance to
change).

13) Camera angle made it impossible to see if Berg's eyes were even open.

Not true. Berg's eyes can clearly be seen to be closed. While being decapitated.

14) Alleged "scream" from Berg sounded to be that of a woman and was clearly
dubbed in.

I think it's pretty obvious the scream wasn't intended to be Berg's

The following are the ones that appear to be more controversial:

7) Audio clearly dubbed in.

It is my opinion that the audio is not dubbed, but is not synched with the rest of the video after the cut to the hooded men standing behind Berg. Somethig I cited earlier was that the reader appears utterly lost in the pages and continues to speak, but a moment before that there is a short pause in the audio. Additionally, the sound of the commotion caused by the man whipping out the knife and beginning to cut Berg's head off can be heard before it actually happens.

9) "Arabs" have lily-white hands and (other exposed) skin.

This point appears to be arguable. I think it is difficult to tell a person's true skin color by their hands, viewed on a low-quality video like this. I don't see any other exposed skin.

10) "Arabs" have Western-style body posture and mannerisms.

I don't know about this one, other opinions? How does an Arab posture differ from an American one?

11) When Berg decapitated, there was almost no blood. If Berg were still
alive at this point, with the cut starting at front of throat, blood would
have been spraying everywhere. Berg's severed head, the floor, Berg's
clothes, and even the hand of the "Arab" who decapitated Berg had no visible
blood on it.

I can't believe some one hasn't taken a frame from this video and messed with it in photo shop to see about this. Even though I personally don't have any idea what to do with it other than mess with the brightness, I would have done this myself, though I don't know how to take a frmae shot in Windows Media, and the print screen button doesnt appear to work. Anyone know how to take a frame shot in windows media?

12) Berg's body didn't move while on the ground. Although held down, Berg
would have tried to instinctively wiggle and writhe away from captor's grip.

Here is what happens in the video:
- 4:33 The reader pulls out a knife, and Berg cannot see it, as his back is towards the man.
- 4:37 Berg is thrown to the ground, facing away from the man with the knife. still unable to see it. At this point, Berg, not having seen the knife, probably just thinks they are going to beat him up a bit for the camera or something.
- 4:38 The camera cuts to another angle. The man with the knife begins to take the knife to his neck, as the camera zooms in close. We can see nick's right eye, which is closed. He appears to be grimacing, though it is difficult to tell. We cannot see the rest of Nick's body at this point.
- 4:43 The camera cuts to a shot zoomed out more, and the head is already partly cut off. It can be assumed that Berg is already dead here.

I think one cannot tell if he struggled here or not, as Berg could not see the knife. When the knife began cutting, we cannot see the rest of his body. As for the movement of the body after death:

After this, another man appears to be restraining the body, trying to keep it from moving. Here the body movements made appear at first to be from the cutter moving it around so he may saw through Berg's head. However, with the head partly cut off already, I doubt the cutter's manipulation of the head could make the body move to the extent that it does. Watch the video again and see what I am talking about. Particularly watch the way the body contracts at about 4:44.

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by spngsambigpants]

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by spngsambigpants]

[Edited on 12-5-2004 by spngsambigpants]

Originally posted by letxa2000
... in my opinion you are completely disrepecting the people that are dying by turning everything into a sick, deluded conspiracy story.

AMEN!

and nice to have you here. Look forward to reading more logical statements from you.

However, watching the footage there were things that did not sit right with me about it so I felt it best to write about my concerns and put it up on this conspiracy discussion board (why some people are using conspiracy on this thread lik it's a dirty word really confuses me). Now if I didn't do this I wouldn't see the point in me coming to this board, nor anyone else.

I have no problem with honest investigation. But unless someone here plans to go to Iraq with the FBI and do some real forensic work over there, virtually everything is just speculation. Analyzing the time/date stamp on the video may be an interesting academic exercise in trying to determine how many cameras were used, etc. but it does not change the important fact: this man is dead.

It seems there are two options:

1. Al Qaeda kidnapped and beheaded an innocent American, who happened to be Jewish, in yet another cruel display of barbaric terrorism.

2. The previous option is a fabrication and the whole thing is a PsyOps hoax perpetrated by the evil U.S. Government which thought nothing of killing a U.S. citizen who was helping in the rebuilding effort that the coalition needs so desperately and, although it has a virtually unlimited supply of knowledge, skill, and money, is unable to pull off a special effects videoclip that anyone in Hollywood could do in a heartbeat without messing up the time/date stamps and doing iffy audio dubbing and generally such a shabby job that anyone with an Internet connection with no forensic knowledge could detect the fraud. Not to mention that the original video appeared on a website that has frequently been used to distribute Al Qaeda material--so if this video was really a PsyOps it means the U.S. government somehow cooperated with Al Qaeda, otherwise how would the video appear on an Al Qaeda information source without being yanked or denied by Al Qaeda itself? Such a U.S. Government/Al Qaeda cooperation scenario absolutely requires a conspiracy at such a rediculous level as to be absurd in the extreme.

My concern is about those that would conclude that #2 is somehow more probable than #1. It defies all logic and I would definitely have to worry about the analytical skills and mindset of anyone that could conclude #2 is even remotely possible.