Author
|
Topic: virus: Nick Berg email I got (Read 2738 times) |
|
|
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
  
|
 |
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #17 on: 2004-05-15 19:17:30 » |
 |
[Blunderov] And curioser. There is a fairly complete analysis of the video
at this site.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6189.htm
Best Regards
<snip><excerpt>
The Strange Case of Nicholas Berg...
"The FreeRepublic.com web site and forum has a reputation for right-wing
views, fanatical Republicanism and relentless pro-war activism," writes
Fintan Dunne, editor of BreakForNews.com. "On 7th March, 2004, just three
weeks before the first anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, an 'enemies'
list of anti-war groups and individuals was posted on the Free Republic
forum ... It began: 'Here you are, FReepers. Here is the enemy' ... Among
those listed as having endorsed the call to action was this entry: 'Michael
S. Berg, Teacher, Prometheus Methods Tower Service, Inc.'" Prometheus
Methods Tower Service was the independent communications company owned by
Nick Berg. Michael Berg was his son's business manager.
</snip>></excerpt>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
ElvenSage
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 288
Reputation: 7.60
Rate ElvenSage
Think for yourself, question authority.
|
|
Re:virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #18 on: 2004-05-16 02:19:40 » |
|
Thank you all for the information. Reading this prompted me to download the video and I must admit that there is something very fishy about this. There was very little blood, the men in the video did act very western, and there was no movement from NB's body at all after the frame jump. His face was in the same position as it was before they started to cut him. Also, I'm not sure about you all, but the screaming on my video started way before they actually started cutting.... something is fishy here.
|
Safe from the pain and truth and choice and other poison devils
See.. they don't give a fuck about you, like i do.
Just stay with me, safe and ignorant,
Go back to sleep
Go Back to sleep
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #19 on: 2004-05-16 04:31:33 » |
|
ElvenSage
Sent: 16 May 2004 08:20 AM
Thank you all for the information. Reading this prompted me to download the
video and I must admit that there is something very fishy about this. There
was very little blood, the men in the video did act very western, and there
was no movement from NB's body at all after the frame jump. His face was in
the same position as it was before they started to cut him. Also, I'm not
sure about you all, but the screaming on my video started way before they
actually started cutting.... something is fishy here.
----
[Blunderov] The soundtrack is apparently dubbed (added afterwards) - highly
suspicious in its own right. Some opine that the screaming is a woman's
voice.
Lest we forget; it is not just America that is involved in the prisoner
'abuse'.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/story.jsp?story=521760
<excerpt>
Regiment in fake photo storm to be charged over death of prisoner
First criminal prosecutions against UK troops
By Francis Elliott and Raymond Whitaker
16 May 2004
Soldiers from the Queen's Lancashire Regiment will be charged this week in
relation to the death of Baha Mousa, an Iraqi hotel receptionist severely
beaten while in British military custody.
Around six soldiers from the QLR - the regiment at the centre of the row
over hoax pictures published in the Daily Mirror - face charges in relation
to incidents in Iraq. Senior military officials said Geoff Hoon, the
Secretary of State for Defence, will confirm "within days" the first
criminal prosecutions against British soldiers since the war began.
</excerpt>
IMO it is ridiculous that Rumsfeld is allowed to wriggle free of his direct
responsibility for these events. It was his decision to send so few troops
to Iraq, right from the beginning, and in spite of expert advice to the
contrary.
|
|
|
|
|
Kalkor
Magister
Gender:
Posts: 109
Reputation: 6.94
Rate Kalkor
Kneading the swollen donkey...
 
|
|
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #20 on: 2004-05-17 12:15:57 » |
|
[Eric]
A more fitting object of outrage is the executioner.
No true progress has ever been made through finding fault in others.
When things like this happen, we are all, and none of us, to blame.
[Kalkor]
(to quote professor farnsworth) "ehhhhh whaaaaa...?? "
More fitting in the opinion of whom?
So it is impossible to learn how to do something right by learning how
someone did it wrong?
Things like what? People beheading people? People making a video about
people beheading people? People supposing that the video of people beheading
people is really a fake video of people beheading people? People making a
fake video about beheading someone?
I'm puzzled, but only because when you say things like this, you sound like
a pastor.
;-}
Kalkor
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.86
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #21 on: 2004-05-17 13:12:47 » |
|
Sorry, the quote "A more fitting object of outrage is the executioner." was
posted by Joe Dees
(correct?) who I was replying to... but I failed to indent and credit. be
nice if the forum threaded things a little better...
Did I say it was impossible to learn how to do something right by learning
how someone did it wrong?
No.
I said that "No true progress has ever been made through finding fault in
others.".
How did you interpret this in such a way?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kalkor" <kalkor@kalkor.com>
To: <virus@lucifer.com>
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 12:15 PM
Subject: RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
> [Eric]
> A more fitting object of outrage is the executioner.
>
> No true progress has ever been made through finding fault in others.
>
> When things like this happen, we are all, and none of us, to blame.
>
> [Kalkor]
> (to quote professor farnsworth) "ehhhhh whaaaaa...??"
>
> More fitting in the opinion of whom?
> So it is impossible to learn how to do something right by learning how
> someone did it wrong?
> Things like what? People beheading people? People making a video about
> people beheading people? People supposing that the video of people
beheading
> people is really a fake video of people beheading people? People making a
> fake video about beheading someone?
>
> I'm puzzled, but only because when you say things like this, you sound
like
> a pastor.
>
> ;-}
>
> Kalkor
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to
<http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #22 on: 2004-05-17 13:27:56 » |
|
Kalkor
Sent: 17 May 2004 06:16 PM
<snip>
People beheading people? People making a video about
people beheading people? People supposing that the video of people beheading
people is really a fake video of people beheading people? People making a
fake video about beheading someone?
[Blunderov] Apologies in advance if everyone is tired of the subject (I
thought I was too) but I noticed something new about the video when they
played it on the news again.
Nick Berg DOES move in the wide shot when all the pontificating is taking
place. Three times he appears to hunch his shoulders slightly. Each time it
is an identical movement. This is, as far as I can tell, absolutely the only
motion he makes. Each time Berg does this, the masked figure on the left
(who seems quite restless throughout) makes an identical swaying motion with
his knees.
In other words the tape has been looped three times. The reason for doing
this must be to artificially convey the impression of movement on Berg's
part.
(It is quite easy to capture a video frame on the wrong field which would
then produce a frame which is slightly out of alignment with the original.
One could then copy a number of these frames (in order not to make too
sudden a jump) back into the video.
One does not need very specialized equipment to do this. Most computers have
a firewire port or similar. Microsoft MovieMaker which comes standard with
Windows XP is perfectly capable of performing such an edit.)
If I am correct about this, it would amount to a virtual confession by the
editor of the tape that Berg was not capable of movement.
Best Regards
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
Kalkor
Magister
Gender:
Posts: 109
Reputation: 6.94
Rate Kalkor
Kneading the swollen donkey...
|
|
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #23 on: 2004-05-18 02:43:10 » |
|
[Erik]
Sorry, the quote "A more fitting object of outrage is the executioner." was
posted by Joe Dees
(correct?) who I was replying to... but I failed to indent and credit. be
nice if the forum threaded things a little better...
Did I say it was impossible to learn how to do something right by learning
how someone did it wrong?
No.
I said that "No true progress has ever been made through finding fault in
others.".
How did you interpret this in such a way?
[Kalkor]
Because, if ever in the history of history, someone has made "true
progress", such as creating a better model for the universe, by correcting
an error made by someone else on a model that seeks to define an overlapping
aspect of reality...
Then your statement is false.
For example:
Bob makes a theory to explain a natural phenomenon. Bob's theory is proven
incorrect and a BETTER theory is made by Jon. Jon has therefore made "true
progress" by coming up with a BETTER theory, and he did so by finding out
where Bob went wrong in his theory.
I would have no problem with your statement if you replaced "no" with
"little" or something. Not that the modification wouldn't be incorrect, but
that it would be much more difficult for me to falsify ;-}
Of course, the quibble depends on the readers' definitions of "true
progress" and "finding fault". In this case, I used "an increase in
knowledge" to fit into the category "true progress", and "proving a theory
incorrect" into the category "finding fault".
So what we end up with is (not quite as inclusive as your statement but for
falsification purposes, one example to negate your "no" is sufficient):
"No increase in knowledge has ever been made through proving a theory
incorrect in others"
I submit that true progress HAS been made at least once through finding
fault in others.
I apologize for the bad paraphrasing in my original reply. There is no way
that I could take your past-tense statement (no true progress has been...)
for saying "it is impossible to" and still remain rational in my argument.
It is akin to Bob saying "this has never happened before" and Jon saying "so
what you mean is: 'therefore it is impossible'". I hope this helps explain
where I'm coming from a bit better ;-}
Kalkor
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.86
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #24 on: 2004-05-18 09:01:05 » |
|
<Kalkor>
: Bob makes a theory to explain a
: natural phenomenon. Bob's theory
: is proven incorrect and a BETTER
: theory is made by Jon. Jon has
: therefore made "true
: progress" by coming up with a
: BETTER theory, and he did so by
: finding out where Bob went
: wrong in his theory.
<Erik>
I'll agree with you that advancement in knowledge is progress, and that finding holes in theories is one way to create new distinctions and thereby advance knowledge.
However, nowhere in your argument did Jon find fault with Bob.
Jon found fault with Bob's theory, perhaps. But not with Bob himself.
Making people to blame is not where progress/advancement of knowledge is made.
Advancement of knowledge is only ever made by addressing and correcting other people's theories and information, not by finding fault with a person or group of people.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
Kalkor
Magister
Gender:
Posts: 109
Reputation: 6.94
Rate Kalkor
Kneading the swollen donkey...
|
|
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #25 on: 2004-05-19 10:40:40 » |
|
[Erik]
I'll agree with you that advancement in knowledge is progress, and that
finding holes in theories is one way to create new distinctions and thereby
advance knowledge.
<snip>
Advancement of knowledge is only ever made by addressing and correcting
other people's theories and information, not by finding fault with a person
or group of people.
[Kalkor]
So, what you're saying is this:
There has never been an advancement of knowledge that did not in some way
involve correcting someone else's theory.
Finding holes in theories is ONE way to advance knowledge.
Explain the contradiction above.
And explain to me how "correcting other people's theories and information"
must necessarily be separate from "finding fault". Currently, you're telling
me that the reason I do not agree with your statement is because of an
ambiguity of definition you embarked on when making it. One I sought to
clarify.
One *can* be faulted for writing something that turns out later to be
incorrect. Or even something that is known to be incorrect. That person can
be said to be "at fault" for writing something false.
I submit:
That I have advanced at least one person's knowledge of debate through this
discussion. True progress.
I have done so through correcting your ambiguous statement.
The statement was made by YOU, not by ME, which means that you are at fault
for typing it in the first place.
True progress has just been made by finding fault in others.
I don't think I've had to twist or stretch anything to come to this
conclusion; I merely used your own definitions of "true progress" and
"finding fault", definitions which are much too subjective and ambiguous,
and I have tried to make them less subjective and less ambiguous (at least
for the purpose of finding one example that falsifies your statement).
Kalkor
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.86
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #26 on: 2004-05-19 11:53:04 » |
|
> [Erik]
> I'll agree with you that advancement in knowledge is progress, and that
> finding holes in theories is one way to create new distinctions and
thereby
> advance knowledge.
>
> <snip>
>
> Advancement of knowledge is only ever made by addressing and correcting
> other people's theories and information, not by finding fault with a
person
> or group of people.
>
> [Kalkor]
> So, what you're saying is this:
>
> There has never been an advancement of knowledge that did not in some way
> involve correcting someone else's theory.
> Finding holes in theories is ONE way to advance knowledge.
> Explain the contradiction above.
[Erik]
The context was in the area of "finding fault". In the area of "finding
fault", advancement of knowledge is only made by finding holes or
inconsistencies with the theories or ideas. It is not ever made by finding
fault with a person, as a person.
Contradiction explained. Thanks.
[Kalkor]
> And explain to me how "correcting other people's theories and information"
> must necessarily be separate from "finding fault".
I distinguish between people and their ideas. I don't think that a person's
ideas are who they are.
> Currently, you're telling
> me that the reason I do not agree with your statement is because of an
> ambiguity of definition you embarked on when making it. One I sought to
> clarify.
Indeed. The ambiguitiy is around the understanding of finding fault with a
person, versus finding fault with what a person said or did.
> One *can* be faulted for writing something that turns out later to be
> incorrect.
No, only the writing can be faulted. Not
> Or even something that is known to be incorrect. That person can
> be said to be "at fault" for writing something false.
No, the writing can be said to be false. The person, on the other hand, is
just a person.
> I submit:
> That I have advanced at least one person's knowledge of debate through
this
> discussion. True progress.
I submit that we both have advanced each other's knowledge to this
excercise. We both deserve the credit for each other's argument for
without which our own argument would not have been needed.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #27 on: 2004-05-19 19:22:23 » |
|
[Blunderov] Isn't democracy wonderful? Everyone imagines that they are
choosing their leaders on the basis of informed consent. I believe 8,000,000
documents were classified secret in the USA last year.
More prime fruit of Democracy to be found at
http://www.guerrillanews.com/human_rights/doc4492.html
Torture 101
<excerpt>
Editor's Note: As the Abu Ghraib scandal widens, the Bush administration is
sticking to its mantra, "This is not America." But this essay sent to us by
veteran deep cover operative Celerino "Cele" Castillo III offers a stark
reminder of this country's true legacy of the use of torture.
</excerpt
There is no doubt, in my mind, that the CIA was involved in the murder of
Nick Berg, the America who was executed in Iraq. There is a history of how
the CIA has a way of staging murders of Americans, so that the enemy takes a
fall from it. My opinion is that the CIA found that Nick was getting to
close to some Iraqis, which made him an automatic target of the CIA.
According to his family, he had been detained by American intelligence and
later disappeared.
<excerpt>
I saw it time and time again in the 1980s in Central American. Our
government has staged several events where it attempted to implicate
Nicaragua government in drug trafficking. The CIA was also implicated in the
torture of an American nun in Guatemala. And in El Salvador, it had staged
the murder of Jesuits priests. The FMLN were supposed to have to taken the
fall for the murders, but it backfired on the CIA. A U.S. military adviser,
who accompanies the Salvadorian soldiers, gave up the U.S. involvement. Once
again, in my opinion, Berg's murder was set up to enrage the American people
in support of what American is doing to the prisoners in Iraq.
</excerpt
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
RE: virus: Nick Berg email I got
« Reply #28 on: 2004-05-23 02:31:57 » |
|
[Blunderov] Confirming the lack of blood and its significance.
Best Regards
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FE22Ak03.html
<snip>
Berg beheading: No way, say medical experts
By Ritt Goldstein
"I would have thought that all the people in the vicinity would have been
covered in blood, in a matter of seconds ... if it was genuine," said
Simpson. Notably, the act's perpetrators appeared far from so. And
separately Nordby observed: "I think that by the time they're ... on his
head, he's already dead."
Providing another basis for their findings, in the course of such an
assault, an individual's autonomic nervous system would react, typically
doing so strongly, with the body shaking and jerking accordingly. And while
Nordby noted that "they rotated and moved the head", shifting vertebrae that
should have initiated such actions, Simpson said he "certainly didn't
perceive any movements at all" in response to such efforts.
During the period when Berg's captors filmed the decapitation sequence,
circumstances indicate that he had already been dead "a quite uncertain
length of time, but more than ... however long the beheading took", Simpson
stated. Both Simpson and Nordby also noted the difficulty in providing
analysis based on the video, the inherent limitations presented by this. But
both also felt that Berg had seemed drugged.
A particularly significant point in the video sequence occurred as Berg's
captors attacked him, bringing the supposedly fatal knife to bear. "The way
that they pulled him over, they could have used a dummy at that point,"
reflected Simpson regarding what the video portrayed. Separately, Nordby
said Berg does not "appear to register any sort of surprise or any change in
his facial expression when he's grabbed and twisted over, and they start to
bring this weapon into use".
</snip>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
