Berg beheading: No way, say medical experts

I saw a report about the attack at Khobar over the weekend, and apparently a dead body was dragged behind a car.

The impression I am left with is that this has gone beyond "terrorism" into horror. The horrors of a battlefield are bad enough, but to intentionally inflict a gruesome end is really inteneded to make a statement.

There are only a few ways you can interpret some of these bizzare and gruesome events. First, that those perpetrating these horrors are tougher, meaner or more ruthless than thier opposition. Second that there is a myth, particularly after Somalia, that America is weak, and will run from conflict if events are horrible enough. Last, it may simply be an act of evil, perpetrated because there is a perverted joy in doing so, masked in a political cause.

Whatever the reason, the world is hitting new lows.

Faisal, the big difference is that there are investigations on the prison deaths but dismissal by most here (and not any interest in investigations) on the beheading. Conspiracy theories are one-way streets apparently. It's just oh, so convenient that there's never any definitive proof for these atrocities. I don't remember anyone here claiming the prison photos were doctored.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
^ Well. The guy not only lost his life, he also lost his head. They did, after all, find his headless corpse (not sure if they also found his head).
[/quote]

not much investigative efforts were spent on this.. his body was transferred to a military base and buried without a postmortem to determine the exact cause and time of death or clues to circumstances surrounding the same.

[quote]
Having seen the video, the last word I would use to describe it is "grainy." People like to use that word to make other people think it was hard to see what was happening. It wasn't. If it was made by Steven Spielberg, maybe I'd question for a moment whether it was just the use of special effects to give the illusion that it was a real person.

[/quote]

it was also inconsistent.. and there were some oddities like Russian/English phrases and a coalition soldier cap seen in some frames.

[quote]
The only relevance of the supposed lack of blood is whether the beheading took place after Berg's death or was the cause of his death. In my mind, that fact does not in any way make the act more or less palatable.
[/QUOTE]

it raises more doubts as to why the whole drama needed to be staged like this? certainly terrorists would want the most dramatic and horrendous of displays of an American suffering.. why would they undermine their own efforts like this?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
Faisal, the big difference is that there are investigations on the prison deaths but dismissal by most here (and not any interest in investigations) on the beheading.

[/QUOTE]
Whose responsibility is it to investigate the alleged beheading? Ours or US occupation forces? Supposedly the act was carried out in Iraq. The lack of investigation is more troublesome for the conspiracy theorists than for you.

And those 34 people whose deaths in US custody are publicly acknowledged by the US... do you think they died a peaceful-bullet-in-the-head kinda death? If they had made videos of their deaths, you'd probably be seeing 34 videos matching the cruelty of those five masked men.

I don't think one should scrutinise the armed forces in this manner, they have a job to do, after all and it's not as if they enjoy being in the midst of such barbarity. A few loonies have carried out some acts that's all and all for the greater good.

However, I think it's time to cut losses and ship home, it's obvious our efforts are largely unappreciated.

The story on Berg is an interesting one and is no clear cut case in my opinion, it's a wait and see.

well said:k:

I saw the whole video seems VERY real to me …

that’s why we should leave such analysis to the experts only

So what is your theory PA? More lame conspiracies?

They found the guys body and head along side a road, so there is no doubt whatsoever they beheaded him. Perhaps he had a few choice comments for his captors and they edited it, or perhaps he struggled and they shot him and then they beheaded him for the camera.

What is your point? Trying to conjure up a good Johnny Chochran excuse? Those guys in black just wayward kids from the neighborhood?

Or perhaps the five guys were Dick Cheney, the head of the Mossad, The head of the RAW, Benazir Bhutto, and a representative from Halliburton? hahahah you guys are so funny.....

Too bad it looks, sounds and acts like the Richard Pearl murder......

Denial is not just a big river in Egypt.......

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ohioguy: *
Or perhaps the five guys were Dick Cheney, the head of the Mossad, The head of the RAW, Benazir Bhutto, and a representative from Halliburton? hahahah you guys are so funny.....

Too bad it looks, sounds and acts like the Richard Pearl murder......

Denial is not just a big river in Egypt.......
[/QUOTE]

Richard Pearl..Richard Pearl..hmmmm

Daniel Pearl..innit

Now you guys have ME beheading the wrong guy! Sorry, I must be channeling the lefties here. (can't imagine folks here wishing the prince of darkness ill)

I stand corrected, DANIEL Pearl.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ohioguy: *
Whatever the reason, the world is hitting new lows.
[/QUOTE]

sadly everyone justifies these lows or makes excuses for these lows..and I mean everyone.

OG…bad slip up, we have it on teh record now. what exactly re you planning to do with richard pearl?

although this british newspaper had written his name as richard pearl too..here u go

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4379337-103681,00.html

Agreed.

"OG...bad slip up, we have it on teh record now. what exactly re you planning to do with richard pearl?"

Hold on, Ashcroft is at the door! I reply in about 20 years.....

I am not one for conspiracy theories, but would like to get answers for some of these questions that have been brought up, teh chair, walls, dress, ppl partially in frame, language and all..

its confusing.

P.S. OG whatever you do, dont remind ashcroft that he lost elections to a dead guy in his state.

Nick Berg Video : Detailed Breakdown

hi guppies
i searched the net to find all what i could on the Nick Berg vdo anomalities and this is the one i found most interesting and comprehensive . Those who have the vdo in can check all the anomalities
i should have posted it a little earlier but i could not spare time to give it a reading myself first , now that i have read and checked it on the vdo here it is for u

" I have just conducted a thorough frame by frame analysis of the Nick Berg footage. I’ve paid particular attention to the editing.

I’ve included here a breakdown, shot by shot. I’ve tried to remain totally objective thoughout, and limit my analysis to the evidence we can see, and others can hopefully corroborate. My apologies for the messy layout.

For the sake of this discussion, I’ll name the captors from 1 to 5

John Doe1
John Doe2
John Doe3 (reading the script)
John Doe4
John Doe5

==============================

Video Breakdown

Shot A video time 13:26:24 to 13:26:27 synced audio
Nick sitting in a chair giving his details


Shot B video time 02:18:33 to 02:18:43 synced audio
Nick sitting in chair, giving his details, different angle

This is NOT a second angle on the first shot. Nick has clearly moved in between these two shots, as illustrated by the change in his voice tone while reciting his details, and the change in the pattern of folds and clothing position under his harms and on his chest. This clearly shows a careful edit has been made, and we cannot know how long apart these two shots were taken. It also shows that the editor as at least some basic editing skills.

we also hear a door squeek at 2:18:41

we see the reflection of a horizontal light in the top left of screen.

questions :-
Why did they shoot the scene twice?
Was nicks “performance” not up to scratch?
Why did they go to such lengths to make it look like it was shot at the same time?
Did they get him to replicate his hand position is that just coincidence?


Shot C video time 02:40:33 to 02:44:37 (audio 5-10 seconds ahead (see below))

Nick is definitely alive and conscious though-out this section. He occasionally shrugs, as if he is aware of an impending issue regarding his neck. He sits tense for a moment, then forces has shoulders back down. He does remain very still.

In this shot, the audio is 5-6 seconds in front of the picture. The fact the this audio is out of sync while the first section is IN sync show that the slipped audio is part of the original master, and not due to later encoding/decoding issues of the whole video.

How far out of sync? The person reading the speech coughs audibly at video time 02:42:33. We see him raise his hand at 2:42:38. So the audio appears to be 5 seconds ahead of the picture..

however…
We hear a thump, which sounds like Nick hitting the ground, at 02:44:02, and then we see him hit the ground at 02:44:11. thats 10 seconds ahead, without any visible cut in the video. Therefore an audio edit has taken place, with five seconds of audio removed sometime before the thump.

Also The screaming also doesn’t start unit a couple of seconds after the thump. Visually this shot also lasts about 2 seconds after nick hits the ground. As he hits the ground the JohnDoe3 raises his knife, but we do not see him actually cutting with it. We also don’t see any panic reaction from him or hear a noise, even taking into account any slippage of the audio.

Some subjective observations.
JohnDoe2 is starting straight at camera. 4 and 5 though look nervous, and don’t know what to do with their hands.
JohnDoe4 in particular seems to nervously fiddle with his mask, often just after JohnDoe3 has shuffled his papers, I’ve had trouble following these paper moves, but they don’t seem to coincided with the speech. None of them show the same body languages as other Iraqi kidnappers we’ve seen?

Questions:
Why leave the audio out of sync when the editor is clearly perfectly competent?
What was the 5 seconds of audio they removed?
Why did the cameraman cut away from this shot just before Nick is actually attacked?
Why didn’t Nick react or even make a noise has he was thrown to the ground?


Shot D video time 13:45:47 to 13:45:52 inconclusive audio

We now zoom in very close. the video is shaky and blurred. It is impossible to tell if nick is alive or dead at this point.

Between shots D and E, we seem to get a period of accelerated time, where the video clock jumps forward to 13:45:59,. However we also see an intermediate frame or two, giving as a glimpse of 13:45:57. this appears to be intended to give continuity while removing around 3 seconds.

questions:

Why zoom in like that? is that the best footage they had (given they were supposed to have 2 cameras)?
Why are we having seconds edited out, and yet returning to the same shot?


Shot E video time 13:45:59 to 13:46:32

There is a slight jump cut with about half a second missing at 13:46:27, as shown by the video clock and the jump in JohnDoe3’s arm position. At the end of this shot we JohnDoe3 lift the knife away slightly and lay the head down, as if he’s given up trying to get it off.

Questions:
Why the edit?


Shot F 13:47:46 13:47:52

Having just jumped about 80 seconds of video time, the head is removed from the body and raised in the air. However it isn’t JohnDoe3 who is hold the head and knife, it’s JohnDoe2 ! MINUS HIS BOMB VEST!!! (unless it’s JohnDoe3 and he’s switched masks!!!)

Questions

Why has JohnDoe2 removed his bomb vest!!!
Why is he now the the one to hold up the head?
Where as JohnDoe3 gone?
Why would JohnDoe3, as a terrorist leader, humiliate himself in front of thew others by appearing incapable of removing the head?


Shot G 2:46:18 to 2:46:22

Back to the other camera/different time. another shot of the head being held up.

This appears to have been shot at the same time as Shot F, but for reasons discussed earlier, we can’t be sure of this.


Shot H 13:48:29 to 13:48:49 lots of missed frames here, about 5-10 seconds worth.
END

=======================================

Other observations.

it’s widely assumed that two cameras were used, because of the difference in the video clocks.

If this is the case, both were set up exactly the same in terms of white point and aperture. Both exhibit the same edge of frame artifacts (dark pixels where the images doesn’t make it to the end of the frame) Both may also be of the same model given the similarity of time clocks and image.

The two clocks are roughly 11 hours and 8 minutes apart at the start of the film. The exact difference is impossible to judge since shots A and B were NOT shot at the same moment in time. (see above)

At the end, they are roughly 11 hours and 2 minutes apart, although again it is hard to tell.

the camera with timings around 2:40 appears to be on a tripod at all times.

It is impossible to tell if there were two cameras or not. It seems likely, but we cannot be conclusive one way or the other.


Ill leave it there for now. there is much more analysis to be done, an I don’t want to get into guessing at potential scenarios until all the objective evidence is in..

In particular I’d like to know about the video tears across the bottom of the screen. Is this a digital or analog artifact? What was the likely signal path, from camera to web? The blurred images suggest an analogue stage. However the skip time edits suggest digital, at least at the editing process.

Also can anyone identify the make of the camera? Do the time clocks look familiar? Things like this do differ from cam to cam, and the more we know the better. "