Zarqawi Killed In Air Raid

[Ban Hammer 14,274]

Oh yippee the Zarqawi thread is back

here ya go tmma

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Actually I am speaking specifically of the Berg video here.

It does not show the slaughter of a living person.

I apologize to the squeamish for having to be so graphic, but cutting the throat of a live person or animal (in other words, the severing of the carotid artery) results in a LOT of blood spewing out, which will spatter over everything within several feet.

Let me ask you.... have you seen the video ?

as am i. i'm referring specifically to the berg video. are you a forensic scientist? are you a blood spatter expert? where is the citation of your proof i've asked 3 times for already?

LOL. No. Are you ?

However, throats of living mammals that are cut BLEED. The one in the video doesn't. At all.

nope, i'm not either. but i'm not trying to sound like an expert, as you are. thank you for the basic biology lesson, but i'm just asking for your proof of such being fake, as you indicate, or is your statement based on your own perception?

LOL where did I try to "sound like an expert" ?? I am just pointing out the simple facts... and any farmer or trapper who does his own slaughtering can confirm it: blood spurts out from the cut throat of a living being.

Look at the video again.

[dalegg 143]

Actually I am speaking specifically of the Berg video here.

It does not show the slaughter of a living person.

I apologize to the squeamish for having to be so graphic, but cutting the throat of a live person or animal (in other words, the severing of the carotid artery) results in a LOT of blood spewing out, which will spatter over everything within several feet.

Let me ask you.... have you seen the video ?

as am i. i'm referring specifically to the berg video. are you a forensic scientist? are you a blood spatter expert? where is the citation of your proof i've asked 3 times for already?

LOL. No. Are you ?

However, throats of living mammals that are cut BLEED. The one in the video doesn't. At all.

Well, I tell you one thing. You guys just forced ME to watch the video (thank you very much for that, I will be missing dinner now) . If the video is a fake, apparantly one thing these terrorists have that we didn't give them credit for is an excellent hollywood type dummy maker at their disposal, because the fake guy getting his head cut off looks exactly like the real guy we see minutes before. Do all of the insurgent groups have one of these guys?

Oh wait wait wait..I think I understand now, it's the CIA who made this video, because they do have access to the hollywood type dummy makers. They just don't have access to the special affects guys who produce the pumping blood, right? I'm confused.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Actually I am speaking specifically of the Berg video here.

It does not show the slaughter of a living person.

I apologize to the squeamish for having to be so graphic, but cutting the throat of a live person or animal (in other words, the severing of the carotid artery) results in a LOT of blood spewing out, which will spatter over everything within several feet.

Let me ask you.... have you seen the video ?

as am i. i'm referring specifically to the berg video. are you a forensic scientist? are you a blood spatter expert? where is the citation of your proof i've asked 3 times for already?

LOL. No. Are you ?

However, throats of living mammals that are cut BLEED. The one in the video doesn't. At all.

Well, I tell you one thing. You guys just forced ME to watch the video (thank you very much for that, I will be missing dinner now) . If the video is a fake, apparantly one thing these terrorists have that we didn't give them credit for is an excellent hollywood type dummy maker at their disposal, because the fake guy getting his head cut off looks exactly like the real guy we see minutes before. Do all of the insurgent groups have one of these guys?

Oh wait wait wait..I think I understand now, it's the CIA who made this video, because they do have access to the hollywood type dummy makers. They just don't have access to the special affects guys who produce the pumping blood, right? I'm confused.

I don't know about all that hollywood dummy theory.

All I know is that the person shown in the video getting his/its head "cut off" was not a living being at the time of the decapitation.

[Ban Hammer 14,274]

LOL where did I try to "sound like an expert" ?? I am just pointing out the simple facts... and any farmer or trapper who does his own slaughtering can confirm it: blood spurts out from the cut throat of a living being.

Look at the video again.

ok, it's a foregone conclusion that such is your opinion, and not something you can back up other than saying watch the video. you are dismissed.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

LOL where did I try to "sound like an expert" ?? I am just pointing out the simple facts... and any farmer or trapper who does his own slaughtering can confirm it: blood spurts out from the cut throat of a living being.

Look at the video again.

ok, it's a foregone conclusion that such is your opinion, and not something you can back up other than saying watch the video. you are dismissed.

LOL. As if.....

[dalegg 143]

Actually I am speaking specifically of the Berg video here.

It does not show the slaughter of a living person.

I apologize to the squeamish for having to be so graphic, but cutting the throat of a live person or animal (in other words, the severing of the carotid artery) results in a LOT of blood spewing out, which will spatter over everything within several feet.

Let me ask you.... have you seen the video ?

as am i. i'm referring specifically to the berg video. are you a forensic scientist? are you a blood spatter expert? where is the citation of your proof i've asked 3 times for already?

LOL. No. Are you ?

However, throats of living mammals that are cut BLEED. The one in the video doesn't. At all.

Well, I tell you one thing. You guys just forced ME to watch the video (thank you very much for that, I will be missing dinner now) . If the video is a fake, apparantly one thing these terrorists have that we didn't give them credit for is an excellent hollywood type dummy maker at their disposal, because the fake guy getting his head cut off looks exactly like the real guy we see minutes before. Do all of the insurgent groups have one of these guys?

Oh wait wait wait..I think I understand now, it's the CIA who made this video, because they do have access to the hollywood type dummy makers. They just don't have access to the special affects guys who produce the pumping blood, right? I'm confused.

I don't know about all that hollywood dummy theory.

All I know is that the person shown in the video getting his/its head "cut off" was not a living being at the time of the decapitation.

Well, they very well may have killed him first, but you need to look closer at the video. There is very clearly a pool of blood under the head of this victim before they raise his head in front of the camera

Edited June 18, 2006 by dalegg

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Actually I am speaking specifically of the Berg video here.

It does not show the slaughter of a living person.

I apologize to the squeamish for having to be so graphic, but cutting the throat of a live person or animal (in other words, the severing of the carotid artery) results in a LOT of blood spewing out, which will spatter over everything within several feet.

Let me ask you.... have you seen the video ?

as am i. i'm referring specifically to the berg video. are you a forensic scientist? are you a blood spatter expert? where is the citation of your proof i've asked 3 times for already?

LOL. No. Are you ?

However, throats of living mammals that are cut BLEED. The one in the video doesn't. At all.

Well, I tell you one thing. You guys just forced ME to watch the video (thank you very much for that, I will be missing dinner now) . If the video is a fake, apparantly one thing these terrorists have that we didn't give them credit for is an excellent hollywood type dummy maker at their disposal, because the fake guy getting his head cut off looks exactly like the real guy we see minutes before. Do all of the insurgent groups have one of these guys?

Oh wait wait wait..I think I understand now, it's the CIA who made this video, because they do have access to the hollywood type dummy makers. They just don't have access to the special affects guys who produce the pumping blood, right? I'm confused.

I don't know about all that hollywood dummy theory.

All I know is that the person shown in the video getting his/its head "cut off" was not a living being at the time of the decapitation.

Well, they very well may have killed him first, but you need to look closer at the video. There is very clearly a pool of blood under the head of this victim before they raise his head in front of the camera

It is a reasonable possibility that Nick Berg (assuming this was Nick Berg in the video) was already dead when the video of the "decapitation" was shot.

My point was simply that the video does NOT show the slaughter of a living person.

[dalegg 143]

It is a reasonable possibility that Nick Berg (assuming this was Nick Berg in the video) was already dead when the video of the "decapitation" was shot.

My point was simply that the video does NOT show the slaughter of a living person.

Okay, but you would agree that it does show the slaughter of a human, right?

Edited June 18, 2006 by dalegg

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

It is a reasonable possibility that Nick Berg (assuming this was Nick Berg in the video) was already dead when the video of the "decapitation" was shot.

My point was simply that the video does NOT show the slaughter of a living person.

Okay, but you would agree that it does show the slaughter of a human, right?

Well no.

Didn't you read what I wrote ? I am saying the opposite.... I do NOT agree that the video shows the slaughter of a human being.

I am saying that whoever/whatever it was was getting its head cut off in the video -- whether it was actually an already deceased Nick Berg, or another deceased person, or even a "hollywood dummy" -- was most certainly NOT a living human at the time of the cutting.

[dalegg 143]

It is a reasonable possibility that Nick Berg (assuming this was Nick Berg in the video) was already dead when the video of the "decapitation" was shot.

My point was simply that the video does NOT show the slaughter of a living person.

Okay, but you would agree that it does show the slaughter of a human, right?

Well no.

Didn't you read what I wrote ? I am saying the opposite.... I do NOT agree that the video shows the slaughter of a human being.

I am saying that whoever/whatever it was was getting its head cut off in the video -- whether it was actually an already deceased Nick Berg, or another deceased person, or even a "hollywood dummy" -- was most certainly NOT a living human at the time of the cutting.

Are dead people not dead humans? Is there another word I should be using to describe a human body that is applicable whether the body is alive or dead other than human? I did not say "the slaughter of an ALIVE human". ** Sapien? Perhaps it is the word "slaughter" that would be inappropriate if we are talking about mutilating the dead.

Okay, I can rephrase "Would you agree that it does show the mutilating of a ** sapien body"?

But it does not really matter, you've answered anyway because you've said it could be a hollywood dummy or some other dead cadaver that resembled Mr Berg, and if this is the answer I have to wonder why they would go through all of this trouble and not just kill the real Nick Berg. I wonder if Mr Berg ran away and got accidentally shelled by American bombs. Or maybe he was rehabilitated into an excellent terrorist and is now the new leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. We'll never know....

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

It is a reasonable possibility that Nick Berg (assuming this was Nick Berg in the video) was already dead when the video of the "decapitation" was shot.

My point was simply that the video does NOT show the slaughter of a living person.

Okay, but you would agree that it does show the slaughter of a human, right?

Well no.

Didn't you read what I wrote ? I am saying the opposite.... I do NOT agree that the video shows the slaughter of a human being.

I am saying that whoever/whatever it was was getting its head cut off in the video -- whether it was actually an already deceased Nick Berg, or another deceased person, or even a "hollywood dummy" -- was most certainly NOT a living human at the time of the cutting.

Are dead people not dead humans? Is there another word I should be using to describe a human body that is applicable whether the body is alive or dead other than human? I did not say "the slaughter of an ALIVE human". ** Sapien? Perhaps it is the word "slaughter" that would be inappropriate if we are talking about mutilating the dead.

Okay, I can rephrase "Would you agree that it does show the mutilating of a ** sapien body"?

But it does not really matter, you've answered anyway because you've said it could be a hollywood dummy or some other dead cadaver that resembled Mr Berg, and if this is the answer I have to wonder why they would go through all of this trouble and not just kill the real Nick Berg. I wonder if Mr Berg ran away and got accidentally shelled by American bombs. Or maybe he was rehabilitated into an excellent terrorist and is now the new leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. We'll never know....

The term "slaughter" does not apply to acts of mutilation of the dead. It specifically means to kill or butcher or massacre, usually in a violent bloody manner.

I am not sure if the video shows actual mutilation of the dead or not, because I am not sure what exactly is being "beheaded" in the video.

My point (again) is simply that the video does not show the "slaughter of a living human being."

By the way, I am not the one who brought up the idea of a Hollywood dummy in this thread. But I am including it in the realm of possibilities. Unlike the idea of a living human who does not bleed when having his throat cut -- this is distinctly OUTSIDE the realm of possibility.

As far as what exactly happened to the "real" Nick Berg, or what he was actually up to in Iraq..... I don't have answers for you.

[dalegg 143]

As far as what exactly happened to the "real" Nick Berg, or what he was actually up to in Iraq..... I don't have answers for you.

Well, don't you see? This is the rub of the whole situation. The way I see it, under your observations, you've got two possiblities:

1) This is not the work of Terrorists at all. It's another CIA plot created to horrify Americans so we would believe we were fighting animals.

The problem with this idea is that if it was a CIA plot, and they had access to a Nick Berg double, and could create a dummy that well, you'd have to believe they would take this a bit further and actually show a struggle the whole way through and include gushing blood for that extra effect. So, I think we can rule that out.

2) These are actually terrorists and that actually is Nick Berg sitting there in front of them. I think we both agree that there is an alive human being there on the floor in front of them as they spout out their declarations. Then, at the end of the video, they stage a struggle, and in the part where you really cannot see what is going on, they bring in the fake body, and show these guys cutting it's head off. If you look close enough you can even see what I would say is blood pooling under his neck. They did a fantastic job with this fake, and why did they do it?

To show everyone that they are brutal and that they do not value the life of (the enemy) at all. I don't think for a minute that they thought everyone would think this was a fake. To almost anyone who sees the video, these guys accomplished their goal.

And to this option, I ask, what is the difference whether that was actually Nick Berg or not?

3) Is there another reason for the fake video I haven't considered?

[yabasta 0]

that's quite alright, i have a difficult time taking you seriously with your flower child outlook on life. btw, be careful about the emoticon addicts, you might tick off more people than you realize. war does unite people, and it divides people. it also has solved more issues in human history than you realize. ask the city of hiroshima.

We disagree on war which is hardly suprising since we disagree on the military. War is a negative way to unite people. Obviously i say that as an advocate for peace and all those sorts of negative values. How do i ask Hiroshima anything? what exactly was solved? The people to ask would be the dead or deformed?

as terry nichols is not a country, the same could be said for most of the terrorists, can it not? they are not "iraq" and most are from different countries (zarqawi was from jordan).

No he was not Iraqi but presumably the official story of Zaqawi was that he was fighting for the people of Iraq in the same way that Che Guevara was not Cuban. If Terry Nichols had been bombing for a more popular cause then of course he would have more support and it would be more dangerous for the state to murder him. As it stood most people either had that weird glee at his death or they were simply not really bothered what happened to Nichols. Zaqawi would in theory have support from all those who did not like being invaded by foreign troops. They would perhaps be united in their distaste for the invading forces even if they did not agree with him 100%.

why did france make such an uproar about the usa going into iraq? because they had their hands in the pie selling weapons to saddam. many countries were doing shady deals with saddam, think about that for a while.

Yes America and Britain also. It is called the arms trade. British aerospace sells torture devices abroad which are illegal in the U.K. It is call capitalism. Saddam was backed by the U.S. too and so naturally you must see the irony when we bang on about WMD`s as if we A: don`t have them ourselves and B: didn`t supply them to the world. If you sell a bomb you surely expect it to be used don`t you?

that you are a human being is not in dispute. what is in dispute is what is your solution to iraq? shaking your head? hand wringing? proposing we sit down and talk with whoever? those won't work..... we have two cultures at opposite extremes. radical muslims want nothing more than to see the usa, and every american, dead. got it? now taking that into account, what plausible solution is there?

I have not offered up a solution to Iraq as i don`t think it is my business to come up with one. You see I don`t live in Iraq so how can i know the culture or have any idea what is best for the people there. I am pretty sure they don`t want America or Britain there. One idea would perhaps be to pull out. As a child it seemed like a good idea to me that the troops leave Ireland and then London would not be bombed. It is a absic solution of course but if you take violent acts out of the equation you lessen the ammoutn of violence. The best results from hostage situations are the ones where people are talked out of their actions and not violent ends. You seem to give violence too much credit. I don`t think Violence has solved anything. It just simplifies complex situations. Saying Hiroshima was a solution is like saying the WTC attack handled the problem of cleaning the thousands of windows.

oh i'm fully awake. and yes, killing 1, or 1,000,000 will work. it's called attrition, simple math. which, as you say, is basic common sense. militant radicals are created by weakness, because they know they can get away with it. why didn't you see such in saddam's reign? because he would have, and did, squash them like a bug. as for the stupid remark about "for a military man..." i'll just ignore that, as you have no clue about the military as previously proven.

I have no clue? Meaning i have a different view to you. Militant Radicals are created by your war mentality. They are created by carpet bombing. They are created by the U.S. government(both literally and indirectly). Why didn`t you see an uprising under Saddam? Well i see the uprising as an indication of the bad situation.

buy? it's basic deductive reasoning. no wonder you can't understand it.

The fact that you don`t see any PR at all here says it all. You really do just accept everything given to you don`t you? Nothing about this seems convenient? To you it is just our good ole military Intelligence at ti`s best. Of course we will never find out how they knew any of htis as that is classified.

Where is your deductive reasoning though? Fair enough you buy the story but what have you done to reach this decision?

you're hardly one to correct spelling errors, einstein. and no he was not.

and here's one smiley just for you

Spelling is not a subjec ti am bad on. I can`t type for ###### i admit. My point was that not only are you American and a pro war Republican but you made a big deal about Military people being smart. Yet you can`t even spell an ex president`s surname. I point it out for irony. Also what has Einstein go tto do with spelling? He is known for his brain yes but it seems an odd comparison to use in that instance.

So you don`t think Reagan had any dealings with "freedom fighters"? You don`t think Reagan had any external influence on his presidency? Do you think the hostage crisis just happened to end when it did?

[Cristy 4]

slaugh·ter ( P ) Pronunciation Key (slôtr)

n.

The killing of animals especially for food.

The killing of a large number of people; a massacre: “I could not give my name to aid the slaughter in this war, fought on both sides for grossly material ends” (Sylvia Pankhurst).

tr.v. slaugh·tered, slaugh·ter·ing, slaugh·ters

To kill (animals) especially for food; butcher.

To kill (people) in large numbers; massacre.

To kill in a violent or brutal manner.