jasey

It's all a hoax mate - everything that has ever happened was a put up by the Yanks - it's all made up to justify the High Oil price !

Brendan Hughes

Eh? Presence never entered into my argument, I don't see your point. I'm in full agreement that someone who stands by and does nothing at the scene is way, way closer than a viewer over the internet. And you are again removing the distinction I made between those who were clearly warned and those who weren't. I don't blame anyone who didn't really know what they were clicking on.

Porno movies - the ones I saw apparently showed adults happily enjoying themselves. I haven't seen any which involved torture, rape, blood, or anything else designed to shock the viewer, and certainly don't want to. If you're going to reply that maybe there was someone behind the camera bullying the girl to take part, then the "high moral ground" can be extended all the way until only the vegans are left, so please don't bother.

Head in the sand - I've read the evidence statements for what guys did to each other in Bosnia as part of my war crimes / crimes against humanity module, thanks but I don't need to choose to watch any videos of it. The one I'll never forget is three naked prisoners in a pit and one forced to bite the genitalia off another otherwise he gets a bullet whilst the soldiers stand around the pit laughing and cheering. 1994, not 1944. And I was in Croatia six months ago attending a meeting of officials from the region, and the tension was noticable. The amount of times I heard people start a sentence with "Since the war,..." was sobering. I've also read the details about the massacres in Rwanda, and the first place the guys would aim their machetes was at the achilles tendons so people couldn't run away. It sort of focuses your attention on the subject.

Jye, many thanks for your reply, I think I'm getting it. Rather than me having my head in the sand ( jasey) it seems that you admit you had (please don't take that perjoratively) and that now you haven't, for which you are ruefully grateful. I can only shrug, and say that for me, news reports are enough, I don't feel like I have to view the glorious technicolour but instead I'm usually happy to read the press articles of those far more qualified than me to decide whether or not something's a fake (and I already knew a knife was used before the link was posted). You felt differently.

Jye

NP Brendan

jasey

Brendan - go on - post the links - pretty please ...

Brit_in_Japan

I think you and I will just have to agree to differ there. I see a big difference in watching footage which I know is a re-enactment and what is actual footage of murder. I think everyone should watch films like Schindler's List and SPR so that they get an idea about the horrors of war. But I don't think that actual footage of people getting killed should be used as entertainment.

A precise reconstruction of Nick Berg's murder.. the very fact that it was not real would make a difference, but I'm not sure what I think.

If you are accusing me of having morals then I plead guilty. But let me strike a concillatory note here. I have in the past seen actual footage of people getting killed. I have seen the films shot in Auswitz and Belsen. I have seen some of the film taken during the second world war. I have seen enough to know that it disturbs me greatly to see people being killed/murdered. So I decided I didn't need to see a graphic video of someone getting beheaded. If someone has never seen any footage of a person getting killed then maybe they should, part of life's education. In that case I have no problem with people viewing the footage. It's how people react to seeing it which in my mind makes the difference whether it's sick or not. If people are repulsed and disturbed by the images, then they are normal human beings. If they are unaffected or treat it lightly or humourously, that worries me. With an increasing amount of this stuff available on the internet I think the more some people watch this type of thing the more dehumanised they become, and that should be a worry to us all.

I have never equated someone viewing the video with the ???? (can't think of a adequate word) who actually did the deed.

Faire D'Income

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Where did I mention that you had talked about being present - I was giving an example to help you differeniate between levels of involvement and condoning the atrocity in order to help you understand that someone who clicked on the link, whether with prior knowledge or not of the content, is not comparable to the scum who carried out this murder. I have not removed your distinction at all, so I suggest that you read over my last post again because this is what I said...

"Watching the video passively out of a sense of curiousity or whatever and being genuinely disgusted by what you saw whether you had fair warning of the content or not? "

... the clue is in the wording after whether.

The point I was making about porno movies is that there are plenty about involving animals and other sado-masochistic activities which are degrading and immoral if you stop to think about it but again I doubt you've ever seen one.

Lastly, as part of your humanties module presumably you were warned that the content of the evidence statements and yet you still chose to read them. In other words, you had prior knowledge and yet you still took the opportunity to examine them which makes you just as guilty (in your eyes) as the people who watched the video. Please don't try to make a distinction between the media involved because that won't wash.

You cannot compare the individuals (whether with prior knowledge or not - just before you accuse me of removing your distinction) who watched the video with those who perpetrated it, not unless they condoned it in any way and I sure as hell don't see that from anyone on here.

Brendan Hughes

Oh FFS.

I DON’T consider media analysts, doctors, researchers, investigators, or anyone with that intention, or the unprepared, to be sick for watching such a video. And yes I'll include myself as a law student, reading those reports (no I didn't know they'd be so graphic) in that.

I DO consider some bored ******* at work who clicks on the link saying "oooh, apparently this is really gruesome, let's have a look" to be more than a few pence short of a pound. As I originally said, it’s my OPINION that you’d have to be pretty sick to do such a thing, and that is where my original comment came from (and since that a number of people have written to say either that they weren’t warned, that they were watching to see if it was fake, etc, thus excluding themselves from the voyeurs that I censured so strongly). I understand that in your opinion, you see the two acts miles apart and totally incomparable. I hope you’ll spare me the usual scoobynet cliché about opinions. If it lowers your blood pressure, no, I don’t think that viewers should be shot/life imprisoned etc as those who did it should be. But you say I can’t compare the voyeur with those who did it. I have no respect [not strong enough] for the group of viewers I’ve tried to describe, just as I have no respect for those who did it. I can and do make that comparison.

I'm getting tired of repeating myself. Looks like you are too. I have an opinion, you have an opinion, and curiously, they aren’t the same. Neither side is going to convince the other that one is right and one is wrong – this particular one is a debate about moral standpoints, let’s face it. Maybe your replies take you three minutes, but mine are taking a lot longer, and I just don’t have that time to comprehensively explain my moral viewpoint to everyone, sorry.

Jye said he saw a difference in my child rape analogy, that one is made to gratify and the other is made to scare. I maintain that analogy – if you put it on a Beeb site to scare people, as I suggested, it’s the same. And no-one has answered my point about “what would you think about someone who said they’d watched the child rape video”. I maintain that, IN MY OPINION, anyone who chooses to watch either is either professionally involved or disturbed.

Have PM'd someone else for a bit more info, and as I consider this a debate rather than "me right, you wrong", I'll let you all know whether or not it supports what I've been trying to explain earlier (if anyone is still awake at this stage). But I haven't seen them post for a week at least, so don't expect rapid results please .

jasey

I've seen some ****e on scoobynet in my time on here but that's about the best.

You don't like people who view videos but feel you just had to share your "favourite" war crime with us (in graphic detail).

You're gonna make a GREAT lawyer

MarkO

Fair enough. Just strikes me as incredibly pious and patronising to think that it's okay for some people to see something like this, but if the rest of us are interested (for whatever reason) then we're clearly sickos.

I personally watched the video because:

a) There's been that much media interest that it sparked my curiosity to see what all the fuss was about.

b) I wanted to see whether the video was likely to be real or potentially faked.

c) There was an element of morbid fascination, I'll grant you. But nothing sick - more of a "surely they can't have....?"

If something's in the public domain, I don't see why I shouldn't view it without having to be judged. Sure, there's exception (paedophilia, etc) and the boundaries are pretty blurred (I can't personally see the difference between the Nick Berg video and a snuff film) but I think when push comes to shove it's down to the individual to choose, and that person shouldn't be morally judged on whether they watch it or not.

Having said that, in the same way as child abuse is perpetuated by the distribution of child ****, the fuss this video has generated (and that includes people who haven't watched it but have passed judgement on those who have) means that such an event is far more likely to happen again. We're all partly responsible - just the act of having a 10-page thread about the subject (plus the countless other discussions continuing around the world as we type) means that we've played right into the hands of the psychos that carried out the murder....

Brendan Hughes

MarkO - that's precisely my point. I see that paedophilia, snuff videos, and Nick Berg are in a group. You don't. Why not? (Fair point to Jye that some are for gratification, others are to shock).

Thanks also for raising the point about spreading it, though I was thinking of it slightly differently. Basically, terrorists spread terror by information dissemination, that's their "job" - if the public didn't know of individual atrocities, they wouldn't force the government to act, which is what the terrorists want (it's their gamble on which way the government would react). News blackout would never happen in our society though.

jasey - can't be arsed to try to wriggle out from your first point, so touché . Otherwise, thanks for the compliments

jasey

If you want and "jobs" doing - you know where I am

Mitchy260

There's a big difference with paedophillia and the Berg video.

Viewing child **** is illegal and you will have incriminating evidence on your computer, this may involve you losing your job, wife, family, being sent to jail, put on the sex offenders register and most of all you would have lost all self respect in yourself. Do you know what they do to kiddie fiddlers inside? Being branded a paedo is probably the worst sentence you can have as everyone will always look down at you. Now im not saying if this wasn't applicable, that you should go and view child **** because its sick.

Comparing the Berg video to child **** is lunacy! I wont lose my job/wife/family/selfrespect for viewing the Berg video but im afraid i'd lose all that if i viewed any kiddie ****.

This video is no where near on the scale of child ****.

Faire D'Income

This is what you originally said. In other words, you find the act of an individual clicking on the link equal to the perpetrators actions or very close to
them.

You can keep repeating that mantra ad infinitum if it keeps you happy but we all understand the distinction that (in your opinion) if you have a professional interest, then it is acceptable to watch the video. I understand the distinction you're trying to make but what I object to is your accusation that people who watch the video are no better that the perpetrators. I do find it hard to believe that you had no advance warning of the reports that you were about to read but as it is impossible to prove either way, I'll just have to accept it.

Being a few pence short of a pound is a long way from directly comparing them to the perpetrators, so which is it?

Well, having excluded myself from the voyeurs in an earlier post I don't understand your comment about cliched opinions but it seems to me that you are confused as to what opinion you actually have of people who clicked on the link. On one hand you accuse them of being "a few pence short of a pound" and then you accuse them of being "pretty sick" so it seems to me as if you're confused. There's nothing wrong with opinions or expressing them but if you're going to do so, then be prepared to defend and explain them and indeed if you're wrong then be prepared to admit so.

Just to put it into plain English, what you are saying is that if I watched the video (with prior knowledge) then I am just as bad a person as the guy who wielded the knife.

That just does not stack up and the majority of posters seem to think so.

As for the rest of your post, some of it seemed a bit confused to me but again it seems as if you're back tracking by mentioning ...

"I don’t think that viewers should be shot/life imprisoned etc as those who did it should be"

...but if that's the case, then surely by lumping the viewers and perpetrators together you would feel that their punishment should be equal? Unless, you don't actually believe that they are comparable and just made a rash post that you're unwilling to admit was far too generalised.

jasey

Faire D'Income - Brendan is gonna be a lawyer - although I suspect with his grip on reality he could probably go straight to being a Judge .


"You're all guilty cos you're scum" is what he's scared to say !

MarkO

LOL. Many (including Brendan, I think) would argue that there's very little between them. In terms of disgust/horror/shock, I'd say that a child **** video is likely to be only marginally (if at all) worse than the Berg video (unless you're a nonce, of course ).

Sure, the legal implications of obtaining/watching/storing child **** is serious, whereas the same for the Berg video is negligible.

However, to see it purely from a legal standpoint is ridiculous; surely it's the 'nastiness' of the content of the two which puts them in a very similar vein?

MarkO

BTW, quick poll here. Can all of the people who haven't watched the Berg video (and who claim they won't for whatever reason) tell me - honestly - whether on 9/11 if they watched any of the footage of the twin towers burning/collapsing at all (either live, or recorded later on that day/evening/week/month)?

If you did, why not contemplate your hypocracy for the rest of the afternoon?

Brendan Hughes

Fd'I - I did indeed first make a rash post which was far too generalised (I'm happy to admit that, I don't think I'm the first person to do that on scoobynet, and it's not the first time I've had to backtrack on what I posted). I've spent a hell of a lot of time trying to carefully qualify that rash generalisation to explain what I meant by it. I can see that some people accept it after the qualification, and some don't. I can even see that some understand what I'm trying to say, however badly I've put it.

The cliché reference was that a number of debates on here generate into "It's my opinion" / "Opinions are like ********, everyone has one". Could have been a cheap retort, thanks for not typing it.

Thank you for the quote of my original text, I did re-read it before the previous reply.

Just because I thoroughly dislike two groups of people, no it certainly doesn't mean that I agree they should be punished equally for whatever it is I don't like. I don't remember arguing for the death sentence for car thieves, for example, unlike a number of others on here.

Sorry you object to my accusation that (certain) viewers are not much better than perpetrators. I remove any accusation, and maintain that it is my opinion. I stand by it. If you still want to know why, you're going to have to ask my psychologist where my moral code came from somewhere in my childhood or my subconscious. Perhaps we can put your "why" mantra together with my "because" mantra, they can keep each other company .

Jasey, that will be £1500 please.

Jye

And on that note................

Jerome

Changing my statement? You obviously chose to ignore my post on page 4 where I admitted to being rash in saying much of what I said previously. And what does the fact that British troops are being targetted have to do with anything I had said before anyway?

Brendan Hughes

...bad luck Jye

jasey

Take it off my first fee Brendan.

I'll do anything - but you know that cos I'm willing to watch a Video !

I've been practising my hacking off a persons head with a blunt knife whilst trying to bite off MarkO's grandad's nads and videoing it for all who will pay at my site www.igottheideafrombrendan.com.

Scooby96

Just seen the Nick Berg execution video c/o Overnet

Sick, sick, sick *******.

So thats revenge for a few naked blokes piled up on top of eachother!

And **** not fighting them on a Friday / on sacred ground cos its a Holy Day, ******* ***** need nuking if you ask me

Taff107

Just seen it too.
Jesus, it makes me sick to the stomach and ashamed to call myself British when I hear these know-nothing fellow compatriots spout off about the 'abuse' that we are inflicting upon Iraqis.
Watch that video.....it might give you an insight into the type of animals that the British and American soldiers have to deal with, day-in, day-out.

Geezer

During the battle at Monte Cassino in 1944, a section of the British army was sent out on recon on the Snakeshead ridge to probe the German defences and generally gather information. They came across a foxhole containing 3 German soldiers, asleep. They decapitated 2 of them, leaving the third to wake to found 2 headless colleagues with him.

They were apparently quite pleased with their work, enough to boast about it to their peers, and joke about what a shock the remaining soldier would get when he woke up. They also said that it would instill a fear in the Germans, which it did.

Now I now you're gonna say these were soldiers, but still, they could have killed all of them, and they could have killed them without doing what they did. Considering it was a recon patrol, they didn't have to kill them at all, after all, if they had woken before they had been killed, or the third one had just as they were leaving, they risked bringin enemy fire upon themsleves and alerting the Germans to the other patrols around.

And before someone says "yes, well that was 60 years", I'm well aware that we cannot continue to raise previous atrocities forever (even though we still persue **** war criminals ), what I'm trying to illustrate is that this is a situation where terrible things happen.

The people who beheaded Nick Berg wanted to make a point, and they certainly have, just like those soldiers in 1944. They want to try to frighten westerners away, and I'm sure alot of contractors etc. will think twice before going out there now.

War (and it is a war, despite what you may think) is ****e, and both sides will only pay lip service to any conventions. They are out to win, simple, and will do whatever it takes to acheive that. If you think the US will not go to similar lengths (perhaps covertly so they have plausible deniability) then you have your head stuck in the sand.

Just try and find the website that the video is on, it's nigh on impossible. The video would not have been available to the western world had the powers that be not allowed it, making you fall into their trap of going down the road of thinking of all Arabs as blood thirsty savages who should be nuked. Judging by alot of the posts on here, they have done a pretty good job.

Geezer

ProperCharlie

yeah but they didn't have camcorders back then. if they'd video'd it and sent the video back to ma and pah that'd have been really f*ckin *sick*

Geezer

Exactly, so the only difference between the 'savage Arabs' and the troops in 1944 is the media.

Geezer

Taff107

Geezer, I have served in the Army for quite a few years now and seen many things that are fundamentally 'wrong'. From a person being blown to pieces by a anti-tank mine, mass graves and more recently, the victims of executions. This, without doubt is the coldest, most evil thing I have ever seen.
You mention the British cutting off the heads as if it happens all the time. Sure, in any Army at a given time, there are going to be psychopaths but I assure you these clowns serving with the Fedayeen all border on it. They have absolutely no regard for human (or any other type,for that matter) life. All this reinforced by their over-zealous, hypocritical belief in Allah. My opinions of Arabs were formed well before seeing this video.
I personally wish we could 'take the gloves off' with this tin-pot country and see how long they last then.

....oh, and by the way, I found the video in under 30 secs on Google

SomeDude

Fair question, and as I didn't look at the vid, I think it deserves an honest answer.

Yes, I did watch it all unfold (funny, mostly because I was reading Scoobynet at the time and the thread about it caught my attention) and I felt... I felt it was almost surreal as a) it reminded me of Hollywood movies and b) I could just not get my brain around the fact that there were real people involved. Towering Inferno, Die hard, it all crossed my mind.

I was not able to process the information, and even up to this day, the combination of the thirst for more news and the horror of it all, I'm still not comfortable with my reaction to it.

It made me question my own moral values etc. as there was an aspect of "curiosity" as well "The medium is the message" as some smarter guy than me once said (surprise me OK ?), and it really felt like I was a rabbit staring into a big bundle of light.

Thing is, I don't need you to tell me I'm somewhat of a hypocrit. I know, and try to fight it, with varying success.

OTOH you do need people like Brendan to confront you, and to make you wonder just why you want to see this vid, right here, right now, click, "oohh, awfull, those people are savages". Lots of braindead people have responded to this thread.

Maybe we should have learned, after Orwell, to not react like total hysterical ***** to the information that is being fed to us, for whatever reason.

I mean, I've seen stuff like "it's better to shoot a baby in the head..." in reaction to this vid, and if you have one ounce of brain left, that kind of total stupidity should make you think.

So yeah, I think that unless you feel at least a bit stupid for clicking on that link, your moral standards are at lquestionable.

Anyway, enjoy your hysterisis, I'm outta this thread

Jye

LOL @ that one Brendan

I'm just one of those 'braindead' (SD) peeps who thought this thread had run it's course

Geezer

Taff, I am not trying to show that we are all as bad as them, or that coalition forces are a bunch of thugs. But there are elements of the forces on both sides, who, given the oppurtunity will stoop so low, or will be driven to do terrible things by the extreme situation that a war brings.

These people also live by a different set of rules. They are not right or worng, just different. They have incensed our values, but you obviously do not think about how degraded or abused they may feel about their treatment at our hands. We treated Japanese POWs very well, but it was seen as a disgrace for them. You go figure.

Your statement about your opinion of Arabs being formed before this is very telling indeed. You didn't even qualify it by saying Arab 'terrorists' or 'extremists'. Like all races/religions etc. 99% of them will be perfectly normal people, who wish to live their lives peacefully, doing the best that they can, not hacking off peoples heads or shooting babies, or gassing people and so on.

As for the video, yes it appears in the first few hits on Google. That wasn't my point. Please re-read the post and then try and find the website it was published on, not the hundreds that have got hold of it because they were 'allowed' to.

Geezer