Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Nicholas Berg murdered by Americans?

  1. May 17, 2004 #1
    I never saw the original footage and I find it difficult to believe that the beheading video was staged by the CIA or somebody in the military. But this link tries to prove otherwise.

    Just another conspiracy theory? a supposed fact?
    http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000233.html
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2004
  2. jcsd
  3. May 17, 2004 #2
    There is someting weird about Nick Berg, yes. Is this a CIA/MOSSAD conspiracy? Hardly anything points at that at this point except ramblings and fallacies from conspiracy sites. Things like "omg, a plastic chair " or "an orange jumpsuit!!!!".

    We are worried about terrorists getting weapons grade uranium,but they can't get an orange jumpsuit for a political statement????
     
  4. May 17, 2004 #3

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    If it were a CIA conspiracy do you really think they would be stupid enough to have him dressed in a prison uniform?

    I mean... come on people... it's called critical thinking.
     
  5. May 17, 2004 #4

    But some soldiers beat up some Iraqis,so that means the CIA is stupid!!!!!
     
  6. May 17, 2004 #5
    I don't subscribe to this Berg/CIA conspiracy theory. However, I would stop short at defending the stupidity level of the US government's actions in recent years.

    The first rule of thumb about committing crimes: don't videotape yourself doing or saying something incriminating. You'd think they would have learned that from watching "America's Dumbest Criminals"...
     
  7. May 17, 2004 #6

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Not that I agree with all of the tactics used in the prison, but videotaping/photographing is a standard interrogation technique. If you humiliate and put a person you're trying to interrogate under stress, they will eventually crack. If you have evidence of what you've done, it can be used to influence other prisoners. If the person being interrogated knows what will be coming if they don't talk, and they know that it wont stop until they do based on what they've seen happen to others, it'll make them falter quicker.

    Again, I don't agree with all of the tactics used, but the people who are in unholy uproar over the photos are the same people who are complaining that we had awful intelligence prior to 9-11. Getting information from people who want to hurt you about how they're planning on hurting you is ugly business. You can't just go up to a militant and nicely ask where they're planning on blowing up the next car bomb. It takes "coersion", plain and simple.
     
  8. May 17, 2004 #7
    Not to digress from the topic at hand, but you must remember (a) these interrogation "techniques" are banned by rules of engagement which the US is claiming to be upholding, and moreover (b) most of these people are not trying to hurt anyone. The Wall Street Journal reported that between 70-90% of those being held were arrested by mistake. Not a good way to treat the innocent, from whom you're seeking sympathy.
     
  9. May 17, 2004 #8

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I'm not debating that things were done wrong. That's what happens when you've got reservists doing the interrogating...

    The lines are murky. There is quite a bit you can't do. Torture for instance. There are still many things you can do. I'm not certain on it, but I'm pretty sure you can do things like humiliate them, disrupt their sleep cycles, etc.

    Note that the pictures of torture by the british troops were forgeries.
     
  10. May 18, 2004 #9
    The reservists received orders from commanding officers -- who may have received their orders from much, much higher...

    Not relevant here, since the US photos are authentic and have been corroborated by testimony.
     
  11. May 18, 2004 #10

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Or so they (sort of) say. We don't know who gave them the orders, because they won't specifically come out and say who it was (unless something has changed since I looked last... which is possible).

    If they're not willing to say who, I'm hesitant to believe them. If it was an actual order, why are they hiding who gave it?
     
  12. May 18, 2004 #11
    Because most of it is illegal and inhumane, and the fact is the government is denying *everything* these days, to save face in light of the coming election.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2004
  13. May 18, 2004 #12

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That doesn't explain why they're so adamandtly refusing to say who gave the order. If anything, it's a strike against them getting orders.

    Not a single one wants to have their punishment reduced in exchange for talking? I'm hesitant to believe them...
     
  14. May 18, 2004 #13

    Njorl

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    You're assuming an offer has been made to reduce their sentence in return for cooperation. I am not aware that the offer has been made. The soldier who anonymously submitted the photographic evidence is being court martialed with the rest. Cooperation is punished, so far.

    Njorl
     
  15. May 18, 2004 #14

    adrenaline

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Could this be a psyop operation? I don't thinkit is that way off base. If I remember correctly the CIA has a history of killing American innocent civilians. I remember the Michael Devine case when I had just entered the working world after college. In 1990, The CIA had commisioned an agent in Guatamala who was responsible for the 1990 torture and brutal slaying of Michael Devine, an American innkeeper (his head was nearly sawed off by a machete) and for the 1992 torture and murder of the husband of Jennifer Harbury, an American citizen.

    http://ssdc.ucsd.edu/news/notisur/h95/notisur.19950331.html

    Normally, I am not a conspirationalist type of person but it's not like the CIA has a sterling reputation. However, as everyone pointed out, they sure were sloppy to leave all those clues.
     
  16. May 18, 2004 #15
    Have the interrogators ever looked toward an "supreme annoyance" policy? As in find a person with the most scratchiest, high pitched, and generally the abosolutely most annoying worst dialect ever imaginable that someone can ever possibly speak, and have them repeat things to the prisoner until they are driven mad.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2004
  17. May 18, 2004 #16
    Indeed, that what they do also in Guantanomo ... a lot of rap with plenty of ****-words.

    Added: hé ... I typed the real letters ... and it was converted to those high quality stars. :mad:
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2004
  18. May 31, 2004 #17
    Don't forget that the words "Now are we done" seem to be said at the end of the tape while Berg's head is being displayed.

    I don't think you need a conspiracy theory for this one- the only evidence linking the tape to Mousawi are the titles, which could have been manufactured by literally anyone who had access to the tape before it was webcast. Also, there's a logical inconsistency with Mousawi proclaiming his identity in the titles but hiding it while committing the act. Not to mention that Mousawi was reported as having lost a leg in 2001 and killed in 2003. There are at least 3 edits or splices when the time signature jumps about 11 hours, and dozens of other circimstantial things that are suggestive to say the least. The CIA claims to have done analysis of some type on the voice of the killer, but will not present this evidence. If waveform analysis has been done, it should be public.

    One thing is clear- I;ve found absolutely no proof that the official story is true.
     
  19. Jun 4, 2004 #18
    one this is ridiculus to say that the CIA is behind the death of Nick Berg. Also it is just plain dumb to say that the interrogations were conducted improperly because they were conducted by reservists. Reservists recieve the same military training that active duty military recieve. So they conduct interrogations in the same manner. Just because there are a select few who find it funny to abuse prisoners does not reflect on the rest of the military and how they run things. But back to Nick Berg, the CIA would not stage something like that and make obvious mistakes like the ones you are trying to point out. There have been many CIA cover ups that have been revealed in some manner but they all were good and usually took an inside source to expose the truth. Orange jumpsuits, lawn chairs, edits, etc. does it matter? Nick Berg is dead and dirty liberals are trying to blame the CIA when we are at war with terrorists. Where is the logic in blaming his murder on the CIA?
     
  20. Jun 4, 2004 #19

    Oh man, Germany rocks!
     
  21. Jun 4, 2004 #20
    Yes, germany rocks. I find it despicable how Nick Bergs death is being used by the anti Bush crowds.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Nicholas Berg murdered by Americans?
  1. Terror murder in London (Replies: 85)

Loading...