Eugene Armstrong beheading video

n-Track Studio Discussion Forum
21
But it's fucking horrible, all of it.

Could not have said it better.

I've read the other day about a prison experement that was done in the 60's (or 70's ?).

There it was only an experiment, and it lasted less than 2 weeks, but the corruption that happened in some of the 'warden's' minds because of having power over people was mindblowingly evil.
And that wasn't even the real deal.

I'm not making comments about US soldiers or anyone here, I'm just saying in general.
If you have a p.o.w. situation, and one group have total control over their enemy, I am sure some very evil things can happen there. And that will only brew more hate.
The people on the other side will retalieate out of hate, and if they get the chance they will return the favour.
A bad evil circle.

Have we become desensitized ? You bet.
I won't even look at something like that 'cause it will haunt me for weeks/months/years.

I've one day (by some guy at work who said ' Hey come look at this shit') saw what could be described as a short snuff movie.
Debate if they're real or not, that one looked the real deal.
The terror in the girl's eyes, the killing. The whole thing was like 20 seconds long, and before I knew what I was watching it was over, but that haunted me for years.

People do have an inherent evil in them that seems (in some people more than others) to just wait for the right moment to jump to the surface.

The human race is the only species that are so evil towards each other.
Yeah , shure, there are animals that kill other animals to eat, but (appart from a cat sometimes) there aren't any that harm / mutilate / torture others to make a point or to have fun.

Humans can do those sort of things to each other.
And enjoy it.

And there are no winners in a war, just one party that gets fucked up less than the other. (pardon my language).

It's just so sad.

:(

"But these are only boys and I will never know
how men can see the wisdom in a war" - Chris de Burgh

"And in that bright October sun, I knew our childhood days were done.
I watched my friends go off to war - what do they keep on figthing for" - Billy Joel



:(

Wihan
22

I refuse to watch the videos for two reasons. I feel it disrespectful to the poor victims. That is seeing someone at their most vulnerable and worst hour. To me it would be like watching the video of a rape out of a need to rubber neck. Secondly, I would cry like a baby and honestly have no intention of being desensitized by it. The repulsion and disgust I feel now I think is healthy. When folks stop feeling that way towards such heinous acts, they have less hesitation to act in kind.

23

I don’t think it’s a bad thing to be able to see the fucked up things that are happening in the world - it sure beats being in the dark. I heard about it on CNN, but I really had no clue how bad it was. The internet is making it harder to look the other way, and for that I am thankful.

Maybe the names Eugene Armstrong and Jack Hensley won’t be forgotten like Donovan Jackson, Jose Vargas, and even Chandra Levy.

24
I don't know the objectives of the people who do things like that. To weaken the resolve of USA, UK, etc?
To terrorize - that's their only motive. They can't fight against us directly, because they'd lose, but they can terrorize. Terror can have 2 objectives: 1) rally support for their case, and 2) weaken the resolve of the opposition.

Or is that there are truly evil people in this world?
There might be but it's an dangerous to simplify the problem to just "good and evil". Often, we (the USA) tries to do that but it's wrong.
25

Still no word on Ken Bigley (the third hostage). And the situation is getting massive media coverage in the UK and Ireland.

Interestingly, the UK Foreign Office advised Ken Bigleys family not to contact the press etc. that they would handle the situation. I suppose after listening to empty assurances that the Government were doing ‘everything they could’ to secure his release (yea, right), they decided to take matters into their own hands, to much greater effect.

Interesting coincidence that the press conferences and headlines they’re getting now weren’t happening when the Government were ‘taking care of’ the situation. Also, Ken Bigley’s brother is actually in indirect contact with the kidnappers via Al Jazeera. More than Tony Blair managed… Let’s watch Blairs popularity plummet after this one (whatever the outcome);

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1311845,00.html

In the Netherlands, Paul Bigley has spent the last week sitting at his computer in his flat.

“I haven’t spoken to the Foreign Office at all,” he said. "The most helpful people have been al-Jazeera. They have somehow, with their contacts, got me indirect access to the terrorists.

"The statements I make through them reach the insurgents in half an hour. All I have had from al-Jazeera is support."

Mr Bigley believes it was the family’s decision to wrest control from the Foreign Office which secured his brother an extension of the deadline for his execution. He blames the Americans for sabotaging that by refusing to release the two female Iraqi prisoners, whose liberty had already been approved by an Iraqi judge before Mr Bigley was taken hostage.

“Forget this ‘negotiate with terrorists’ syndrome. Nobody needs to negotiate with terrorists. Just let the Iraqi people conduct their legal judiciary system in the way they wanted to,” he said.
26

Anyone criticizing Paul Bigley? I would do exactly the same in his shoes, but I can imagine someone saying that he and al-Jazeera are merely playing into the terrorists hands and doing more damage than good. As I said, I’d do exactly what he is doing. I’m just curious about the reaction to a private individual taking such a problem into his own hands. When leaders screw up this badly it is a mistake to trust them, IMHO.

27
Quote (TomS @ Sep. 24 2004,07:37)
but I can imagine someone saying that he and al-Jazeera are merely playing into the terrorists hands and doing more damage than good.

The terrorists are already getting their way with certain companies (Turkish, Kuwaiti etc.) pulling their workers out of Iraq, and even with some of the smaller countries pulling their forces out. So they're already 'playing into their hands'.

Why should the US and UK hostages be the ones to suffer while many of the other countries are rescuing their people by cutting deals with the kidnappers?

Surely the 'no negotiating with terrorists' thing only works if NOBODY is negotiating with terrorists. Or are the US/UK trying to prove how tough they are by letting people like Ken Bigley die?

Are they trying to send some sort of message to the other 'coalition' countries; "See? - We're not afraid to let our hostages die, cause we know how to stand firm, so you should be doing the same" - What a lovely way to set an example.
28

Interesting, johnan. I bet that Blair and Bush think that the refusal to bargain will work even if it is not that case that all refuse to bargain.

These terrorists are unlike many others, in that they do not have terribly specific goals in mind. The terrorists that killed all those school kids in Russia have a specific goal, for example, and for that reason the cases seem different in an important way. Does that seem correct?

???

29
Quote (TomS @ Sep. 24 2004,09:37)
These terrorists are unlike many others, in that they do not have terribly specific goals in mind.

There appear to be different groups doing the kidnapping and making the demands, and they fall into the following categories;

1) The common criminals. This group kidnaps anyone (including Iraqis) and make demands for cash.

2) The rebels-without-a-cause. For example, the group who kidnapped the French journalists were making demands for France to reverse the headscarf ban. This seems like the demand was something they thought up when they realised they had a couple of Frenchmen (who still haven't been released btw)

3) The organised kidnappers. This group appear to target foreign workers and have specific demands. Their demands are always aimed at a) getting foreign troops out of the country, b) getting foreign workers (i.e. these assisting the foreign troops) out of the country, or c) freeing Iraqi prisoners held by occupation forces.
30

I think the terrorists (Al Qaeda) have very specific goals in Iraq.

31
Quote (MidnightToker @ Sep. 24 2004,10:47)
I think the terrorists (Al Qaeda) have very specific goals in Iraq.

And the Iraqi insurgents don't have similar goals? - An interesting discussion point is how much al-Queda has to do with the unrest, and how much is down to the Iraqis themselves. This always seems to be a bit vague (with perhaps too much emphasis put on blaming 'al Queda' and 'foreign fighters')

Blaming al Queda for all the problems in Iraq is a red herring.

I doubt very much the Iraqis are sitting at home waiting for Al Queda to get out of the country so they can start showering the coalition with rose petals...
32

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1312053,00.html
<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
UK Muslims fly to Iraq in bid to save hostage
A delegation of British Muslims was today preparing to fly to Baghdad to try and save the life of the hostage Kenneth Bigley, the Guardian has learned.

The two will tomorrow meet with senior Iraqi religious leaders and ask them to do all they can to save the life of the British contractor, whose captors have threatened to behead him.


also;

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote

The Irish Labour politician Michael Higgins yesterday offered to travel to Iraq in a bid to negotiate with the hostage-takers. The offers came as Mr Blair made a second call to Mr Bigley’s family.


I don’t see Blair or Jack Straw offering to fly to Iraq. Says a lot when a politician of a neighboring country and a group of Muslims in the UK want to fly to Iraq to try to save Ken Bigley, while the UK Government just faffs about on the sidelines looking pathetic.
33
And the Iraqi insurgents don't have similar goals? - An interesting discussion point is how much al-Queda has to do with the unrest, and how much is down to the Iraqis themselves.
Right - it's unclear who is doing what in Iraq? I think the insurgents are a separate group who's goal is to upset the change occuring in Iraq. However, Al Quada's goals are different & concrete IMO.
34

Just watched it. Sickenening to say the least. Pretty much speechless…and sad…okay, need to walk outside. be back later. whew.

35

I’m not quite sure why Ken Bigley was in Iraq, isn’t Iraq where there’s a lot of trouble going on?

Guy

36

I’m not quite sure why a lot of people are in Iraq…

37

I bet the biggest reason is $$$. Contractors make big bux over there, tax-free. Lots of these guys plan to stay just long enough to get rich then come back. Iraqis want the jobs, but the “infidels” won’t hire them (often enough, that is). I wonder who’s really beheading these people sometimes…

WG

38
Quote (Gumboot @ Sep. 26 2004,18:54)
I bet the biggest reason is $$$. Contractors make big bux over there, tax-free. Lots of these guys plan to stay just long enough to get rich then come back. Iraqis want the jobs, but the "infidels" won't hire them (often enough, that is). I wonder who's really beheading these people sometimes...

WG

"Big Bux" is a relative thing, of course. Most of these people are just working folks, aren't they? Getting a bit of hazzard pay, but not realy that much more than they might make back home driving a truck or whatever? ???
39
Quote (TomS @ Sep. 27 2004,08:01)
"Big Bux" is a relative thing, of course. Most of these people are just working folks, aren't they? Getting a bit of hazzard pay, but not realy that much more than they might make back home driving a truck or whatever? ???

It's impossible to tell what a lot of these people are... Ken Bigley and the 2 Americans were reported to have been working on housing projects for the Iraqis. However, in the video released by the kidnappers they say they were working on building projects in American military bases.

I think I know where they'd make more money....

Of course, it plays better in the media when you hear they were 'only over there trying to help the Iraqis'
40

Some of these folks are taking jobs over there because they don’t have good paying jobs where they live, or are out of work all together. It’s a last ditch effort to get back on their feet.

There was interview with the wife of one of the guys that had been kidnapped a few moths ago. She said her husband was there because he had been laid off and hadn’t been able to find a job. They were behind on payments. He was over there because they saw it as the only way to get out of the hole they were in. He had planned on being there for a short time and then to come home. Of course he didn’t have a job to come back to so he was there longer than he had planned. Fortunately, he was eventually let go, or this might have been that guy that escaped.

I don’t remember the specifics unfortunately, but that interview was pretty eye opening why some folks might risk going over there. Think about it. These folks feel like the only way they can support their family is to leave the US for a war zone. That’s appalling.