Nick Berg video... do you hear what I hear?
 

At just over five minutes into the long version of the Nick Berg decapitation video - audible on all versions but clearest on the Consumption Junction version - at the point where the onscreen timecode reads 13:46:28, a voice can clearly be heard.

Others claim to hear "Thy will be done" repeated twice. First softly and slowly, then faster. Others say they hear "How wicked was that?" Still others think they hear "How will it be done?"

To my ears, that voice sounds like that of a Black American male, and the words he speaks sound like: ?I don?t believe that,? delivered in the kind of numbed out monotone that one might expect from someone who just witnessed - or even participated in - a cold-blooded murder.

After these words are spoken, there is general muttering, followed by what sounds a bit like another Western voice saying ?Thy will be done.?

Again, I'm not saying I'm 100% on this - but it sounds to me like someone is saying "I don't believe that," followed by a couple mumbles, followed by "Thy will be done", like the second guy is telling the first guy to get over it. That second bit isn't as clear and obvious to me as the first, but it sounds like it could be right.

Immediately after that, the soundtrack stops completely. The video of someone holding Nick Berg's severed head aloft continues for a few seconds, in silence.

Is this a blooper? An oversight by whoever put together this video (for whatever purpose)? If so, the potential implications are staggering. Could there be a more innocent explanation? Of course. I'm basing my observations on a crap, compressed version of a video that was recorded under crap circumstances to begin with.

However, if this is, indeed, the classic, paranoid "worst case scenario", it brings up a conundrum about which "authorities" to contact about it. The CIA? The FBI? The White House?!

Yeah. Right.

Anyway. I'd like to hear your opinions.

Here is the high-quality Consumption Junction version of the video, which is a lot clearer than the version put out by BreakForNews.com:

http://66.115.191.135/content/detail...1&page=1&fav=0

Jump ahead to 13:46:27 on the video's timecode. One second later, you will hear the voice. Please tell me... do you hear what I hear?

:1orglaugh

You're probably right. This was posted on another board: http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000233.html

Interesting stuff...

ZzZ I dunno if it's real or not but I don't care ...

If the CIA or FBI would have done it, I think they would have killed the guy anyways to make it look more real .

Many conspiracy "theorists" have suggested that the tape is a top-to-bottom fake. I don't think so. To me, there's no question that Nick Berg was murdered, and there's no SERIOUS question that the video - as far as Nick being killed is concerned - is authentic. I think it presents a true, brutal murder.

Now, having said that, the video has definitely been edited. This thing is a stitched-together mess.

During the "attack", at no time do the audio and video elements sync up. Berg's screams continue beyond a point that would seem to be physiologically impossible (without getting too graphic). And when you consider that the decapitation was started by someone wearing a black hood, then finished by someone wearing a white hood, you can hardly escape the conclusion that the video was definitely EDITED.

But by who? And why?

Whoever edited this thing seems to have excised part of Nick's struggle. An edit occurs immediately after his captors knock him down. The audio track, however, is uninterrupted. This explains how a nearly headless man can howl out loud. It also explains the lack of arterial gushing, and the unseen black-to-white mask perpetrator switcheroo.

Those elements were cut out, and the two remaining halves were squeezed together under an intact audio track, with crude but effective results.

This leaves us with a perplexing question: Editing out of the worst of the brutality seems suspicious and counter-productive. If the terrorists' aim was to induce terror by showing the brutal lengths to which they were willing to go... why hold back? Why remove the most terrifying part? We can speculate, but it's probably futile.

Others have said that Nick Berg appears to be sitting in the same kind of white plastic chair being used by coalition forces in Iraq. Of course, those chairs are made in China, and are thus ubiquitous. But after the fall of Saddam, which came after more than a decade of intensive trade blocking efforts, one of the first things people looted was for furniture. Are such white plastic chairs easily available in Iraq? I don't know, and I'm not about to fly to Iraq to find out.

Other questions remain. Is he wearing standard issue prison silks? It sure looks like it. And some of those Arab terrorists have awfully pink hands, and seem a little overly well fed for insurgents, who you would expect to constantly be on the move.

There are also questions about his two weeks in the custody of Iraqi police, his repeated interrogations by American authorities while there, what he was doing there in the first place, why he was hanging out with an activist Iraqi with ties to the Russian mob and the American neoconservative establishment, whether or not he worked at Abu Ghraib, the FBI interrogation of his parents in the days before he was kidnapped, conflicting government accounts of his time in custody, etc, etc, etc.

More to come, if anybody's interested.

Unless of course whoever did it, intentionally left a well-stocked trail for conspiracy theorists to follow and be entertained and occupied by.... anything to keep your eye off the ball.

I mean come on... the orange jumpsuit, the white chair, the thing with his dad giving the gov a hard time, the rumor (or is it fact) that he was working around the prison, the cheesiness of the video when they swap to the second camera.

If you're looking for a good conspiracy... could it get any better than that?

Hey Jerky... Your web-site rocks :thumbsup

That's certainly true. In only two short weeks, Nick Berg's murder has sent waves of paranoia rippling through the Undernet. Theories ranging from the plausible to the lunatic are replicating at Tribble-like speed. This thing is already nearing JFK proportions, and with good reason. The whole mess is fast devolving into a bad kind of strangeness.

But to me, it seems more like incompetent blundering than screwing up on purpose. Like they were in a rush. Like they had something coming up that they had to deal with.

Like the growing Abu Ghraib prison scandal. Today we learned that there are literally thousands more photos, including depictions, smiling soldiers messing around with corpses, of rape (both homo and hetero) including the rape of young boys, a series of photos showing a guy being slowly beaten to death, etc.

The timing isn't proof of anything. But it sure was convenient. And considering public reaction to the Berg tape - with right-wing nuts and their followers calling anybody who doesn't think the brutal murder of one individual isn't sufficient grounds for all-out genocide - it worked like a charm.

Thanks, Tittyfucker!

Cheers!
YOPJ

:1orglaugh

But what I REALLY want to know is... do you hear what I hear?

I'll repeat the coordinates, because I'd really like to know if I'm the only one who hears this:

At just over five minutes into the long version of the Nick Berg decapitation video - audible on all versions but clearest on the Consumption Junction version - at the point where the onscreen timecode reads 13:46:28, a voice can clearly be heard. That voice sounds like that of a Black American male, and the words he speaks sound like: ?I don?t believe that.? After these words are spoken, there is general muttering, followed by ?Thy will be done,? like the second guy is telling the first guy to get over it.

Here is the high-quality Consumption Junction version of the video, which is a lot clearer than the version put out by BreakForNews.com:

http://66.115.191.135/content/detai...age=1&fav=0

Jump ahead to 13:46:27 on the video's timecode. One second later, you will hear the voice. Please tell me... do you hear what I hear?

Just for the record, I am in no way affiliated with ConsumptionJunction.com.

thats very interesting indeed, dont have the time to read all of that though

there was already a thread about this, i took the audio looked and listened... before the voice there is a clear splice, and the voice after listening to it 500 times says (to my hearing) "that will be enough"... not "thy will be done".

And if you've seen the Zapruder film, frame by frame, then you know the answer to that one... well.... at least that LHO wasn't the only person firing a gun that day. And the government bought the actual film for ~$16 million or something... I mean come on.


Whatever though.

We've spun out of control. I'm just hanging on for the ride at this point.

Jerky - just wanted to say welcome aboard!
I've been reading your newsletter for prob close to 2 years now
and its some of the funniest writing about disturbing issues I've ever read.

Keep up the great work.

(And for the record I do hear mumbling but its unintelligible to me..)

Thats good to know. I looked all around the office and couldn't find you.

Love your site. You guys are a buncha fuckin' psychos. And I mean that in the best possible way.

The First Amendment is First for a REASON!!!

Thanks for your kind words, and for the feedback on the Berg issue. Like I said, I'm not trying to proselytize here. Just trying to see how many people hear what I hear.

So far, it breaks down roughly as follows.

A little over half the people who listen to it say they hear it clearly.
About 30 percent say it's possible, but they can't be sure.
The final 20 percent say it's totally unintelligible.

Thanks again!

Where there is smoke, you most always find a fire.

umm dunno i chose not to watch it

Believe me, I can sympathize. I almost wish I hadn't watched it.

The version we posted was unedited. We also didn't even try to lower the file size so it will be the clearest version you can find.

I for one am tired of hearing about this already. Speculation is mostly pointless.

whats the point?

I understand and appreciate that. I even complimented the exemplary quality of the version you guys put up.

I'm not saying YOU guys edited it. I'm saying the video was edited before it was "released."

When you watch it, it's obvious.

i could play a Britney Spears song backwards and ask how many people hear Donald Rumsfeld say "I hate sand ******s" and the breakdown would be something like this..

A little over half the people who listen to it say they hear it clearly.
About 30 percent say it's possible, but they can't be sure.
The final 20 percent say it's totally unintelligible.





power of suggestion.

I've had people tell me this, then listen to it and say "Wow. You're right. It's clearly audible."

Suggestion or no, would you do me the favor of checking it out and telling me if you hear it?

I have heard people tell me they feel the power of God in their life and it's very dramatic and a life changing experience.

...so? It does not end the debate or prove anything.

I think some of you have done a damn good job of proving the video tape was edited.

Now..the question is..by WHOM?

I'm still sticking with the terrorists (yes, even terrorists know how to edit things as opposed to blowing up things) as it would mean Nick Berg is still alive and in solitary confinement somewhere, OR got offed by whoever after the tape was released to keep him quiet (which would be a bit of an oxymoron wouldn't you say?)

To those that think the video is a fake by the terrorists or done by the CIA..just one question:

Where heck is BERG then! And you don't think his parents didn't have the body fingerprinted or something before it was buried?

Maybe someone can answer this for me and maybe it has been covered already... He was wearing a prison issue type orange jumpsuit, this is very strange to me, why would terrorists be concerned with putting him in a prison uniform, I don't think they would bother with it and/or be that organized about the treatment of their prisoner/s. What do they do, "Hey we better order some more of those jumpsuits, I think we are getting low..." Just doesn,t make since to me. Correct me if I am missing anything on this particular point.

Simply put, the fact that the tape is edited does not automatically mean it doesn't portray an actual murder.

It could have been edited for other reasons, like somebody in an identifiable military uniform stumbling into the frame. There are those who claim you can still see glimpses of a green military cap in some frames.

Nick Berg is dead, and his murder - at least parts of it - are captured on that video. I think that much is probably true. As for the rest, I just don't know.

But tell me, did you hear what I heard? Or are you also avoiding the video?

His clothes certainly look like standard issue orange military prison silks, to me. He was in the custody of the Iraqi police for over two weeks prior to being released, and almost immediately kidnapped. Maybe the prison let him keep or purchase his jumpers. And then, after being kidnapped, his captors found them in his bags and decided to make him wear them to ram home the point that this was retaliation for the goings-on at Abu Ghraib. I don't know. Nobody knows at this point.

And that's the problem. The Bush administration's strict policy of secrecy and subterfuge, of keeping the American public in the dark over anything except that which the Power That Be determine they NEED to know.... it breeds paranoia.

Not that secrecy is the only problem with this tape. This tape is riddled with weirdness. One of the hardest parts in discussing it is trying to figure out where to begin.

I heard nothing close to what you say is on there as it's basically just "jumbled" mumbling. With imagination, you can MAKE it sound like anything you want I suppose.

And NO, I'm NOT avoiding the tape! I saw the whole sick video the first day it came out.

And since you're a newbie..suggest you read OTHER threads about the tape that were put up about a week ago, and you'll see my participation is very heavy in those..so LOOk next time before ya leap at conclusions.

I dont believe this.

Heres my :2 cents:

I recorded it , and listend to it many times, tweaked the eq and check the wav.

The last 10 seconds of audio on the tape is a least 3 different spliced pieces of audio. You can here it cut in, then 'mystery guy' speaks, then his last noise if briefly repeated, then he says the rest of what he says.

To me it sounded like an older African American male, and it sounded like he said:

"That will be enough...........that was enough." Thge the tape ends.

or more accuratly considering the skip in the audio:

That will be enough(.....nough)......that was enough."


It could be anything, probably something else. but this is what I heard.

I also just reversed it.

This is more creepy: Now it sounds MORE like english, and sounds like Two different people , it sounds more clear than before,

First guy (younger): What do you want?

2nd guy (older slower): I told you to watch.


No shit,,

Tinfoil hat anyone???

WAG THE DOG

Plot Outline: Before elections, a spin-doctor and a Hollywood producer join efforts to "fabricate" a war in order to cover-up a presidential sex scandal.


Is someone making a purposefully low quality "wag the dog" style beheading video?

With arabic accents