Video of US journalist 'beheading' pulled from social media

Twitter and Facebook have taken steps to close down the accounts of militant Islamic State supporters after the publication of a video that appeared to show a man with a British accent "beheading" the American journalist James Foley. The video is thought to have first surfaced on an account called @mujahid4life which was …

[Anonymous Coward]

Recognise the voice?

They should play the voice on the news so hopefully someone can recognise them and then they can never return home without spending the rest of their miserable pathetic lives in jail. Utter scum.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Recognise the voice?

There are a lot of people here who would welcome him with open arms.

Most of them work for the BBC.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Recognise the voice? @AC

Choking a bit at the cost of the license fee there AC? I didn't think that many Islamic Jihadists worked for the BBC.

[Anonymous Coward]

@Titus Re: Recognise the voice? @AC

" I didn't think that many Islamic Jihadists worked for the BBC."

I never said they did. Auntie never saw a "freedom fighter" she wouldn't put on a pedestal while she spread bullshit about how they were acting out against western oppression and colonialism.

[h3]

Re: @Titus Recognise the voice? @AC

Not true. Look at how the separatists have been portrayed in Ukraine

(Even though to start with they were doing exactly the same stuff as the ones they called freedom fighters did).

[Wilseus]

Re: Recognise the voice?

the rest of their miserable pathetic lives in jail.

IMO prison is too good for them.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Recognise the voice?

It's a London accent, don't they all sound like Michael Caine down there?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Recognise the voice?

It's a London accent, don't they all sound like Michael Caine down there?

Only Sarf of the river.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Recognise the voice?

They have...

http://cdn.theguardian.tv/mainwebsite/2014/08/20/140819foleykiller-16x9.mp4

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Recognise the voice?

No need.

There are other ways to identify the individual.

[Destroy All Monsters]

Yeah, well, like, you know.

in a bid to terrorise Americans

Who are now too dumb to distinguish Hollywood made-up horror from the real thing.

"If genuine, we are appalled by the brutal murder of an innocent American journalist and we express our deepest condolences to his family and friends."

Totally different from the brutal murder of an innocent American citizen by the Obama administration via drone strike for which we decline to express any of our deepest condolences to his family and friends.

What's that? Yeah, it's the sound of a high moral horse. It has rachitis.

[Richard 81]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

To what the hell are you referring?

What innocent American citizen? What drone strike?

[phuzz]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

I'm assuming they're referring to this guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

Given that the US claims a policy of "Innocent until proven guilty", shooting a US citizen, in a foreign country where they have no official jurisdiction, was rude at best, and probably illegal under US law.

Of course in most countries, if the government does something it's legal by default, but Americans are weird about stuff like that.

Possibly they're referring to al-Awlaki's son, who was also a US citizen and who was killed two weeks later, and doesn't seem to have any connections with terrorism beyond his father.

[Jim 59]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

Those comparing this to other killings in war etc. The point here is that the killing was an orchestrated murder, filmed and broadcast. As far as I am aware, neither the US or any other country has filmed and broadcast en execution. Even N. Korea has not done this. The US has, of course, killed thousands of its enemies, often deliberately, sometimes by accident, as have most big nations. Sure there are big moral arguments there too, but different ones.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

"The point here is that the killing was an orchestrated murder, filmed and broadcast. As far as I am aware, neither the US or any other country has filmed and broadcast en execution".

I see your point, but I think it's a very weak one. Do you really mean to suggest that filming and broadcasting horrible murders is worse than committing them - whether they are broadcast or not?

Many of us would be inclined to think that someone who procures the violent deaths of thousands of innocent civilians, while taking care that there is never any visual record that the public might see, is even worse than someone who kills a person openly.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

There's this thing... enemy combatant.

The trick is for the US Government to find a lawyer who can successfully argue to sanction the guy and that it wasn't illegal. (It had been done.)

The point is that its a bad argument on the point of DAM (Destroy All Monsters) .

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

I'm sure I saw a report somewhere that said one of the ISIS (or whatever they are called) religious leaders had been in Guantanamo. If true it looks like US tactics are biting then on the bum.

Something to go on the "lessons learned" slide, perhaps?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

Wasn't a British soldier recently jailed for killing someone he captured. I think that was filmed too, although not uploaded to YouTube.

Not that I agree with either action.

Another point, as I'm allowed to edit this: Where are ISIS etc getting their guns from?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

"Where are ISIS etc getting their guns from?"

The dear old USA. In two main ways:

(1) Weapons supplied to the "opposition" in Syria, where ISIS (under other names) has been viciously fighting to overthrow the Assad government for several years - with the active help of the US and UK governments. We may not have given them weapons openly, or bragged about it, but there are ways and means - e.g. via Saudi Arabia or the Gulf States.

(2) Weapons given, in vast abundance, to the "Iraqi army" which was even trained by the Yanks. That army was sent to fight ISIS, whereupon it abandoned its weapons and ran away. The ISIS guys gratefully took over the American weapons, including tanks - some of which the Yanks have now bragged about destroying with air strikes. This is the military-industrial complex in its purest form: industry produces weapons (such as tanks) at great expense to the US taxpayer, which are given to the Iraqis, who then hand them over to ISIS. Very expensive US aircraft then use fairly expensive bombs and missiles to destroy those self-same American tanks and other weapons! Rinse and repeat. The only real loser is the US taxpayer, and the only winners are those who own the munitions companies.

[Mark 85]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

For weapons, In the early days, yes.to #1. #2 is only partially right. They've captured weapons from whomever they have fought and until recently, they were winning a lot.

As for money... the current mode seems to be extortion of the old: "you have a nice house and family, it would be a shame for something to happen to them." routine.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

I was thinking along similar lines. The great and the good (led, of course, by our Dear Old Etonian Leader) have rushed to condemn such beheadings as brutal and unacceptable. Yes, it is a horrible thing. But perhaps slightly less horrible than the effect of a 1-ton bomb landing on a house in which a family is living. The difference is that we are never shown graphic pictures of the burned, decapitated, maimed, shredded victims of THAT kind of violence - because it's done by OUR brave lads from a safe height, and neither they nor we ever have to see the consequences.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Yeah, well, like, you know.

Downvoters: sorry to cheer for the wrong side, and all that - but unfortunately I have this regrettable addiction to the truth.

[stu 4]

Western morality

Though clearly a pretty horrible thing to do, I can't help being a bit depressed by the coverage this gets in the western press.

This morning 6 children were blown/burned to bits by Israeli airstrikes.

It gets almost no coverage at all.

perhaps that also needs to be videoed and posted on facebook before the western media gives a shit....

[Arnold Lieberman]

Re: Western morality

Well you won't see this on the BBC.

http://www.worldtribune.com/2014/07/31/sources-hamas-quickly-puts-dissent-gaza-kills-palestinian-protesters/

It never ceases to amaze me how many rabid apologists surface when these psychopaths and their comrades do their thing, all from the comfort of their living rooms/offices in the "evil" west. By all means, if they hate the west so much, they should do as the wannabe IS butchers do and go out there, not forgetting to leave their passports on the way out though.

Face it, even opportunists like Galloway are in for the chop if these IS types make it to Europe. Just as, according to him, all Israelis must be evil (even the socialist/peacenik ones!), so all kuffar are to face the same fate a the hands of the Calliphate. Events in Iraq certainly put to bed the lie that peace will break out if only Israel and the Jews were to disappear into the sea. Christian, Yadsik, wrong sort of Muslim, all going the same way.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

Arnold, can you tell us how many Israelis and how many Palestinians have died in the recent activity?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"Arnold, can you tell us how many Israelis and how many Palestinians have died in the recent activity?"

And roughly what percentage of each side were military, civilians, women, and children?

[LucreLout]

Re: Western morality

"And roughly what percentage of each side were military, civilians, women, and children?"

Stand next to your wife firing a gun until the police turn up, and you shouldn't be suprised if she gets shot as well as you.

[Ragarath]

Re: Western morality

Stand next to your wife firing a gun until the police turn up, and you shouldn't be suprised if she gets shot as well as you.

Why should you not be surprised? If she was shot, whilst not holding said gun and not doing said firing the police that attended were either badly trained, have bad situational awareness (hence should not be doing that job) or just wanted to shoot people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"Stand next to your wife firing a gun until the police turn up, and you shouldn't be suprised if she gets shot as well as you."

Maybe, but how about if the police deliberately take out the whole neighbourhood, complete with schools and hospitals...?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"And roughly what percentage of each side were military, civilians, women, and children?"

Hamas without accurate modern weapons killed ~ 97% occupying IDF military forces.

Israel with precision guided munitions killed over 75% civilians of which at least 50% were women and children, including multiple deliberate strikes on known to be occupied civilian infrastructure including schools and hospitals.

[LucreLout]

Re: Western morality

"Arnold, can you tell us how many Israelis and how many Palestinians have died in the recent activity?"

That's irrelevant - in any conflict one side will always have better weapons or greater numbers.

For example, how many of Saddams guys died vs the allied forces in gulf war 1 or 2?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"That's irrelevant - in any conflict one side will always have better weapons or greater numbers."

It's not irrelevant to the thousands of injured and dead Palestinian civilians.

And you mean that one side if they were civilised can use those modern weapons and their overwhelming force to minimise civilian casualties? Oh, wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"Well you won't see this on the BBC."

That's because where it says "Palestinian sources said " it actually means "The Israeli paid propaganda department said".

See http://thehigherlearning.com/2014/07/11/israels-government-is-paying-college-students-to-spread-pro-israel-propaganda-on-social-media/

"It never ceases to amaze me how many rabid apologists surface when these psychopaths and their comrades do their thing"

Yes - we have been tolerating this terrorist state for far too long now. Sanctions against Israel's long ongoing war crimes, apartheid and genocide are called for.

[Jagged]

Re: Western morality

"Well you won't see this on the BBC.

http://www.worldtribune.com/2014/07/31/sources-hamas-quickly-puts-dissent-gaza-kills-palestinian-protesters/"

Of course not, the BBC is a generally well respected new organisation that requires some degree of confirmation or corroboration for its news stories. The "World Tribune" looks very flashy but its not a newspaper and is little more than a rumour blog.

[Jim 59]

Re: Western morality

ISIS has no chance of making it anywhere, but they will probably keep murdering civilians and making videos. Sooner or later, they will bump into a real army, with a real air force and a real navy standing by. At that point, the video chap will realize that perhaps he should have stayed at his job in Slough (or wherever). The ensuing slaughters (of ISIS but also of many innocent bystanders) will be so severe that, 10 years from now, people will be arguing that it was all too much and how we should have not killed so many people just because of a few beheadings.

[Mark 85]

Re: Western morality

A few beheadings? Have you been not seeing the reports on various ethnic and religious populations being rounded up, shot, buried alive, etc.????

I sure that those involved back in the late '40s' with setting up Israel and then when the Palestinians were offered full citizenship, those in power told the Palestinians "not to worry, we've got you covered and will take care of you better than Israel" had no idea where this would lead. For my money, those in the oil countries had best wake up and realize what their late leaders have wrought by setting things up. Read some history about the region. The treachery and backroom deals are appalling in light of what's happening. Including certain countries setting up Jihadic schools to teach the very things the ISIS is running amok with. I'm afraid that the genie is out of the bottle and has opened Pandora's box and there may not be any way to turn things back.

Yeah.. I'm ranting, but do go read the history of what really transpired and why things in the middle-east are the way they are. Those in Gaza and in Iraq/Syria/Lebanon and even Israel are just the pawns of some serious double dealing by certain oil producing countries and their royal families.

[NogginTheNog]

Re: Western morality

You're making the fundamental mistake to believe this latest bloodshed, along with all the other 'wars' in the name of religion, are anything other than evil people trying to do down others because they've decided they're "different".

Sadly it's too ingrained in the human nature for me to think things might change significantly any time soon.

[stu 4]

Re: Western morality

'Hamas' do not fire missiles.

How can they, when the government of Palestine is not allowed an army ?

So what you have on one side, is a group of nutters, backed into a corner like a dog - don't be expected if it bites.

But they are not 'Hamas'. they are not the government of Palestine carrying out the wishing of the population. They are a bunch of nutters.

On the other side, we have a GOVERNMENT sanctioned army, killing civilians.

The equivalent would be Britain sending airstrikes on Dublin because the IRA bombed Manchester. It would be utterly moronic, immoral and pathetic.

And it's what Israel does every time. That, sir, is the difference.

[Arnold Lieberman]

Re: Western morality

This is so mad, I have to answer line by line...

"'Hamas' do not fire missiles."

They would beg to differ! Have you seen the videos or do you only watch the BBC?

"How can they, when the government of Palestine is not allowed an army ?"

ISIS is doing pretty well on the weapons front without being an "army" in the formal sense.

"So what you have on one side, is a group of nutters, backed into a corner like a dog - don't be expected if it bites."

Yes, nutters. For once you are correct. Elected nutters. Just like Hitler, elected by popular vote. And ever since then they've done exactly as Hitler did and removed any opposition within their electorate.

"But they are not 'Hamas'. they are not the government of Palestine carrying out the wishing of the population. They are a bunch of nutters."

Hamas IS the governing party. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4650788.stm

"On the other side, we have a GOVERNMENT sanctioned army, killing civilians."

Please name one war where no civilian was killed.

Apologies if this causes a bout of cognitive dissonance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM0fTss0UX4

"The equivalent would be Britain sending airstrikes on Dublin because the IRA bombed Manchester. It would be utterly moronic, immoral and pathetic."

So what should Britain do in that situation, oh enlightened one?

"And it's what Israel does every time. That, sir, is the difference."

Go on then, what's the alternative, assuming a government's first priority s the protection of its citizens.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

An Iraeli fuckwit provides the Godwin moment.

You couldn't make it up.

'So what should Britain do in that situation, oh enlightened one?'

we WERE in that situation you arehole.

clue: we didn't bomb dublin.

As for the rest, you seem to have been unable to follow some pretty basic points. if palestinian people = hamas = terrorists to you, Then you are doing exactly what was done to you.

Keep it up, and I'm sure you'll soon have the whole of america behind your Juden Rous.. oh sorry... Hamas Rous campaign.

Zionism is a disease that should be eliminated. Israel is the concrete result of it, and must go. end of.

If we had proper UN that wasn't a puppet of the USA that might happen.

[Triggerfish]

Re: Western morality

Actually Hitler was not elected by popular vote, he lost the election but a lot of politicking and then another dodgy election consolidated his power.

Follow that with some nice propaganda and a populace that was cowed into not saying to much against the Nazis and you really had a dictatorship.

Frankly the situation is screwed because you have to many hawks in power on both sides, there's some over there that seem to hate so much that there is never going to be peace unless they lose power on both sides.

Problem is it would have to be simultaneous, if its not then one sides hawks are going to end up causing the political weakening of the other sides doves who would be seen as weak when facing the other countries aggressive pursuit of their agendas.

They're both feeding off each other.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

The mixed blessing of the Internet means that the media can tell what their viewers/readers want to hear about, judging by the page-view stats on their various stories. If war news isn't all that popular, then the question is : do they have some kind of duty to report absolutely everything that happens, or just the stuff that sells?

Sorry, but I just ignore the miserable news on the whole. There's nothing I can do about it, I feel powerless seeing it, it's better for my mental health if I just focus on Happy Things instead. Sad, but that's the way it is. So if a bunch of grown adults halfway around the world can't get on without murdering each other, forgive me for tuning out.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"Sorry, but I just ignore the miserable news on the whole. There's nothing I can do about it, I feel powerless seeing it, it's better for my mental health if I just focus on Happy Things instead".

When you were at school, were you ever asked why the great majority of German citizens did nothing to stop the Holocaust? You have just provided the answer.

[Bernard M. Orwell]

Re: Western morality

There is no greater evil than wilful ignorance.

[smartypants]

Re: Western morality

One question you never hear asked, when it comes to the recent Gaza tragedy, is:

"Why did Hamas start fire missiles at Israel again?"

Did they think that, unlike all the other times, Israel wouldn't retaliate with a bloody response?

(Hardly likely)

Did they think that by killing a handful of random Israelis, they could finally snuff out their mortal enemies?

(Hardly likely)

Or did they hope that, like all the other times, Israel would retaliate as they always do, because they thought it would benefit their cause in some way.

(The very sad, most reasonable explanation).

Which leads you to the conclusion that it is particularly miserable to be a Gazan, when the people in power consider your death and impoverishment part of their weaponry in a political war.

I predict the dust will settle. Time will pass. Then the nutters in charge will do it all again, with much gnashing and wailing all round (and guaranteed misery for all in Gaza - those that survive the next retaliation).

The alternative would be to NOT fire any more missiles, and aim to reach agreement with an unliked but powerful neighbour. This is clearly too much to ask for islamists. They'd rather keep their people in poverty, and put them in serious danger of being killed by the next incursion.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality @smartypants

Unfortunately when you need to draw attention your plight you don't always have many options.

[Arnold Lieberman]

Re: Western morality @Chris W

'cos no-one has heard of Gaza.

The IRA gave up blowing up bits of the UK - look where that got them!

The ANC gave up their armed struggle - look where that got them!

Even ETA eventually put down arms - look where that got them!

Your point?

It's the senseless waste of life caused by the recklessness of Hamas and their ilk that is so depressing. If they had wanted to protect their civilian population they would have a) not chosen civilian areas to fire rockets from, b) spent some of the billions of aid money they have received building bomb shelters. But that doesn't generate suitable PR that gullible idiots and racists in the West lap up.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality @Chris W

Arnold, if the Palestinians or Hezbollah in Lebanon give up then the Israeli government will just green light more settlements on the West Bank, more ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem and carry on treating the populace of the Palestinian territories as a source of cheap labour. The wonderful Israeli PM and his cohorts have made it clear that they are not interested in a peace settlement, and will continue stalling as long as the US doles out yet more money to prop up their military.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality @Chris W

Arnold, as stu and others have pointed out the response to those attacks was not for the UK to bomb Dublin nor for Spain to bomb the Basque region. In addition neither did they destroy the homes of relatives of alleged terrorists. As for one side will always be more powerful, with power comes responsibility, somethig the Israelis should have learnt from history but now the boot is on the other foot they act like the bullies they once succumbed to and are now no better than safe in the knowledge that they also have a powerful protector behind them.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"The alternative would be to NOT fire any more missiles, and aim to reach agreement with an unliked but powerful neighbour".

How plausible that sounds! Of course, it would involve:

1. Accepting that the state of Israel is legitimate, and is entitled to go on enjoying the land and resources it stole from the original inhabitants 66 years ago. Also that it cannot be punished for all the people it killed in doing so.

2. Giving the rest of the world, led by the UN, permission to go back to sleep and utterly forget the existence of such people as Palestinians.

3. Allowing Israel to continue undisturbed with its programme of extending settlements further and further into what half-decent land the Palestinians have so far been allowed to keep, and gradually tightening the noose around the Gaza Strip. Since 1870, Zionists have always been absolutely clear that they can never feel safe except in a country that contains Jews and only Jews. Now how do you think that is to be accomplished?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2014/08/the-inconvenient-wog-settlement-in-a-land-devoid-of-people-origin.html

[Arnold Lieberman]

Re: Western morality

That mad rambling is proof of what exactly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"That mad rambling is proof of what exactly?"

What "mad rambling", Arnold? On this forum it's customary to indicate whose comment you are answering, either by quoting some of the text to which your comment is a reply, or by using a header such as "@RatFink" or "@AC/time/date".

As things have shaken out, it looks as if your comment refers to the Haaretz article citing Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela in support of the Palestinians. Was that your intention? And if so, what exact aspects of the archbishop's open letter, or Mr Mandela's remarks, do you object to?

[Arnold Lieberman]

Re: Western morality

@Tom Welsh

Apologies, I meant this one: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2014/08/the-inconvenient-wog-settlement-in-a-land-devoid-of-people-origin.html

"Submit" pressed just a bit too late.

At least we can have a semi-reasoned debate, rather than sink to the level of the "Juden Raus" AC fruitcake above. :)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/1.610687?v=66691173328C172D77ED27A198582751

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

Maybe those downvoters who disagree so strongly with Archbishop Tutu and Nelson Mandela would care to identify themselves, and explain what exactly it is that they disagree with?

Assuming, of course, that they even troubled to follow the link and read the Haaretz article.

[P. Lee]

Re: Western morality

> enjoying the land and resources it stole from the original inhabitants 66 years ago

Here's a question: how far back do you go? 66 years? That certainly doesn't take you back to the "original inhabitants." 2000 years? 3500 years? Should we still be fighting the Germans because the Angles and the Saxons stole land from the true Britons? Do we hunt down a long lost relative of the Czar and put him back on the Russian throne? The people fighting are not the ones who either lost or won a fight 66 years ago.

At some point you have to admit what the status quo is. Then you have to decide whether your morality allows or demands that you kill people to change the status quo. As long as there are people happy to kill others for gain there will be no peace. That was the case with the Bablylonian seige of Jerusalem (597BC) and it was the case with the invasion of Iraq by the US.

Without wishing to be too judgemental, I'm not sure what the Palestinians are fighting for. Their best case scenario is that all the Jews leave. Whereupon they would take control of scorched earth and the US is certainly not going to continue to pour money in where there is no Jewish interest. All that wealth will just leave and they will be left with just more of what they already have in Gaza. I suspect the temple of the dome would be blown sky-high as a parting gift, maybe even nuked, to become lethal to anyone who wants to take possession. Quite frankly, winning is never going to happen for them. History shows the Palestinians fighting and losing. At some point, you really need to consider walking away. When my grandfather died, the government took 97% of the land he owned. I'm certainly not going to kill or risk being killed to get it back.

There comes a point when you can't put wrongs right because there is no-one left in the right. It does no good to harp on about past wrongs, because they will never be fixed. You can either forgive and move on or you can continue to kill and be killed. In moving on, the worst case is that Palestinians accept the Israeli ethnic cleansing as reality and move as refugees elsewhere. Of course that doesn't make Israel's actions right but it does give those who do it the chance to start fresh and perhaps they or their children will prosper. No-one prospers living in a war zone, so the question is how much longer their pride will prevent them from taking the kick in the teeth that they've been dealt, turning away from the fight and progressing elsewhere.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

'Here's a question: how far back do you go? 66 years? That certainly doesn't take you back to the "original inhabitants"'.

Sorry, P. Lee, that doesn't hold up. I specifically stated that I was going back 66 years - to the Jewish seizure of Palestine in 1948, which involved taking by force land on which Palestinian people had houses and farms, on which they had been living for hundreds of years. Killing many of those who resisted. Shooting and blowing up lots of British armed forces personnel, civilians, and administrators - something the British government seems to have completely forgotten.

And I beg to differ: the "original inhabitants" I meant were precisely those who were thrown violently off their farms and out of their houses, and killed if they tried to resist.

You may argue that people have been violently expropriating land and killing anyone who resisted since the beginning of time, and you would be correct. One might point to the Norman Conquest of England as a classic example. The difference in this specific case, however, is that it occurred three years AFTER the end of WW2, which is always pointed to as the start of a new (UN) era in which it is absolutely NOT acceptable to do such things. Not to put too fine a point on it, the founders of Israel did to the Palestinians exactly what the Nazis did to other peoples whose land they wanted - just three years after the final defeat of the Nazis and the enshrining of international principles that told us such behaviour is utterly unacceptable. No student of human behaviour should be too surprised that the victims of the Nazis responded by adopting very similar behaviour themselves; but it's not right and it's not just.

[Jess--]

Re: Western morality

I always say the media should stop referring to a ceasefire and just call it reloading

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Western morality

"The alternative would be to NOT fire any more missiles, and aim to reach agreement with an unliked but powerful neighbour. This is clearly too much to ask for islamists. They'd rather keep their people in poverty, and put them in serious danger of being killed by the next incursion."

With the caveat that I'm not a Hamas supporter or apologist, it appears they've got some very dodgy ways of dealing with dissent. The problem with doing nothing and negotiating is that the more time passes the more the options for a settlement narrow. Most Palestinians support the "two state" solution but as time passes more and more Israeli settlements are put in place on disputed land; splitting Gaza and the West Bank and making negotiated, practical borders more and more difficult to achieve.You could almost think this was the plan.

[LucreLout]

Re: Western morality

@stu 4

Maybe it gets less coverage because the journalist wasn't hiding in a school or hospital while firing rockets at his murderers?

Lets face it, its certainly not beyond the bounds of reason for Hamas and others to be killing people they don't like and stuffing the bodies in previously struck buildings. Great way to hide yet another 'honour' killing while generating some adverse PR for your enemy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Liveleak

Just waiting for Liveleak to publish the video.

[AbelSoul]

Re: Liveleak

Just waiting for Liveleak to publish the video.

Waiting?

From the article:

However, the footage is still available for viewing on LiveLeak, where it has been viewed more than 5,000 times.

[RegGuy1]

Re: Liveleak

I think that was the point of his post...

[MiguelC]

What about Google's legalese?

They “terminate any account registered by a member of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization and used in an official capacity to further its interests."

So HOME Terrorist Organizations are in the clear? Or if they use YouTube unofficially and/or just for fun – as opposed to furthering their interests -, it’s also OK?

Couldn't Google just say that it would ban accounts used by terrorist organizations, whomever they were and whatever they’d be used to? (yes, I know, WHO defines that some organization is or is not terrorist, but for that, Google must comply with US of A's legislation)

Legalese is way too convoluted...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What about Google's legalese?

Legalese is way too convoluted... Maybes, but I wouldn't want to piss off white supremacist red necked NRA backed militias by appearing to take a stand against so called patriotic Americans either.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What about Google's legalese?

>So HOME Terrorist Organizations are in the clear?

Of course they are or they'd have to block all those whacky gun-toting redneck anti-government survivalist preppers and teenagers (another terrorist group) who together probably account for the majority of their audience.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What about Google's legalese?

Have you seen Al Qaeda's YouTube page?

Some damn funny cat videos on there

[Nigel Brown]

Nice 180 degree turn from Facebook

They used to leave these things up, trot out some corporate guff about right to know, public awareness etc. Perhaps now they are starting to listen to their outraged products they'll start to respond about requests to take down the child and animal abuse pages, videos, etc.

[Anonymous Coward]

Over to you NSA/GCHQ/CIA/MI6

THIS is the sort of thing I want our intelligence agencies to pour their vast $bn's/£bn's into finding out who did this instead of watching my pr0n habits.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Over to you NSA/GCHQ/CIA/MI6

There are some of us who hold the albeit possibly quaint theory that the intelligence agencies do in fact do this to a larger extent.

[kmac499]

My sympathies go out to the individuals and families of the 'non combantant casualties' whether they are targeted or collateral. Never forgetting the immediate agony and terror endured in violent deaths;

It doesn't make any difference which 'cause' is responsible, all such deaths are pointless and often ultimately self defeating for their 'cause'.

[Shaha Alam]

I'm finding it hard to distinguish the good guys from the bad guys...

...on the basis of who kills whom and for what reason.

seems like everyone is killing anyone for no reason.

[Dan Paul]

This is the same as the blitz!

There is no morality in war, innocent people get killed. If this were England during WWII, and those were V2's instead of Hamas rockets, the whole lot of you would be praying for the extinction of the enemy instead of supporting them. Germany deliberately targeted civilians during the war.

Hamas attacked Israel first, unprovoked; Israel responded in kind albeit with better weapons.

It's NOT Israels fault that Hamas uses innocent Palestinians as human shields and launches it's rockets from inside so called safe areas (That makes them unsafe for the thick among us).

Hamas controls everything within the borders of Gaza including UNWRA. That makes them responsible for putting people in harms way. If they chose a different area to launch from, they wouldn't have as good a propaganda opportunity.

[Gene Cash]

Local boy

It seems Steven Joel Sotloff is from Orlando and was a reporter for the local university paper. It's a really small world out there.

http://www.centralfloridafuture.com/story/news/2014/08/19/apparent-ucf-graduate-steven-sotloff-shown-hostage-in-isis-video/14315617/

I hate religionists of any style... Christian, Jewish, Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist, or any other. I've been atheist ever since growing up in a very anti-intellectual Lutheran high school. This is the sort of trouble they cause.

[Anonymous Coward]

My worry is that if these "British" ISIS guys ever get caught, they'll waive their British passports around and then chew up millions with Human Rights litigation.

[Anonymous Coward]

I could be wrong ..

but didn't La May pass a law enabling her to remove British citizenship ?

[Bernard M. Orwell]

We go to war for many reasons....

...but usually for unjust ones.

"..a convert to Islam who describes himself as "anti-democracy, loyal to the Caliphate, harsh on kuffar".

In other words, a complete idiot, poorly educated, gullible and misled. A worshipper of sky-fairy #117, a murderer, unrepentant for his crimes and willing to commit more unless his personal demands are met.

You want an enemy? Here it is. A war worth fighting or we will all be consumed by its mad-dog philosophy.

Israel? Hamas? More sky-faires. Just as bad. We need to stop respecting religion and treat it like the wasting sickness it has clearly become.

It needs to be excised and cured.

[Brewster's Angle Grinder]

To inject some much needed levity into this thread...

"anti-democracy, loyal to the Caliphate, harsh on kuffar".

That's exactly how my dominatrix advertises herself, too.

Thanks for my coat; I have an appointment and I will be sore whether or not I miss it.

[Anonymous Coward]

What about computer virus?

This sounds like a good topic for dodgy sites to spread malware

[Tom 13]

I'm of two conflicting minds on this topic.

1. It's nice that some sites are finally showing some respect for civilized values.

2. The video needs to be more widely distributed so the couch potatoes are finally forced to confront the murderous reality of the enemies of civilization.

The only thing they agree on is that it should not be a recruiting tool for ISIS/ISIL.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

No comments on FB?

I mean do you realize how much information they can collect from FB on these guys?

Oh if I were the CIA or NSA, I could have a lot of fun...

Its a Data Scientist's wet dream.

[Fihart]

ISIS -- a Manson gang for our times.

The Woodstock ethic worked when it was middle class kids dropping acid and dressing like dropouts. Once deluded people like Charlie picked up on it things got nasty.

In Europe there's been a fairly harmless fad for teenage Muslim girls to adopt headscarves, but when cretins like the one in the video pick up on Islamist ideas things inevitably turn deadly.

[Mark 85]

Here's what I see is the real problem.

Power and those who are "civilized". On the one hand, the civilized believe that everyone holds the same values as themselves and that discussion will cure everything. On the other, the power mongers. Not the industry types but the those who believe in power at all costs. They've convinced some uneducated, poor guys that killing the "non-believers" is a good thing. It gets them points for heaven. And as an added bonus, if they die doing this, they get heaven and virgins, etc.

You'll never see a leader of one of these movements, including anyone high up, stepping up to go to battle or make a self-sacrifice. They convince others to do it for them. They will engage in the most barbaric of practices and anyone viewed weaker is a target. Anyone viewed stronger is a threat to them.

The reality is that the only way to beat a barbarian is to be a bigger barbarian than they are, unfortunately. But until every one in world is a civilized as the commentards here, expect more atrocities.. middle-east, Africa, even places like the Ukraine.

Downvote me away, but I also suggest that you look at the history of whatever country you live in and even if you have to go back X hundred years, you'll find that barbarian mentality and the power mentality was there. Just because you/I are civilized now, doesn't mean our forebearers were. It's just that rest of world hasn't caught up yet.

[Gerardo McFitzpatrick-O'Toole]

Don't worry;

It's not terrorism if you're only doing it to prove that you don't like it.

[Shannon Jacobs]

Abuse of the First Amendment

If you're so proud of your actions, why the mask?

In general I am quite opposed to censorship, but I just want to go on record (since the topic has apparently not been addressed clearly) that this is clearly on the other side of the bright line, and the censorship is fully justified. This was a deliberate crime performed for the sake of creating the video and with the deliberate intention of propagating the video to threaten other innocent people.

The double irony is that the victim had dedicated his life to the First Amendment. The vicious murderer in the mask would never understand why.

P.S. Other countries have other tags for the freedom of speech, but I'm just framing it from the American perspective because it was also the victim's.

[Neil Hoskins]

It's Ali G, innit?

To my outside-the-M25 ears he sounds like Ali G. "It's 'cos I'm black, innit?"

[SineWave242]

Closing down their accounts and making sure people don't see it will not make it go away.