WebProNews

Tag: james foley

  • Foley Execution Video: Forensics Experts Believe Beheading Was Staged

    The horrific footage of the beheading of American journalist James Foley is being analyzed by federal investigators, who have identified the social media account that originally posted the video. The person who posted the video is part of a group of Islamic extremists that are close to the leadership of the Islamic State group, formerly known as ISIS.

    Fox News reported that a counterterrorism source revealed that the information suggests that top Islamic State leaders such as Abu Omar al Baghdadi gave their blessing to the operation to kill Foley.

    Foley was kidnapped in 2012 while he was reporting on the uprising that took place in Syria. His captors reportedly demanded $132.5 million from his parents and concessions from Washington, but Islamic State posted the video online last week to show his execution.

    Meanwhile, the UK Times reported that forensics experts have suggested that the Foley execution video was staged to look like the journalist was killed during filming. The experts said that it was likely that Foley was executed off-camera.

    “After enhancements, the knife can be seen to be drawn across the upper neck at least six times, with no blood evidence to the point the picture fades to black,” said a forensic analyst to the British newspaper. He also cited blips in Foley’s speech that suggested that the journalist may have had to repeat a line.

    The British forensics company, however, clarified that were not disputing the fact that an execution of Foley had happened at some point.

    Foley’s parents, Diane and John Foley, believe that their son’s death poses a challenge to people to raise awareness on what is happening in the Middle East. “So many people are suffering in the Middle East right now, and there are many hostages being held captive, so this is a mass for all of those who are hoping for peace, and also in Jim’s memory,” said Diane at a healing mass held for Foley.

  • James Foley’s Siblings: More Should Have Been Done

    James Foley’s brother, Michael, and his sister, Katie, are speaking out on the beheading of their brother and what the US could have done differently. They are hoping that their loss could prompt changes in policy that could help those that are still in ISIS (also known as ISIL) custody.

    The siblings spoke with Katie Couric about the incident and how it has affected their lives. They also talked about how the US should deal with terrorists.

    Their brother, James Foley, was beheaded in an incident that took place this past week and was seen in a video that shocked the world. Foley, 40, was one of at least three Americans that were kidnapped and held by ISIS terrorists. They sent a letter to Foley’s family earlier in August saying that he would be killed unless they were paid $100 million dollars.

    However, since the US doesn’t negotiate with terrorists, he was killed in a cruel and barbaric manner.


    Watch more news videos | Latest from the US

    They are now threatening to hand down the same fate to Foley’s fellow journalist and captive, Steven Sotloff. Their anger is partly due to US air attacks on ISIS forces in Iraq.

    James Foley’s siblings are suggesting that the policy of non-negotiation be changed to save the lives of the others. Some European countries have paid to have captives freed, but not the US.

    “I really, really hope that in some way Jim’s death pushes us to take another look at our approach, our policy, to terrorists and hostage negotiations and rethink that,” Michael Foley, 38, said. “Because if the United States is doing it one way and Europe is doing it another way, by definition it won’t work.”

    “The U.S. could have done more on behalf of the western and American hostages over there and still… you know, dealt with the broader, worldwide issues. Other nations have done that. And that’s been a source of frustration for me.”

    He continued, “Take the money aside, there’s more that could have been done directly on Jim’s behalf and I really hope that with respect to Steven, they take some action quickly.”

    Michael Foley suggested that there could be a trade negotiation or another means by which money wouldn’t even have to change hands. Could this kind of thing work? It seemed to with the controversial Bowe Bergdahl trade earlier this year, but some say we are still waiting to see the consequences of that action.

    “There is things that can be done. We are sitting on prisoners for example in Guantanamo. It doesn’t have to be financial. There’s ways to do it… I just feel strongly that more can be done, moving forward,” Michael Foley said.

    Will the pleas of James Foley’s siblings have any weight in pushing for changes in our terrorist negotiation policy? Only time will tell.

  • LiveLeak Bans Future ISIS Videos from the Typically ‘Anything Goes’ Site

    As LiveLeak is quick to point out, it has “never hosted every graphic murder or beheading uploaded to our site.” This is true. You can’t find everything on LiveLeak, but in terms of high-profile, popular tube sites, LiveLeak is the closest thing to ‘anything goes’ as you’re going to find. When YouTube takes it down, head to LiveLeak – that’s something that anyone even remotely familiar with the internet knows.

    That’s why it will come as a shock to many that LiveLeak has decided not to host any future beheading videos from ISIS, should they arise. This decision comes on the heels of the gruesome murder of American photojournalist James Foley, and the promise by the extremist group that there would be more beheadings in the near future.

    “We will not be showing further beheadings carried out by IS. We’ve shown the world the true horror of this form of execution more than once in the past and we cannot find any compelling reason to even be thought of as promoting the actions of this group. We know they do not find support here on LL and that condemnation is virtually universal but there is no reason at all to show more beheadings. Nothing changes about them, they’re still relentlessly grim and no deeper insight will be offered by descending into some grotesque “beheading of the week” scenario,” said LiveLeak in a statement.

    It’s important to note that the Foley video is still available on LiveLeak. The site says that the past couple of days have been “a fairly intense affair…given the sheer volume of traffic we’ve dealt with from people looking for the James Foley beheading video.”

    This ban only affects future ISIS videos.

    LiveLeak makes a point to assuage what they know will be an upset user base, saying:

    “This does not mean we won’t continue to show graphic media should we deem it reasonable to do so, we will continue despite the regular condemnation, in other words for the most part nothing is going to change. We will not be making publicity driven moves to ban people for trying to upload the media or posting screenshots to discuss it. We simply will not host further beheadings from IS. Some of you will not be happy about this and we are still fully supportive of your right to view this media should you wish and many outlets will be only too happy to have you do so at their site. But our belief in your rights to view whatever you wish do not override our rights to not host it here on LL.”

    LiveLeak touches on an important point with that last statement. This is not a free speech issue. LiveLeak is a private company, who can make these types of decisions. It is well within its right to do so. Should they is a different question, and one that’s debatable.

    “Keep in mind, this is not us putting an end to all graphic media nor us saying no beheading will ever turn up on LL in the future. This is us saying we will not have regular beheadings from IS on the site if things go that way.”

    Let’s hope things don’t go that way.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Regarding James Foley, Should Twitter Decide What You See?

    Twitter is absolutely, one-hundred percent, within its right to remove whatever content they deem to be in violation of its rules and terms of service. Twitter can do this, and you’re not allowed to cry free speech! Twitter is not your government, and you are not guaranteed the right to freely express yourself on the social network. Twitter is a private company, and by using its services, you agree to play by its rules. As frustrating as this can be at time, this is a simple, and inarguable reality. Twitter can censor and remove whatever it wants.

    Can. Twitter can, and Twitter has. Should is an entirely different thing. Should is what we can debate.

    Should Twitter remove images and suspend accounts associated with spreading images and video of the horrific beheading of American journalist James Foley? I say no. Let’s discuss.

    Should you watch members of the radical group ISIS murder James Foley? I don’t know. I honestly don’t know the answer to that and am rather torn myself. On one hand, we have an obligation to educate ourselves about what’s happening in the world – the type of brutality that permeates. Shying away from that brutality, at its most gut-wrenching expression, isn’t going to make the problem go away. James Foley died so that you could see. Don’t we owe it to him? To me, this argument resonates.

    On the flip side – why? Why put yourself through something that’s beyond upsetting? I remember watching Daniel Pearl beheaded by Al-Qaeda in 2002 – do you? That, and I’m only saying this because I honestly can’t think of more apt words to describe it, was severely fucked up.

    What does it change? What’s the point? Isn’t that what ISIS wants? Don’t you think they want the world to watch this video, pore over the images, and collectively recoil in horror? Shouldn’t we simply shun this propaganda?

    Clearly, I’m conflicted.

    But Twitter shouldn’t be conflicted about this. Twitter, whose most important reason for existing is the unfiltered spread of real-time news and information, should let me and you decide what we see.

    – – – – – – – – – – –

    Early this morning, Twitter CEO Dick Costolo tweeted this:

    This came less than 12 hours after Twitter decided to enact a new policy concerning images of the deceased, as Twitter public policy’s Nu Wexler outlines here:

    Later, in a tweet to GigaOm’s Mathew Ingram, Wexler suggested that the reason for the site-wide search and destroy mission on any account posting images or videos of Foley’s execution had to do with a request from his family, per the new policy.

    It’s important to note that Twitter is not being that discerning in deciding which accounts to suspend – journalists, regular users, and accounts thought to be associated with ISIS were all shut down. Some have been reinstated, some haven’t.

    That new policy, enacted on Tuesday, allows the family of a deceased individual to petition Twitter to remove images “from when critical injury occurs to the moments before or after death.” The Foley video/images clearly satisfies this criteria.

    But Twitter also says that “when reviewing such media removal requests, Twitter considers public interest factors such as the newsworthiness of the content and may not be able to honor every request.”

    What could possibly be more newsworthy than these images?

    FYI, Twitter’s terms of service states that “users are allowed to post content, including potentially inflammatory content, provided they do not violate the Twitter Rules and Terms of Service.” Twitter’s rules do not outlaw violent images. Twitter bars “direct, specific threats of violence against others,” but not simply violent content.

    – – – – – – – – – – –

    There’s a movement on Twitter right now, under the hashtag #ISISmediablackout, in which people are pledging to share, link to, tweet about, or generally give any attention to ISIS’ clear attempts at propaganda. That’s a completely reasonable choice to make. Personally, I won’t be sharing the James Foley imagery.

    But this is just one side of a complicated issue. Twitter, like it or not, is many people’s go-to place for the news. It’s the fastest-growing disseminator of information in the world. People rely on Twitter.

    Is an image of James Foley moments before being beheaded the end all be all of new coverage? No. The story can be told without the image, and without the video. But it is newsworthy. As depraved as it is, it is a crucial element in an event that’s dominating global conversation. Twitter should let its users decide if it’s important enough to view.

    The should Twitter censor offensive content question isn’t new. One could ask the same question of Facebook or YouTube, both of whom do plenty of that.

    And we should ask that question of any corporation that has a huge influence on what information we see and how we see it. Should you watch James Foley’s execution? I don’t know. Do you want Twitter deciding for you? I don’t think so.

  • Twitter Is Suspending Users Who Post Execution Images

    In light of the apparent execution of American photojournalist James Foley, Twitter has bee hard at work removing accounts that have been spreading the alleged beheading imagery around the network.

    Foley, an freelance journalist, disappeared in Syria in November of 2012. Late Tuesday night, a video found its way online appearing to show Foley, 40, beheaded by militant group ISIS.

    Here’s what Twitter CEO Dick Costolo had to say:

    Twitter also announced that it would now remove images of the dead upon request from the family, as long as the images don’t provide some public interest or newsworthiness.

  • Twitter Now Removes Images of the Dead Upon Request

    In some circumstances, upon request of the family, Twitter will now delete images of the deceased.

    In order for Twitter to act on any specific imagery, a few qualifications must be met. Once an immediate family member of the deceased contacts Twitter with the request, the company will weigh whether or not the images have “public interest factors such as…newsworthiness” before making a decision.

    The types of images Twitter is trying to shed are graphic ones related to the actual deaths of individuals – this isn’t about removing all traces of a person’s image from the network.

    Twitter specifies by saying “Immediate family members and other authorized individuals may request the removal of images or video of deceased individuals, from when critical injury occurs to the moments before or after death…” [emphasis mine]

    Here’s the full statement, as tweeted out by Twitter’s Nu Wexler:

    This move comes just one week after Zelda Williams, Robin Williams’ daughter, was bullied off Twitter by, for lack of a better word, assholes who tweeted photoshopped images of her father. Twitter promised to work on its anti-abuse policies, specifically saying that would involve “improving support for family members of deceased users.”

    Twitter has also been hard at work suspending accounts that have been spreading graphic imagery of the beheading of American journalist James Foley, according to CEO Dick Costolo.

    Image via Rosaura Ochoa, Flickr Creative Commons