http://66.102.11.104/search?q=cache:...xecution&hl=en
Is worth a read, certainly raises some interesting questions.
And also this:
http://www.refuse-resist.com/modules...ticle&sid=2610
which catalogues all the inconsistencies in the video.
And @TL, i can't remember which thread you complain about double standards and how the Arabic world never condemns things like this but I'm afraid this is not the case:
In Lebanon, the Hezbollah backed TV station, al-Manar, ran a statement condemning the killing as shameful and ignoble. (remembering that Hezbollah are semi-terrorists themselves).
None of the major satellite and national channels showed the moment of the beheading - saying that the story was strong enough without those images and it would have been indecent to show them.
The editorial in the United Arab Emirates paper, al-Ittihad, said the killers had committed a heinous crime and could not be called Muslims.
The well-regarded Lebanese newspaper, al-Safir, said the beheading "was not an eye for an eye. It was a scene for a scene." The paper continued: "Competition has begun between the disgusting pictures from Abu Ghraib prison and the one of Nick Berg's slaughter - just like advertisements marketing various products."
Kuwait's al-Ra'y al-Am said those who carried out the beheading were harming their own county, while another Kuwaiti newspaper, al-Qabas, warned that the crimes committed by terrorist organisations in Iraq would be exported to neighbouring countries.
It is true that the story was not widely reported in all media. But that, as we saw, was also the case in the United States throughout the war (eg prisoner abuse etc) However, there is no mention of any newspaper or tv station that endorses it, or even plays it down.
The fact that it is not reported that much is in part because these are totalitarian societies, and the press faces much harsher restrictions, and
not because people think it is not bad.