Brutal, fatal cleaver assault in London called a terrorist attack

  • Thread starter Thread starter News Feed
  • Start date Start date
N

News Feed

Guest
They first hit the man, thought to be a British soldier, with a car in broad daylight. Then the two attackers hacked him to death and dumped his body in the middle of a southeastern London road.

qvmhkYyVQZQ


Continue reading...
 
Now this is is curious; here's another version of the same clip but the chap doesn't appear to have any blood on his hands.


The question is, which one has been doctored?
 
I don't know about you, but I would rather go by a gun shot over a cleaver assault :confused:
 
Robert said:
Now this is is curious; here's another version of the same clip but the chap doesn't appear to have any blood on his hands.


The question is, which one has been doctored?
Click to expand...
I notice that the first video you posted is VERY low res and looking at it fullscreen it has a great deal of artifacting and (no pun intended) lots of color bleeding.

the 2nd video is higher res, little (by comparison) bleeding....however, without looking at the original file I can't say for sure.

I doubt there's anything sinister going on, however. at least not at this point
 
Robert said:
The news presenter referring to this as "Baghdad-style violence" is a touch ridiculous, given what happened there just the day before:
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's a little rich... but wars do have a tendency of coming home.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Yeah, that's a little rich...
Click to expand...
No it's not. I'd say beheadings in the street are more Baghdad style than London style. Until now I guess. And Londoners should be used to bombs by now.
 
ok, so I looked though a whole bunch (dozen at least) examples of this video on youtube and most of them are low res. I picked one that was slightly high res and grabbed it. Then I picked out frames and screen-captured them. Note that we can immediately see that this is NOT directly from the camera because the logo on the upper left has been blurred out. Looking at his right hand there's two fingars which are not "reddish".

vlcsnap-2013-05-23-13h03m30s69.png



rightHand.png
 
no red:


vlcsnap-2013-05-23-13h08m24s111.png

red:

vlcsnap-2013-05-23-13h08m51s140.png




yes, I think there is something strange going on here....still would need to see the original footage however


I'd also like to point out that the clip that Robert posted (with no red hands at all) has also been altered because the women's face is covered with that white dot. At least that one is clearer.

let me know if you want me to make screen captures of the hi res vid
 
Red vs no-red. You might wanna look at the whole picture. The greens look different too. The color saturation is totally different on the full frame. You could go nuts trying to analyze this, but I'd bet some good money at the end of your little investigation you'll eventually learn that the cause is due to transcoding artifacts and other peculiarities of the codecs used and the user settings. I hope that we all know that re-encoding a lossy video or picture loses more info, right? Remember, low resolution means low bit rate and low bit rate means low information. You're looking at something that's intentionally inaccurate to preserve bandwidth.
 
Have to say the difference to me could easily be explained by the increased compression. Artifacts and colour bleeding become progressively harder to deal with the more you do it. The filters that work the best for light scenes can make dark ones a complete mess and vice versa. This becomes even more apparent when you stop doing multi pass encoding, which I'd doubt most tube type sites can justify the cost of in terms of time.

Transcoding is fun!

Sent from my ARCHOS 80G9 using Tapatalk HD
 
There was a suggestion that the EDF were going to march on Woolwich in protest, but I don't know if that will happen.

At least I hope it doesn't.

I'd like to say that many of the comments I've seen elsewhere about this have been reasoned and appropriate. That would be a lie. Frankly I saw significantly less bigotry on display with the July 7th attacks then with this.

Also more " no true Scotsmen" then there are Scotsmen, which was sad.

Sent from my ARCHOS 80G9 using Tapatalk HD
 
Glaucus said:
Red vs no-red. You might wanna look at the whole picture. The greens look different too. The color saturation is totally different on the full frame. You could go nuts trying to analyze this, but I'd bet some good money at the end of your little investigation you'll eventually learn that the cause is due to transcoding artifacts and other peculiarities of the codecs used and the user settings. I hope that we all know that re-encoding a lossy video or picture loses more info, right? Remember, low resolution means low bit rate and low bit rate means low information. You're looking at something that's intentionally inaccurate to preserve bandwidth.
Click to expand...
well, I already pointed this out in one of my 1st posts on this issue. I just had a few spare moments and figured I'd put on my Visual Effects Pro hat and see what I could find if anything.

My already stated conclusion is that I need to see the original footage...and none of that exists on line at all

hey, I had fun...so there :D
 
Glaucus said:
Here's the most interesting article I read about this incident so far...

The Woman Who Stood Up to the Woolwich Butchers

Oh, and she claims he had "blood all over him".
Click to expand...
yeah, what she did makes perfect sense. It's in the same tradition of how my grandmother behaved.

I can see myself walking up to such people and calmly pointing out that their behavior is an embarrassment their families. and how would they think their mother would feel about it
 
Glaucus said:
Here's the most interesting article I read about this incident so far...

The Woman Who Stood Up to the Woolwich Butchers

Oh, and she claims he had "blood all over him".
Click to expand...
That is a very interesting story. I notice how they keep using the word "butcher" a lot. I'm sure that's a very neutral and journalistic word. I also like how they imply that killing a soldier when you can overpower him (instead of having a fair fight) is somehow very bin Laden (also a nice neutral phrase) and not standard military doctrine. If you have the luxury of discretion you only attack when you know you will win. Anything else is considered stupid.

The first lesson in the fight against such criminals is not to show that you are frightened: not to let them shut down society;
Click to expand...
Not to let the authorities put your city under a marshal law lock down - not to let your politicians pass laws that strip you of your rights ... etc.

They were, in their way, punctilious about killing a soldier, however cowardly the attack, hitting him with a car, then laying into him with their blades. The kinds of things they told Loyau-Kennett and others on the scene suggest they saw themselves as warriors killing another warrior, and sparing the innocents. One of the alleged killers even apologized for the fact that women in the neighborhood had to see the carnage on the street.
Click to expand...
Or with the benefit of better PR, it was a surgical strike against a military target that tried to minimize collateral damage. Obviously knocking a man down with a car and then setting about him with blades while he is unarmed and incapacitated is not the epitome of courage, but nor is blowing up an unarmed man and his son in a car by remote control from thousands of miles away.

I'm not supporting what these men did, I think it was horrible and wrong, but it is not different in principle from what other men do in the name of the Queen or their country. I applaud the woman who stopped to hold them with her tongue, but I wondered how long she would have lasted if she had tried to do the same to Tony Blair or George Bush. Would we even know what foreign country she was being tortured in?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top