British SAS sniper kills ISIS flamethrower executioner with a crack shot to save 12 hostages

[NWCorona]

"The expert British special forces marksman was almost a mile away when he gunned down the feared ISIS executioner and three others as they were set to turn a flamethrower on the civilians who were accused of being spies.

The SAS sniper fired a single round from his high calibre .50 Barrett rifle at the fuel tank of the executioner's flamethrower, causing it to explode, incinerating him and three other ISIS members who were poised ready to film the killing of the civilians.

A source told the Daily Star Sunday that it was part of a rescue operation near Raqqa in Syria earlier this month.

The so-called ISIS executioner who was killed in the mission is said to have been on a US 'kill list' for months because of his brutal method of killing prisoners with his flamethrower, burning them alive.

The source told the newspaper:“The SAS team moved into an overwatch position above a village where they were told the execution was going to take place.

“Up to 12 civilians were going to be murdered – eight men and four women. They were suspected of being spies.

“The executioner gave some sort of rambling speech over a loud hailer then when he finished the SAS sniper opened fire.""

http://www.joe.ie/news/british-sas-sniper-kills-isis-flamethrower-executioner-with-a-crack-shot-moments-before-he-torched-12-hostages/559788

[patsimp]

1. Good

[AllTooEasy]

47. Jill Stein: "OMG, they should have read him his rights first!"

[Lunabell]

70. lol

I know, right? It was too nice of a death for such a heinous motherfucker.

[Tarc]

113. Nobody likes an antivaxxer Israeli hater like Stein either

She ain't a Dem, so this nutty Greenie gets every bit of flak that she deserves.

[AllTooEasy]

144. I hate Trump and McConnell too

Got a problem with that too?

[Tarc]

146. Well that's kinda too bad, ain't it?

[Tarc]

149. Perhaps you should stop sounding like one, then?

[Warren DeMontague]

119. Having dealt with the threads when OBL was killed and some here were going on about

how he was a "kindly little old man in his jammies, beloved by cats and the neighborhood children"


I disagree with you, here.

[Grey Lemercier]

124. Stein and all her delusional far left loon acolytes ARE de facto Trump supporters

They thoroughly deserve the ridicule, whether germane to the thread subject or not.

[Warren DeMontague]

140. She should drop out and endorse Hillary Clinton

then I'll back you up 100%, on this.

[AllTooEasy]

145. Not hating the KKK is ok. Got it

I hate the KKK, but I guess you don't. It depends on who you hate. BTW, I don't hate JK, but I do think she's batshit crazy regarding a few issues.

[snooper2]

153. No, it is okay to mock idiots

[Warren DeMontague]

127. I'm not particulary fond of Jill Stein, nor do I think the Greens are real helpful

But I'm not hating.

Criticism isn't hating, either. The criticism in the post you responded to, made a a somewhat sideways but arguably valid contextual point--

particularly in light of the current political season, where Jill Stein not only made a relevant policy declaration pertaining to Osama Bin Laden just a week or so ago, but she also is on the ballot in direct competition with our nominee.


She drops out of the race, then yeah, okay, don't "make fun" of her. As it is, though, as she's running against (and competing for votes against) our candidate, I think she's fair game.

[Warren DeMontague]

139. uh, yeah.

it's an election year, and she left herself open to it with her OBL comments.

[Warren DeMontague]

143. I'm not in charge of Hillary's campaign. If I was, I'd tell her to fully embrace pot legalization.

that might make some inroads with some Stein voters, too.

But I think it's you who doesn't get it, mon frere. She -Jill Stein- made a statement critical of the killing of OBL, as a policy point related to the Presidential campaign. So criticizing her on this is a valid point, and at least somewhat contextually relevant in the context of this discussion.

Don't want people here to criticize Jill Stein? Tell her to drop out and endorse Hillary Clinton.

[vdogg]

125. Lmao

It's sad because I could totally see her saying this.

[shenmue]

2. Wow

[Archae]

3. Bullseye!

Roast in pieces, you bastards!

[Me.]

4. More Of This Please

[hamsterjill]

31. +1

n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. I won't celebrate an act of war no matter how legitimate but I wil celebrate protecting innocents.

[Act_of_Reparation]

9. Then don't.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. Too much nuance?

[Act_of_Reparation]

18. Nope.

Too much sanctimony.

[narnian60]

22. +1

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. I said the war was justified and I could celebrate the protection of innocents. What is it about war

that should be celebrated?

[tymorial]

65. The death of rapists, serial killers and terrorists. Nt

[Nuclear Unicorn]

68. A review of my posting history will show

that I am an unapologetic advocate of the right to keep and bear arms. I believe people have the right to defend themselves.

But I do not celebrate the taking of human life, even the lives of rapists, stalkers, killers, thieves, etc. I would prefer each person live their life to the fullest without preying upon others. I understand that many choose to prey upon others. I also admit those who would live their lives without preying others have every right to defend themselves. I find it regrettable when matters are forced to violence.

I also believe these views are not in conflict with each other.

[Act_of_Reparation]

100. Nothing at all.

But while we're on the topic of nuance, I should point out that gallows humor is not a celebration of death.

[George II]

28. Yes, thanks.

[LanternWaste]

53. Too much pharisaism.

It can be difficult to encounter an individual who does not celebrate death, regardless. We often pretend they're simply sanctimonious to better rationalize our own biases and visceral cravings for blood. Nuance is far too inconvenient to the mind which is entertained by the spilling of blood.

Too much pharisaism.

[Act_of_Reparation]

99. Yeah, that too.

Kind of like how some people accuse others of lacking nuance while tossing out utterly transparent projections like: "We often pretend they're simply sanctimonious to better rationalize our own biases and visceral cravings for blood"?

[Adrahil]

97. Meh... some people need killing.

I'm not overjoyed by that fact, but when the person who gets it really serves it? GOOD.

[MineralMan]

29. Sometimes, an act of war is required to protect innocents,

as in this story. I'm sure the people who were about to die celebrated the action.

Since you were not threatened, you can voice your reservations. Lucky you...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

33. I admit war may be necessary, without argument, but war is not to be celebrated.

[MineralMan]

34. I saw nobody celebrating war. I saw people celebrating

an action that saved innocent lives. Did you see a celebration of war?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

36. I made no claims about others. I speak only for myself. Did you see where I said I

could celebrate the protection of innocents?

[MineralMan]

40. That sniper shot was an act of war.

That is what you said in your initial post. You said that you could not celebrate acts of war. Since then, you have tried to generalize your statement to be against celebrating "war" in general.

You are being inconsistent, I think. People here were celebrating a particular act of war that saved innocent lives. There was no celebration of war itself. You have changed your argument in midstream.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

42. I said 3 things in my post --

1. I won't celebrate an act of war

2. the war was justified

3. I will celebrate the protection of innocents.

You guys just want to pick a fight.

[yodermon]

71. I've read this whole subthread. Since the act of war is identical to the act that

protected the innocents, you are not allowed to hold a complex thought or have mixed feelings or make any sort of (as you said) nuanced point. You have made a prima facie contradictory point and must be summarily ridiculed, patronized and dismissed. The spirit of your point has no value, because rah rah bad guys dead, good guys saved.

DU.

*sigh*

[Nuclear Unicorn]

82. Well, if -- Heaven forbid -- Trump is elected I can't help but wonder

if suddenly they'll all be standing on my side of the tent (or worse, calling it a war crime).

[eleny]

72. "You guys just want to pick a fight."

No you appear to be projecting. High horses have slippery saddles.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

81. Why is reiterating what I have said from the very beginning considered picking a fight?

Am I not allowed to reemphasize the points within my posts that appear to be overlooked without acknowledgement? I can't help but believe that if those points were acknowledged the complaints lodged against me would disappear.

[eleny]

83. Here's a good thought for you from Will Rogers...

"If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging."

The thing is that your first posting here truly came off as pontificating and smacked of holier than thou. People tried to tell you this and yet you continue to reject that their reception to your thoughts were invalid. You're at a stalemate but you keep digging.

Now, please take the last word between us. I'm done.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

87. I'm not in a hole. I stated from the beginning that I celebrated the protection of innocents.

Not one person seeking to scold me at anytime admitted my statement about that. In fact, judging from their comments, they appear to assume I resent the protection of the innocent.

I am under no obligation to agree to their errors.

[Ellipsis]

115. You lend yourself to it.

[sunnystarr]

118. Personally I'm a ding dong the witch is dead kinda gal. nt

[6chars]

150. It was an extra judicial execution

Not war. War crime, maybe.

[MineralMan]

151. Nonsense!

Protecting unarmed people from someone who is planning to burn them to death with a flamethrower is not a war crime. Period.

Give me a break!

[CreekDog]

111. it's not an act of war to kill someone threatening others with a deadly weapon

If the people who were the targeted victims of the assailants would have had the right to defend themselves against the assailants, then so too would a party defending them.

No need all kinds of talk about war, this immediate circumstance provides the justification for the action and not as a part of war.

[Dreamer Tatum]

38. Guess you weren't one of the ones about to be incinerated. nt

[Nuclear Unicorn]

44. You guys get to the first half of the first sentence and shut down all ability to

comprehend and reason in the name of unearned moral outrage.

[Dreamer Tatum]

46. I usually love your posts, but your sanctimony from 10000 miles away is off.

If you celebrate that innocents were saved, then you absolutely celebrate the act of war which facilitated the salvation.

No need to nuance your support for the lives of people about to be blowtorched.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

48. What sanctimony? Seriously.

In the post everyone is taking umbrage with I characterize the war as justified and say I can celebrate the protecting of innocents.

The war is justified. I'm glad innocent lives were saved. I still find war to be a dreadful thing.

[Dreamer Tatum]

49. The only person I am aware of who loves war is Trump

So you're pretty damned safe in that.

I, too, abhor war, but have to problem with it being shoved up the asses of ISIS.

"War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want."

William Tecumseh Sherman

[safeinOhio]

57. I usually don't care for some of your post,

but no problem with this one.

[sarisataka]

86. I get your point

and know many other combat vets who wholeheartedly agree. Sometimes to achieve a good end one must do what is necessary.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

88. Thank you. I appreciate the support amid the tempest.

[PearliePoo2]

6. A mile away??? What??

I can't even fathom that kind of marksmanship or the rifle that is capable of doing it. Holy crosshairs Batman!

(but then, the largest rifle I've ever owned is my .22 Marlin)

[NWCorona]

8. The amount of skill it takes to shoot at that level is amazing.

[PearliePoo2]

11. Whoa! That's beyond impressive.

I'm glad that marksman could save those people's lives. Thanks for sharing the video.

[REP]

20. That's a bit more impressive than making that shot with a .50

Not that making that shot with a Barret .50 isn't impressive, but that's what it's made for.

[Travis_0004]

95. The .338 is every bit as good as the .50 for long range shots.

I would argue more capable than the .50

I prefer .416 Barrett myself. Of course the longest I ever shoot is about 1200 yards.

[REP]

96. .338 drops a bit more than .50 at 2500y

[Jim Beard]

26. Lever action? Good Rifle.

I am a .22 person too, good for rats, rabbits and tin cans.

[PearliePoo2]

62. Rats, yes. Can't stand them! Put a scope on it too.

Just yesterday got a 10 round magazine clip to replace the 7 round. Packs of Raccoons are showing up to terrorize my 4 month old Border Collie puppy. They are a ruthless mob that will tear her to shreds given the chance. I'm not going to let that happen. They already got to my neighbor's dog, $500 vet bill and lots of stitches.

[Eleanors38]

67. The .338 Lapua round is evolving into the round of choice for the "One Mile Club,"

an informal designation for those shooters who are into long range. Now, a number of arms manufacturers are producing rifles capable of such ranges. For example, Savage Arms now offers at least 4 models. Most seem to be single-shot bolt actions. Targets are usually squares of metal which mve or "clang," indicating a successful shot. Problem is finding a range or other suitable site for 1 mile attempts!

[Still In Wisconsin]

103. Yeah I'm not sure where one would go to practice shots like this.

Wow. I can't even imagine.

[Yo_Mama]

104. The same reason I am a renegade Mennonite.

Most of it I still believe and practice, but when I reached the years of reason, I just could not convince myself that God didn't want Hitler and his buddies out of power.

ISIS is the same sort of thing. We don't see it very often - the evil power that cannot be mitigated, only destroyed, but every once in a while. ...

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

10. "One shot, one kill"

The sniper motto.

[alcibiades_mystery]

15. Looks like one shot, three kills in this case tho

[alcibiades_mystery]

13. Why did he wait for him to finish the speech?

That's good writin'!

[Glassunion]

16. Dramatic effect?

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. Uh huh

Sure.

[Glassunion]

21. I recall a Bruce Willis flick where the sniper waited and shot the lighter our of the bad guy's hand

before taking another shot to take him down. Way cooler that way.

[alcibiades_mystery]

24. It does remind one of a movie

That's true!

[George II]

32. Maybe to not be disracted?

[muriel_volestrangler]

69. What's distracting about a speech a mile away?

It takes about 5 seconds for the sound to reach you, and even with the claimed loudhailer, that's not exactly off-putting. If you waited until the sound stopped, the target would probably have moved. If this happened, it would have made far more sense to shoot him while he was speaking, when he'd be more likely to be still.

As others say, it's in the tale for dramatic effect.

[jmowreader]

76. It's possible he was moving around during the speech, and facing the sniper

.50BMG bullets are not guided projectiles. You have to wait till the guy stops jumping around praising Da'esh and the glory and mercy of Allah ("mercy of Allah" and "execution by flamethrower" don't really go together, but we ARE talking about ISIS, right?) before you can fire if you want to be sure to hit the bastard on your first round. The sniper also wanted to shoot him in the fuel supply (he probably had an old Soviet LPO-50 flamethrower, which comes in two parts - the flamethrower, which looks very much like a machinegun, connected by a hose to a backpack containing three fuel cylinders) so the blast effect from the explosion would take out the other two terrorists; while it's possible the bullet would have passed through the terrorist and breached the fuel tank, it works a hell of a lot better if you just shoot him in the gas tank in the first place.

And also, when Clint Eastwood makes the movie of this mission letting the terrorist finish his dramatic, stirring speech before ending his life is going to make a MUCH better climax than just blowing the guy's shit away the second he gets the opportunity.

[druidity33]

94. Too much gesticulating? nt.

[Ford_Prefect]

14. It is curious that papers like the Star and Daily Mail have reported this but not serious press.

No AP byline, BBC, The Times, Guardian. Very odd distribution for HMG official military facts as such.

It has the feeling of hype and propaganda to it, at least in the presentation. In some ways it sounds to my tin ear like war stories told out of school, tending to get more heroic as they are told and ultimately based on rumor rather than fact.

I'm not running down soldier's actions taken in the field. They are facts as far as I know. I am not sure how much fact there is to the actions reported in the referred article. I recall a certain American Sniper who told some rather hard to swallow tales and those who celebrated him without question, including a few wearing command uniforms.

And this coming at a time when further, more conspicuous military action is contemplated in Iraq, Syria and Libya....Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmm?

[sammythecat]

19. Feel good story of the day, except

the article says nothing about what happened next or if all the were eventually rescued.

[PatSeg]

23. Its a remarkable story

I was wondering the same thing though.

[Oneironaut]

91. It's an embellished copy-pasta.

One kidnapper became three. The shooter is from SAS, the marines, etc., the story recently changed to add a flamethrower into the mix, etc. Something like this story might have happened, but it's both old and has taken on a life of its own.

[sammythecat]

131. Oh, well that's a shame

Someone once said, "A lie that's a half-truth is the darkest of all lies." Just one little mouse turd and we have to throw out the whole pot of stew. A compelling news story + a little lie here, an embellishment there = a time-wasting load of bullshit.

Now I have to forget I ever read this.

[Egnever]

114. well there is this

The civilians targeted for execution escaped and were later rescued by British and US special forces.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/544652/Isis-jihadi-killer-flame-thrower-SAS-sniper

[MynameisBlarney]

25. Awesome!

SAS ain't no joke!

[packman]

30. Amazing - I counted 5 sec. between firing and hit

would like to work out the ballistics on that - drop, speed, etc.- but am ignorant of the physics involved.

[Glassunion]

56. Lots of variables.

But a 50BMG would still be traveling at about 1300 feet a second at a mile, and have about 2900 ft.lb of energy.

You would definitely be lobbing the projectile at that distance. The projectile would have to travel in an arc of about 90 feet up and back down.

[muriel_volestrangler]

66. Counted? the joe.ie site has no video; the Star has an unrelated video of a missile

hitting a building.

In 5 seconds, a bullet (or anything) will drop about 125m if fired horizontally - s=ut+at*t/2 .u=0, a=10m/s/s.

If the OP story is real, then he was nearly a mile (1603m) away - call it 1500m. 5 seconds would be a quite a slow bullet - 300m/s, or just below the speed of sound. I'd expect a sniper rifle to be faster than that - Wikipedia says it's 852m/s.

So say it takes 2 seconds to travel the distance. If you want to aim a bullet, then ignoring air resistance, the top of the arc should be reached after 1 second - which means it needs 10m/s vertical velocity at the start. So he'd need to aim about 10m higher at half the distance, or 20m above the target at the full distance.

Well, I supposed that means the sights have to be set for 20m difference. I guess with laser range finding to give you an accurate distance, it can be attempted. You'd need to know the wind very well to do it with the first shot.

[Eleanors38]

73. Of course, the effects of gravity and wind resistance are not measured arithmetically...

The track of the bullet would form an asymmetrical parabola, with the rate of fall increasing and speed decreasing with a given distance. The bullet design has to be factored in; new ones have a "ballistic tip" which, among other things, resists melting and thereby altering the aerodynamics of the projectile. The high temps are the result of air friction as it rushes toward the target.

[muriel_volestrangler]

75. I find it hard to believe melting from air friction is a problem

when it's only travelling the same kind of speeds as a supersonic jet, for a few seconds.

Yes, air resistance would make a difference, and that doesn't get an easy calculation like gravity did. But the whole thing would have to be done with a scope calibrated for the precise distance anyway, so they'd do the calibration to take air resistance into account too.

Wind would be the major problem, I think - knowing how it's acting over the full range and height. See, for instance, http://www.rifleshootermagazine.co.uk/features/shoot-better/long_distance_target_shooting_wind_effects_and_ballistics_1_4552141

[Eleanors38]

84. 3,000 fps is an average muzzle velocity speed for deer rifles.

Evidently, that is enough to smear up the conventional exposed lead tips of bullets, even when sheathed in copper. How heat affects all-copper bullets ( what the industry is going to soon) is unknown to me. The last 20 years have seen remarkable tech advances in arms and ammo: Rifles which shot 1" inch groups in the 90s would cost you several thousand dollars and hand work in custom shops. Some can shoot that well at a retail cost of -$600. And factory (i.e., cheap) ammo can now shoot like the premium stuff of the 90s.

It seems that only the overall design and action of firearms available to civilians has remained in stasis. (There is an industrial documentary on Youtube called "One at a Time" which shows how Remington makes their civilian arms. In one scene, a worker uses a computer to draw out the plans for a shotgun. In 1969.)

I am told that supersonic Soviet-era fighters were very heavy due to the use of stainless steel to counter heat from resistance. U.S. models used titanium, which at the tme was available only to the U.S. and presumably its allies. Titanium is much lighter.

[muriel_volestrangler]

92. Heat effects from most of an hour of supersonic travel are a lot different from a couple of seconds

during the flight of a bullet. It's possible that a harder tip is desirable at long range to for better penetration, after allowing for the slowing down of the bullet - the 1124 ft/sec figure for velocity at the target in #74 is barely above the speed of sound.

On edit: "Ballistic Tip" seems to be a trademark for Nosler plastic-tipped bullets (and if it was air friction melting things, plastic would not be your solution). The idea is that a pointed tip has good aerodynamics, needed so the bullet doesn't slow down too much over distance (they want to keep it supersonic, since the characteristics will change a lot as it goes transonic), but the plastic tip behaves like a hollow point when it hits the target.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic-tipped_bullet

[Eleanors38]

130. You are certainly right about improvement of ballistics, and the performance of the round on impact.

I have seen Ballistic Tip used generically, so no telling what that can mean.

Similar-appearing tips have appeared on Hornadys Leverevolution ammo designed for internal tubular magazines on lever action rifles. But here, the tip is quite flexible to the touch and not hard and rigid. The "point" being to keep a normally hard tip from igniting the cartridge ahead of it in the mag, causing a catastrophic firing of the whole sh-Bang. The flexible tip then returns to normal shape upon chambering, giving the inheritantly mediocre accuracy and range of old .30-30 and .35 REM an improvement on both counts.

[GoDawgs]

116. Hornady has a match round bullet to overcome melting.

The melt causes asymmetrical drag, affecting the spiral. The longer the flight time, the greater the error.

[muriel_volestrangler]

121. OK, that is to overcome melting of a plastic tip

http://www.hornady.com/support/heat-shield

I'm not so surprised that melting of plastic is an issue; whether soldiers have been using the plastic-tipped bullets, I don't know.

[sarisataka]

74. According to ballistics table

for the Barrett rifle, if it is sighted for 500 yrds, at 1700 (just under a mile) the bullet will drop 1086 in (~90.5 ft), travelling 1124 ft/sec, 1975 ft lbs energy and take 2.747 sec to travel the distance

[AllyCat]

35. I really don't want people "good" or "bad" to die, but these freaks were going to kill

potentially innocent people. I'd rather an expert mark take out the "bad apples" than carpet bomb a whole city.

Makes a lot more sense to take out ISIS this way than any of the other suggestions I have heard.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

126. That is exactly how I feel.

[Ford_Prefect]

37. Joe.ie is an Irish based men's "lifestyle" magazine, not a responsible news outlet.

That may explain much about why the BBC isn't reporting this. More and more this seems to be a planted piece of war porn rather than military fact.

[PersonNumber503602]

41. I am skeptical too... No doubt the SAS snipers are skilled and all that

but the just in the knick of time AND the exploding flamethrower all seem a bit much.

So were have:
- Long distance shot
- Just in time
- Exploding flamethrower
- And they stopped a truck bomb from going off in a crowded market

I can easily accept one of those without giving it a second thought, but all four is a bit Hollywood.

[Ford_Prefect]

43. I keep wonder why no credible source is reporting such an exceptional heroic event?

I'm ready to call this busted war porn on that basis.

NOT that it could not have happened.
NOT that SAS could not have made the shot.
NOT that soldiers somewhere in the field do not do amazing things in warfare.

If the real press haven't picked it by this hour there's a reason they haven't. It's too big a story to ignore otherwise.

Planted, Faked War Porn.

Who do we call?

[NWCorona]

54. Could very well be fake. I'm skeptical but that isn't an impossible shot

and with all the savagery coming out of that group. It kinda feels good reading about a win for the good guys.

[Ford_Prefect]

59. I think that "feel good part" is the purpose behind the planted story.

The shot could have been done over the distance. The timing of the shot and the story release both beg credulity.
I'm doubtful about the rest of it especially why no mention of what happened to the 12 lucky survivors. the way it's presented and where it's been published as well as where it has NOT been published lead me to be very doubtful indeed.

[Eugene]

58. Other outlets are reporting this story, but the majority seem to be British tabloids

and Murdoch papers like the New York Post.

Something probably happened but it will take time to sort out exactly what.

[Glassunion]

61. Is it one of those stories where each article reports a different source?

Article on the Sun sourced from an article on the Sunday Times which sources the article on the Mirror which sources the article on the Guardian which sources the article on the Times which sources the article on the Sun?

[Ford_Prefect]

63. The point is NO credible news source has published it. It has been in circulation for far too long.

This is a typical pattern for planted items with dubious parentage. I note that no official military or HMG source is cited for it nor has any taken credit. That seems quite odd for such heroic news that no one in HMG will stand behind it or confirm even the least fact that might apply to it.

During the War in Vietnam there was an army unit which did nothing but produce and place this kind of heroic patriot fodder. It has been said that it was neither the first of its kind nor was it the last, nor was it exclusively the product of American minds.

[Eugene]

136. Point taken. A closer look shows all reports citing The Daily Star as their source.

And The Daily Star has a low reputation even as tabloids go.

[Oneironaut]

134. It's an oldish internet story.

It's very likely to be highly embellished or totally untrue. I've read multiple versions of this story at different time periods. While being the same at its core, as with any urban legend, the details change slightly. The first version I saw was an attempted beheading by multiple ISIS fighters. Now it's turned into shooting a flamethrower.

It's possible that this happened (or something like it), but there's no evidence for it. The fact that I've seen different versions of it over a long time period, and the fact that it is always reported as just happening makes me believe that this is fake.

[Ford_Prefect]

135. This and the complete lack of any location or time frame for this alleged event.

There was a long time ago in Afghanistan a regular army British sniper who did pull off a record shot over a great distance. It was credited to a specific marksman and unit, and the location was quite specifically described.

This fake edition and the other "stories" echo that one real event in so many details. If there was indeed a specific ISIS soldier killed in that way they would have had his name in the story and the SAS or the Army would be taking credit publicly for dangerous work well done.

That the BBC and the other mainstream British press do not cover it is very telling indeed. They have a very tight arrangement with the Army and other services about what is said and when. This "event" didn't happen. It was either planted as "feel good" propaganda, or was made up by one of the "papers" that published it.

There are quite a few wannabe soldiers out there who get pumped up by this kind of mythology especially when the subject is the SAS and other "elite" units. Those units have a specific history that has little to do with headlines and less to do with jingoistic nationalism. They don't go to war for our entertainment even if this kind of war/gun porn is how they are celebrated in the penny dreadfuls and the yellow press.

[PersonNumber503602]

39. It doesn't say what ultimately happened to the hostages though

I guess since it mentions they had a car bomb, that means they traveled to the location after the kills. And that there were no other ISIS shits around to execute the hostages using a method with less bravado than a flamethrower?

[lunatica]

45. Very good shot indeed

[George II]

50. Surprise! Four more gone for good.

[leftynyc]

51. Wow - awesome shooting

I wish I believed in hell.

[muriel_volestrangler]

52. Sounds remarkably similar to the Star's February "SAS sniper kills ISIS killer at a mile" story

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027616468

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/643966/ISIS-Islamic-State-SAS-sniper-commander-head-blown-off

and also remarkably similar to the kind of story a bloke will tell a Star reporter in return for a few drinks in a pub.

[NaturalHigh]

55. I'm glad the civilians were saved.

[beaglelover]

60. This is AWESOME NEWS!!! I wish there were video of the execution!

Post it to the internet and tell those ISIS assholes to go screw themselves. We got you!

[Ford_Prefect]

64. No offense to NWCorona but this needs to be locked as fake news.

[brooklynite]

108. Based on what evidence?

[muriel_volestrangler]

122. It comes from the Daily Star, a British tabloid with a reputation roughly of the National Enquirer

but more naked or semi-naked women in it. As I noted, they published an almost identical story in February.

I'd certainly object to it being in LBN; it's just a story, from one anonymous source, and told to the least reliable British publication that might be said to employ 'journalists'. It has all the elements of war porn - the single shot, the incredible skill of the British sniper killing multiple evil guys, the innocent victims saved at the last moment - though that 'saving' is remarkably hazy - as #114 says, it just consists of "the civilians targeted for execution escaped and were later rescued by British and US special forces." It seems a remarkable coincidence that all the bad guys got killed in the blast, and none of the civilians, and that this somehow enabled a rescue which would have been quite complicated, you'd think, and would involve some more heroics.

It reads like the storyline for a post-WW2 boys' comic. It's obviously very popular on DU, and no doubt with Daily Star readers too. Which is why they wrote another.

[Ilsa]

77. Good. And if there's a Gell, I hope he's still

Feeling his skin crisp up as if he was getting basted with melted butter.

[ronnie624]

78. Lol. n/t

[Mr. Evil]

79. This is one of the best examples of poetic justice

I've seen in a very long time.

[blueseas]

80. Good

Nice shot!

[catbyte]

85. Wow, poetic justice. Flamethrower guy & film crew incinerated by flamethrower.

Great shot, sir. And I don't care that they didn't get a trial. As far as I'm concerned, members of ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, or whatever anybody wants to call them, have forfeited all rights to be treated as human beings.

[Not Sure]

89. The sniper caught the bad guy monologuing! What a classic blunder!

Seriously though, nice shot

[trof]

90. MOVIE!

guranteed

[rollin74]

93. haha! awesome! a roasted daeshbag

good shot

[flamingdem]

98. Jolly Good!

[Still In Wisconsin]

101. Don't f*ck with SAS. THey are on par with best special forces around the world...

better than most actually. They are good at what they do.

[Portland_Anni]

102. Happiness is a clean kill.

This couldn' t of happened to more dwserving a bunch of assholes.

[Takket]

105. Happy Trails, scumbag!

[awoke_in_2003]

106. SAS

When you care enough to send the very best.

[GOLGO 13]

107. Unlike you, I wont weep for the extermination of human cockaroaches.

This SAS operator is a man of respect & worthy of glorious praise. Thank goodness we have hard men willing to serve us.

[Warren DeMontague]

120. "I thought he'd never shut up"

[mountain grammy]

129. ....

Good speech. Didn't want to interrupt.

Let's go home.

[Hulk]

128. Hope it's a true story. Karma....

Sounds too good to be true....but hope it was.

[sammythecat]

133. It seems there is zero evidence

from any credible sources that this is true. I fell for it at first too, but think about it. If this amazing story was true it would be headline news. CNN, ABC, etc., would milk this forever. They'd be talking about it non-stop for a week.

[BigDemVoter]

132. Good.

It's time these kinds of things are stopped. While I really, seriously hate violence, I would prefer to see it visited upon the instigators than on the victims. Anybody who thinks it's a good idea to set somebody on fire for fun is truly courting some bad juju.

[Divine Discontent]

141. fantastic job, if true. would expect this to be breaking news, though. nt

[JNelson6563]

152. Nice work Good Guys!

Wow!