With his weight lifting and the hair cut he easily looked military or at least civilian
ex-military and could have plied information from GIs, which might have been the intention.
One purely speculative theory of mine is this:
Berg was in Iraq with the comm tower non-job for cover-for-action to travel around odd places.
His real mission was to act as a messenger, trying to become a go-between from Int'l A.N.S.W.E.R. to Al Queda. I mean, ANSWER can't exactly just pick up a phone to call Al Queda. To communicate with them, you have to GO to where they ARE, and fish around dropping hints, until you're picked up.
That's when you tell them the glorious news: you have come from a group "allied in the struggle against the Western imperialists" yadda yadda. You have a message, and an offer to coordinate activities, or perhaps hints on how to tweak their operations for the best effect, IOW, what and when to pull an operation which will result in the defeat of George W. Bush in November.
You expect to be treated fairly well, perhaps roughed up like the fake Japanese hostages/peace activists. After all, you can't talk to Al Queda, and just walk away like nothing happened.
But they saw the Jewish name Berg, and the Israeli passport stamp, and that trumped his ANSWER credentials. When the AG Prison scandal hit the papers.... Nick went on to serve a higher Al Queda purpose: human sacrifice on film.
That's why Daddy Berg (Mr. ANSWER) said "They killed their best friend."
The above is pure speculation on my part.
Somewhat similar to my theory with minor differences. I don't want to elaborate now (too lazy).
That is true. Plus, you gotta have boatloads of insurance as one slip of a wrench and the whole tower could crumble to the ground.
Nobody is going to leave a communications tower in the hands of a freelance 26 year old with questionable credentials and no Engineering license. Not even in Iraq.
I've thought it strange people have accepted the old man's explanation that "Nick was a Bush Supporter". He may have been, but I would question ANYTHING an ANSWER hack would say.
Though there really are little exact similarities, the fog of his travels reminded me of the fog of Oswald's activities in the late summer-early fall of 1963.
I like your speculation
RE:"That's why Daddy Berg (Mr. ANSWER) said "They killed their best friend."
He actually said that???
Travis, this is a book that almost writes itself. Are ya up to it? LOL
Something just feels out of sorts here.
Speaking of videos. Check out what he Islamic Nazis did in Chechnya here and here.
Keep in mind these are the exact same people. Islam is a one world equal-opportunity cult.
That was my take as soon as DFU posted that Berg Senior was an ANSWER man.
Plus, I thought Michael "doth protest too much" that his son was a Bush man.
A) Being young and a liberal is, by far, the norm.
B) How many young, gung ho Republicans go to Africa to build mud huts....give away all he owns and returns emaciated?
Possible....yes.
Probable....no.
What Codeflier said.
Pretty good speculation, I'd say. Wonder if the truth will ever come out?
Travis, your "speculation" makes far more sense than anything else I've read on the topic.
I don't think so, but I could be wrong. I think Berg was Mossad or CIA--that's what I think. He looks like a heck of a nice kid--didn't look like a John Walker Lindh type.
Maybe Berg was in deeper, actually aiding Zarqawi kill Americans. We got wise and had the new Iraqi police nab and hold him. Berg stays defiant while in custody. After a couple weeks we tell the Iraqi police to let him go. He finds his way back to Zarqawi and tells him what happened. Zarqawi realizing immediately that Berg is no longer useful but a huge liability decides to use him for their despicable video. Did they run with Berg and then kill him, or did they murder him and then run?
How successful has Zarqawi been in killing Americans? If the hundreds I have read on other articles is true, isn't he the worst of the worst? Getting Zarqawi is a must.
What is really going on here? The ANSWER-Al Queda link.
Just a theory, no evidence whatsoever to support it and I too was deeply distressed by the photos I saw on one of the threads a few days ago, I also do not mean to make light of his gruesome killing nor suggest that he was in any way responsible for his death.
Hey Lan,
check out #2 post, after you read this article...some things about Nick Berg's story don't check out. Could it be possible???
I think the conspiracy theorists are WAY off base here.
As a person who likes to climb _UP_ONLY_ anything over 800ft just for pleasure, I say this.
I think Nicholas Berg had a good idea!
He had needed skills and the motivation to apply them.
Below I list some things to (re)consider please.
Repairing communications infrastructure promotes freedom!
How many million Iraqi eyes benifit from (some)TV news?
He wrote that he wanted the lights on the towers to work so they would be safer for _OUR_ Coalition to fly near.
Right off the bat one big positive for Nicholas Berg!
It takes 'connections' to fly directly to Iraq.
It is SOP for 'regular people' to drive into Iraq from the nearest non-Iraq international airport.
He DID find work more than once in Iraq.
Had any of the 9/11 evil even sought work? (I don't know!)
If he were not finding work he would have taken the ride home offered IMO.
It is the nature of the work to not be a 9-5 gig.
He wrote specifically about the "tower lighting" aspect of the field. This can be as simple as changing a bulb.
The electronics driving a tower strobe are simple.
A portable soldering iron, a few capacitors, and spare bulbs would fit in a carryon bag. (I would check it nowadays though)
Typically a replacement is installed and the removed unit is repaired in a motel room for the next climb.
In Iraq spares may not be available, he might have been soldering at altitude.
Iraq may have different liability laws(or none), negating the need for a zillion dollars worth of insurance.
It is not fair to judge this aspect of his business by US litigation standards.
This would make it easier/possible for a startup to operate.
In the USA it is common for 1 man to be sent to a tower to repair lighting.
(some companies require 2 people, but not all)
Everything needed fits in carryon luggage!
The thing that makes it lucrative is ALTITUDE.
Anyone willing to climb over 500ft. in weather, on a regular basis will have no trouble finding work anywhere there are towers.
He wrote about many(12+) >1000Ft. towers just around Bagdad :-) altitude is where the money is!
It takes 2-3 HOURS of steady climbing just to get _UP_ a 1000' tower _IF_ you are in very good shape.
THAT IS NOT A 'non-job', IT IS VERY HARD WORK!!!
He also wrote about doing 'consulting' work.
One man consultancies are common! It only takes a pair of eyes and a pencil if you DO know what you are doing.
Lighting repair requires only basic electronics training. (as opposed to being an RF Engineer)
Even most antenna "RF" repair jobs do not require an Engineering degree. Cleaning and resealing weathered connectors is the most common task.
He went to school in Oklahoma, home of a zillion tall towers. It _IS_ common for type-A students to labor on tower crews 'out west'. The high winds keep 'em busy with repair.
He had in the past worked doing 'rigging' for the GOP.
Many a lefty would rather eat dirt.
Personally, _I_ can relate to doing exactly what he did.
I'm considering going to Iraq to field_test/sell a carbomb detector! (simple weight in motion technology)
I am also a Spelunker (caver) and I have considered travel to Afghanistan to go 'caving for freedom'!
I'm also interested in participating in landmine detection/removal.
(I'm single, no kids, so I can think like I do)
Am _I_ crazy? More likely than not I am, but that does not automatically make me wrong does it?
I want to help in some way just like Nick did!
If I could only loose a few K $ and survive I would call it a success just for the experience. (if the detector works)
I have no idea what Nicholas Berg's ulterior motive for going to Iraq was. (nor do I think Y'all know)
He is described as someone with dominant traits similar to myself, and I can follow his logic clearly.
I do know that his actions do NOT seem far fetched to me.
Unusual yes, but we live in unusual times!
Please solicit the opinion of other type-A/mad-scientist/inventor/enterprenuer personalities before passing further judgement on Nicholas Berg.
He sounds to me like an "eNT?" temperment type.
(see Meyers&Briggs and/or Kiersey)
NT's are not common (less than 5% of all people) and are typically misunderstood as to motivations.
I know from experience!
ie: pragmatic/logical dominant
We often are incorrectly percieved as ONLY
'cold, calculating and mean' by others.
Nicholas Berg followed his dreams to Iraq.
That takes courage and a willingness to embrace the unknown.
He has my respect and admiration, not suspicion.
As a US citizen he is/was innocent until PROVEN guilty.
Next time I am somewhere 'with a view':-) I shall pause and think of Nicholas Berg for a few moments.
None of the data available eliminates an evil motive.
None of the data available points TO an evil motive. (yet?)
It's just that I can relate to doing what he did for good motives way before evil ones.
Please consider looking at it from my perspective.
TUNE IN TODAY!!
http://boortz.com/
Well .. there's certainly been no shortage of news this week ... so it's anything goes on the Boortz show today! Also ... is it now time to tell Michael Berg that he's a bit out of line? I think so.
Friday, May 14, 2004
SORRY, MR.. BERG. BUT YOU'RE OUT OF LINE
There is just no imaginable way to understand the grief of Michael Berg. His 26-year-old son was brutally murdered -- his head sawed off -- by Islamic monsters, and the whole thing was videotaped and not appears on the internet for all the world to see. Michael Berg is and was against the war in Iraq, and, by all accounts, has never been a fan of George Bush. Nick Berg, on the other hand, was a supporter of George Bush and the war effort.
From the very time Nick Berg's body was found on a roadside in Iraq, Michael Berg has been making statements blaming the Bush administration for his son's fate. Now Michael Berg is telling the world that his son "died for the sins of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld."
Sins? Does Michael Berg mean the sin of liberating over 10 million Iraqis from the brutality of Saddam Hussein? Saddam had rape rooms. In these rooms people weren't stripped naked and arranged in piles. They were raped, they were electrocuted, and they were murdered .. and no small number of them suffered deaths unlike that suffered by Nick Berg. Or maybe Michael Berg is talking about the sin of making sure that Saddam would never again use biological or chemical weapons against his own people, Iranians or anyone else, and that he would never succeed in his long-term goal of developing nuclear weapons. Perhaps Berg is referring to the sin of making sure that Saddam is never again capable of launching missiles into civilian areas Tel Aviv.
Quite a sinful guy, this George Bush. He stepped in where much of the rest of the world would not. He stepped in where the much-vaunted United Nations would not. He removed one of history's bloodiest dictators from power, and quite possibly saved the lives of untold thousands of people -- maybe tens of thousands of Americans or Israelis -- who were destined to become the victims of a terrorist attack with weapons too horrible to imagine; weapons supplied by Saddam Hussein.
After a decade of inaction by the United Nations ... which actually par for the course for the United Nations ... and in the face of the reluctance of our European "allies" to do anything (after all, they were getting big bucks from Saddam), George Bush acted. After 9/11 he was determined that no rogue nation, no nation that cooperated with terrorists, was going to be permitted to produce chemical, biological or nuclear weapons that could make their way into the hands of Islamic Jihadists. A bold policy? You bet. And thank God we had a president who was strong enough to take that stand.
Look ... there were only two ways to go here. Ignore Saddam, and let him continue with whatever his plans were. Maybe he would behave. But, again, maybe not. We would be taking that chance. We would be betting the lives of tens of thousands of Americans on the idea that Saddam wasn't going to proceed with his weapons plans, and wasn't going to continue his flirtation and cooperation with terrorists. Or .. the second choice .. we could remove the potential threat by removing Saddam from power. The world community gave him every opportunity to cooperate -- to play nice. He refused. Now he's gone. It took guts. Bush had guts.
As for Michael Berg. The last time I checked, Mr. Berg, the evidence was that your son traveled to Iraq on his one ... looking for work. He wasn't drafted. He wasn't conscripted. He wasn't forced. He made the decision, and unfortunately paid with his life. There are Islamic terrorists throughout the world, Mr. Berg. Your son could have gone to the Philippines instead of Iraq. Islamic terrorists have decapitated Americans there, too. Would you have also blamed that on Bush and Rumsfeld?
Wouldn't it be a travesty if Michael Berg were using the death of his son as an excuse to assign blame to a president he hasn't liked from the beginning? For now, we'll just chalk it up to grief. A few more words out of Michael Berg and we're going to start thinking otherwise.
With his weight lifting and the hair cut he easily looked military or at least civilian
ex-military and could have plied information from GIs, which might have been the intention.
Your "pure speculation" might be right on the money.