Posted on 05/14/2004 12:07:59 PM PDT by NotchJohnson
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.
Sorry for calling Nick Berg :Dan. in the origional post. I have corrected.
It is a shame when telling the truth can be so inflamatory.
The first assignment for guilt for Nick Berg is the islamofascists.
The 2nd assignment for guilt is Nick Berg himself. A Jew with a travel stamp from Israel traveling is a grossly unstable Moslem country loaded with islamofascist was playing Russian Roulette with a full gun.
The first bullet was Jew in Arab country.
The second bullet was being in an Arab country with a passport stamp from Israel.
The third bullet was traveling in war torn area with very active islamofascists.
The fourth bullett was traveling unescorted with out benefit of driver or translator.
The fifth bullet was the lack of good judgement in general for not considering the first 4 points.
It was bound to happen sooner or later.
In spite of all of this, I am deeply saddened by the means and method of his death. I am sorry for his family's loss.
His father's delusional thinking does nothing to lessen the pain.
Any Jewish person that is involved in ANSWER is delusional and in need of psychiatric care.
The death of MR. Berg is illustrative of the end goal of the Islamofascists. They would take the sword to every Jew on principal, to every Christian, to every secularist, to every man, woman and child that they found it expedient to murder, and to every non Whabist muslim .
But of course in Mr. Berg's eyes it was Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld under the masks of the ghouls that sawed off the head of his son with a dull knife as he screamed for an eternity as he died.
May God have mercy on the soul of Nick Berg, whatever he was doing there.
No, the 5 hooded men were innocent. It was President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld who beheaded his son. Silly us.
Berg is your typical liberal left-wing Democrat. God help any nation that has people like this man as a citizen. The blindness of people like Berg is the reason we're in this mess. Bet he voted for Clinton and loves Kerry.
BUMP!
That Iraqi's were put into shredders, beheaded, tortured, gassed, and lived in utter fear every single day of their lives means nothing to these people.
That American young men and women are willing to give their lives to free the Iraqi's and the Afghanistan people from such subhuman people is a credit to our country and I thank them from the bottom of my heart.
SHAME ON YOU, MICHAEL BERG.
They could have titled the article a little better, though.
Liberal democrats will always put the "Party" ahead of everything else. No matter what.
Before family,or friends.
Before God, Country,or common sense.
Your use of the word GROTESQUE fits these floks like a glove.
"Personally I'm starting to wonder if the senior Berg didn't have a round about part in his sons death"
Yeah...it smells like a another Juanita Smith performance on his part!
Do these Berg Sr. type apologists believe that they are immuned to the dangers of a war zone because of the side they choose? How completely brainwashed can one be?
Berg Jr. it seems, paraded around Iraq looking for work, ignored advice from our military to leave and eventually got caught up in a real live war.
I have come to think that Nick Berg was with ANSWER too and the kidnapping was staged. Unfortunately for Nick Berg his "best friends" had other plans.
If this is true then Michael Berg will have to live with this the rest of his life. IMO, that is worse than the fate of his son. I couldn't imagine any greater punishment.
My sentiment exactly ... but it will take very little more from this guy before I "start thinking otherwise" ... very little more.
I agree. He is not out of line. He may be wrong, he may be a moron, he may be mentally ill with grief or any other number of things. But this is still America and he isn't out of line. It's the difference between a free society and an un-free one.
The Soviets had a name for true believing dupes like Michael Bery. It was s$#teaters. The Soviets couldn't understand how anyone from the west could support the communist system when they had such wonderful opportunity in the west.
Nick made some bad decisions but he wasn't a stooge like his father.
I agree.
It's his own choice of words, which as free citizens we will be able to view in any way we as individuals see fit. It's my guess that the more he speaks, the more he will undermine his own position with the public.
being called out of line in this nation doesn't make one any less free than another person.
I never claimed it did, but thanks for the input.
Of course he can --- but the minute he decided to play politics with his son's horrific death then everything is fair game. Including his activities and leftist American ideology that may have caused his son to go to Iraq the way he did ---- What is insane about Berg's accusations is that Bush had nothing to do with his son being in Iraq, he wasn't there in the military, he wasn't working for the USA, he was either working for Iraqi groups or individuals and apparently was there out of love of money --- not country. Bush never asked him to go there, to stay there or anything like that.
And none of that had anything to do with why Nick Berg was over in Iraq --- at best he was there for some weird adventure or love of money. He was there by his own doing ---- our government didn't want him over there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.