Posted on 05/27/2004 9:26:51 PM PDT by Rennes Templar
May 27, 2004 | Filmmaker Michael Moore filmed an interview with American Nicholas Berg in the course of producing his documentary film "Fahrenheit 9/11" before Berg left for Iraq, where he was taken hostage and killed, Moore confirmed to Salon in a statement Thursday. The 20 minutes of footage does not appear in the final version of "Fahrenheit 911," according to the statement.
Word of the footage reached Salon through a source unaffiliated with Moore or his film "Fahrenheit 9/11," which is reported to feature stark images of U.S. civilians and soldiers grappling with conditions in war-torn Iraq, as well as examining the relationship between President George W. Bush and the bin Laden family. It received the Palme d'Or, the Cannes Film Festival's highest honor, on Saturday.
In a statement widely circulated by Moore's people after an initial request for comment by Salon, Moore said, "We have an interview with Nick Berg. It was approximately 20 minutes long. We are not releasing it to the media. It is not in the film. We are dealing privately with the family." Moore's camp declined to comment further on any aspect of the interview. Because the footage is not in the film, a spokeswoman for Miramax Films, the production company behind "Fahrenheit 9/11," said the company had no comment.
It was not clear from Moore's statement whether footage from the interview with Berg had ever been included in early cuts of "Fahrenheit 9/11." Reports about a film industry controversy surrounding distribution of the film first hit the news on May 5, a week before Berg's death. The film officially screened for the public and the press for the first time during the Cannes festival on May 17.
The news that Moore spoke to Berg while he was still in the United States only adds to the mystery surrounding the young man's presence in Iraq and tragic death. The interview was shot before the 26-year-old Berg left for Iraq late last year as a private contractor in the hopes of helping to rebuild the ravaged country. Though it was unclear what Berg spoke about in his interview with Moore, or how the two men met, unrelated reports following his death indicate that he headed for the Middle East with plans to work to improve the country's technological infrastructure and communication abilities. He ran his own company, Prometheus Methods Tower Service, in a suburb of Philadelphia.
Berg did not find employment in Iraq, and when he attempted to return to the United States he was detained by Iraqi police and questioned by American forces. He was released after his family complained. But shortly after, he is believed to have been kidnapped by Islamic terrorists. Video of his beheading was released on an Islamist Web site on May 11. Salon was unable to reach the Berg family for comment before publication.
Moore's film chronicles the United States' military, political and business involvement in the Middle East in the years before and after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. His previous politically charged films, including "Roger & Me" and "Bowling for Columbine," have created controversy and won him praise (including an Oscar, for "Columbine"). "Fahrenheit 9/11" has already sparked a media storm; in early May, Miramax's parent company, Disney, announced that it would not allow Miramax to distribute the film, which is highly critical of Bush and his administration.
Miramax has yet to make a deal with a distributor, though the film's warm reception at Cannes and the publicity surrounding the film have made it a hot property that is generating a lot of interest in Hollywood. "Bowling for Columbine" grossed $21 million, making it the highest-grossing non-IMAX documentary of all time.
A source close to "Fahrenheit 9/11" said that a new distributor will be announced shortly, and that the film is expected to be released in theaters during the first week of July, as originally planned.
WHO? This is a pretty loaded comment to just tack on the end of the article devil-may-care!"
Has anyone else heard about his "partner". Obviously he would be more a target for death if he were hanging out with anti-Saddam groups. But you think the terrorists might have captured some others and beheaded them also?
From your link:
Nick Berg was on his way out of Iraq. He had been released from the prison where he had been held for 13 days by Iraqi police for reasons he said he did not know. He had made his way from Mosul to his Baghdad hotel. He was finished with being an independent civilian contractor and was coming home to West Chester.
That was April 9. A month later, Berg's parents, Michael and Suzanne, still haven't heard from him. They've gone from concerned to frantic.
Also it says he first went to Iraq on December 21st (strange day to leave, IMO), was back on February 1st and returned on March 21st?
Correction:
He stayed until Feb. 1, making contact with a company that indicated there would likely be work for him later. But he returned on March 14 and there was no work, so he began traveling. He usually called home once a day and e-mailed several times; Michael Berg is his business manager, and they needed to stay in touch.
They spoke on March 24, and Nick Berg told his parents he was coming home on March 30. Then the communications stopped, and he wasn't on the plane on March 30.
What is Michael Moore already knew about those prison pictures when he talked to Berg. Didn't they happen in November, or am I wrong on that?
"Stranger than that: Why would Moore or his crew interview Berg for "Fahrenheit 9/11" for 20 minutes, when Berg's family insists the slain contractor was pro-Bush and supported the American military action in Iraq?"
The first thing that comes to my mind is that Moore was told to interview Berg because he could be useful to Moore when Berg got in Iraq.
"Thats the question. What did Moore know? Did he influence Berg to go over there, after persuading him that the war was evil? 26 is an impressionable age. Did Moore tell him that if he got some info from the insurgents he could get a role in a future movie?"
See my answer above. Someone told Moore that Berg would be a good interview and could be helpful with his upcoming hit project in Iraq.
"Bergs father hates GW. The apple usually doesn't fall too far from the tree."
I don't any of the apples fell far from this family tree. Our priest has a saying never look for a Peach under an Apple tree when people fail to see an obvious family trait.
Done.
According to what the sister says, the family didn't know a thing about it.
See post #279, by Freeper Roughrider. He quoted an article from a Philly paper.
I couldn't answer fully before as the computer was being comandeered by Mr. Peach.
If your reaction to the book is the same as mine, you will be angry. The book, The Third Terrorist, will make you hate Clinton more than you already do. You will understand fully how he didn't want foreign terrorism on United States soil because he'd have to deal with it. You will be more angry at our goverment than you have ever been.
The book is incredibly well researched. The witnesses are named and careful attention is given to their descriptions of the Iraqi ex-Republican Guard who got out of the Ryder truck moments before the OKC blast. The conclusions are inescapable.
Wait.......won't you be on this weekend? We need your research skills!
Wow. That's another really good point. It's not so unusual that they'd hold him that long before they killed him; but the fact they didn't even mention having him is bizarre. What were they all doing during that month?
I know...it has been bothering me ever since I read it. Someone brought up the theory earlier in the thread that maybe Michael Berg had prior knowledge and I almost posted that statement back to them, but decided against it. I would hate to think that he would martyr his son in that fashion. Even more wild is his next sentence:
"That manner is preferable to a long and torturous death."
Why would he say something like that? Especially considering the manner in which it was done. Maybe it was just his grief at the time.
His father couldn't have watched the video, and still say that about his son.
Don't know, if I had to guess, I thought it was you! Better put me on the ping list, gotta go back to work.
Especially since the father filed a lawsuit/claim/whatever on April 5th!
Big gap there.
"He seemed quite detailed in his emails, and if he left the Michael Moore encounter out, there was a good reason."
Excellent point.
More questions: Is the omission of Moore's interview by Berg in Berg's emails as telling as Moore's omission of Berg's interview by him in either public comment (until Salon revealed it) or his crock-of-benalities movie?
You'd think they would have wanted the publicity, right?
I think Nick Berg's father is behind all this crap.
Yes, somebody posted it last night. MizSterious called it to my attention and I pung Mo1.
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.