Posted on 05/28/2004 10:21:09 AM PDT by DocRock
Berg's father was on that list, as was the family firm, Prometheus. This information may well have triggered the arrest of Berg in Iraq.
I guess Richard reads the trash at DU and makes a living "exploring" it. What amazes me is that this makes the papers in Sydney just as news breaks that Nick was interviewed by Michael Moore.
Oh, I did a search and didn't see this posted anywhere and I'm not real familiar with all the rules in posting, so please feel free to correct me if I did anything wrong.
There reason why Moore didn't use the footage is because Moore only used footage of people trashing the U.S. He therefore probably only used 1% of the footage that he shot.
"The rumor that won't die" ping DFU!!!
You're right . . . BARF!
The thing I don't understand is that if they LOOK at that thread Doug put up, they have to KNOW that the list came directly from the A.N.S.W.E.R site -- it was copied and pasted.
One has to wonder why they leave that out.
Hey liberals, I'm adding bin Laden to the enemies list! Remember you saw it here on FR first!
Sadly, this is on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald's website and probably on the front page of the paper itself. The Aussie version of the NYTimes, but with an even more leftist slant.
I'm not so sure the reason is that Berg didn't trash the US, my guess is that Moore didn't use the film because Berg was not really a Bush supporter. There is something very strange about who Berg really was, possible connections with Prometheus radio, a George Soros project and just a lot of unanswered questions. Just the fact that Berg's father calls him a Bush supporter doesn't make it so.
I love the spin they put on it -- I especially love the statement that we were supposed to harass those on the list.
Liberal Site puts list up = good
Conservative site puts same list up = bad
Of course we don't need the "puts list up" part, do we?
Not possible.
You wondered why the spin doctors leave out the fact that the list was copied from ANSWER's web site, reason is that they don't want to point out the connection between themselves and the murderers, they don't want to take any responsibility for the murder at all. The truth is that there is no real evidence that Berg was a Bush supporter, that his father was the person who put that name on the web site or even that there was such a company. Berg's father's claim to be the person who placed the name on the web-site is actually bizarre when taken in context with the claim that Nick Berg was a Bush supporter.
Oh dear GOD! I had no idea it was THIS BAD!!!!!!!!
Well when you are all the way to the left then all that is left is right.
But I know lots of non-USA papers are pretty communistic.
I thought Mark Steyn wrote occasionally for SMH. And isn't it a Murdoch paper?
Same with Moore ~ so far, even though he's been given ample opportunity to correct the record ~ he has not denied that the interview with young Berg took place while he was held captive (which is why I am continuing to discuss this deal as though Moore was instrumental in it to some degree).
Didn't know sand could burn. I thought it was mostly SiO2.
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.