Posted on 05/29/2004 9:13:24 AM PDT by Dane
Ping
finally makes sense.
New Berg information.
16 minute interview? I thought it was 20 minutes...What happened to the other 4 minutes?
RD
Great post. I was wondering about this. It's respectful that Moore let the family handle the footage. Maybe he's got a little good in him after all... or not.
He's not "anti-war" -- He's anti-American.
At least David Berg is honest enough to say Nick wasn't about helping the Bush Administration.....but just WAIT til David finds out Moore used Nick as either a cameraman/reporter or "bugger". He won't be thinking Moore is such a class act!
Yes, indeed. It was 20 minutes...now i's 16 minutes....hmmmmm....shades of Nixon.
gag
something about this is making little red flags pop up in my mind. can't put my finger on it yet, but... there is something really really bad in this Berg-Moore connection.
Berg sure got around.
I need to discuss this
news with someone before
I comment further.
The plot thickens...
Michael Moore is actually rooting for the terrorists in Iraq. But with all these coincidences about Berg(e-mail address used by mousawwi(9/11 20 th hijacker), Berg refusing a trip home out of Baghdad, etc.etc.) something doesn't add up, IMO.
"Moore said he had considered using some of the footage in his film but that it got edited out, David Berg said."
Yep - a class act all right! He did use some of the footage that got edited out.
I still think this is a very strange coincidence that the 1 guy Fatso's crew interviewed got his head sawed off. Just wondering WHY they picked him. I think the 'supporting Bush' is so much BS. Also wondering what Fatso's connection with the enemy really is.
Which contradicts the public statements by his father, Michael Berg.
It is not unusual to give a ballpark figure for an amount of time like that.
I think this does make sense. But if it's at a conference, why does the family wish to keep it "private"?
If as purported, it most likely is indeed dry and nothing sinister.
It IS odd that Moore told the family that his staff knew of the footage and it stuck in their minds enough that they cried upon hearing of Berg's death, but still did not notify the family immediately about the existance of possibly the last known video of Nick BEFORE his heinous murder. But that could be just typical unthinking libs.
It also could explain the tipster to Salon. Another attendee knew that Moore's crew was filming that day and that Berg was there and that footage existed, and after two weeks when it became clear Moore wasn't going to say anything this person told the Salon reporter. That's how the tipster would know about the footage, but not be affilitate with Moore or his movie.
It does appear to be a coincidence. Too bad about the brother raving about what a swell guy Michael Moore is. Ack
(Interesting that brother now says Nick wasn't that political after all. Hollinger (name?) who worked for Berg said he talked about politics all the time)
How did Michael Moore find out about Nicholas Berg's pending trip in the first place?
And there still needs to be some explanation of why Moore, the classy person he is, never mentioned this film until AFTER Salon.com published it's piece on Thursday, when Moore was forced to contact the family and admit he had it.
Statements as this are far too common amongst the Left. These people are a blight on everything good and decent in our country.
In the article this thread is based on it says Moore was filming an Iraqi business conference that Nick Berg attended on business opportunities over in Iraq.
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.