my view of the Berg murder video

[speedracer59]

I was listening to the radio and heard that Berg was told to leave Iraq by the US offical many times. I listened to his dad and he was blaming the US gov for his sons death. Come on, how was it the gov's fault? Those murderers have been doing this anyways. It is nothing new. They saw it as an opportunity to say they were getting rvenge for the pics and use our media against us. That is the only way we will lose this war. Our media is their best weapon. When people see vidoe and pics like that some(like me) want to get revenge.Others want to pull out and have "peace". Here is an artical about berg and the gov telling him to get out. I dont want to seem like an asshole but if the FBI tells me to go I go.

WASHINGTON - The U.S. government warned a young American to leave Iraq (news - web sites), and offered him a flight out of the country, a month before his grisly beheading was broadcast on an al-Qaida-linked Web site, officials said.


But authorities in Baghdad denied that Nicholas Berg, 26, was held in U.S. custody before he disappeared in early April, despite claims to the contrary by his family. The authorities said he had been held by Iraqi police for about two weeks and questioned by FBI (news - web sites) agents three times.


The final movements of the telecommunications businessman from suburban Philadelphia remain unclear as officials in Washington and Baghdad try to piece together how Berg crossed paths with a group of Islamic militants who savagely decapitated him in a video released Tuesday bearing the title "Abu Musab al-Zarqawi shown slaughtering an American." It referred to an associate of Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) believed to be behind a wave of suicide bombings in Iraq.


Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told reporters Thursday in Baghdad that it appears al-Zarqawi was responsible.


Asked whether he meant al-Zarqawi personally carried out the execution, Sanchez said, "All indications are he did it." Asked about al-Zarqawi's whereabouts, he said, "We believe he's moving around the country."


Later, however, Sanchez said it wasn't clear that Zarqawi was present at the killing. "I don't know whether he was personally holding the knife or in the room," Sanchez said. "I do not know that."


Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had said earlier it was likely that al-Zarqawi himself was "the lead perpetrator."


Berg's body was found Saturday in Baghdad. Two e-mails he sent to his family and friends show he traveled widely and unguarded throughout Iraq, an unsafe practice rarely done by Westerners.


Shortly before Berg's disappearance, he was warned by the FBI that Iraq was too volatile a place for unprotected American civilians and that he could be harmed, a senior FBI official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Wednesday.


On April 10, four days after Berg was released from an Iraqi prison, an American diplomat offered to put him on a flight to Jordan, State Department spokeswoman Kelly Shannon said.


But Berg told the diplomat he "planned to travel overland to Kuwait and would call (his) family from there," Shannon said.


Several days later, around April 12, the diplomat received an e-mail from Berg's family in West Chester, Pa., that "noted he had not been in contact," Shannon said. Staff members at the $30-a-night Al-Fanar Hotel in Baghdad told The Associated Press that Berg stayed there for several days until April 10.


Berg's father, Michael Berg, said that although his son wanted to leave Iraq, he refused the flight offer because he thought the travel to the airport would be too dangerous. Attacks had taken place in the areas his son would need to drive through, Michael Berg said.


On April 14, the U.S. consulate sent a private contractor to the Al-Fanar Hotel in Baghdad, where Berg was believed to be staying, to see whether he was still there.


"The people we talked to at the hotel didn't remember him being there," Shannon said.


Diplomats then alerted the U.S. military to be on the lookout for him.


In Baghdad, U.S. spokesmen Dan Senor said that "to my knowledge" Berg was not affiliated with any U.S. or coalition organization, nor was he ever in U.S. custody.





Iraqi police arrested Berg in Mosul on March 24 because local authorities believed he may have been involved in "suspicious activities," Senor said. He refused to elaborate, except to confirm that the Americans were aware Berg was in custody.

Berg was released April 6 and "was advised to leave the country," Senor added. Instead, Berg checked into the Baghdad hotel.

Mosul police chief Maj. Gen. Mohammed Khair al-Barhawi told reporters Thursday that his department had never arrested Berg.

Since Iraq remains under U.S. military occupation, it seems unlikely that the Iraqi police would have held Berg, or any other American, for such a length of time without at least the tacit approval of U.S. authorities.

"The Iraqi police do not tell the FBI what to do, the FBI tells the Iraqi police what to do," Michael Berg told the AP. "Who do they think they're kidding?"

The younger Berg told his family that U.S. officials took custody of him soon after his arrest and he was not allowed to make phone calls or contact a lawyer, his father said.

Kimmitt said U.S. forces kept tabs on Berg during his confinement to make sure he was being fed and properly treated because "he was an American citizen."

But the three FBI visits suggest American authorities were concerned about more than Berg's well-being. They may have had their own suspicions about what the young American was doing in Iraq.

During a briefing Wednesday, Senor confirmed that Berg had registered with the U.S. Consulate in Baghdad but insisted he "was not a U.S. government employee, he has no affiliation with the coalition and to our knowledge he has no affiliation with any Coalition Provisional Authority contractor."

He also said Berg "was at no time under the jurisdiction or detention of coalition forces."

[hitmansb]

While I do feel terrible about what happened to the guy, there is no way that the U.S. government should be blamed, or that the guy's family should be allowed to sue. He was there of his own free will to make money. He risked his life for the big bucks that are there for anyone brave enough (or foolish enough) to conduct business in Iraq right now...and unfortunately, he got nabbed and paid the price.

[speedracer59]

Originally posted by hitmansb
While I do feel terrible about what happened to the guy, there is no way that the U.S. government should be blamed, or that the guy's family should be allowed to sue. He was there of his own free will to make money. He risked his life for the big bucks that are there for anyone brave enough (or foolish enough) to conduct business in Iraq right now...and unfortunately, he got nabbed and paid the price.

exactly. I also found out a little while ago the guys dad has completly different views than his son. he is a left wing Bush basher. Hed rather play politics that go after the guys who actually killed his son(who in fact was for the war and agreed with President Bush and what we are doing over there.)

[Auriflex]

All I know is that unless I'm a soldier - I'm not going into a conflict-torn country. I don't give a rat's ass who is fighting, who is winning, or who it's for.

Berg took a chance with his life, and lost.

Now after saying all of that....I think it's a good time to start treating Iraq like an occupied country, and less like a nursery. I'm no military tactician, but I think Marshal law would be a good start right now. Then I would make Iraq an unofficial province, and start sucking those wells dry and make the largest overseas US military base on the planet right there. If they don't like it - too bad, they shouldnt have lost.

[speedracer59]

Originally posted by Auriflex
All I know is that unless I'm a soldier - I'm not going into a conflict-torn country. I don't give a rat's ass who is fighting, who is winning, or who it's for.

Berg took a chance with his life, and lost.

Now after saying all of that....I think it's a good time to start treating Iraq like an occupied country, and less like a nursery. I'm no military tactician, but I think Marshal law would be a good start right now. Then I would make Iraq an unofficial province, and start sucking those wells dry and make the largest overseas US military base on the planet right there. If they don't like it - too bad, they shouldnt have lost.

Thats what Im talking about .Im tired of these high ass gas prices

[Breeze]

Regardless of what Berg did or did not do, it takes a real sick coward to kill a man like that- if you have to execute someone at least make it quick- I'm sure most people over there are more or less good people but there are obviously many who are being taught from birth to destroy anything and anyone who is not muslim- it's sad to think about all the little kids over there who will look at those losers who killed Berg as heroes and role models- another generation of children that we will have to fight years from now- I'll never forget after Sept. 11 seeing news footage of adults handing out candy to little kids to celebrate the twin towers going down-

[Stonecold54]

the country is a lost cause, pull out and let them start killing each other again.

[Timma]

Originally posted by stonecold54
the country is a lost cause, pull out and let them start killing each other again.

[speedracer59]

Originally posted by Breeze
Regardless of what Berg did or did not do, it takes a real sick coward to kill a man like that- -

Definatly

[psyko1]

Originally posted by Breeze
I'm sure most people over there are more or less good people but there are obviously many who are being taught from birth to destroy anything and anyone who is not muslim
- I'll never forget after Sept. 11 seeing news footage of adults handing out candy to little kids to celebrate the twin towers going down-

the only good people out there are the dead ones.

[Auriflex]

I still like the idea of making them a temporary province.

If you disagree with me, you are wrong.

[lordikon]

Originally posted by speedracer59 Our media is their best weapon. [/b]

Here's where I vent.....:
The media is fuckin' terrible. I'm so sick of the news I could throw up. I like knowing some details of what's happening in our country (the economy, the wars, crime) stuff like that. But they take shit that happens every fuckin' day and they talk about it for 10,000 years.

OJ Simpson, so fuckin' what he was a famous football player, that doesn't mean I want to hear about his trial everyday, 10 times a day, on 10 different channels, for a year straight.

Lacy Peterson, just your average ordinary everyday murder, with the old "dump them into the lake/ocean" trick. Probably happens a few times every single day.

Kobe Bryant, just another person claiming rape/assault/etc... on a famous person. Again, nothing special, nothing different, nothing EVERYONE in the nation should have to hear about everyday.

What's worse is that I believe the media gives bad ideas to people which are normally too stupid to think up something terrible on their own. For instance, stuff like the Columbine shootings. Now that 75 million kids have heard about them, how many of them do you think are completely fucked up and are thinking "That's EXACTLY what I need to do to the kids at my school."? --- How many terrorists around the world, see bombings and stuff like 9/11 and think "We need to do something like that, make an impact like that."?

I have nothing against a source for complete information on important events happening around the world. But I also don't believe stupid shit like Kobe Bryant should be on the news everyday. They first should've told us how it started, and then 1 year later (or whenever it ends) they should tell us the verdict, and THAT'S IT. The media shouldn't be run by a bunch of greedy motherfuckers that air the "juicy" personal shit of people's lives, just to profit from it, the media should be airing news that will impact most people. How many people's lives are impacted socially, or economically by Lacy Peterson? 10? 20? Certainly not millions. IMO the airtime would be better sent SAVING people's lives, talking about missing people or most wanted criminals.

Ok, I feel better now.

[Lexi]

Originally posted by stonecold54
the country is a lost cause, pull out and let them start killing each other again.

The sad part of this, is that they want to kill anyone who doesnt follow their religion. The "non believers" are those who should be killed, and frankly, if you arent one of them, then you are a target.

I hate how all of this is playing out.

[YellowJacket]

Im not convinced the video was real, Id venture to say its a fraud....

[Stonecold54]

Originally posted by YellowJacket
Im not convinced the video was real, Id venture to say its a fraud....

You know I didn't want to say this but I have had these thoughts in the back in my mind. there is too much shit going on around this killing.

[Primal Instinct]

Originally posted by YellowJacket
Im not convinced the video was real, Id venture to say its a fraud....

You aren't kidding, YJ. Here's my take on it.
I watched the video of the Nicholas Berg killing up to the point just before they killed him. I could not stand to view the rest of that disgusting evil deed. I am somewhat confused by this video though. There are several questions that are posed to me from it that I can't seem to let go of when I try to rationalize them in my mind. I can't seem to find a viable answer for them. Here are a few examples; the five hooded men standing behind Berg appear not to have dark skin, like that of a middle eastern man but instead appear to be light skinned or even caucasion in appearance. Look closely and you can see the skin tones of their hands in comparison to that of Berg's skin tone. Also, Berg does not look severely distressed by these men at this point- granted, he doesn't know what fate is about to befall him. Another thing that truly bothers me about this video is that the men involved are somewhat heavy-set and not thin like a large majority of young and middle aged arabic men. These men have builds similar to that of Americans.

Why is the man on the end at the right wearing white sneakers? That seems pretty out of place given the region and climate there in Bagdad. The other terrorists I've seen in videoclips usually wear sandals. Something else doesn't make sense to me here. From other video clips I have witnessed, the terrorists (including Al Zarqawi) are enraged and very loud when pronouncing their statements. This guy does not even sound like Al Zarqawi and he's not enraged by his outward appearance. He also is reading from a script which doesn't really seem to be very authentic and his Arabic is poor, to say the least.

I guess what really caught my attention and has since begun to bother me the most about this video is that the chair that Mr.Berg is seated in looks exactly like the same chair in several of the photos taken at Abu Ghraib prison. Don't take my word for it, look for yourself. The photo of several guards surrounding the man on the floor shows the same type and color of the chair that Berg was seated in prior to his demise. Another photo shows Lynndie ? sitting in the same type of chair with her fiance standing behind her. This brings to mind the expertly proven fake photos of Oswald holding a rifle on the cover of Time magazine. It just rings hollow to me.

I have no doubt that Mr. Berg was murdered but I am beginning to have serious reservations about who exactly did the killing. Perhaps a qualified independent investigator using voice recognition software would help to determine whether or not Al Zarqawi was in fact the person who decapitated Mr. Berg.

We must also keep in mind that Berg was detained by Iraqi police and that they (Iraqis) have claimed to release him to US officials in Bagdad. The US said that is not so but can offer no conclusive proof to this account. I highly doubt that Berg- an American- would have been detained without prior knowledge of the US military intelligence community there in Iraq. The Iraqi police is currently not a stand alone agency and is directed (or at least guided) by the US forces there. It would explain the chain of custody in which Berg may have been in US hands during the filming of the decapitation video. Where did the bright orange jumpsuit come from? That's the kind that the Iraqi prisoners have to wear when they're allowed to wear clothes. The walls are similar to Abu Ghraib prison walls too.

I know how this must sound- like some odd conspiracy bullshit- but if you just look at the evidence presented you can make up your own minds. I think having some clandestine conversations with former intelligence personnel and professional voice recognition specialists might help shed some light on this situation. It would not be the first time in history that CIA/military Intel has performed criminal acts to justify their methods and causes. It could be used as a diversion to help reduce the scrutiny of the American public with regard to Iraqi prisoner torture and abuses that have been recently made public. There is more to this tragedy than meets the eye. I hope that I'm wrong about this.

[goliath]

i love a good conspiracy theory...

[Stonecold54]

Originally posted by goliath
i love a good conspiracy theory...

[rude]

That would be crazy if Americans killed him.

Question for everyone, how would you feel if we found out Americans killed Berg as a distraction to the naked pictures of soldiers? Would you still support our government and etc?

[imonboardtoo]

Damn, rude. That's a nasty what if. I don't think that theoy makes any sense based on the recent release of 300 Iraquis from the prison. THAT was the U.S. response to the scandal, not killing Berg. The gov. knows we're in deep shit about the prison pictures, but I don't see how they'd go that route for diversion.

[Primal Instinct]

It would not be the first time that the US fabricated evidence or sacrificed one of their own for the cause of war. Anyone here know about the Gulf of Tonkin incident? It formerly brought the US into the Viet Nam War.

On July 31, 1964, the American destroyer USS Maddox (DD-731) began a reconnaissance mission in the Gulf of Tonkin. The official purpose of the mission was to obtain information about North Vietnamese coastal defense forces. Other similar U.S. ships were involved in supporting South Vietnamese commando raids on the North Vietnamese coast during the same period.

On August 2, three North Vietnamese torpedo boats, mistaking the Maddox for a South Vietnamese vessel, launched a torpedo and machine gun attack on her. Responding immediately to the attack, the Maddox, with the help of air support from the nearby carrier Ticonderoga, destroyed one of the attacking boats and damaged the other two. The Maddox, suffering only superficial damage by a single machine gun bullet, retired to South Vietnamese waters where she was joined by the C. Turner Joy.

On August 4, a new DESOTO patrol to North Vietnam coast was launched by Maddox and the C. Turner Joy. The latter got radar signals that they believed to be another attack by the North Vietnamese. For some two hours the ships fired on radar targets and maneuvered vigorously amid electronic and visual reports of torpedoes. It is highly unlikely that any North Vietnamese forces were actually in the area during this gunfight. Captain John J. Herrick even admitted that it was nothing more than an "overeager sonarman" who "was hearing ship's own propeller beat." Also in 1995, General Vo Nguyen Giap, commander-in-chief of North Vietnamese forces at the time, disavowed any involvement with the August 4 incident, though he did confirm the August 2 attack.

On July 31, LDNN in "Nasty's", the name commandos give to the fast attack boats, attacked a radio transmitter on the island of Hon Nieu. On Aug. 3, they used an 88mm morter to attack a radar site at Cape Vinh Son. The North Vietnamese responded by attacking hostile ships visible in the area. While US officials were less than honest about the full extent of hostilities that led to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, critical claims that a naval commander fired weapons solely to create an international incident tend to overlook circumstances and opportunistic responses that suggest a less intentional motivation.

Squadron commander James Stockdale was one of the U.S. pilots flying overhead August 4. In the 1990s Stockdale stated:

"[i] had the best seat in the house to watch that event, and our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets -- there were no PT boats there.... There was nothing there but black water and American fire power."

Lyndon Johnson, who was running for reelection that year, launched retaliatory strikes and went on national television on August 4. Although the Maddox had been involved in providing support for South Vietnamese attacks at Hon Me and Hon Ngu, Johnson's Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, went before Congress and denied that the United States Navy was supporting South Vietnames military operations. He thus characterized the attack as "unprovoked." Despite the fact that there was no second attack, he also claimed before Congress that there was "unequivocable proof" of an "unprovoked" second attack against the Maddox. A year later, Johnson said in private "for all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there."

As a result of McNamara's testimony, on August 7, the Joint Resolution passed the House unanimously, and the Senate with only two 'no' votes: Senators Wayne Morse of Oregon, and Ernest Gruening of Alaska.

The United States officially got into military action in the Viet Nam war and 58,000 US soldiers died as a result. That is what I'd call sacrificing our own for the gain of a few.