Bush Jumps To Conclusion About Berg Murder, Blames Zarqawi Though Evidence Is Lacking
In the Absence of Truth from the White House, Conspiracy Theories Emerge About the Nick Berg Murder
BUZZFLASH READER CONTRIBUTIONS
Comments from Four BuzzFlash Readers.
If any incident lends itself to conspiracy theories, the murder of Nick Berg does. The Bush Cartel has only poured fuel on the fire by lying about key facts surrounding Berg’s detention and the videotape of his killing. Most curious is the rush to identify the killer as Abu Musab Zarqawi. They still haven’t found the Anthrax killer, but they claim to have identified a man wearing a ski mask within 24 hours. Preposterous. Especially since it appears that it wasn’t the elusive – and perhaps dead -- Zarqawi at all. Then who was it? Good question, indeed.
Is BuzzFlash implying that the forces of darkness are so evil in the Bush Cartel that they had Berg killed because they thought he had a terrorist connection to Al-Qaeda – and they needed the beheading to divert attention from the torture and abuse at Abu Ghraib? And they needed America to “rise up in revulsion against the barbarity” of ski-masked covered Muslim terrorists in order to take the heat off of Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Boykin, among others?
Oh God no, we are not conspiracy theorists. We just report the facts. Too bad we can’t get them from the Bush administration about the murder of Nick Berg. In the absence of the truth from the Bush Cartel, we certainly think our readers are entitled to speculate. The Berg beheading raises many, many questions, and, in response, we have only gotten lies from the Bush Cartel.
Something smells about this whole tragedy. In fact, it stinks.
But who can say what happened for sure, not us.
In the absence of the truth from the White House, we can only post theories.
* * *
For Your Information Buzz:
In today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle P-I), May 13, 2004, A4, appeared an AP article by Robert H. Reid entitled:
"Questions over beheading victim's travel in Iraq."
That article, which is not online, says:
"Berg first worked in Iraq in December and January and returned in March. He was inspecting communications facilities, some of which were destroyed in the war or by looters. During his time in Iraq, he worked on a tower in Abu Ghraib, site of the prison where U.S. soldiers abused Iraqi inmates."
And from The Guardian here is a similar reference: guardian.co.uk
Perhaps Nick saw too much when he was at the prison repairing the tower. And/or maybe that work required close collaboration with the military intelligence onsite so that he learned too much.
Also, today's NY Times article entitled: "General Took Guantanamo Rules To Iraq for Handling of Prisoners" by Tim Golden and Eric Schmitt says:
"When Major General Geoffrey D. Miller arrived in Iraq last August with a team of military police and intelligence specialists, the group was confronted by chaos."
"In one prison yard, a detainee was being held in a scorching hot shipping container as punishment, one member of the team recalled. An important communications antenna stood broken and unrepaired."
A BuzzFlash Reader
* * *
I cannot bear to watch the Berg killing, but I have a question or two. Have any of your readers wondered this, too?
The video clock on the camera reportedly says the decapitation occurred on May 11, between 13:46 and 13:47....Do Arabs also use military time? Or did they do pick up a US video camera and throw in the orange Gitmo suit to throw folks off?
And several news reports, including USA today, reported that "The body found on the overpass was identified as Nick Berg, 26, of West Chester, Pa., a self-employed civilian contractor. Berg's body, with signs of trauma, was found Saturday, the military said."
If his body was found on Saturday, how was he killed on Monday?
Maureen Farrell
* * *
Buzz:
The Nick Berg execution is rapidly rising to the level of a "conspiracy theory," so many facts, as with 9/11, are just not "adding up." I propose a new theory, outlined below, that argues that Abu Musab Zarqawi could not have been the executioner, and therefore the CIA must be lying. But first a few introductory tidbits.
Following up on a letter from Destin, FL published in the Mailbag on the 13th, and today's articles at BuzzFlash titled More Analysis of Nick Berg Conspiracy Theories 5/14 and Conspiracy Theories Abound About the Nick Berg Killing -- And With Good Reason.... the following issues set the stage for the final argument, No. 12 below, that I propose, that the CIA is lying about the identity of the killer.
Some of the issues discussed below may in fact be "coincidental" (such as the demeanor and appearance of the executioners, the orange jump suit) but others are much more critical of the facts (e.g., Nick Berg's computer used by Zacarious Moussaoui to send emails).
1. Nick Berg's father, Michael Berg, has his business listed on the FreeRepublic web site (freeper site) as an "Enemy of the State". (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1092851/posts -- this may have been linked to the 3 visits by the FBI during Nick Berg's containment by the Iraqi Police and then the US Military).
2. The FBI has told us (CNN, MSNBC, FOX) that Nick Berg's e-mail account was used by the "20th hijacker" of 9-11, the infamous Zacarious Moussaoui, whose computer held evidence of the 9-11 hijackers (and could not be searched by the FBI field office because of "orders from Washington," though the office had every reason to suspect Moussaoui was "up to something" since he only wanted to learn how to "steer" a commercial airliner, and was not interested in take-offs or landings).
The FBI interviewed Nick Berg about Moussaoui's use of his e-mail account to send "emails" but concluded that it was entirely "coincidental." Berg had apparently given the password to his e-mail account to an acquaintance of Moussaoui who he met on a bus (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Northeast/05/13/berg.encounter/index.html).
3. We now know the military lied about keeping Nick Berg in custody. Why did the US Military hold Nick Berg for 13 days? That question has yet to be answered, nor have we been provided an answer as to why the military lied about holding Nick Berg.
4. On the first day of Nick Berg's execution, it was reported on several major news networks that Al-Qaeda was connected to the executioner's statement, which turned out to be false. The US Intelligence translation still retains this "reference" to Al-Qaeda, which does not exist. (Muslim translation: angryfinger.org (Official US Transcript: corrente.blogspot.com
5. There is no evidence that the killer wore a prosthetic device (as Abu Musab Zarqawi allegedly does, according to previous CIA reports). (http://www.iht.com/articles/86184.html)
6. The skin color of the terrorists in the film is white, not brown.. (http://www.angryfinger.org/archives/000232.html)
7. The orange jump suit "appears" to be identical to the jumpsuits used at Guantanamo.
8. Large green tattooed "dots" are known to be on the back of Abu Musab Zarqawi's left hand. These tattoos cannot be seen in the close up video of the execution, though the back of his hand is fairly visible. (http://www.iht.com/articles/86184.html)
9. At least some experts have agreed that the accent of the executioner is not "Jordanian," the birthplace of Abu Musab Zarqawi (http://www.angryfinger.org/archives/000232.html).
10. It has been reported all week in the media that Nick Berg was "looking for business" for his small telecommunications business (some of his friends in Iraq who were interviewed said "business was booming," yet others said Nick was leaving because he "couldn't find any work.")
11. It has been reported by people who knew Nick in Iraq (interviews, major networks) that strangely enough, Nick "traveled" at night. Indeed, when Nick was initially picked up by Iraqi Police (checkpoint) he was held because of "suspicious activity."
Analysis of Execution video -- I propose that the executioner's voice (according to my analysis of listening closely to the audio feed) is not that of the killer's. When listening to the executioner's voice on the tape one first notes that there is a 2-3 second lag in the "time" between audio and video, audio leading. This is consistent with the argument that the video camera and tape recorder are actually two different recording devices. What convinced me that the executioner could not be the "voice" behind the document, read prior to Nick Berg's execution, is the lack of consistency seen between the video and audio recordings, even if the 2-3 second delay is considered. A careful viewing of the video shows the executioner on "several occasions" fumbling with the 2 pages that he held, and at times reading the same page over again -- or so it appears. At least 4 times during the video the executioner is "turning over" pages, holding the pages "apart" as if confused, and all of this adds up to one conclusion. There should have been a "pause" or "2-3 second delay" in the reading of the documents during the physical handling of the documents -- but none is found that is long enough to account for it.
Conclusion: The executioner is not "reading" the document. Someone else is. The executioner is trying his best to "lip sinc" the reading, but fails miserably on close inspection. The "smooth" reading of the document is entirely inconsistent (according my analysis of the video) and therefore cannot be the same person that is recording into the audio device.
There are many unanswered questions remaining, the least of which why the networks and military have already been caught in several lies about the whole ordeal.
There is no doubt that this video served the purpose (at least for Freepers) of turning down the heat on the Iraqi abuse scandals (which I would propose is systemic) -- indeed -- the majority of sites which had links to the video (it is difficult to find now) were right wing sites (in their discussions forums they "brag" about this, and the fact that the video links were nearly absent from "left wing" sites; a rather sickening declaration of their hatred of the left).
The timing, the inconsistencies, Berg's motives for being in Iraq, are all unanswered questions. That the executioner appears not to be the "voice" behind the audio seems particularly convincing on close inspection.
Whatever the truth is behind all of this, it is hidden somewhere behind closed doors.
But "closed doors" is the modus operandi of the current Bush administration.
Roy Thomas
Crestview, FL
* * *
Buzz,
Question is: If Nick Berg had ties to Al Quaida, why would they kill him? And why did the Bush Administration put out the story that he was killed because he was Jewish? And if he was Jewish why would Al Quaida have anything to do with him, or he with them?
The whole thing sounds so phony it could come out of a bad movie, only the guy died a horrible death, and is being smeared. The CIA doesn't try this hard for nothing.
A Loyal Expatriate Reader in Germany |
