Filmmaker Moore Says He Has Berg Footage

They said no.

I wondered about that... if it were negative against Bush I would have thought he'd release it immediately. But if it were positive and supporting Bush, why would the owner of the tape have given it to Moore? It's all very odd.

WRONG!

The ONLY reason that ANY of this would make ANY sense is that Nick Berg, like his father, was a member of the International A.N.S.W.E.R / Bush-Is-Hitler set. I do not believe a single word of the propaganda that Berg was a Bush / war supporter, for these reasons:

There would have been NO reason for Moore to have scheduled an interview, for his oh-so-subversive documentary, with someone he would have dismissed out-of-hand as an irrational, unsophisticated idiot
IF Berg had been a Bush supporter, his interview would have been released IMMEDIATELY upon news of his murder. What BETTER way for the International A.N.S.W.E.R. VERMIN to "prove" the irrefutable "fact" that people who support Bush / The War, do so in folly until their very deaths?
The ONLY reason NOT to release this interview, is because it EXPOSES Berg as stridently anti-Bush, and lays bare the lie that Islamic fundamentalist terrorists would stop MURDERING us if we would just be NICE to them, and stop "exploiting the world's poor" and "exporting Capitalisam" and "being AmeriKKKa."

I now believe, and will until proven wrong, that Nick Berg - whose murder must be avenged with the full might and force of the United States of America, let there be NO doubt - went, in folly, to Iraq as a self-styled "supporter of the Iraqi resistence." Perhaps to film for Michael Moore. Perhaps to make his own documentary, with Moore's backing. But always, ALWAYS, with the intention of meeting, likely interviewing, "the resistence."

I believe that any public statements he made before his trip, in supposed "support" of it, were to smokescreen his actual intentions when, as he expected, Iraqi informants told coalition officials there was an American nosing around asking questions. NO American is getting into Iraq without the FBI doing a thorough background check, let alone showing up with the CIA unawares.

I believe he intended to document the "abuses" of the "occupation," for eventual publication either by himself or by Moore. And this very naievete, so obvious to all of us at FR, is what got him slowly decapitated while he screamed. This, International A.N.S.W.E.R., THIS is the response to your offered olive branch. Take a GOOD look at it.

THERE IS NO OTHER VIABLE EXPLANATION. And I firmly believe that, had not government spies and informants SEEN Berg in the early cuts of Moore's mockumentary, this would NEVER have been made public by Moore's production company, and that the ONLY reason it has been confirmed, is that Moore knows he is about to be subpoenaed. There may be no crime here, but there is certainly the abject dissolution of every shred of Moore's credibility - and that of International A.N.S.W.E.R.'s entire worldview, as well.

And, here you are now: Nick Berg, obviously, was Moore's cameraman. Interviewing the "minutemen" and the "REVOLUTION" of Iraq.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-04-14

To quote: "I currently have two cameramen/reporters doing work for me in Iraq for my movie (unbeknownst to the Army). They are talking to soldiers and gathering the true sentiment about what is really going on."

Whoolllly sh!!!!!t
ROTFL!

I need a new keeyboard.

So, what is the real story, why no release? I hope it never sees the light of day out of the can-can festival.
The lie is that he just found out that Disney was blocking the release, and that it was because Jeb Bush was pressuring Disney with promises to revoke their tax breaks. The truth is that Disney told him a year ago that they wouldn't allow Miramax to release the movie. He knew this before even an frame of film was shot

Thanks for the info, makes sense, the bafoon is at it again.