Posted this on another thread but I think it should be here.

This morning showed the world what religious fundamental fanatics are willing to do to control your lives even your thoughts.
Please note I said religious not just Islamic. Any religion that is used to murder torture control terrorize and discriminate is wrong.
There is nowhere in the Koran that can justify the murder of Nick Berg. Yet they praised Ala.
Christians look in the mirror and ask your self do I use my religion to discriminate or to excuse the discrimination of others. By saying I am not discriminating against a type of person. But won’t say anything to stop it you are just as bad as those that do. Words, action and inaction are just as bad as the knife used on Nick Berg.

CG, turn on your filter, not worth responding to this moron.

And i still agree the war was worth it, in the start at least, time to get out of it now and let all those phycos kill themselves. Now it makes you wonder if it would be better with saddam back in power, at least he knew how to handle them. Its one godless country.

PS. iupdate must be someone i had helped put in jail for steeling on tape (there have been many), notice every post they make, not even in response to mine, has my name in it, only reason i can see he/she/it has so much hate for me, unless it is a islamic fundementalist and then we dont care because this is a Bahamas web site. Unless iupdate is so totally in love me and wants to have my baby! :what:

The Bahamas is open to all religions we just might have a few Islamic fundamentalist. We sure have a lot of Christian fundamentalist and they are just as psycho as the Islamic fundamentalist just our laws keep them in check. They are pushing their agenda though. They say no to: lottery $.50 concert to Harry Potter the list is endless. Oh they also say no to equal human rights. Only their kind of Christian should have equal rights. But then no one is equal are they.

Delroy I just read this I am ashamed of and for you. With what you said you look no better than Sadam himself. Do you think Christ would do what you are saying you would do? War is war hate is hate the only thing Christ sanctioned is love and kindness.

My views haven't changed Vicky. Stick around until the rapture and you will really see what Jesus would do.

Let me give you a little scripture on God and hate:

Deuteronomy 22:5
A woman must not wear men's clothes, and a man must not wear women's clothes. The Lord your God hates anyone who does that.

Enjoy your day.

yeah i saw it 2 days ago. Even though in no way do i condone what they did, but why did they have to saw his head off? The humane thing would have been to use one clean motion but i guess that wasn't their goal.

CG, turn on your filter, not worth responding to this moron.

And i still agree the war was worth it, in the start at least, time to get out of it now and let all those phycos kill themselves. Now it makes you wonder if it would be better with saddam back in power, at least he knew how to handle them. Its one godless country.

PS. iupdate must be someone i had helped put in jail for steeling on tape (there have been many), notice every post they make, not even in response to mine, has my name in it, only reason i can see he/she/it has so much hate for me, unless it is a islamic fundementalist and then we dont care because this is a Bahamas web site. Unless iupdate is so totally in love me and wants to have my baby! :what:

I agree Rory. Like Delroy said it would make more sense to just clean up Saddam and give him his job back. The situation must stabilize and it means a lot more killing who is the best man to take on this dirty look, this dirty job, not Bush, not Blair, it would be far more better if it was Saddam. Now aren’t we glad we dint’ “kill them all”.

Saddam is best monster for the Job he can exercise himself far more of a monster than Bush can ever. In this case save our neighbors America from the outlook of this ugly treachery and embarrassment.

But you are wrong about the hate part, I don’t hate you at all, and you didn’t send me to prison (is that what you do?), I was never there. I was another member, I only changed my username to deal with you, and I decided to be more severe a menace than you to show you up, but your way is not for me.

I do not like insulting people and I did not enjoy the sassiness, I see you enjoy this, but it is for you and not me. I will remain iupdate and go along with the way you are. It would be great if bahamasissues.com can be the first quality intelligent discussion site sticking to the point kind of forum expressing the views form the ‘L” and the “R” without the senselessness and rude bickering that I experience on so many other forums. Perhaps it is not possible and perhaps it is.

Now about the baby part, I don’t like babies for me, because I can’t figure what to do with them.
But if you were a pretty girl :heartbeat

Thanks for your reply.

As for the war being finished (however you care to define it) I don't think so. There is a long way to go yet - perhaps years, in one form or another. Much blood, innocent and guilty will be spilt, this is a tragedy. The only way to end it is to do what has to be done as skillfully as possible. One of the things that must be done is to identify a new leader for Iraq. I don't see this being done. I understand that the US plans to had over power in June. It is now May! Handing things over to a council will not do the job. People like to see a leader, one person who represents the country - someone to follow.

At the risk of straying off topic, I don't see you as a problem. I enjoy hearing your views. If everyone agreed, this would be a dull site indeed.

As for me (or perhaps you were speaking in general?) selecting what I want to answer and ignoring your other points. Well, perhaps I am guilty, but then we all are. You have missed some of mine. On the other hand, some or your questions I took to be rhetorical. Many of your statements, in my mind, required no answer as your message was clear. For example, your remarks about submission. They are well thought out and require no reply. This does not mean I am ignoring them, it just means there is nothing more to say on that matter - you covered it. The same hold true for the anger bit.

I agree CG, some times we miss the point or over look it not always intentionally.

You say: “Do I support the war? Yes - but lets get on with it and do what must be done. The most painless surgery is the one that is done the quickest.”

I agree that the point now is not whether this war was necessary or not, or whether we should have gone to war but how to clean it up now that is going on and going wrong.

Someone said: “A good general is one who is willing to go anywhere to enhance it, and if he can not enhance it he dwell in it the way it is at the least; and when he leaves he leave it the way it was in the least – before he got there, almost as if he was never there” but, in any way never in the lesser state.

So then the question is not only for Iraq what but also how. The US is faced with a race of people who have live in the despair and suffering of war all their lives, and the worst thing of all that it can continue to do is create despair and suffering. At this time the war has done just this and at same time while liberating they are creating the fight that they are trying to put down and put away. Fighting is all the Iraqis know it is all the Arab world knows - for centuries and thousands of years of theocratic oppression. So then why be there and fight? Force is necessary where force is necessary and obsessive use of forces makes only for fighting, and the Arabs-the Iraqis know how to fight and they will fight back as they are fighting back now.

Most of us here in the western world do not understand this that is because we know only peace, so then we think that war is the answer, we may be horrify of the thought of war on us, and will be more easily able to contain even than the Haitians, that is because we don’t know war, but not the Iraqis. Perhaps a bit of calm will come from the fighting, but it will not last.

The US needs an overhauling of methods to make this work. Many US generals continue to disagree with the heavy handed violent tactics of the US forces, not only because they are from the other side of politics, because the people who do not want the liberation of Iraq choose a fight and the fight is exactly what these people want and know. And, now terrorist groups and US oppositions are capitalizing on the negativity of this war, the deaths, the prison abuse, the rapes and tortures, the oil shipments, and only God knows what else, etc.

Now that US is bogged down, the point is HOW. Perhaps they are not listening at all but I know for sure that they are paying millions of dollars to for advice that is locking them in to a bigger and longer fight. So, until they change how they are doing what they do, the most anyone can do is post the solutions, perhaps they would turn to the forums to find their way out, and the US can download solutions for free! :hammer:

I agree CG, some times we miss the point or over look it not always intentionally.

You say: “Do I support the war? Yes - but lets get on with it and do what must be done. The most painless surgery is the one that is done the quickest.”

I agree that the point now is not whether this war was necessary or not, or whether we should have gone to war but how to clean it up now that is going on and going wrong.

Someone said: “A good general is one who is willing to go anywhere to enhance it, and if he can not enhance it he dwell in it the way it is at the least; and when he leaves he leave it the way it was in the least – before he got there, almost as if he was never there” but, in any way never in the lesser state.

So then the question is not only for Iraq what but also how. The US is faced with a race of people who have live in the despair and suffering of war all their lives, and the worst thing of all that it can continue to do is create despair and suffering. At this time the war has done just this and at same time while liberating they are creating the fight that they are trying to put down and put away. Fighting is all the Iraqis know it is all the Arab world knows - for centuries and thousands of years of theocratic oppression. So then why be there and fight? Force is necessary where force is necessary and obsessive use of forces makes only for fighting, and the Arabs-the Iraqis know how to fight and they will fight back as they are fighting back now.

Most of us here in the western world do not understand this that is because we know only peace, so then we think that war is the answer, we may be horrify of the thought of war on us, and will be more easily able to contain even than the Haitians, that is because we don’t know war, but not the Iraqis. Perhaps a bit of calm will come from the fighting, but it will not last.

The US needs an overhauling of methods to make this work. Many US generals continue to disagree with the heavy handed violent tactics of the US forces, not only because they are from the other side of politics, because the people who do not want the liberation of Iraq choose a fight and the fight is exactly what these people want and know. And, now terrorist groups and US oppositions are capitalizing on the negativity of this war, the deaths, the prison abuse, the rapes and tortures, the oil shipments, and only God knows what else, etc.

Now that US is bogged down, the point is HOW. Perhaps they are not listening at all but I know for sure that they are paying millions of dollars to for advice that is locking them in to a bigger and longer fight. So, until they change how they are doing what they do, the most anyone can do is post the solutions, perhaps they would turn to the forums to find their way out, and the US can download solutions for free! :hammer:

I agree with most of your posting but allow me to answer the last paragraph,

The Vietnam War showed American a lesson. Never let Politicians run a war. They don't know how to! War is for the Military. That is their job, that is what they train to do. They cannot do that job however if they are being second guessed by guys in comfortable chairs in Washington - it just can't work that way! And it will never work if the Commanders have to get the OK from Washington before they can spit!

This war is beginning to look like it is being fought for Political objectives rather than Military ones. (Political and Military objectives are never the same.) If I am right then this is what is bogging down the Americans, not the pictures, nor the innocent deaths, or anything else. Political interference is the villain here.

If I was Bush I would say to the Top Military Brass, "O.K. boys do what needs to be done. Call me when it is finished." Then I would go and do something else, like trying to win the next election - which he will not win if he keeps fiddling around in Iraq.

I agree with most of your posting but allow me to answer the last paragraph,

The Vietnam War showed American a lesson. Never let Politicians run a war. They don't know how to! War is for the Military. That is their job, that is what they train to do. They cannot do that job however if they are being second guessed by guys in comfortable chairs in Washington - it just can't work that way! And it will never work if the Commanders have to get the OK from Washington before they can spit!

This war is beginning to look like it is being fought for Political objectives rather than Military ones. (Political and Military objectives are never the same.) If I am right then this is what is bogging down the Americans, not the pictures, nor the innocent deaths, or anything else. Political interference is the villain here.

If I was Bush I would say to the Top Military Brass, "O.K. boys do what needs to be done. Call me when it is finished." Then I would go and do something else, like trying to win the next election - which he will not win if he keeps fiddling around in Iraq.

very well said and this is in need of no further explanation, at least not from me.

My views haven't changed Vicky. Stick around until the rapture and you will really see what Jesus would do.

Let me give you a little scripture on God and hate:

Deuteronomy 22:5
A woman must not wear men's clothes, and a man must not wear women's clothes. The Lord your God hates anyone who does that.

Enjoy your day.

Read it again

Deuteronomy 22
5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Tell the women to stop wearing pants they pertain unto a man.
Also When I or my wife buys a bra for me its mine not a womans.
Also as far as the Old Testament what is the differance between a garment and clothes?
The next thing I don't live by any of the Old Testement I live by the teachings of Christ the man who walked the earth.

Here is something from the Old Testament for you
1 Samuel 16
7 But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.


The New Testament
Galatians 3
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Christ said nothing about male or female clothing or garmrnts.
Also to point out you are picking on one law of the Old Testament. How about all the others you don't live by. Its called being a hypocrite

Here are Christ's referance to Hypocrite
Matthew 6:2
Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Matthew 6:5
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Matthew 6:16
Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Matthew 7:5
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Matthew 15:7
Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

Matthew 16:3
And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?

Matthew 22:18
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?

Matthew 23:13
But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

Matthew 23:14
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.

Matthew 23:15
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

Matthew 23:23
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Matthew 23:25
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.

Matthew 23:27
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.

Matthew 23:29
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

Matthew 24:51
And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Mark 7:6
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

Luke 6:42
Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.

Luke 11:44
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them.

Luke 12:56
Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time?

Luke 13:15
The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or his *** from the stall, and lead him away to watering?

I am having a very nice day

Bras are you man enough to wear one.

Who did this was it Islam or US agents?

The Unanswered Questions of Nick Berg's Murder
by Anthony Gregory

Updated 5/15/04 7:30 pm EDT

The mysteries surrounding the murder of Nicholas Berg multiply. There are a few mysteries that need to be cleared up.

Who Had Custody of Nick Berg, and When?

Michael Berg, Nicholas's father, insists that for eleven days Nicholas was detained by U.S. forces in Iraq, and the reason Berg lost his life "was the fact that the U.S. government saw fit to keep him in custody for 13 days without any of his due process or civil rights."

According to Berg's friend, Chilean journalist Hugo Infante, Berg told Infante that "Iraqi police caught [him] one night, they saw [his] passport and [his] Jewish last name and [his] Israeli stamp. This guy thought [he] was a spy so they put [him] with American soldiers and American soldiers put [him] in a jail for two weeks."

U.S. officials deny that Berg was ever held in custody by U.S. forces. However, a U.S. general says that FBI agents were the ones who instructed the Iraq police to detain Berg for two weeks, since he was traveling In Iraq without proper documentation. According to the official story, local police in Mosul arrested Berg on March 24 and released him on April 6, during which period the FBI visited the detainee three times.

Mosul police chief Maj. Gen. Mohammed Khair al-Barhawi denies that Berg was ever in Iraqi custody, saying that "The Iraqi police never arrested the slain American…. Take it from me… that such reports are baseless."

Even if the Iraqi police chief is inaccurate in denying Nick was ever in Iraqi custody, Nick’s family remains unconvinced that U.S. officials were not ultimately responsible. Nick’s father said to the Associated Press: "The Iraqi police do not tell the FBI what to do, the FBI tells the Iraqi police what to do. Who do they think they’re kidding?" Nick’s brother, David, points out, "The jail had U.S. MP's in it. Technically it was an Iraqi prison, but there is no Iraqi government, so what does that mean?" Given the recent claim from a U.S. general that the FBI instructed the Iraqi police to hold Nick Berg, his family’s attitude on this makes a lot of sense.

As evidence that Nick was in fact in U.S. custody, his family has provided an e-mail sent on April 1 from U.S. consular officer in Iraq, Beth A. Payne, which says plainly:

"I have confirmed that your son, Nick, is being detained by the U.S. military in Mosul. He is safe. He was picked up approximately one week ago. We will try to obtain additional information regarding his detention and a contact person you can communicate with directly."

Spokeswoman Kelly Shannon has responded that Payne was wrong about this, saying that "as Mr. Berg had been released, the consular officer did not convey this information to the family because he was released, thankfully…. And we thought he was on his way."

Shannon has also said that on April 10 – four days after he was supposedly released from Iraqi custody – the United States offered Berg a flight out of Iraq and into Jordan, but he declined the offer because he thought it wasn't safe. For the next couple days Berg reportedly stayed at a hotel, but had no contact with his family. It's very unclear what happened in those crucial days.

Perhaps strangest of all is Michael Berg's mention of a possible arrangement he says he heard about, in which his son might have been released by al-Qaeda in exchange for an Iraqi prisoner:

"I would like to ask him if it is true that al-Qaida offered to trade my son's life for the life of another person…. And if that is true, well, I need that information. ... and I think the people of the United States of America need to know what the fate of their sons and daughters might be in the hands of the Bush administration."

Email Address Plot Twist

The most recent, and possibly most bizarre, development in this mystery is the enigmatic pre-9/ll connection between Berg and al Qaeda. News has just broken that the FBI had investigated Berg in 2002, because his e-mail password had been found in the possession of Zacarias Moussaoui, who had been arrested shortly before September 11. According the Berg’s father, U.S. authorities determined during the investigation that Moussaoui got the password when Berg carelessly let Moussaoui use his computer after they met on a bus.

Some have theorized that perhaps this completely coincidental incident is what inspired FBI agents to question Berg while he was in Iraqi custody, but now that Berg is thought to have been detained at the FBI’s request, we have a more likely explanation for the visits.

So far, the U.S. government has shed very little light on the surreal Moussaoui coincidence.

Further Questions

Some have focused on questioning the credibility of the execution video itself, pointing out that one of Berg's executioners wore a gold ring, forbidden by Islam. There has been little progress on these types of questions, but one does not have to be a conspiracy nut to find this whole story perplexing.

Many questions must be asked. Why was Nick Berg's company, Prometheus Methods Tower Services Inc., not registered with the Pennsylvania State Department? What was Nick Berg doing in Iraq in the first place, if, as his father says, he "was not over there to make money"? What happened in the crucial days during which Berg supposedly stayed at the Iraqi hotel?

Most importantly: Who had custody of Nick Berg, and when? If he was in Iraqi custody, why did the FBI visit him three times, and in what ways did the U.S. authorities have operational control over his custody? Why do the Iraqi police, working with the U.S. government, insist they never held him?

And if the U.S. government changes its story, why has it not been candid in the first place? An editorial in today's New York Times concludes:

"The occupation authority needs to stop passing off those questions to the Iraqi police force, which does not exist other than as an agent of American power. The Berg family deserves answers so they can grieve for their son's death in peace."

Berg's family definitely deserves answers, and so do the American people. With the way things are going, any answers will probably lead to even more and bigger questions.

Who did this was it Islam or US agents?

The Unanswered Questions of Nick Berg's Murder
by Anthony Gregory

Updated 5/15/04 7:30 pm EDT

The mysteries surrounding the murder of Nicholas Berg multiply. There are a few mysteries that need to be cleared up.

Who Had Custody of Nick Berg, and When?

Michael Berg, Nicholas's father, insists that for eleven days Nicholas was detained by U.S. forces in Iraq, and the reason Berg lost his life "was the fact that the U.S. government saw fit to keep him in custody for 13 days without any of his due process or civil rights."

According to Berg's friend, Chilean journalist Hugo Infante, Berg told Infante that "Iraqi police caught [him] one night, they saw [his] passport and [his] Jewish last name and [his] Israeli stamp. This guy thought [he] was a spy so they put [him] with American soldiers and American soldiers put [him] in a jail for two weeks."

U.S. officials deny that Berg was ever held in custody by U.S. forces. However, a U.S. general says that FBI agents were the ones who instructed the Iraq police to detain Berg for two weeks, since he was traveling In Iraq without proper documentation. According to the official story, local police in Mosul arrested Berg on March 24 and released him on April 6, during which period the FBI visited the detainee three times.

Mosul police chief Maj. Gen. Mohammed Khair al-Barhawi denies that Berg was ever in Iraqi custody, saying that "The Iraqi police never arrested the slain American…. Take it from me… that such reports are baseless."

Even if the Iraqi police chief is inaccurate in denying Nick was ever in Iraqi custody, Nick’s family remains unconvinced that U.S. officials were not ultimately responsible. Nick’s father said to the Associated Press: "The Iraqi police do not tell the FBI what to do, the FBI tells the Iraqi police what to do. Who do they think they’re kidding?" Nick’s brother, David, points out, "The jail had U.S. MP's in it. Technically it was an Iraqi prison, but there is no Iraqi government, so what does that mean?" Given the recent claim from a U.S. general that the FBI instructed the Iraqi police to hold Nick Berg, his family’s attitude on this makes a lot of sense.

As evidence that Nick was in fact in U.S. custody, his family has provided an e-mail sent on April 1 from U.S. consular officer in Iraq, Beth A. Payne, which says plainly:

"I have confirmed that your son, Nick, is being detained by the U.S. military in Mosul. He is safe. He was picked up approximately one week ago. We will try to obtain additional information regarding his detention and a contact person you can communicate with directly."

Spokeswoman Kelly Shannon has responded that Payne was wrong about this, saying that "as Mr. Berg had been released, the consular officer did not convey this information to the family because he was released, thankfully…. And we thought he was on his way."

Shannon has also said that on April 10 – four days after he was supposedly released from Iraqi custody – the United States offered Berg a flight out of Iraq and into Jordan, but he declined the offer because he thought it wasn't safe. For the next couple days Berg reportedly stayed at a hotel, but had no contact with his family. It's very unclear what happened in those crucial days.

Perhaps strangest of all is Michael Berg's mention of a possible arrangement he says he heard about, in which his son might have been released by al-Qaeda in exchange for an Iraqi prisoner:

"I would like to ask him if it is true that al-Qaida offered to trade my son's life for the life of another person…. And if that is true, well, I need that information. ... and I think the people of the United States of America need to know what the fate of their sons and daughters might be in the hands of the Bush administration."

Email Address Plot Twist

The most recent, and possibly most bizarre, development in this mystery is the enigmatic pre-9/ll connection between Berg and al Qaeda. News has just broken that the FBI had investigated Berg in 2002, because his e-mail password had been found in the possession of Zacarias Moussaoui, who had been arrested shortly before September 11. According the Berg’s father, U.S. authorities determined during the investigation that Moussaoui got the password when Berg carelessly let Moussaoui use his computer after they met on a bus.

Some have theorized that perhaps this completely coincidental incident is what inspired FBI agents to question Berg while he was in Iraqi custody, but now that Berg is thought to have been detained at the FBI’s request, we have a more likely explanation for the visits.

So far, the U.S. government has shed very little light on the surreal Moussaoui coincidence.

Further Questions

Some have focused on questioning the credibility of the execution video itself, pointing out that one of Berg's executioners wore a gold ring, forbidden by Islam. There has been little progress on these types of questions, but one does not have to be a conspiracy nut to find this whole story perplexing.

Many questions must be asked. Why was Nick Berg's company, Prometheus Methods Tower Services Inc., not registered with the Pennsylvania State Department? What was Nick Berg doing in Iraq in the first place, if, as his father says, he "was not over there to make money"? What happened in the crucial days during which Berg supposedly stayed at the Iraqi hotel?

Most importantly: Who had custody of Nick Berg, and when? If he was in Iraqi custody, why did the FBI visit him three times, and in what ways did the U.S. authorities have operational control over his custody? Why do the Iraqi police, working with the U.S. government, insist they never held him?

And if the U.S. government changes its story, why has it not been candid in the first place? An editorial in today's New York Times concludes:

"The occupation authority needs to stop passing off those questions to the Iraqi police force, which does not exist other than as an agent of American power. The Berg family deserves answers so they can grieve for their son's death in peace."

Berg's family definitely deserves answers, and so do the American people. With the way things are going, any answers will probably lead to even more and bigger questions.

Interesting, but not likely he was killed by anyone other than the fundamentalists. I wonder why Americans always see a conspiracy?

I would question one thing, "Some have focused on questioning the credibility of the execution video itself, pointing out that one of Berg's executioners wore a gold ring, forbidden by Islam." I knew a lot of Islamic people, many, if not most worn rings, gold or silver ones.

Interesting, but not likely he was killed by anyone other than the fundamentalists. I wonder why Americans always see a conspiracy?

I would question one thing, "Some have focused on questioning the credibility of the execution video itself, pointing out that one of Berg's executioners wore a gold ring, forbidden by Islam." I knew a lot of Islamic people, many, if not most worn rings, gold or silver ones.

that's becuase like a lot of the persons that follow religion they nit pick and choose exactly what laws to follow

2.331:albukhary
Narrated Al-Bara' bin `Azib:
Allah's Apostle ordered us to do seven things and forbade us to do other seven.
He ordered us:
to follow the funeral procession. to visit the sick, to accept invitations,
to help the oppressed, to fulfill the oaths, to return the greeting and to
reply to the sneezer: (saying, "May Allah be merciful on you," provided
the sneezer says, "All the praises are for Allah,"). He forbade us to use
silver utensils and dishes and to wear golden rings, silk (clothes), Dibaj
(pure silk cloth), Qissi and Istabraq (two kinds of silk cloths).

that's becuase like a lot of the persons that follow religion they nit pick and choose exactly what laws to follow

That is true, and in some cases, thank God they do.

By the way, the words you quoted are by Syed Mohamad Albukhary and are not in the Koran, correct? In fact in (the Koran) Al-Kahf 18.31 it speaks of the rewards for the righteous: "For them will be Gardens of Eternity; beneath them rivers will flow; they will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold, and they will wear green garments of fine silk and heavy brocade: They will recline therein on raised thrones. How good the recompense! How beautiful a couch to recline on!"

http://www.oldradio.com/people/berg.htm

Some more Nick Berg info...

Interesting, but not likely he was killed by anyone other than the fundamentalists. I wonder why Americans always see a conspiracy?

I would question one thing, "Some have focused on questioning the credibility of the execution video itself, pointing out that one of Berg's executioners wore a gold ring, forbidden by Islam." I knew a lot of Islamic people, many, if not most worn rings, gold or silver ones.

You say: “Interesting, but not likely he was killed by anyone other than the fundamentalists. I wonder why Americans always see a conspiracy?”

Not all of us will believe and do believe the same thing. I approach each subject in what possible without resorting to side though at most times you might find me down the middle way. And from time to time I might lean to L or R rather than down the middle, nothing is wrong either way.

First of all I will say this, as far as I know, it seems to me that each time the fundamentalist of terrorist groups do something they stand by it and back their claim, and even before they do it they announce publicly before they act.

Perhaps there are many cases where they don’t. But there are many cases where the government is involved in crimes that are denied and only later documents are released to prove that it was so all along. But since time has passed and anger has calm it becomes more of historical facts and figures to some, but yet again by some a memory in which to judge or view what is known.


There are many articles and books that are published on the subject of conspiracy most of these articles we see from day to day, but one book in particular that reminds some of us of the memories of the pass is “Ghost Wars “ by Steve Coll. Since politicians or officials are unwilling at most times to admit directly the truth the case at hand, or since they choose to twist and to spin the point, or to answer a question to their advantages rather than to the question based on the moment of truth- “no hidden files” (so that they can move on, so that there is no consequences to affect something else or future politicians later), then the what else can the documents and interviews of the noble prize winner and denials of the politicians allows but for each individual to choose what he believes.

Because we have far more denials and very little confessions of the pass, we may know more of the truth in the future, but as for now what we have articles and books, any some will believe and some won’t, what else do we have other than this to make our judgment? Politicians are making conspiracy, they know that the truth will come forth later, so then bring it out now "kill that one time" and move on.

Many can write and present facts but it would be a whole lot easier if the authorities would answer truthfully the questions, then the thought of conspiracy would be a limited concern and not so much a 50-50 thing. But we know that not every act will be claimed by their perpetrators and not every article or book will be true but so far the denials of the pass and present fact stirs the opinion of conspiracy.

If the US is at fault here and not Islamic fundamentalist, then Islam has brought this on themselves by their pass and present actions. If Islam is at fault and not the US officials then the US has brought this on them selves by their pass and present actions. Not every one will believe that it is US, but there are many who do. Not every one will believe that Islam is guilty of this, and it is obvious that this is so, many do.

There is no one answer to this war, but each thing is apart of a sum that makes for the answer to end or to prolong the fight, this is how it seems to me. Regardless to who performed this act it is clear that the pass and present actions of either sides is contributing to making this war more difficult to win hearts and minds, rather it seems to me, whether this is intentional or not it seems that such actions are fueling an already prolonged fight.