to be clear - my primary hyopthesis is that theres something fishy going on with the berg/f911 video, beyond that its all a guess - so we are henceforth in the realm of speculation - as i said, my hypothesis leaves me well short in terms of trying to explain it.
looking at the facts as i know them to be, they *seem* to maybe point to the possibility that the video doesnt exist.

as i said, i cant put the pieces together, yet, but *if* the video doesnt exist, then we have to look for a possible set of scenarios that might explain the circumstances "im still short on a few things - mostly motivations" - hence my most unsatisfying stretch to the cia in an attempt to find something that fits., and i agree wholeheartedly that it all seems illogical - but that was my 'best speculative guess' simply cos i dont have any other guesses... i know it seems unbelievable - but that seems to be where the facts point

the best i could come up with for motivations for the CIA was the 'tower guy' thing, or praps proving that sunberg was in the us at the time. unsatisfying.

the best i could come up with for motivations for moore was money. again, unsatisfying. or praps it was an offer he couldnt refuse.

independent (for the time being) of motivations, the apparent facts of the f911 video seem odd. and while you say that everything about the berg story is odd, that doesnt therefore mean that we simply ignore the 911berg video cos its also odd. of course, the fact that the tape exists is odd all by itself... as i said the other day - whatever the truth of bergs story, its almost inevitably gotta be near-unbelievable and spooky.

in no particular order, here are the reasons why i think that the tape might not exist - no smoking guns, but i think theres enough here to arouse some suspicion.

1. no-one mentioned the existence of the bergf911 video till moore announced it a few weeks after bergs beheading - this at a time when both berg and f911/cannes stories were top of the news. and remember, news travels fast - the berg beheading was in congress the *same day* that the video was released. yet no-one in the f911 team mentioned it, nor any of his friends. it seems that sunberg was intending to use the interview to drum up business, yet he was apparently silent about it...

2. sunberg was an avid emailer to family and friends, yet he seems not to have mentioned to anyone that he was interviewed in december for a movie that will probably become the biggest doco ever, with a director who already holds that title, and an academy award. we certainly dont have any confirmation that any knew of it before, but we have specific information that the sister didnt know, and didnt believe it existed. theres no discussion that she was estranged from the family and she is acting as a fam spokesperson, in part. they seem to be a closish family - at least to the extent that sunberg and dadberg worked together in their own 2-man company - promestheus (which incidentally wasnt registered to do business)

3. its true that he said it was 'a personal thing for the bergs' - but i just dont buy it. for starters, f911 aparently has a bunch of ugly footage of wounded and dead people - did he think about other families? why on earth would he extend such a courtesy to the bergs? the video was benign remember - its not like he was dealing with anything toxic like the beheading footage. and berg was already public property - his beheading having already been seen around the world - unlike the other footage that moore uses which is much more shocking for families, and most probably unseen by them... why the misplaced sensitivity all of a sudden?

4. and even if the *video* was 'a personal thing for the bergs', that doesnt mean that the berg story is a personal thing. even for pure financial/publicity reasons, one would normally expect moore to at least give his reasons for giving back the video, or say what a good kid sunberg was and that its unfortunate that he is dead cos of an unjustified war. most directors do the talkshow thing to build up a movie before release, and moore is praps the loudest of them all, yet he has shutup, 3 weeks before the release (june 26). even if the objective was trying to soften his boorish image and look like a good guy, he could announce with dignity why he returned it to the family. his website doesnt even have the statement that he released to the media.

5. and point 4 is all assuming that the official original berg story is true - yet we have majormedia asking serious questions about whether thats the case - the grazing couldnt be more fertile, yet moore shuts up for the first time ever - purportedly for respect to the family, altho that is inconsistent with his treatment of many other familes, and the tape is benign, and even if it was for the berg family, then he still is passing up enormous opportunities to get in front of a camera (for publicity or politics) where he could make his point without disrespecting the family. i just dont buy it. did the moore pr team somehow have this conversation a: ya know how his boorish behaviour (and directing skills) have made him a household name, and the highest selling doc, and a palmedor and an oscar? b:yeah a: and ya know how he has a movie coming out in 3 weeks? b: yeah a: and ya know how much free media this berg thing is getting? b: yeah a: lets do a 180 turnaround and change our successful formula rather than get involved with this perfect storm b: yeah.

6. hithertofore outspoken, articulate dadberg gets outta town the minute they are about to receive the video, and apparently cant be fedexd a copy. it could be that he was getting outta the kitchen cos he didnt think he could lie convincingly for the cameras.

7. each to their own form of grieving of course, but ive seen some parents with recently dead kids who would love to have a recent, unseen 16minute video of their now-gone kid - and they didnt have to suffer the horrors of repeatedly seeing images of their kids death in newspapers & tv, or have to deal with the uncertainty of having a bunch of conspiracy theories about whether/how the kid died. most mothers i know would be desperate to see the footage - not only for the nice memories, but becuase they seem to cling to the hope that their kid mite still be alive - especially given the wide-ranging speculation about his death. and most mums would wanna look at the footage to see if they could glean any extra bit of understanding about the situation. one mum i know of a trainwreck victim couldnt believe that the dead kid in her sons clothes with her sons wallet (and a missing son) was sure that he'd run away. most mums i know seem to think (often correctly) that they know every expression/emotion of their sons. if i were nicks mum, id wanna see the video to see if i could put any of the confusing pieces together - its bad enough having a dead kid, being uncertain as to the facts would be horrible - and id try to make sense of it all.

8. sisberg called the vid "a gift" - given the grief the parents have been through, wouldnt you also want your parents to share the gift and try to help them ameliorate the pain for the next 2 weeks? i would. and i cant imagine parents running away incommunicado just weeks after the beheading, and with the possibility that more news would come out.

9. dadberg is outspoken and virulently antibush and antiwar - claiming that bush & rumsfeld killed he son - although he didnt mean it literally at the time. since then, the evidence has pointed to a much more literal interpretation, and now he goes away for a couple of weeks. true, he and mumberg might have needed to get away for a bit, but dadberg was saying recently how much strength he has found thru the experience and the importance of unselecting bush and demanding peace and generally saving the world, and how important nicks work was and how it must be continued et al. and he gets his opportunity to really step up to the plate and make a difference (with moore) and he goes awol. he doesnt even need to say anything much anymore, all he has to do is sit next to moore at a press conference and his cause would make the news all round the world. or if he was getting sick of it all he could give moore permission to speak on his behalf, or read a statement or wotever. dadberg could hardly find a better platform to promote his cause stopthewar/avenge his son/save others/stop bush. and yet we get silence from the land of no fedex... dadbergs new-found silence is somewhat similar to moores new-found silence.

10. the family decided not to release the footage *before* (without) the parents had seen it. dadberg being the spokeshead of the family, with his newfound strength and determination to step up to the plate and make sure that his son didnt die in vain, who presumably had been informed that it was mostly dry technical stuff, except for when he talks about his humanitarian deeds in uganda and kenya. why rule out using it without seeing it? for personal reasons u mite wanna release it to leave the world with a different reminder (articulate, ambitious, humanitarian, besuited) of your son than being unheaded with a girlie squeal in a prison suit. and for political reasons, yuo might wanna show how immoral and stupid the war is - killing nice people and all that... even if u decided at a later point not to show any of the footage, it seems like an odd decision to make in advance. and its not like they can hope the story will go away, whether they like it or not, their sons death is part of the abuG pix story and that story has about 1785 photos and some high level sackings to go. the unheading is inextricably linked to the abuGpix - either 'arabs are worse - look at berg' or 'the unheading was designed to minimise the impact of the abugpix'. either way, their nightmare isnt over, so simply not playing isnt really an option. one might imagine that a 'we havent decided yet' would be more rational than 'we wont release' - altho one doesnt necessarily expect rationality from people in such circumstances. i havent heard of any publicity agents swarming - one expects that the harrymmillers are licking their lips at the prospects - the bergs could feed the profits into one charity or other... building towers in uganda or something nick cared about. the berg story is out there, they might as well use it for some good or something... better that than see gwb use the beheading footage in a campaign video to prove that muslims are bad and gwb should be re-elected...

10. im not sure of the logic of treating a dry video as a family matter, and then get the only 2 people who have seen it sisberg/broberg in front of the media talking about it. if you wanna go underground, fine, but shutup. otherwise, i cant see how it makes sense.

11. moore didnt conduct the interview - we havent yet heard who did the interview, or heard from them

remember, this war is widely acknowledged to be a war of images, and moore is a filmmaker who rails against govt propaganda and media control, and he has legitimate, orginal, relevant footage, which was filmed with sunbergs consent, shows him in a good light and has no controversial content.


so there you go - i reckon theres enough there at least to question the official story of the f911berg video. and to the extent that *might* be true, then there is a bunch of new unanswered questions - and, if true, its hard to conceive of a situation where mm (and the berg family) isnt complicit... how it fits together, nobody knows. where it stops, nobody knows, if you are sniffly, blow your nose. if u dont wear shoes, you'll get cold toes. if u shut your mouth, you'll have fewer foes. will they lynch the kobes, and the wackojacko's?

i agree that the cia/moore thing sounds most unlikely, but theres very little that would surprise me these days... power corrupts, and absolute power blah blah... it somehow seems easier to believe that moore is corruptible (or anyone else - we've seen so much of it) than to believe that he turned into a class act all of a sudden for no apparent reason. im not a moore hater (nor his biggest fan) - but the facts seem to suggest the possibility that the official story is wrong, which usually means that theres another story which is right, and which was obscured for one reason or other... and the fact that moore has stepped into the fray means either that the story is correct, or that he is complicit.

one *speculative* *hypothesis* mite have moore talking to (representatives of) the cadmin in his negotiations for f911 distribution - cutting out certain scenes to get extra screens etc - and *conceivably* the berg proposition was put to him there. that would (partially) explain why they used such a big stick - thats all they had lying around. to the extent that the beheading video isnt legitimate, then it would appear that they mite be getting a lil desperate, and if they are getting desperate, what wouldnt they do? in this scenario, praps they asked him to claim that the cia/fbi's footage was from f911 research. or praps berg isnt dead and it is actually a post-beheading interview. praps if the fam releases the video, the usual suspects will be able to demonstrate in a minute that it isnt real - just like the beheading video.

is my argument convincing/reasonable in the slightest? or u still think im completely barking up the wrong tree?

(if i can clear up the jonah thing - i mentioned it firstly cos that was the only other reference i saw to the possibility that the f911 vid might not exist. ive never heard of him before. he is a bushlover/moorehater. and then i noticed that he logged on first thing sunday morning to make a very bland, unsupported, unreferenced, retraction (his only post for the day, its right at the bottom of the page) http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/04_05_30_corner-archive.asp#032811
"I WAS WRONG - Moore didn't lie about having Berg footage." is the entire post. irregardless (sic), jonah is merely incidental to my hypothesis)

alla


>
> _______________________________________________________
> the sky is falling
> wotisitgood4.blogspot.com