PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Michael Berg, whose son Nick was beheaded in Iraq in 2004, said on Thursday he felt no sense of relief at the killing of the al Qaeda leader in Iraq and blamed President Bush for his son's death.

Asked what would give him satisfaction, Berg, an anti-war activist and candidate for U.S. Congress, said, "The end of the war and getting rid of George Bush."

The United States said its aircraft killed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the insurgent leader who masterminded the death of hundreds in suicide bombings and was blamed for the videotaped beheading of Nick Berg, a U.S. contractor, and other captives.


"I don't think that Zarqawi is himself responsible for the killings of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq," Berg said in a combative television interview with the U.S. Fox News network. "I think George Bush is.

"George Bush is the one that invaded this country, George Bush is the one that destabilized it so that Zarqawi could get in, so that Zarqawi had a need to get in, to defend his region of the country from American invaders."

Berg said Bush was to blame for the torture of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad.

"Yeah, like George Bush didn't OK the torture and death and rape of people in the Abu Ghraib prison for which my son was killed in retaliation?" he told his Fox interviewers.

In a telephone interview with Reuters from his home in Wilmington, Delaware, the father said: "I have no sense of relief, just sadness that another human being had to die." Continued...

< Previous 1 | 2 Next > © Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Also on Reuters
In Pictures: Expanding the US-Mexico wall in San LuisAustralian rocks show early signs of life on EarthRonaldo to miss training; World Cup stories, videoAds by GoogleWhat's This?
Reappearance of Christ
He is physically in the world now.Read all about it!
www.Share-International.org

Don’t Shut Down the UN
Tell world leaders: Resolve thecrisis. Take action today!
www.DontShutDownTheUN.org

International Studies
Scholarships, Grants, FinancialAid. Get instant access to free aid
www.MyFreeDegree.com

ID LIKE TO KNOW WHAT MR BERGS SON WOULD SAY ABOUT IHE ASS HOLE WHO SAWED HIS HEAD OFF. ISENT IT BUSHS FAULT THAT OUR FARTS STINK.

The rectal sore who was responsible for Mr Bergs death is now dead. Any virgins reserved for that individual are waiting for him in the everafter. They are dressed up in sexy nighties. Oh, and I think they all go oink oink.

And yes, President Bush is only responsible for the stench that emanates from either end of his GI tract. Being the President of the United States however means that when he farts the world smells it and we all get blamed.

Mr. Berg's opionions seem a bit shy of plumb and square, but he's not completely off. Under a "the buck stops here" presidential philosophy, all things related to the war, good and bad, are Bush's responsibility.

Food for thought: As unlikely as it may seem, consider for a moment that the U.S. loses the war in Iraq. Now consider, would G. Bush be tried as a war criminal by an international tribunal?

Salmo I though you were a moderate?

He is.

Some moderates think Bush is a train wreck. You can call them liberals if it helps, though.

Are any of you nieve enough to think we are going to WIN the war in Irag? Or win any holy war for that matter?

Sol,

Maybe I am naive, but I'm also the moderate, too, remember? I have strongly doubted from the outset that we could win a war in Iraq, but we moderates allow for uncertainty.

PSA1,

You didn't address the question. It's always the zealots who automatically assume their side is infallible and always the "good" guys. We moderates and other critical thinkers try to make as few assumptions as possible and let clear, cogent, and convincing evidence develop our conclusions.

Saddam and Iraq was not a threat to the U.S.

Saddam was not connected to 9/11.

Bush made an unprovoked military invasion of the sovereign country of Iraq.

U.S. military action in Iraq has resulted in the deaths of an estimated 23,000 Iraqis.

Bush is the responsible party, no matter the number of willing accomplices.

How would an International Tribunal handle this?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.