I said doubt, not denied.

Fair enough, but in the present context it's surely a distinction not germane to the discussion. Say or think what you like about Father Berg—and I'm not a cheerleader for him—but I don't see him opting contentedly for some bishop consecrated at a funhouse caricature of a Novus Ordo ceremony to ordain his priests.

To speak plainly, with regard to the larger situation, I, unlike you, am glad to admit that I am looking to give Berg and the priests of this Newparish the benefit of the doubt. The part of the country in question is one where the Trad presence is anything but thick on the ground, and I think that the number of people with Traditionalist inclinations or even yearnings who will profit from a radical home-alone plan of action is disappearingly, not to say dangerously, small.

Oh, its germane alright:

The SSPX used to teach us that we must take a tutiorist approach when it comes to sacramental validity, and therefore the faithful are rightfully repulsed by the thought of receiving sacraments from those who were doubtfully ordained.

Some of the best theologians in the SSPX have acknowledged the doubtfulness of the form of the new rite of episcopal consecration: Williamson, de Mallerais, Calderon, Scott, et al.

Avoiding priests ordained by those doubtfully consecrated bishops follows.

FSSP priests fit that bill perfectly.

Archbishop Lefebvre wrote this in his own hand. (He didn't speak English very well)
If you want to say that there's no doubt, take it up with him.
http://www.dominicansavrille.us/questionable-priestly-ordinations-in-the-conciliar-church/

Ecône, 28 oct. 1988
Very dear Mr. Wilson,
thank you very much for your kind letter. I agree with your desire to reordain conditionnaly these priests, and I have done this reordination many times.
All sacraments from the modernists bishops or priests are doubtfull now.  The changes are increasing and their intentions are no more catholics.
We are in the time of great apostasy.
We need more and more bishops and priests very catholics.  It is necessary everywhere in the world.
Thank you for the newspaper article from the Father Alvaro Antonio Perez Jesuit!
We must pray and work hardly to extend the kingdom of Jesus-Christ.
I pray for you and your lovely family.
Devotly in Jesus and Mary.
Marcel Lefebvre

The question is, not whether there is no doubt whatsoever, but whether there is sufficient doubt to declare invalidity of the very forms of Novus Ordo ordination and consecration themselves. The fact that conditionality has ever been stressed in the SSPX, whether by ++Lefebvre or admittedly less so by some of his successors in the SSPX leadership, ought to suggest to those who are sufficiently attentive precisely where the problems, both actual and potential, lie and how they ought to be addressed.

Surely the changes to both rites were grave enough—especially in that they lessened one's ability to be confident, ipso facto, of their sacramental efficacy and validity irrespective of the mind-set of the ordaining or consecrating bishops—without insisting that they are even worse!

I used the phrase "no doubt," not "no doubt whatsoever."
I did not declare all NO ordinations invalid.
I simply said that we cannot say there are no doubt about the new sacraments. Much different from declaring invalidity.