The late, great Jim Croce had a great song out once, called “You Don’t Mess Around With Jim.” And with poetic license and, great deference to Mr. Croce, I’d like to paraphrase him…
You don’t tug on Superman’s cape You don’t spit into the wind You don’t pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger And you don’t mess around with… The US Military
When Taliban Snipers Shot At An Army Base, The Retaliation Was EPIC
You are about to watch one of the most epic videos ever. This is what happens when you mess with US Soldiers. Get ready to be pumped up.
Your ads will be inserted here by
Easy Plugin for AdSense.
Please go to the plugin admin page to Paste your ad code OR Suppress this ad slot.
These brave men were taking fire from the enemy Taliban near a ridge, so they immediately called in the big guns to take care of these terrorist thugs! You can’t miss this video. I have never seen a war video presented in such a cool way.
And just like that… 3 snipers that were responsible for many innocent deaths… blown to bits. That’s how it’s done here in America. When you mess with our brave men and women fighting for our freedom.
In a pair of statements made on Christmas Day and Dec. 28, President Obama said that the U.S. is “ending our combat mission in Afghanistan” but that U.S. forces will remain there “to conduct counterterrorism operations” against what he called the “remnants of al Qaeda.”
The president also said of Afghanistan on Christmas Day: “It’s not going to be a source of terrorist attacks again.”
So we’re getting out, but we’re staying in…
Clear as mud, sir. On Christmas, we’re out of combat!
“This is an important year,” Obama said at Marine Corps Base Hawaii on Dec. 25.
“We’ve been in continuous war now for almost thirteen years—over 13 years,” Obama said. “And next week we will be ending our combat mission in Afghanistan.
“Obviously, because of the extraordinary service of the men and women in the American armed forces, Afghanistan has a chance to rebuild its own country,” Obama continued. “We are safer. It’s not going to be a source of terrorist attacks again.
But three days later, we’re remaining in combat!
And tell me why this is going to be different from any other aspect of your foreign policy? I mean, okay. We’re outta Afghanistan! Whoopee!!
And then on December 28th, he released a NEW statement?
This statement—announcing the “end of the combat mission in Afghanistan”–said U.S. forces would remain in Afghanistan “to conduct counterterrorism operations against the remnants of al Qaeda.”
“Afghanistan remains a dangerous place, and the Afghan people and their security forces continue to make tremendous sacrifices in defense of their country,” Obama said in the statement. “At the invitation of the Afghan government, and to preserve the gains we have made together, the United States–along with our allies and partners–will maintain a limited military presence in Afghanistan to train, advise and assist Afghan forces and to conduct counterterrorism operations against the remnants of al Qaeda.
“Our personnel will continue to face risks, but this reflects the enduring commitment of the United States to the Afghan people and to a united, secure and sovereign Afghanistan that is never again used as a source of attacks against our nation,” Obama said.
I get it!!! If we like our combat, we can keep our combat? Yes? No?
I give up! Can someone put a rush on January 21st, 2017, please?
The mother of an Afghan policeman gunned down by the Taliban reportedly went on a revenge-fuelled spree, helping kill 25 militants in an act that’s being hailed as heroic among her countrymen.
When her son’s police outpost came under attack in the Balabolok district of western Farah province on Nov. 17, Reza Gul said she rushed to the scene, found her son dead and picked up his gun, NBC News reported.
“The Taliban attacked our village and my son’s outpost at dawn,” Gul told NBC News. “After seeing my young son’s body I picked up his gun and decided to fight off the killers of my son until I die.”
Gul and other family members, including her daughter and daughter-in-law, took part in a seven-hour gun battle between police and militants that left 25 Taliban dead and five more wounded, Khaama Press reported.
“The fighting was intensified when we reached the battlefield along with light and heavy weapons,” Gul’s daughter-in-law, Seema, told Tolo News. “We were committed to fight until the last bullet.”
The family went head-to-head with up to 400 militants and eventually drove off the fighters.
Ex-Bergdahl Roommate, retired Army Spc. Cody Full told “The Steve Malzberg Show” that the White House knew he deserted, knew he wasn’t a hero, and knew he Was a traitor before swap.
Bowe Bergdahl’s former roommate, retired Army Spc. Cody Full says the government knew that Bergdahl had deserted his post and was a traitor to his country before they made the swap of five high-level Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay to get him back.
“They have all the documentation on it. The administration knew he deserted, they knew he wasn’t a hero,” retired Army Spc. Cody Full told “The Steve Malzberg Show” on Newsmax TV.
“They knew that he wasn’t captured on a battlefield or lagged behind on a patrol. They knew he went out and deserted on his own.”
Bergdahl was held captive in Afghanistan by the Taliban-aligned Haqqani network from June 2009 until May of this year.
He was traded for five high-ranking Taliban members who were being held at Guantanamo Bay — a secret deal made without the consultation of Congress.
This swap began to stink early on when Bergdahl’s fellow soldiers started telling of his disillusionment with the United States, and eventual desertion.
But the swap quickly came under fire when Bergdahl’s fellow soldiers went public to accuse him of abandoning his post and possibly seeking out the enemy.
Full angrily disagreed with National Security Advisor Susan Rice’s declaration that Bergdahl had served his country with “honor and distinction.”
“Deserting is not serving with honor and distinction and it’s a spit in the face to every U.S. service member who has served with honor and distinction, who has fulfilled his oath. It’s disgusting,” Full said.
Full goes on to say how he felt when he saw Bergdahl’s parents on TV in the Rose Garden with President Obama.
He criticized the fanfare surrounding the Obama administration’s announcement of the deal, which was highlighted by an event in the Rose Garden of the White House in which Bergdahl’s family attended.
“[It] is gross. I mean how many soldiers that have given their lives honorably for this country, how many of their parents had a Rose Garden ceremony?’‘ he asked.
Full said a congressional oversight committee should be formed to further explore how Bergdahl’s actions led to his captivity by terrorists.
“I don’t want to see this get whitewashed,” he said.
Here is his interview on NewsmaxTV on the Steve Malzberg Show.
“I make absolutely no apologies…” – Barack Obama, Democrat
“There was a crooked man, and he walked a crooked mile. He found a crooked sixpence upon a crooked stile. He bought a crooked cat, which caught a crooked mouse, And they all lived together in a little crooked house.” – English Nursery Rhyme
“Impeachment is a political solution to a criminal problem…” – Ben Shapiro
According to a recentstudy, rats are capable of feeling regret about their own actions. This sets them apart from Democrats, who never seem to feel sorry about much of anything.
John Kerry, the Norman Bates of the diplomatic corps, for example, has likened concerns about Barack Obama’s release of five jihadi killers back into gen-pop to an Italian sausage, while his predecessor tours the talk-show circuit, shilling her new book and inventing ever more excuses for her Benghazi dereliction, including a creative attempt to blame the late Ambassador Chris Stevens for his own murder.
The White House, like a broken washer, is stuck on an interminable spin cycle while its dirty laundry piles up faster than the bedsheets in a three-dollar brothel. As the Yankee sage Yogi Berra might say, Barack Obama spends 90% of his time devising ways to ruin the country and the other 50% looking for someone else to blame it on.
[…]in many cases, Obama’s exercise of authoritarian power is criminal. His executive branch is responsible for violations of the Arms Export Control Act in shipping weapons to Syria, the Espionage Act in Libya, and IRS law with regard to the targeting of conservative groups. His executive branch is guilty of involuntary manslaughter in Benghazi and in the Fast and Furious scandal, and bribery in its allocation of waivers in Obamacare and tax dollars in its stimulus spending. His administration is guilty of obstruction of justice and witness tampering … when it comes to presidential lawbreaking, the sitting president could literally strangle someone to death on national television and meet with no consequences.
Former Louisiana governor Edwin Edwards, a Democrat, once boasted that “The only way I can lose is if I’m found in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.” In Obama’s transformed America, neither circumstance seems to matter anymore.
I think that President Obama should have to be locked in a room, broadcast on C-SPAN (REALLY, this time), and have to explain to this young lady why her father’s murderer was released to go and murder more Americans. That little girl hugging her Daddy in the picture above has had to grow up without him and our President just blithely lets his killer go free, and then heads to the friggin’ golf course.
Alison Spann was just 9 when she learned her father, a U.S. Marine turned CIA operative, had become the first American killed in the war in Afghanistan. Thirteen years later, she found out her country had freed the Taliban leader behind his death.
In the time between, Spann has cherished the memory of her father, Johnny Micheal “Mike” Spann, who was killed during a Nov. 25, 2001 prisoner uprising at a northern Afghanistan compound where he was interrogating Taliban fighters. The 32-year-old was buried at Arlington National Cemetery in a ceremony in which he was lauded by then-CIA Director George Tenet for trying to build a “better, safer world.” His daughter has since grown up and recently graduated from Pepperdine University, even as more than 2,300 Americans have died fighting in Afghanistan.
But nothing prepared Alison Spann for news that Mullah Mohammad Fazi, the unquestioned leader of the prisoners at the compound where her father was killed, had been traded along with four cohorts held at Guantanamo Bay for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who had been held by the Taliban for nearly five years..
This piece of excrement doesn’t deserve to be drawing oxygen, much less enjoying his freedom. What kind of human being takes someone’s life by beheading them? And Fazi evidently uses this method often.
I can only imagine how I would feel about this. It is one thing to know your father died a hero, defending his country, but to learn that the President of the United States releases the man who killed him just to gain possible political points?
“My initial reaction was shock. I was shocked that our president would release five of the most high-risk prisoners being held in Guantanamo in exchange for one American,” she told FoxNews.com. “As a whole, my family was extremely upset and saddened that our government would do something like this, especially in light of the fact that it seems that people in the intelligence community are fairly united in their belief that these terrorists are likely to seek to further harm Americans in the future.”
She has followed the story closely, but still cannot fathom how the country her father loved and fought for could allow his killer to go free.
“It does become harder and harder to have faith in an administration that is plagued with scandal after scandal,” she said. “I do not believe that it was the right move by the administration.”
Alison’s father died a hero.
Mike Spann died at the Qala-i-Jangi compound near Mazari Sharit in northern Afghanistan, where he was interrogating detainees captured during the early weeks of the war. Fazi, according to his Guantanamo case file, had been deputy defense minister and commander of all Taliban troops in the northern Afghanistan region at the time of the September 11 attacks. Before that, he was accused by Human Rights organizations of personally supervising the murders of thousands of Shiite and Tajik Sunni Muslims.
And judging by her comments, it seems this 22 year old college grad has more common sense and smarts in her little finger than our Commander in Chief has in his entire scrawny, barely able to life weights, body.
“You cannot release someone of such a high caliber within the Taliban community and expect him to suddenly emerge as a peaceful being. I would think now more than ever after being detained in Gitmo that he would seek revenge on America,” she said. “These prisoners had one goal when they went into Gitmo and I feel certain that they left Gitmo with that same goal, and that is to do harm and spread evil in the world. The implications from this act will reach further than our soil and I am afraid that these prisoners have no plans of standing down from their original fight.”
The debate rages on: Is Barack Obama an epically incompetent amateur? Or is he a cunning and treacherous domestic enemy well on his way to destroying the United States that most of us have known and loved all our lives.
My money is on the latter hypothesis, of course, since the law of averages dictates that no honestAmerican could drive us so unerringly down the road to ruin unless he knew where he was going from the git-go — or in this case, from the Gitmo, that holding pen for the Islamist killers he’s so eagerly setting loose — men like Mohammad Fazi, pictured here in his jihadi heyday:
Then there’s Osama bin Laden’s former bodyguard, soon to be released so’s he can take up farming. Ee-aye-ee-aye-oh. From the NY Post:
If you thought President Obama’s release of five top Taliban commanders in exchange for POW Bowe Bergdahl was bad, wait until you see what his Gitmo parole board plans.
Desperate to empty the Guantanamo Bay prison by the end of his term, Obama quietly is giving “get out of jail free” cards for the flimsiest of excuses.
One al Qaeda suspect captured in Afghanistan is considered reformed because he took up yoga and read a biography of the Dalai Lama. Another is eligible for release because of his “positive attitude.”
And one longtime detainee, a former bodyguard for Osama bin Laden, is now harmless because he’s going to start a “milk and honey farm.”
The Great Humanitarian apparently plans to send all his jihadist brothers back to the ‘Stans, presumably with 40 acres and a goat, where they can harvest milk and honey and human heads in unfettered perpetuity. Meanwhile, our courageous “opposition” party sits on its glutinous derriere and wrings its palsied hands:
Despite anger in many quarters of the nation over the president’s prisoner swap, Republicans are backing off impeachment threats because they fear it would rally President Obama’s Democratic base and kill the GOP’s chances to win the Senate, according to congressional insiders and sources. (Washington Examiner)
Such poltroonery makes sense only if the GOP plans to impeach and wants to ensure conviction. Because someone has to stop this man and to hell with the Democratic base. And the sanction must be severe enough to deter future would-be tyrants. Otherwise, it’s Requiescat In Pace U.S.A.
Evidently Bowe Bergdahl got his feelings hurt when the Taliban didn’t altogether trust him and his intentions…
The Taliban were just as confused by Bowe Bergdahl as the Afghan villagers who first encountered him after he allegedly wandered off his base, two former commanders say. Fighters rushed to capture Bergdahl after villagers informed them of his presence, and he was found walking alone, acting strangely, and cursing his fellow Americans, one commander tells NBC. He said “he wasn’t happy with his countrymen, but he didn’t intend to convert to Islam” or become a jihadi, the commander says. Both say that they at first believed it was some kind of trick, and they wondered how and why he had left the base alone—which he may have done more than once. They say he described his departure as a “personal issue.” A commander who left the Taliban in 2010 says that Bergdahl didn’t convert to Islam. “Think he had deserted his army with a mission and wanted to accept Islam, but our people didn’t trust him,” he says. “That shattered his belief.” Taliban sources say Bergdahl was taken to a “safe location” after his capture, and was later moved around sites in Pakistan.
And all Obama’s and Bergdahl’s actions have done is to empower and rejuvenate our terrorist enemies.
A commander still with the Taliban, meanwhile, says the exchange of Bergdahl for five Taliban leaders gives the movement legitimacy and has boosted morale among the hundreds of fighters under his command. The prisoner exchange “shows we are able to deal directly with the Americans and also successfully,” he tells Reuters.
White House: 90 in Administration Knew of Bergdahl Deal, But Not Congress
Um, we didn’t tell Congress because, um, because we were afraid of a leak bringing danger down on Bergdahl. Yeah, that’s it! We did not want to inform a bunch of folks because we feared for Bergdahl’s life.
Yeah! That’s the ticket!
Between 80 and 90 administration staffers knew about the trade of five Taliban leaders for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl even though Congress was kept in the dark, CNN reports, and members of both parties are unhappy about it.
During a classified briefing to the entire House of Representatives late Monday afternoon, White House officials said that up to 90 people had prior knowledge of the trade.
Well, okay we told a few folks, but – Dude, it was only like 80 or 90 people! What harm could that have done?
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon called that news “disturbing,” partly because of the high number who knew and partly because the White House has been saying it didn’t inform Congress until after the swap was made because it feared Bergdahl’s life might be in danger if there had been a leak.
McKeon, a California Republican, told CNN he wants to get an exact number of those who knew and their names.
“My question to them was, if you don’t know who knew, then how could you – if a leak had happened and the sergeant had been killed – how could you go back and find out who leaked?” McKeon said.
This just gets more bizarre by the minute.
Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, declined to offer a defense of the administration when offered the chance by CNN’s Ashleigh Banfield.
“It didn’t sit very well with those of us who were listening at the briefing,” Schiff said of the news that so many administration staffers knew of the decision ahead of time.
John “I was for it before I was against it” Kerry is at it again. It’s obvious that he’s on damage control after his boss said, “Absolutely” when asked if it were possible that the Taliban Five he released might attack America again. While in France, he taped an interview for CNN.
Secretary of State John Kerry says it’s “a lot of baloney” to suggest the five Taliban prisoners released in exchange for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl will return to battle and kill Americans.
Still, he tells CNN, if they try they’ll likely be killed themselves.
And despite details to the contrary saying that the released terrorists wouldn’t be watched by US officials, Mr. Kerry is saying otherwise.
In an interview recorded in France and aired on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, Kerry said the government of Qatar, which agreed to keep watch on the men for a year, aren’t the only ones with an eye on them.
When asked if that meant the United States would be monitoring them, Kerry wouldn’t be specific, but said that if the former prisoners don’t meet the requirements of their release the United States has “the ability to do things.”
“I’m not telling you that they don’t have some ability at some point to go back and to get involved,” Kerry said. “But they also have an ability to get killed doing that. And I don’t think anybody should doubt the capacity of the United States of America to protect Americans.”
When pressed on statements by one of the released terrorists that he is going to kill more Americans, Kerry downplayed it.
He said that the freed Taliban detainee who already has vowed to return to kill more Americans is simply engaging in propaganda.
“Propaganda is propaganda, and they’ll say whatever they want to stir the waters,” he said.
The question of whether Bowe Bergdahl was a deserter to the US Army came up again.
As far as questions relating to Bergdahl’s disappearance — some of his former platoon members say he walked away willingly — Kerry said there is plenty of time to sort through what happened now that Bergdahl is safe from enemy hands.
It would have been, he said, “offensive and incomprehensible to consciously leave an American behind … in the hands of people who would torture him, cut off his head.”
John Kerry – It would have been, he said, “offensive and incomprehensible to consciously leave an American behind …
It’s too bad that this administration didn’t hold the same view for the four brave Americans who they let die in Benghazi…
Hey, Barry … The “D” In D-Day Doesn’t Stand For “Doublemint.”
Social media users tore into Barack Obama on Friday after the US president was seen chewing gum during solemn ceremonies to mark the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings. People took to Twitter to denounce Obama’s “shameful” and “vulgar” chewing, with one user attacking him as a “lout.” (Newsmax)
Benedict Arnold: “What do you think would be my fate if my misguided countrymen were to take me prisoner?”
Colonial army Captain: “They would cut off the leg that was wounded at Saratoga and bury it with the honors of war, and the rest of you they would hang on a gibbet.”
If boorish behavior was the only thing we had to fear from Barack Obama, we’d all sleep easier at night. After all, chewing gum is not an impeachable offense, even if the used cuds are pasted to the underside of the Resolute desk. But, as Matt Barber writes:
Barack Hussein Obama is America’s biggest threat to national security. He is “an enemy within” … Merriam-Webster defines “treason” as, “the crime of trying to overthrow your country’s government or of helping your country’s enemies during war.” Whether Obama is intentionally trying to overthrow his own government is open for debate. But that he has “helped his country’s enemies during war” is a slam dunk.
The amazing thing? This arrogant clown admits to it: “Is there a possibility of some of them trying to return to activities that are detrimental to us?” Obama asked rhetorically of the five terrorists he just cut loose. “Absolutely,” he answered.
… It wouldn’t matter if Bergdahl were Mother Teresa. This scandal isn’t about Bowe Bergdahl. It’s about a sitting United States president intentionally, overtly and criminally violating the National Defense Act to release five of the world’s most dangerous Muslim terrorists – dubbed the jihadist “Dream Team” – thereby directly placing American lives in jeopardy.
Obama swore an oath to protect America “from all enemies, foreign and domestic,” not to protect all enemies, foreign and domestic, from America.
Apparently, according to NBC, and as reported here at Conservative Hideout 2.0, “the U.S. had provided written assurances that no country would arrest any of the five freed for a year as long as they lived peacefully …”
… Keep in mind, at least two of these men are actually wanted war criminals. They have been declared war criminals by the U.N and are accused of the murder of thousands. But we guaranteed they would not be pursued for a year?
While some top Obama administration officials are downplaying threats posed the five senior Taliban officials released from Guantanamo in the prisoner exchange for Bowe Bergdahl, not long ago the administration went to court to prevent one of those men from going free. In a decision on May 31, 2011, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, ruled in favor of the government–and “Respondent Barack Obama”–in its effort to keep Khairulla Khairkhwa in detention. That decision, once classified “Secret,” has since been declassified and released.
Today, with these Taliban leaders free in Qatar and already looking likely to rejoin the fight against America, top Obama administration officials are seeking to reassure Americans that the threats are minimal–or, in the words of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, “sufficiently mitigated.” But just three years ago, the same administration argued in court against Khairkhwa’s writ of habeas corpus because of his senior position with the Taliban, his close relationship with Taliban leader Mullah Omar, and his support for Taliban forces fighting against the United States.
The case provides a window on the Obama administration’s concerns–concerns that many top intelligence and military officials continue to have. The court summarized the government’s case this way. “The government contends that the petitioner, a former senior Taliban official, is lawfully detained because he was part of Taliban forces and purposefully and materially supported such forces in hostilities against the United States,” the court wrote in the introduction to its opinion. […]
The court found persuasive the Obama administration’s argument that Khairkhwa helped lead Taliban fighters after the beginning of hostilities with the U.S. in the fall of 2001. Khairkhwa “had a “long history of involvement with the Taliban’s military affairs” and was a “prominent and influential leader within the Taliban.”
Before he was released, the Obama administration argued that Khairkhwa’s long experience as a jihadist leader required his continued detention by the U.S. government. Now that Obama has chosen to transfer him to Qatar the administration would have the public believe that he and the other freed Taliban leaders do not constitute a threat to the United States.
You know it’s pretty bad when the leadership in your own party makes public statements against you and your actions. Well that is exactly what happened this week when a Senator from California said that the President is lying about the Bergdahl Scandal.
President Obama blatantly violated federal law and statute when he unilaterally decided to release five highly-dangerous Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo in exchange for captured US Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.
Obama deliberately neglected to inform Congress before the swap took place, which violates a law that he himself signed last year. He also provided “material support” to a known terrorist organization, the Taliban, which is in violation of federal code and carries a stiff prison term as a penalty.
This has led to many people and organizations speaking out against the prisoner exchange, with some calling for his arrest and impeachment for such obvious disregard for Congress and lawlessness.
So who is this top Democrat that is not towing the party line?
Now a highly unlikely voice has joined opposition to the President’s actions. Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein is upset that she wasn’t notified before the deal was done, and has publicly contradicted the official story coming out of the White House, according to Politico.
When asked whether there was a “credible threat” on Bergdahl’s life if word had gotten out, the California Democrat responded: “No, I don’t think there was a credible threat, but I don’t know. I have no information that there was.”
Feinstein’s comments, part of an interview with Bloomberg Television’s Political Capital with Al Hunt airing Friday evening, put her at odds with White House officials. At a briefing Wednesday, administration officials told lawmakers that they couldn’t give Congress advance notice on the Bergdahl deal because the Taliban vowed to kill him if any details about the prisoner exchange came out.
Feinstein and several other members of Congress are saying that Obama clearly violated the law by not keeping them in the loop on the negotiations to free Bergdahl. In fact, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers claims he hasn’t received a briefing on Bergdahl since 2011.
Feinstein said White House deputy national security adviser Tony Blinken called her this week to apologize for not keeping her informed about the deal that returned Bergdahl to the U.S. and released five senior Taliban officials from Guantanamo Bay prison.
The senator added that the administration has an “absolute obligation” to fully investigate the nature of Bergdahl’s capture. Some media reports have suggested that the solder was a deserter given that he likely voluntarily walked away from his platoon.
In this snippet of an interview, Obama rolls out the Left’s new talking point about the Bergdahl swap. And that is that if someone wears our country’s uniform, we don’t leave them behind.
Well then Mr. President, please allow me to ask:
WHAT IN THE BLUE HELL HAPPENED IN BENGHAZI THEN?????!!!!!!!!!!
He believes he is the government. If Congress does not challenge this, he will be.
During an interview with NBC’s Brian Williams, Barack Obama claims – incredibly – that “my government” acted ‘unanimously” in its decision to trade five Taliban commanders for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.
It was a “unanimous decision” by “my government.” “I make no apologies for it.”
But surely, he meant to say “my administration,” right? Don’t bet on it.
The deal was overwhelmingly rejected in 2012 by members of Congress, Pentagon officials and the intel community. That doesn’t suggest that the American people’s government was “unanimous” about the deal.
“To allow a guy like [Bergdahl] to be posed as a hero, like Kerry self-posing as a hero, is really an affront to everybody who died there, and that’s why those guys in his platoon have come forward and that’s why we came forward 40 years ago and ten years ago.” – John O’Neill
If the Bergdahl affair proves anything, it’s that modern Democrats can never be trusted to ensure the national security. But most of us knew that already. You don’t need a degree in rocket science to realize that exchanging the high command of the Taliban for one lowly former PFC is not a deal that promises to turn out well for our side. Which begs the question, is Barack Obama even on our side? Most of us already know the answer to that one.
President Barack Obama was repeatedly advised by several of the nation’s top military and intelligence officials not to engage in the prisoner swap to secure the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl … Intelligence and defense officials told the Beast that the deal that was arranged was hastily done, and in a manner that suggested it was designed to squelch dissent and impose the will of the White House.(Obama Advisers Repeatedly Told President Not to Deal)
A senior intelligence official with intimate knowledge of the years-long effort to locate and rescue Bergdahl told the Washington Free Beacon that the details of that exchange do not add up. The official, who requested anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the press, speculated that a cash ransom was paid to the Haqqani Network to get the group to free the prisoner …
“The Haqqanis could give a rat’s ass about prisoners,” the official said, referring to the Haqqani Network, a designated terrorist group in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the five Guantanamo Bay prisoners who were freed in exchange for Bergdahl’s release. “The people that are holding Bergdahl want[ed] cash and someone paid it to them.” (Washington Free Beacon)
As more revelations emerge about Bergdahl’s disappearance, it becomes clearer that the White House has something really big to hide. Here are three clues:
1. In predictable fashion, those who question the official story must be discredited. The Soldiers who are providing their own on-the-ground recollections must be “psychopaths,” as an Obama administration official at HUD referred to them. State Department spokesperson Marie Harf has attacked their integrity, and now the media has resurrected “swift-boating” — all meant to disparage, demean, and discredit these brave American Soldiers. This is what liberals do — and I speak from experience.
2. The Soldiers who served alongside Bergdahl and were on the ground with him when he disappeared were forced to sign non-disclosure agreements. Why? Would that be anything like the muzzling of the Benghazi survivors?
3. The classified Pentagon report from 2010 on Sergeant Bergdahl should by now be de-classified, but it’s not. Why? What’s in it?
Oh, and then there’s the case of Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings who wrote about Bergdahl’s disappearance in 2012 and ended up dead in 2013. Maybe it’s just a terrible “coincidence” but why was he being investigated by the FBI? (Allen B. West)
The bottom line? Barack Obama wanted five high ranking Taliban killers freed from custody, but he needed a plausible cover story to get away with it. Bowe Bergdahl would have to be it.
The Obama administration gives away FIVE HIGH LEVEL TALIBAN JIHADISTS and we get a soldier who went AWOL, and that in all probability aided the enemy. What the friggin’ hell? Obama has either totally lost his mind, is insane, or he willingly gave aid to the people who are killing our soldiers; the the very people our soldiers are fighting, the enemy.
Yes, Andrew C. McCarthy is correcti n saying that we need to be focusing on the fact that President Obama has freed five high value Jihadist members of the Taliban and Haqqani network while the Taliban and Haqqani netword are still fighting us, trying to maim and kill our men and women serving in the Middle East.
Forget about Obama having violated the NDAA’s 30 day notice to Congress. That’s peanuts compared to him giving away five members of the enemy who want to kill Americans, our soldiers, while we are still at war with them. The GOP needs to get some cajones, get a back bone, and do what is right for this country. They need to stand up to our lawless President to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, as the Oath of Office they all swore to uphold says for them to do.
Andrew C. McCarthy gives details explaining what is horribly wrong with the Obama trade.
The vital point here is that the president has returned five senior commanders to the Taliban and Haqqani networkwhile those violent jihadist organizations are still conducting offensive attacks against American troops, who are still in harm’s way and still conducting combat operations pursuant to a congressional authorization of military force.These terrorists were not exchanged in connection with a final peace settlement in which it would be appropriate to exchange detainees—after all, if there is no more war, even unlawful enemy combatant prisoners must be released unless they can be charged with crimes.While the president is obviously abandoning the war effort, it has not been fully abandoned yet. The Taliban and Haqqani have not surrendered or settled; they are still working hard to kill our troops. It is thus mind-bogglingly irresponsible for the commander-in-chief to replenish their upper ranks. The reason the laws of war permit enemy combatants to be detained until the conclusion of hostilities is humane: when enemy forces are depleted, they have a greater incentive to surrender, bringing a swifter, less bloody conclusion to the war. By giving the enemy back its most effective commanders, Obama, by contrast, endangers our forces, potentially extends the war, and otherwise makes it far more likely that the war will end on terms injurious to American interests.As I demonstrate in Faithless Execution, high crimes and misdemeanors are not primarily statutory offenses. They are the political wrongs of high public officials—the president, in particular—in whom great public trust is reposed. When the commander-in-chief replenishes the enemy at a time when (a) the enemy is still attacking our forces and (b) the commander-in-chief has hamstrung our forces with unconscionable combat rules-of-engagement that compromise their ability to defend themselves, that is a profound dereliction of duty.That’s what we ought to be outraged about. The chitter-chatter about a 30-day notice requirement is a sideshow. Yes, the president has once again violated a statute. And as I said in yesterday’s column, he undoubtedly did so in order to get the swap done before public and congressional protest could mount. But in the greater scheme of things, that’s a footnote to the real travesty.
What President Obama did is unbelievable! This president is twenty times worse than Carter. President Obama is dangerous for the United States.
These men are the real heroes. No matter what the Left in the media say, nor how many times Susan Rice says he served with honor and distinction, Bowe Bergdahl is NOT a hero and, in this author’s opinion, nothing but a sniveling coward.
Bergdahl was serving with the 1st Battalion, 501st Infantry Regiment in Paktika province near the Pakistani border with Afghanistan when he went missing in the early hours of 30 June 2009.
He had been at part of an Observation Post with 28 colleagues men and a few trucks set up in a defensive position to protect themselves.
Some of the men were sleeping in the trucks they had driven in on and others were camped out with their sleeping bags in the open.It was not until the 9am roll call that they realized he was gone.
Up until this point Bergdahl had been seen as a strange loner who wouldn’t socialize with the other men. Instead, he would stick to his bunk, learning Pashto and Arabic with Rosetta Stone.
A week earlier he had sent his belongings and computer home to his parents after setting out in an email to his father that he was ‘ashamed to be an American’ after what he had seen in Afghanistan – including soldiers laughing at running over an Afghan boy with an armored vehicle.
Specialist Gerald Sutton, 31, Sutton remembered Bergdahl talking with him and a third soldier just a few days before he walked away.
‘He was asking us what it would be like to get lost in the mountains … and he asked me personally if I thought he could make it to China or India on foot. At the time we thought he was joking.
‘About a week or two before he left he mailed some of his stuff home,’ he said. ‘including his Apple laptop. He sent that home to his parents. That didn’t seem suspicious to us at the time, but it made sense after the fact.’
‘He left his weapon that day. The only thing he had with him was his diary – that none of us actually saw, so I have no idea what was in there – 2 MREs [‘Meals Ready to Eat’ rations], his knife, a bottle of water and his compass.’
The soldier who discovered him missing, said: ‘The first I heard was when one of the guards said he could not find Bergdahl.
‘I asked him: “What do you mean you can’t find him?’ He said he couldn’t find him anywhere.We sent two guys to the top of the observation post in case he was sleeping between two trucks, I thought maybe he’s sleeping down there.
‘We also sent one of the men to see if he was drinking tea with the Afghans. We looked at his sleeping bag and it was nicely folded.
‘I said what do we have missing here and one of the younger soldiers said that there were four or five bottles bottles of water missing from a crate that he had.It was chaos. We all knew what would happen if we couldn’t find him.
‘Bergdahl’s backpack was missing, so was his knife. I knew right away he had not been captured – he had walked off.’
The soldier was told by an Afghan boy they spoke to that told them he had seen an American soldier walking away through the fields.
The soldier said: ‘Everyone looked at me like I was crazy but I was right, he had walked off.’
The soldiers began a frantic search costing millions of dollars using drones, military tracking dogs and dozens of men for eight days, although the wider operation to find him went on for three months.
Captain Travis Sorenson, the co-pilot of one of the first F15 aircraft sent up to hunt for Bergdahl, said that he heard on intelligence briefings in the next couple of days that he was thought to have been taken East straight away.
The plan was to get him into a cave system over the border with Pakistan because it was away from US soldiers, he said.
Captain Sorenson, 36, who has now left the military, told MailOnline: ‘The operation to try and find Bergdahl must have cost millions.
‘We had F-15s flying constant missions for 48 hours and had 52 planes doing search runs.There were A-10s, Apache helicopters, British Tornadoes, British Navy Harriers and German Tornadoes.
‘When we found out that he had walked off the base we were all extremely angry and could not understand why he did it. We spent a couple of days looking for him when other soldiers were getting bombed, we couldn’t support Navy SEALs and other people.
‘We couldn’t do our jobs because we were looking for this guy’.
Leaked military communications on Wikileaks show the complete military signal traffic relating to Bergdahl’s release.
The text says that one of the last sightings of him was when he was in a black Toyota Corolla with a bag over his head being escorted by three to five motorcycles.
In intercepted chatter Taliban fighters could be heard asking themselves: ‘Is it true that they captured an American guy?’
The men joke about it and one of them responds that they should ‘cut the head off’.
Soldiers in Bergdahl’s platoon have claimed they were forced to sign a highly unusual nondisclosure agreement covering his disappearance in an apparent attempt to cover up what happened.
Two soldiers who spoke to MailOnline said the letter was passed around by commanders to those close to Sgt. Bergdahl.
The ploy backfired, however, as a number of soldiers spoke out regardless in angry Facebook messages and media interviews.
But the irregular action by the military raises fresh and disturbing questions about attempts to control the flow of information about the incident.
Sgt. Evan Buetow, who fought in Sgt. Bergdahl’s platoon, said: ‘I never signed it. I know there were a couple of soldiers who were closer to Sgt. Bergdahl as friends.
‘I know a couple of them signed the official nondisclosure letter. We did not have to sign an NDA for other missions.’
Others who have spoken out anonymously on the Facebook page ‘Boweisatraitor’ have also referred to such a letter.
Another soldier from Sgt. Bergdahl’s unit who is still in the military told MailOnline: ‘The nondisclosure letters were handed around.’
‘Everyone signed them who was told to – they were just following orders.’
NDA letters are usually signed by soldiers who have security clearances or are working on sensitive missions.
The standard form is called SF312 and is known as a Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement. It prevents those who sign it from speaking about a specific event because it is in the interest of national security for them not to do so.
A member of Bergdahl’s former Army unit broke his military gag order to speak about Bowe Bergdahl and he confirmed that Bergdahl did indeed desert.
Bowe Bergdahl left a note saying he had gone to start a ‘new life’ and a former comrade broke his military gagging order today to tell MailOnline of the jaw-dropping moment he discovered the Taliban POW had walked off from their Afghanistan base.
That revelation came just hours before two top government officials confirmed that there will be a new, full investigation into Bergdahl’s disappearance.
The soldier, who requested anonymity as he is still in the military, said: ‘Everyone looked at me like I was crazy but I was right, he had walked off.’
The New York Times reported Bergdahl also left behind a note in which he said he did not want to fight for America any more, did not believe in the war – and was leaving to start a new life.
The letter to his comrades was separate from the email he sent to his parents before he sent his goods home to them, wherein he wrote: ‘life is way too short to care for the damnation of others, as well as to spend it helping fools with their ideas that are wrong…. I am ashamed to even be (A)merican.’
The Army is looking at his possible status as a deserter and the possibility to retrieve him as two separate issues.
Rolling Stone reported the email in 2012 and said that Bergdahl had called his battalion commander a ‘conceited old fool’ and his peers an ‘army of liars, backstabbers, fools and bullies’.
The latest fold in the saga came when General Martin Dempsey wrote today that while if any misconduct is found, Army leaders ‘will not look away’ but until that time, he is protected by an American ethos of assuming innocence.
‘The questions about this particular soldier’s conduct are separate from our effort to recover ANY U.S. service member in enemy captivity. This was likely the last, best opportunity to free him. As for the circumstances of his capture, when he is able to provide them, we’ll learn the facts.
‘Like any American, he is innocent until proven guilty.’
From an email he wrote to his parents shortly before he left his post.
‘life is way too short to care for the damnation of others, as well as to spend it helping fools with their ideas that are wrong…. I am ashamed to even be (A)merican’
-Bowe Bergdahl wrote in an email to his parents days before ‘voluntarily walking off the Army base
Now the question of his back pay is surfacing.
Geoffrey Corn, a South Texas College of Law professor and former judge advocate general, told Business Insider that the Pentagon never followed through on specific criteria held for deserters, meaning that Bergdahl could end up with five years back pay.
‘The military has to process paperwork so that you can’t get back pay and leave and so that the unit can get a replacement… According to the Pentagon there’s no evidence he was ever dropped from the rolls,’ Mr Corn said.
The soldier who spoke to MailOnline made his feelings and those of his comrades very clear.
He said: ‘As far as I’m concerned Bergdahl deserted his men and should face a court martial. People died trying to save him. He was a deserter’.
Bergdahl’s platoon anxiously searched the observation post they had set up a remote area of Afghanistan but only found Bergdahl’s sleeping bag that had been neatly folded up.
It also claimed that he did not breach the perimeter wire and left by possibly hiding in a contractor’s vehicle meaning that he would have planned the escape in advance.
A huge search ensued during which time at least six US soldiers are said to have died while hunting for Bergdahl, 28, who has just been released from five years in captivity with the Taliban.