I just noticed something

[earlycuyler]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Something is fishy about all this. Really, it brings to mind some show on cable awhile back. Cant think of the name. Anyways, if this was a political stunt, could the presidents people be so stupid ? Someone mentioned on the radio that this mans fellow soldiers had to sign nondisclosure forms in regards to this man. Still, if you look at it, a sergeant in the Army is not a very big fish. Could he have important information ? And why wasnt he tortured and killed ? The Taliban is not known to hang on to prisoners, especially those that are American soldiers. This is all creepy weird.

 

[Care4all]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Something is fishy about all this. Really, it brings to mind some show on cable awhile back. Cant think of the name. Anyways, if this was a political stunt, could the presidents people be so stupid ? Someone mentioned on the radio that this mans fellow soldiers had to sign nondisclosure forms in regards to this man. Still, if you look at it, a sergeant in the Army is not a very big fish. Could he have important information ? And why wasnt he tortured and killed ? The Taliban is not known to hang on to prisoners, especially those that are American soldiers. This is all creepy weird.

It is weird....very weird.....there has got to be much more to all of this....that we are not privileged to know yet.... and the nondisclosure agreements were done years ago, so who knows why....or if they were involved with this man's release....???

For others, I do think it is wrong to run around this site posting crud and acting as if members know all they need to know on this and have already convicted this dude....without knowing ALL of the facts.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Bowe Bergdahl has a lot of explaining to do when he gets back into US custody. I'll wait until I hear what he has to say about being a deserter until I comment.

 

[paperview]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Something is fishy about all this. Really, it brings to mind some show on cable awhile back. Cant think of the name. Anyways, if this was a political stunt, could the presidents people be so stupid ? Someone mentioned on the radio that this mans fellow soldiers had to sign nondisclosure forms in regards to this man. Still, if you look at it, a sergeant in the Army is not a very big fish. Could he have important information ? And why wasnt he tortured and killed ? The Taliban is not known to hang on to prisoners, especially those that are American soldiers. This is all creepy weird.

It is weird....very weird.....there has got to be much more to all of this....that we are not privileged to know yet.... and the nondisclosure agreements were done years ago, so who knows why....or if they were involved with this man's release....???

For others, I do think it is wrong to run around this site posting crud and acting as if members know all they need to know on this and have already convicted this dude....without knowing ALL of the facts.

There was a seven page story about Bowe written in 2012 by Rolling Stone that gives a great deal of background and talks about the prisoner swap plan back then.

Even discusses that Obama consulted with some members of congress including McCain who (reluctantly) came around to the prisoner exchange (according to those at the meeting) plan.

Bowe Bergdahl: America's Last Prisoner of War by Michael Hastings | Politics News | Rolling Stone

It's a pretty deep and thorough read and gives details on the early negotiations and Haqqani faction of the Taliban.

It doesn't sugarcoat the circumstances of Bowe leaving his post and even provides intelligence intercepted of a conversation between two Taliban fighters the day after Bowe had vanished.

Also bits on Bowe escaping his captors once and was reportedly kept shackled at night and "moved back and forth across the border to keep his position from being discovered" and because of the constant drone strikes.

I recommend checking the whole story.

This here might explain some of the *why* in the non-disclosure side:

During the first week of Bowe's capture, his parents believed he would be rescued. "We thought they'd get him quickly," Jani recalls. His name hadn't been released publicly, and the couple had only told their close family about his disappearance. At their daughter's Fourth of July party a few days later, they told their friends that Bowe was missing and that it was about to come out in the media.



On July 7th, after Bowe's name was officially released, the national press descended on Hailey, gathering at Zaney's, the coffee shop where Bowe had worked.


It wasn't long, though, before his parents began to grow frustrated by how the government was treating them in the midst of the ordeal. The Army, they felt, was subtly pressuring them not to speak to the press, and they were required to sign a nondisclosure agreement with the National Security Agency in order to view classified and top-secret material.



In addition, Bob believes the military began monitoring their phones in case the kidnappers called – standard procedure in a hostage situation, but one that also enabled the U.S. military to keep tabs on the family.


Things soon got worse. Ralph Peters, an action-thriller writer who serves as a "strategic analyst" for Fox News, took to the air to condemn Bowe as an "apparent deserter."



The Taliban, he declared, could save the United States on "legal bills" by executing him. Horrified by such comments, Bob and Jani told their military liaison that they didn't want the Army to mount an operation to rescue Bowe, fearful that he'd be killed – either by accident, or even on purpose, by an aggrieved soldier or the U.S. military itself.



There have certainly been soldiers who have joined the drumbeat of hatred against Bowe: A recent Facebook post from one soldier in his unit called for his execution. Worried that any further public attention might put Bowe at greater risk, his parents decided to remain silent, releasing a statement to their local newspaper asking the press to respect their privacy.


In what appears to be an unprecedented move, the Pentagon also scrambled to shut down any public discussion of Bowe. Members of Bowe's brigade were required to sign nondisclosure agreements as part of their paperwork to leave Afghanistan.



The agreement, according to Capt. Fancey, forbids them to discuss any "personnel recovery" efforts – an obvious reference to Bowe.


According to administration sources, both the Pentagon and the White House also pressured major news outlets like The New York Times and the AP to steer clear of mentioning Bowe's name to avoid putting him at further risk. (The White House was afraid hard-line elements could execute him to scuttle peace talks, officials involved in the press negotiations say.)



Faced with the wall of official silence, Bob and Jani began to worry that the Pentagon wasn't doing all that it could to get their son back. As Bowe's sister, Sky, wrote in a private e-mail: "I am afraid our government here in D.C. would like nothing better but to sweep PFC Bergdahl under the rug and wash their hands of him."


The first propaganda video of Bowe surfaced in July 2009. It was eventually followed by three others – the most recent from May of last year. Mullah Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban, released a statement in September 2010 claiming Bowe as a prisoner – an example, he said, of America's "humiliation and disgrace."


The videos show a steep decline in Bowe's appearance and mental health. In the first two videos he displays a measured calm, a kind of doped-out serenity that is missing from the most recent installments. Each is typical jihadist propaganda, using Bowe to recite lines criticizing American foreign policy."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/americas-last-prisoner-of-war-20120607page=6#ixzz33aR2tHVT
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
​

Two things, it appears, for Bowe's safety, and the safety of the troops, and the leverage he could provide in Peace talks in finally ending America's longest war. That's what I got out of it.

 

[earlycuyler]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Something is fishy about all this. Really, it brings to mind some show on cable awhile back. Cant think of the name. Anyways, if this was a political stunt, could the presidents people be so stupid ? Someone mentioned on the radio that this mans fellow soldiers had to sign nondisclosure forms in regards to this man. Still, if you look at it, a sergeant in the Army is not a very big fish. Could he have important information ? And why wasnt he tortured and killed ? The Taliban is not known to hang on to prisoners, especially those that are American soldiers. This is all creepy weird.

It is weird....very weird.....there has got to be much more to all of this....that we are not privileged to know yet.... and the nondisclosure agreements were done years ago, so who knows why....or if they were involved with this man's release....???

For othfers, I do think it is wrong to run around this site posting crud and acting as if members know all they need to know on this and have already convicted this dude....without knowing ALL of the facts.

I agree. This type of thing is what the polititions use to keep the sheep in line. Its sad to because if there is any nefarious activity going on it will all be lost in partisan hackery.

 

[rightwinger]

He wasn't a POW
Obama isn't black.

You come at this with your typical keen understanding and knowledge of the facts.

The sun does not rise in the east
The earth is not round

Actually both of those are true.
The sun does not rise at all. The Earth rotates.
The Earth is not round but bulged out at the equator.

Ignorance is stupid. You prove it with every post.

Yes and Obama is not black, he is more of a deep brown
and Bergdahl was not a POW because we had never formally declared war

 

[JakeStarkey]

And you were certain Obamacare would be successful.

It has been and you are wrong.

 

[earlycuyler]

Something is fishy about all this. Really, it brings to mind some show on cable awhile back. Cant think of the name. Anyways, if this was a political stunt, could the presidents people be so stupid ? Someone mentioned on the radio that this mans fellow soldiers had to sign nondisclosure forms in regards to this man. Still, if you look at it, a sergeant in the Army is not a very big fish. Could he have important information ? And why wasnt he tortured and killed ? The Taliban is not known to hang on to prisoners, especially those that are American soldiers. This is all creepy weird.

It is weird....very weird.....there has got to be much more to all of this....that we are not privileged to know yet.... and the nondisclosure agreements were done years ago, so who knows why....or if they were involved with this man's release....???

For others, I do think it is wrong to run around this site posting crud and acting as if members know all they need to know on this and have already convicted this dude....without knowing ALL of the facts.

There was a seven page story about Bowe written in 2012 by Rolling Stone that gives a great deal of background and talks about the prisoner swap plan back then.

Even discusses that Obama consulted with some members of congress including McCain who (reluctantly) came around to the prisoner exchange (according to those at the meeting) plan.

Bowe Bergdahl: America's Last Prisoner of War by Michael Hastings | Politics News | Rolling Stone

It's a pretty deep and thorough read and gives details on the early negotiations and Haqqani faction of the Taliban.

It doesn't sugarcoat the circumstances of Bowe leaving his post and even provides intelligence intercepted of a conversation between two Taliban fighters the day after Bowe had vanished.

Also bits on Bowe escaping his captors once and was reportedly kept shackled at night and "moved back and forth across the border to keep his position from being discovered" and because of the constant drone strikes.

I recommend checking the whole story.

This here might explain some of the *why* in the non-disclosure side:

During the first week of Bowe's capture, his parents believed he would be rescued. "We thought they'd get him quickly," Jani recalls. His name hadn't been released publicly, and the couple had only told their close family about his disappearance. At their daughter's Fourth of July party a few days later, they told their friends that Bowe was missing and that it was about to come out in the media.



On July 7th, after Bowe's name was officially released, the national press descended on Hailey, gathering at Zaney's, the coffee shop where Bowe had worked.


It wasn't long, though, before his parents began to grow frustrated by how the government was treating them in the midst of the ordeal. The Army, they felt, was subtly pressuring them not to speak to the press, and they were required to sign a nondisclosure agreement with the National Security Agency in order to view classified and top-secret material.



In addition, Bob believes the military began monitoring their phones in case the kidnappers called – standard procedure in a hostage situation, but one that also enabled the U.S. military to keep tabs on the family.


Things soon got worse. Ralph Peters, an action-thriller writer who serves as a "strategic analyst" for Fox News, took to the air to condemn Bowe as an "apparent deserter."



The Taliban, he declared, could save the United States on "legal bills" by executing him. Horrified by such comments, Bob and Jani told their military liaison that they didn't want the Army to mount an operation to rescue Bowe, fearful that he'd be killed – either by accident, or even on purpose, by an aggrieved soldier or the U.S. military itself.



There have certainly been soldiers who have joined the drumbeat of hatred against Bowe: A recent Facebook post from one soldier in his unit called for his execution. Worried that any further public attention might put Bowe at greater risk, his parents decided to remain silent, releasing a statement to their local newspaper asking the press to respect their privacy.


In what appears to be an unprecedented move, the Pentagon also scrambled to shut down any public discussion of Bowe. Members of Bowe's brigade were required to sign nondisclosure agreements as part of their paperwork to leave Afghanistan.



The agreement, according to Capt. Fancey, forbids them to discuss any "personnel recovery" efforts – an obvious reference to Bowe.


According to administration sources, both the Pentagon and the White House also pressured major news outlets like The New York Times and the AP to steer clear of mentioning Bowe's name to avoid putting him at further risk. (The White House was afraid hard-line elements could execute him to scuttle peace talks, officials involved in the press negotiations say.)



Faced with the wall of official silence, Bob and Jani began to worry that the Pentagon wasn't doing all that it could to get their son back. As Bowe's sister, Sky, wrote in a private e-mail: "I am afraid our government here in D.C. would like nothing better but to sweep PFC Bergdahl under the rug and wash their hands of him."


The first propaganda video of Bowe surfaced in July 2009. It was eventually followed by three others – the most recent from May of last year. Mullah Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban, released a statement in September 2010 claiming Bowe as a prisoner – an example, he said, of America's "humiliation and disgrace."


The videos show a steep decline in Bowe's appearance and mental health. In the first two videos he displays a measured calm, a kind of doped-out serenity that is missing from the most recent installments. Each is typical jihadist propaganda, using Bowe to recite lines criticizing American foreign policy."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/americas-last-prisoner-of-war-20120607page=6#ixzz33aR2tHVT
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
​

Two things, it appears, for Bowe's safety, and the safety of the troops, and the leverage he could provide in Peace talks in finally ending America's longest war. That's what I got out of it.

I could be mistaken, but I think the guy who spoke out against the SGT claime the soldier quoted in rolling stone wasnt even in country with them and has been largely discredited. Dont know. It turns out I have today off so Ill be reading up on all of it.

 

[paperview]

It is weird....very weird.....there has got to be much more to all of this....that we are not privileged to know yet.... and the nondisclosure agreements were done years ago, so who knows why....or if they were involved with this man's release....???

For others, I do think it is wrong to run around this site posting crud and acting as if members know all they need to know on this and have already convicted this dude....without knowing ALL of the facts.

There was a seven page story about Bowe written in 2012 by Rolling Stone that gives a great deal of background and talks about the prisoner swap plan back then.

Even discusses that Obama consulted with some members of congress including McCain who (reluctantly) came around to the prisoner exchange (according to those at the meeting) plan.

Bowe Bergdahl: America's Last Prisoner of War by Michael Hastings | Politics News | Rolling Stone

It's a pretty deep and thorough read and gives details on the early negotiations and Haqqani faction of the Taliban.

It doesn't sugarcoat the circumstances of Bowe leaving his post and even provides intelligence intercepted of a conversation between two Taliban fighters the day after Bowe had vanished.

Also bits on Bowe escaping his captors once and was reportedly kept shackled at night and "moved back and forth across the border to keep his position from being discovered" and because of the constant drone strikes.

I recommend checking the whole story.

This here might explain some of the *why* in the non-disclosure side:

During the first week of Bowe's capture, his parents believed he would be rescued. "We thought they'd get him quickly," Jani recalls. His name hadn't been released publicly, and the couple had only told their close family about his disappearance. At their daughter's Fourth of July party a few days later, they told their friends that Bowe was missing and that it was about to come out in the media.



On July 7th, after Bowe's name was officially released, the national press descended on Hailey, gathering at Zaney's, the coffee shop where Bowe had worked.


It wasn't long, though, before his parents began to grow frustrated by how the government was treating them in the midst of the ordeal. The Army, they felt, was subtly pressuring them not to speak to the press, and they were required to sign a nondisclosure agreement with the National Security Agency in order to view classified and top-secret material.



In addition, Bob believes the military began monitoring their phones in case the kidnappers called – standard procedure in a hostage situation, but one that also enabled the U.S. military to keep tabs on the family.


Things soon got worse. Ralph Peters, an action-thriller writer who serves as a "strategic analyst" for Fox News, took to the air to condemn Bowe as an "apparent deserter."



The Taliban, he declared, could save the United States on "legal bills" by executing him. Horrified by such comments, Bob and Jani told their military liaison that they didn't want the Army to mount an operation to rescue Bowe, fearful that he'd be killed – either by accident, or even on purpose, by an aggrieved soldier or the U.S. military itself.



There have certainly been soldiers who have joined the drumbeat of hatred against Bowe: A recent Facebook post from one soldier in his unit called for his execution. Worried that any further public attention might put Bowe at greater risk, his parents decided to remain silent, releasing a statement to their local newspaper asking the press to respect their privacy.


In what appears to be an unprecedented move, the Pentagon also scrambled to shut down any public discussion of Bowe. Members of Bowe's brigade were required to sign nondisclosure agreements as part of their paperwork to leave Afghanistan.



The agreement, according to Capt. Fancey, forbids them to discuss any "personnel recovery" efforts – an obvious reference to Bowe.


According to administration sources, both the Pentagon and the White House also pressured major news outlets like The New York Times and the AP to steer clear of mentioning Bowe's name to avoid putting him at further risk. (The White House was afraid hard-line elements could execute him to scuttle peace talks, officials involved in the press negotiations say.)



Faced with the wall of official silence, Bob and Jani began to worry that the Pentagon wasn't doing all that it could to get their son back. As Bowe's sister, Sky, wrote in a private e-mail: "I am afraid our government here in D.C. would like nothing better but to sweep PFC Bergdahl under the rug and wash their hands of him."


The first propaganda video of Bowe surfaced in July 2009. It was eventually followed by three others – the most recent from May of last year. Mullah Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban, released a statement in September 2010 claiming Bowe as a prisoner – an example, he said, of America's "humiliation and disgrace."


The videos show a steep decline in Bowe's appearance and mental health. In the first two videos he displays a measured calm, a kind of doped-out serenity that is missing from the most recent installments. Each is typical jihadist propaganda, using Bowe to recite lines criticizing American foreign policy."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/americas-last-prisoner-of-war-20120607page=6#ixzz33aR2tHVT
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
​

Two things, it appears, for Bowe's safety, and the safety of the troops, and the leverage he could provide in Peace talks in finally ending America's longest war. That's what I got out of it.

I could be mistaken, but I think the guy who spoke out against the SGT claime the soldier quoted in rolling stone wasnt even in country with them and has been largely discredited. Dont know. It turns out I have today off so Ill be reading up on all of it.

I've read nothing to that effect. You're going to have to back that up.

Or chalk it up to...being mistaken.

 

[rightwinger]

It is weird....very weird.....there has got to be much more to all of this....that we are not privileged to know yet.... and the nondisclosure agreements were done years ago, so who knows why....or if they were involved with this man's release....???

For others, I do think it is wrong to run around this site posting crud and acting as if members know all they need to know on this and have already convicted this dude....without knowing ALL of the facts.

There was a seven page story about Bowe written in 2012 by Rolling Stone that gives a great deal of background and talks about the prisoner swap plan back then.

Even discusses that Obama consulted with some members of congress including McCain who (reluctantly) came around to the prisoner exchange (according to those at the meeting) plan.

Bowe Bergdahl: America's Last Prisoner of War by Michael Hastings | Politics News | Rolling Stone

It's a pretty deep and thorough read and gives details on the early negotiations and Haqqani faction of the Taliban.

It doesn't sugarcoat the circumstances of Bowe leaving his post and even provides intelligence intercepted of a conversation between two Taliban fighters the day after Bowe had vanished.

Also bits on Bowe escaping his captors once and was reportedly kept shackled at night and "moved back and forth across the border to keep his position from being discovered" and because of the constant drone strikes.

I recommend checking the whole story.

This here might explain some of the *why* in the non-disclosure side:

During the first week of Bowe's capture, his parents believed he would be rescued. "We thought they'd get him quickly," Jani recalls. His name hadn't been released publicly, and the couple had only told their close family about his disappearance. At their daughter's Fourth of July party a few days later, they told their friends that Bowe was missing and that it was about to come out in the media.



On July 7th, after Bowe's name was officially released, the national press descended on Hailey, gathering at Zaney's, the coffee shop where Bowe had worked.


It wasn't long, though, before his parents began to grow frustrated by how the government was treating them in the midst of the ordeal. The Army, they felt, was subtly pressuring them not to speak to the press, and they were required to sign a nondisclosure agreement with the National Security Agency in order to view classified and top-secret material.



In addition, Bob believes the military began monitoring their phones in case the kidnappers called – standard procedure in a hostage situation, but one that also enabled the U.S. military to keep tabs on the family.


Things soon got worse. Ralph Peters, an action-thriller writer who serves as a "strategic analyst" for Fox News, took to the air to condemn Bowe as an "apparent deserter."



The Taliban, he declared, could save the United States on "legal bills" by executing him. Horrified by such comments, Bob and Jani told their military liaison that they didn't want the Army to mount an operation to rescue Bowe, fearful that he'd be killed – either by accident, or even on purpose, by an aggrieved soldier or the U.S. military itself.



There have certainly been soldiers who have joined the drumbeat of hatred against Bowe: A recent Facebook post from one soldier in his unit called for his execution. Worried that any further public attention might put Bowe at greater risk, his parents decided to remain silent, releasing a statement to their local newspaper asking the press to respect their privacy.


In what appears to be an unprecedented move, the Pentagon also scrambled to shut down any public discussion of Bowe. Members of Bowe's brigade were required to sign nondisclosure agreements as part of their paperwork to leave Afghanistan.



The agreement, according to Capt. Fancey, forbids them to discuss any "personnel recovery" efforts – an obvious reference to Bowe.


According to administration sources, both the Pentagon and the White House also pressured major news outlets like The New York Times and the AP to steer clear of mentioning Bowe's name to avoid putting him at further risk. (The White House was afraid hard-line elements could execute him to scuttle peace talks, officials involved in the press negotiations say.)



Faced with the wall of official silence, Bob and Jani began to worry that the Pentagon wasn't doing all that it could to get their son back. As Bowe's sister, Sky, wrote in a private e-mail: "I am afraid our government here in D.C. would like nothing better but to sweep PFC Bergdahl under the rug and wash their hands of him."


The first propaganda video of Bowe surfaced in July 2009. It was eventually followed by three others – the most recent from May of last year. Mullah Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban, released a statement in September 2010 claiming Bowe as a prisoner – an example, he said, of America's "humiliation and disgrace."


The videos show a steep decline in Bowe's appearance and mental health. In the first two videos he displays a measured calm, a kind of doped-out serenity that is missing from the most recent installments. Each is typical jihadist propaganda, using Bowe to recite lines criticizing American foreign policy."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/americas-last-prisoner-of-war-20120607page=6#ixzz33aR2tHVT
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
​

Two things, it appears, for Bowe's safety, and the safety of the troops, and the leverage he could provide in Peace talks in finally ending America's longest war. That's what I got out of it.

I could be mistaken, but I think the guy who spoke out against the SGT claime the soldier quoted in rolling stone wasnt even in country with them and has been largely discredited. Dont know. It turns out I have today off so Ill be reading up on all of it.

Could be more rightwing Swiftboating

 

[earlycuyler]

There was a seven page story about Bowe written in 2012 by Rolling Stone that gives a great deal of background and talks about the prisoner swap plan back then.

Even discusses that Obama consulted with some members of congress including McCain who (reluctantly) came around to the prisoner exchange (according to those at the meeting) plan.

Bowe Bergdahl: America's Last Prisoner of War by Michael Hastings | Politics News | Rolling Stone

It's a pretty deep and thorough read and gives details on the early negotiations and Haqqani faction of the Taliban.

It doesn't sugarcoat the circumstances of Bowe leaving his post and even provides intelligence intercepted of a conversation between two Taliban fighters the day after Bowe had vanished.

Also bits on Bowe escaping his captors once and was reportedly kept shackled at night and "moved back and forth across the border to keep his position from being discovered" and because of the constant drone strikes.

I recommend checking the whole story.

This here might explain some of the *why* in the non-disclosure side:



Two things, it appears, for Bowe's safety, and the safety of the troops, and the leverage he could provide in Peace talks in finally ending America's longest war. That's what I got out of it.

I could be mistaken, but I think the guy who spoke out against the SGT claime the soldier quoted in rolling stone wasnt even in country with them and has been largely discredited. Dont know. It turns out I have today off so Ill be reading up on all of it.

I've read nothing to that effect. You're going to have to back that up.

Or chalk it up to...being mistaken.

Like I said, I could be mistaken. This is why I did not say the guy in the rolling stone article was discredited and proven to be a liar. Even if he was, this storey is pretty new, and details are comeing almost hourly. Today is the first day that I get to look into it due to the fact I work. I will be happy to post what I find. Now, I cant think of the mans name who said this dude was a deserter, but im pretty sure he claimed the guy in Rollin stone had broken his collar bone snow boarding and missed the deployment. Again, that was what I cought while listening to the radio 600 feet over the houston ship channel. Im not judging here, but the P.O.W.'s storey is weird, the rolling stone guys storey is weird, the man speaking out storey is weird. I will look at this as a normal guy not a political hack . Ill see what I can find and post it in a bit when I get up and moving.

 

[paperview]

"Even if he was, this storey is pretty new, and details are comeing almost hourly...."

The RS story was written two years ago.

 

[earlycuyler]

There was a seven page story about Bowe written in 2012 by Rolling Stone that gives a great deal of background and talks about the prisoner swap plan back then.

Even discusses that Obama consulted with some members of congress including McCain who (reluctantly) came around to the prisoner exchange (according to those at the meeting) plan.

Bowe Bergdahl: America's Last Prisoner of War by Michael Hastings | Politics News | Rolling Stone

It's a pretty deep and thorough read and gives details on the early negotiations and Haqqani faction of the Taliban.

It doesn't sugarcoat the circumstances of Bowe leaving his post and even provides intelligence intercepted of a conversation between two Taliban fighters the day after Bowe had vanished.

Also bits on Bowe escaping his captors once and was reportedly kept shackled at night and "moved back and forth across the border to keep his position from being discovered" and because of the constant drone strikes.

I recommend checking the whole story.

This here might explain some of the *why* in the non-disclosure side:



Two things, it appears, for Bowe's safety, and the safety of the troops, and the leverage he could provide in Peace talks in finally ending America's longest war. That's what I got out of it.

I could be mistaken, but I think the guy who spoke out against the SGT claime the soldier quoted in rolling stone wasnt even in country with them and has been largely discredited. Dont know. It turns out I have today off so Ill be reading up on all of it.

Could be more rightwing Swiftboating

Could be, never know.

 

[earlycuyler]

"Even if he was, this storey is pretty new, and details are comeing almost hourly...."

The RS story was written two years ago.

And refuted yesterday. Hang on and ill see what I can find.

 

[paperview]

"Even if he was, this storey is pretty new, and details are comeing almost hourly...."

The RS story was written two years ago.

And refuted yesterday. Hang on and ill see what I can find.

How about you read the full story first, then make sure you come back with some non-rw-fruitloop link, if there is a such an allegation.

 

[earlycuyler]

"Even if he was, this storey is pretty new, and details are comeing almost hourly...."

The RS story was written two years ago.

And refuted yesterday. Hang on and ill see what I can find.

How about you read the full story first, then make sure you come back with some non-rw-fruitloop link, if there is a such an allegation.

You need only look up Sgt. Matt Vierkant. Hold up on your bleating sheep hackery and consider why this man, as well as others would say what they have. Swift boating is worthy of consideration, but why ? And why when directly asked did Chuck Hagle evade the question about weather this man did or did not run off ? Matt Vierkant is who im looking af here. If you can pleas point out his right wing nuttiness and for what reason he and his battle buddy's would say what they have about this man ?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm glad you have no problem with alleged terrorists not being given any trial and just being held for the rest of their lives without any chance to make their case. If they are terrorists and we have the proof, why not try them and convict them? Guess it sucks for them not having US citizenship, eh?

I am glad you think that high level terrorists for a potential deserter makes sense.

That said, please, try to accuse me of thinking Gitmo s a god idea, I would love to shove your sanctimonious posturing down your fucking throat.

I never actually said it made sense. I just think that convicting an American soldier without a trial as has been done in this thread is wrong. As for our treatment of GITMO detainees, it's been abhorrent. If they are high level terrorists, then they should have been tried and convicted and then given lifetime prison sentences. I don't give a rat's ass if they are US citizens or not, they deserve their day in court. As for you shoving anything down my throat, you can shove it right up your own behind.

Hey, fuckwad, I am entitled to my opinion based on available evidence, I am not the government, due process doesn't apply to me as an individual in forming my opinions. Maybe if you understood the difference between the government and the individual people wpuldn't have to explain the obvious to you. The guy is guilty of being AWOL, period. There is no excuse for it under the UCMJ, yet the military is free to not actually try him, or even take the circumstances into consideration. The facts are on my side, and your whinging like a little girl about how unfair I am to hold him to his fucking oath to obey all lawful orders just makes you look pathetic.

Article 85—Desertion

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I never actually said it made sense. I just think that convicting an American soldier without a trial as has been done in this thread is wrong. As for our treatment of GITMO detainees, it's been abhorrent. If they are high level terrorists, then they should have been tried and convicted and then given lifetime prison sentences. I don't give a rat's ass if they are US citizens or not, they deserve their day in court. As for you shoving anything down my throat, you can shove it right up your own behind.

Perhaps you weren't reading when I said "he'll get his trial." One other thing I didn't say was that he didn't deserve one. Terrorists don't. HE is still an American citizen, he is entitled.

American terrorists get trials, do they not? Didn't Tim McVeigh get a trial? And didn't we execute him? Do you realize that if these alleged terrorists had been tried and convicted, this deal never would have happened?

Believe it or not, there is a difference between trying a person who commits a terrorist act on American soil and trying someone who is caught on the battlefield. For one, the latter is basically a violation of the Geneva Convention, but don't let international law get in the way of your faux outrage.

 

[paperview]

And refuted yesterday. Hang on and ill see what I can find.

How about you read the full story first, then make sure you come back with some non-rw-fruitloop link, if there is a such an allegation.

You need only look up Sgt. Matt Vierkant. Hold up on your bleating sheep hackery and consider why this man, as well as others would say what they have. Swift boating is worthy of consideration, but why ? And why when directly asked did Chuck Hagle evade the question about weather this man did or did not run off ? Matt Vierkant is who im looking af here. If you can pleas point out his right wing nuttiness and for what reason he and his battle buddy's would say what they have about this man ?

I get the feeling you still haven't read the Rolling Stone piece.

Am I right?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You people are certain Bergdahl is guilty and certain the guy in Mexico is innocent.

The bliss of certainty. Is that similar to the bliss of ignorance?

I thought I made it perfectly clear I hadn't made any judgement on the man and said we should get all the facts before we decide anything.

What6 facts do you not have, oh he who lives under a fucking rock?