Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Hillary thinks Bergdahl's actions are 'irrelevant' Desertion is irrelevant?

    June 7, 2014

    Hillary thinks Bergdahl's actions are 'irrelevant'

    By Rick Moran

    Of course they are - if you're ignorant of what the American people are thinking at the moment.
    Just what's "irrelevant" about desertion? Or collaboration? Neither charge has been proved, but if true, how can anyone say those actions are irrelevant?
    Politico:
    Hillary Clinton is defending the deal that freed Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, dismissing questions about how he fell into the hands of the Taliban as beside the point.
    “It doesn’t matter,” Clinton said in an interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer that aired Friday. “We bring our people home.”
    The former secretary of state’s argument echoes that of President Barack Obama, who has come under fire for the prisoner swap that led to Bergdahl’s freedom amid questions about whether he may have abandoned his post and deserted or defected. The military is investigating.
    Clinton’s comments come as the former secretary of state begins to make the rounds ahead of the release of her latest memoir, “Hard Choices,” on Tuedsay.
    “I think this was a very hard choice, which is why I think my book is aptly named,” Clinton said, referring to the Bergdahl deal. “If you look at what the factors were going into the decision, of course there are competing interests and values. And one of our values is we bring everybody home off the battlefield the best we can. It doesn’t matter how they ended up in a prisoner of war situation.”
    There are many - perhaps a majority - who would not have brought Bergdahl home under any circumstances. But even accepting Clinton's premise that everyone comes home, how is it "irrelveant" that by any measurement, Bergdahl is damaged goods and trading 5 top Taliban commanders for him makes his actions very relevant, indeed. In any deal, the ideal situation is for both sides to profit. This deal was as one sided a transaction as the US has ever concluded.
    I suppose if you're negotiating to buy a car, if the engine smokes, the radiator leaks, and the brakes don't work, this is also irrelevant to the deal because the car just got a new paint job and it looks pretty.
    The woman who would be president is a fool.

    http://americanthinker.com/blog/2014...rrelevant.html
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Confirmed: Bowe Bergdahl Converted to Islam and Declared Jihad - Even Allowed to Carry a Weapon

    Dean Garrison June 6, 2014
    130 Comments

    Fox News broke a major story yesterday that further supported the suspicions of many. Bowe Bergdahl did not just desert the U.S. Army. He joined the Taliban and at times was even allowed to carry a gun.
    James Rosen reports:
    U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl at one point during his captivity converted to Islam, fraternized openly with his captors and declared himself a "mujahid," or warrior for Islam, according to secret documents prepared on the basis of a purported eyewitness account and obtained by Fox News.

    The reports indicate that Bergdahl's relations with his Haqqani captors morphed over time, from periods of hostility, where he was treated very much like a hostage, to periods where, as one source told Fox News, "he became much more of an accepted fellow" than is popularly understood. He even reportedly was allowed to carry a gun at times.

    The documents show that Bergdahl at one point escaped his captors for five days and was kept, upon his re-capture, in a metal cage, like an animal. In addition, the reports detail discussions of prisoner swaps and other attempts at a negotiated resolution to the case that appear to have commenced as early as the fall of 2009.

    Retired Marine Corps General James Mattis was also contacted by Fox News for comment.
    Mattis was also adamant that no one at CENTCOM or within the broader U.S. military or intelligence community — despite intensive investigation of such allegations — ever learned of anything to suggest Bergdahl had evolved into an active collaborator with the Haqqani network or the Taliban. "We were always looking for actionable intelligence," Mattis said. "It wasn't just the IC [intelligence community]. We had tactical units that were involved in the fight. We had SIGINT. Any collaborators who were on the other side and who came over to our side. We kept an eye on this. … There was never any evidence of collaboration."
    The irony of what is the New America is that we have the most invasive surveillance state in our nation's history and our own government knows more about us than many of our friends. However, whenever our government gets caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar, no one seems to know anything about it. They all seem to read about it or see it on TV.
    Whether we are to believe Mattis or not, there were certainly suspicions, even if they were never proven.
    As we reported earlier this week, Jake Tapper of CNN interviewed Sgt. Evan Buetow about the Bergdahl desertion, and there was definitely reason for suspicion.
    CNN's Jake Tapper interviewed team leader Sgt. Evan Buetow and Buetow reports of suspicion that Bergdahl began working with the Taliban after his disappearance:

    "Bergdahl is a deserter, and he's not a hero," says Buetow. "He needs to answer for what he did."

    Within days of his disappearance, says Buetow, teams monitoring radio chatter and cell phone communications intercepted an alarming message: The American is in Yahya Khel (a village two miles away). He's looking for someone who speaks English so he can talk to the Taliban.

    Many soldiers in Bergdahl's platoon said attacks seemed to increase against the United States in Paktika province in the days and weeks following his disappearance.

    "Following his disappearance, IEDs started going off directly under the trucks. They were getting perfect hits every time. Their ambushes were very calculated, very methodical," said Buetow.

    It was "very suspicious," says Buetow, noting that Bergdahl knew sensitive information about the movement of U.S. trucks, the weaponry on those trucks, and how soldiers would react to attacks.

    "We were incredibly worried" that Bergdahl was giving up information, either under torture, or otherwise, says Buetow.
    So was Bowe Bergdahl working for the Taliban?
    It looks like he was. The Haqqani Network is a closely affiliated ally of the Taliban, so technically he may have joined Haqqani but they were all on the same team.
    This is looking more and more like 11 jihadists were released while we got nothing. I reported earlier in the week that there were 5 other terrorists released that are not being reported in the mainstream media. If Bowe Bergdahl is on a private jihad then this would be typical of the Obama Administration which has always supported global terror.
    Don't tell me that our government did not know what it was getting with Bergdahl. I won't believe it. Their actions are to always side with Islamic terrorists and this is no different.
    They lied from day one and tried to hide this.

    Source

    Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

    You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

    http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/06/bo...-carry-weapon/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  5. #5
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696



    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  6. #6
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Hillary Clinton Blows Off Bergdahl Debate with Latest Version of ‘What Difference Does It Make?’

    4,934 Shares By Mike Miller 5 hours ago



    While out on the circuit promoting her soon-to-be released book (which she manages to reference in this answer), Hillary Clinton weighs in on the Bergdahl prisoner swap.
    Hillary dismisses all that hubbub about trading the equivalent of 5 Taliban four-star generals for an alleged deserter without consulting Congress and in defiance of it having earlier rejected the deal. Twice.
    And anyway, wasn’t Hillary against this deal before she was for it?

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/1456...ference-makes/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  7. #7
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  8. #8
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Conservative Daily

    Given her record, she really shouldn't be talking about this...



    Contrary To Intel On Taliban 5, Hillary Says 'These Five Guys Are Not A Threat To The US'
    Geez, I wonder who will be proved right?
    Independent Journal Review

    Contrary To Intel On Taliban 5, Hillary Says ‘These Five Guys Are Not A Threat To The US’

    422 Shares By Mike Miller 12 hours ago



    A U.S. Intel officer told the Senate intelligence committee last week that four of the five Taliban commanders exchanged for Bowe Bergdahl would likely return to the battlefield to wage war against the U.S. This week, for reasons unexplained, Hillary Clinton disagreed.
    Given the Benghazi scandal and the consensus among former military officers and the Intel community, I wonder who will be proved right?

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/1466...uys-threat-us/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  9. #9
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Navy Seal Thom Shea: ‘We didn’t give up five to get Bowe Bergdahl. There’s another deal in play.’

    Joshua Cook 3 hours ago
    16 Comments

    Navy SEAL Thom Shea was part of Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl's rescue effort in 2009. Joshua Cook spoke with Shea about Bergdahl and more.



    Cook: Can you really trust this administration?
    Shea: Try and separate the spin from all of the facts. What's hard for the general public and even the military to figure out how to communicate that. Regardless of what happened or what the meaning or the reason was for Bergdahl leaving. It's getting lost in all of this spin. Either or not he's a convert or whether he's prisoner or anything. First of all, he's a soldier until somebody declares him not that way, and he's a U.S. citizen. We had to go after him. It doesn't matter the reason. We knew it was under an extreme situation that he had been held captive. We knew at the time he walked off base under his own demise, if you will. It's still a priority for us for what we do. We're a rescue unit. It's not our primary mission, but it is what we do. I would still do it today. The reasons for all that are regardless of what the tasking is, and we were tasked to do it. And we found a way to do it as safely as possible, and combat is never safe. I can tell you that.
    Cook: I've never heard of trading one pawn for five kings before. It's a controversial exchange. What's the end game here?
    Shea: The administration is not doing the negotiations. The administration is a higher level. The people who the negotiations are at a lower level. I'm not sure who it is… the CIA… not President Obama himself. He's not the negotiator. It's at a lower level. The State Department and the CIA are the ones negotiating this, or it could be the NSA. I don't know, but it's not in support or defense of the administration. They're not the negotiators. It can't be as silly as trading Bergdahl for the five kings. I think it's a diversion, and I don't know what the diversion is. But if that's what they played that card for Bergdahl, I really want to play poker with that negotiator, because I'm going to win every hand. If I just have to put in $1 for $5 million, I'll play every hand, because that's what's really in effect: We gave everything and got nothing in return, but a guy who best case scenario he has PTSD, worst case scenario he's declared a traitor, and he'll stand trial for that. But I'd never negotiate for that guy. I'd risk my life for him, but I'd never leverage national assets for him.
    Cook: In your opinion, how dangerous are these five?
    Shea: It's a weird question that people ask because you have to take it into perspective of where you're thinking danger is going to happen. It's not going to make the war environment any more dangerous. It's already 100 percent. You can't get to 110 percent danger. The war efforts and soldiers' lives aren't going to be any more dangerous right now because it's already at its highest that it can possibly be. What it's going to do, is it going to embolden different networks of Muslims that are extremists. I'm sure they'd use any possible way to embolden themselves. If they use their technology or their smarts to go after Americans, just remember it's always a vote away. You can always vote this guy out of office and get in a different administration. He'll be judged on the merits of his decision, but we don't know what his decision was.
    Cook: What are some of the points missed by the media on this story?
    Shea: Who is doing the negotiations? I seriously doubt if it's Susan Rice. My understanding is that it's a matter of state, The State Department/CIA negotiations. It's not national security, because it's not within the United States, so why don't we ask the people who are doing the negotiations what they can say about it? They're not going to tell you everything, but I'd like to know what the negotiation is. What's the deal? They're not going to say it, but we need to ask these people what's the real deal. We didn't give up five to get Bergdahl. There's another deal in play.
    Cook: There is a lot of mistrust with the Obama administration and those departments. Our position is to not negotiate with terrorists, but it's apparent that's what this trade is all about. Why are we arming terrorists in that part of the region and fighting them in another?
    Shea: That's really why hundreds of years ago the framers of the Constitution put three branches into play, so that one branch cannot make all of these decisions themselves. What's happening now is that the executive branch is taking action without getting approval. Whether it's right or wrong, that's what's causing this. It's not really of our national interest to get involved over there in Syria or Libya. It doesn't protect us or doesn't help us. It's a different game. It should approval through Congress and within the military advisors. We don't know what the game.
    Cook: Tell me about your new book, Unbreakable.
    Shea: It wasn't really meant to do anything but pass on to my kids what I wanted them to know in case I die. We didn't have the intent to make a book or a manuscript out of it. It got some people behind it who knew how to get it published. It became exciting. Stacy and I were trying to figure out how to pass something on to the kids, because war is dangerous. So it grew out of that. It's lessons learned from me as a father to a family, and then me trying to write that in some sort of linear form so that the kids could read eventually. They're too young to read it now. As it grew, it got some endorsements and sponsors from people who read it and wanted it to do more than just be written in crayon and dirt. Now it's doing really well. It's not a self-serving message. It's what we as father want to tell our kids, but most don't get the time to actually put it on paper. So I think it's kind of a universal message.
    Cook: Your book is very inspiration. Tell me more about it.
    Shea: I wouldn't want everyone to go into combat to experience how powerful they are. I was a SEAL instructor for three years and then I was part of an effort to lead the SEAL sniper course to transform that. What I got from all that, is what really stops people is not their physical ability or their goals, it's really they stop themselves. I learned that as an instructor in SEAL training. 85 percent of people who start don't make it, and they don't make it, because they give up. If you give up, you physically can't do it. And how that showed up for me in Afghanistan, I gave up for a small period of time. I just thought that I was not going to make it. I didn't think my guys were going to make it. And for a small period of time, we couldn't do anything about it. We were overwhelmed. The only thing that changed is that we decided to rally and to fight until we were dead instead of just dying, and it made all of the difference. You can translate that to business. You can translate that to being in a fight with your wife — how you kind of give up on it and it's done, or you can start over and get back at it.
    Cook: In honor of D-Day, what's your message for those veterans?
    Shea: Just imagine all of those guys back in D-Day knowing that it gets really lonely that last second before going into a firefight. For that period of time, you feel alone, and you don't recognize that 70-some years later people will recognize your efforts that since that sailor or soldier didn't quit on Normandy, we have the life that we have now. To all of the guys that didn't make it, they're looking on, hoping that we get it. To the guys that did make it and their families are still alive, because they took one more step. My hat's off to them. I've been there, and I'm glad we're able to continue, even with the frustration of a weird executive branch. We're still a powerful nation, because we believe in each other. That to me is the greatest message is that we're going to continue on together. To all of the veterans and to all of the families that are still kicking, don't give up and keep moving on together.
    Source
    Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

    You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.


    http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/06/na...her-deal-play/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  10. #10
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    [Watch] Clinton on Taliban -”These Five Guys Are Not a Threat” To U.S., Just To Our Allies

    Posted on 11 June, 2014 by Rick Wells

    While there is little argument that Afghanistan has been an ally of questionable reliability, motive or intent at times, and that Pakistan has been arguably less dependable, Hillary Clinton takes an interesting approach in dismissing the negative fallout from the release of the Taliban brass from Gitmo.
    In defending the deal, Clinton waves her hands flippantly saying, “These five guys are not a threat to the United States, they are a threat to the safety and security of Afghanistan and Pakistan. It’s up to those two countries to make the decision once and for all that these are threats to them.”
    She is basically saying that what happens to those two countries doesn’t matter as long as we aren’t threatened. That’s quite a leap from the “winning hearts and minds” that had our military handcuffed by rules of engagement that favored our enemies. Now it appears that their hearts and minds are their own concern.
    While it is true that they have played both sides of the field simultaneously, perhaps the knowledge that America has proven repeatedly to be a fickle partner in the end encourages our allies to hedge their bets a little.
    The all-wise former Secretary of State, who still hasn’t accounted for how she managed to get four Americans killed, says “we might be missing the bigger picture here.” She continues, “We want to get an American home, whether they fell off of the ship because they were drunk, or they were pushed or they jumped; we try to rescue everybody.”
    Except when they are defending a compound in Benghazi, right Hillary? We don’t try to rescue those Americans, they’re on their own. They weren’t accident victims, they weren’t deserters, they ran to the fight.



    Back to her original remark about the Taliban 5 not being a threat to the United States. How is it that the Taliban was enough of a threat, based upon their supposed involvement with the attacks of September 11th, for us to wage a 13-year war, but a return of their leadership to the theater is now dismissed as being a non-issue to America?
    Far from being eradicated, the Taliban has been rejuvenated and many of our critics will argue that they defeated America in much the same way that the previous departure of the Russians is described.
    Clinton’s comments call into question the whole premise and legitimacy of our being in Afghanistan in the first place. We were told the eradication of the Afghanistan breeding and training ground for al-Qaeda was vital to our national security interests. Now, it’s simply waved off as no big deal.
    At least one of those stories has to be wrong.

    Rick Wells is a conservative author who believes an adherence the U.S. Constitution would solve many of today’s problems. “Like” him on Facebook and “Follow” him on Twitter.

    http://gopthedailydose.com/2014/06/1...to-our-allies/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Michelle Malkin - The story you haven’t yet heard about Bowe Bergdahl’s desertion
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-03-2014, 07:45 PM
  2. VA CLAIMS VETERANS IRRELEVANT!
    By Newmexican in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-10-2014, 04:53 PM
  3. U.S. congressman declares: Borders will be 'irrelevant'
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-25-2010, 12:45 PM
  4. How the Constitution became irrelevant
    By Skippy in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-01-2008, 03:20 PM
  5. Bush irrelevant
    By Jean in forum Videos about Illegal Immigration, refugee programs, globalism, & socialism
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-26-2007, 10:00 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •