Obama, Bergdahl, and the Hornet’s Nest!

HornetNestby Leigh Bravo   6/5/14
Everday is like opening Pandora’s box! A new lie, an old promise broken, a new scandal and a new hornet’s nest disturbed! Today, President Obama, while in Brussels for the D-day celebration made a statement saying,

“We saw an opportunity and we seized it, and I make no apologies for that.”

“I think it was important for people to understand that this is not some abstraction, this is not some political football. You have a couple of parents whose kid volunteered to fight in a distant land, who they hadn’t seen in five years, and weren’t sure whether they’d ever see again. And as commander and chief of the United Sates armed forces, I am responsible for those kids.”

“I write too many letters to folks who unfortunately don’t see their children again after fighting a war,” he said. “I make absolutely no apologies for making sure that we get back a young man to his parents, and that the American people understand that this is somebody’s child and that we don’t condition whether or not we make the effort to try and get them back.”

But what about the parents of all the other servicemen fighting this war on terror? Are their lives not just as important, if not more so, if in fact, Bergdahl is a deserter and collaborated with the enemy? Won’t the release of these terrorists put all our servicemen and Americans around the globe in greater danger by placing them right back into the war on terror we remain fighting today?

Back in 2007, a Senior Defense official said, in regards to the release of Gitmo detainees,

“I can tell you that we have confirmed 12 individuals have returned to the fight and we have strong evidence that about another dozen have returned to the fight.”

In May of 2007, Pentagon officials repeated their concern that thirty former captives had returned to the battlefield in testimony before the Congress. In January of 2009, the Pentagon said that 18 former detainees are confirmed to have participated in attacks and 43 are suspected to have been involved in attacks. The Pentagon has also had a long history of describing the Guantanamo prisoners as “the worst of the worst.”

So why would the President even consider releasing 5 of the worst prisoners at Gitmo? Obama in defending his decision to release the prisoners said,

“Is there a possibility of some of them trying to return to activities that are detrimental to us? Absolutely.”

According to the New York Daily News, reporters said,

“A top Middle Easten official said officials in Qatar would do little to hinder the terrorists. The unidentified official told Reuters that the Taliban leaders had already moved into a residential compound in the capital, Doha, and could ‘move around freely’ within the nation. The source said the terrorists will not be treated like prisoners and U.S. officials will not be allowed to monitor them. A Taliban commander in Afghanistan said the men were already bracing for battle. “As soon as they arrived in Qatar, they rejoined the Taliban,” he told the Daily Beast website. “We don’t care about U.S conditions and obstacles.”

In a story today by Time Magazine, a Taliban commander close to the negotiations that led to the release of Bowe Bergdahl told them the group wants to grab more Americans for similar deals.

“Its better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people. It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”

Villagers in Afghanistan told the Wall Street Journal that they were terrified of the newly-freed Taliban leaders. A farmer said that his son has been killed by Fazi’s men and feared they would return to his village to do more damage.

Let’s look at the bios of the five terrorists that were released by Obama:

1- Mullah Mohammad Fazi – Taliban army chief of staff:

He is wanted by the United Nations for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiites. He is associated with terrorist groups urgently opposing the United States and Coalition forces. As one of the Taliban’s most experienced military commanders, Fazi worked closely with a top al Qaeda commander, Abdul Hadi al Iraqi, who headed as Qaeda’s main fighting unit in Afghanistan prior to 9/11.

2- Mullah Norullah Noori – senior Taliban military commander:

He is wanted by the United Nations for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiite Muslims. He began to work alongside as Qaeda in the 1990’s as a Taliban military general and continued to work with al Qaeda in the years that followed.

3- Abdul Haq Wasiq – Taliban deputy minister of intelligence:

He arranged for al Qaeda members to have crucial intelligence training prior to 9/11. He was central to the Taliban’s efforts to form alliances with other Islamic fundamentalist groups who would fight alongside the Taliban against the U.S and Coalition forces after the 9/11 attacks.

4- Khairullah Khairkhwa – Taliban governor of the Herat province and former interior minister:

He helped secure Iran’s support for the Taliban’s effort against the United States. He was a major drug trafficker and oversaw on of Osama bin Laden’s training facilities in Herat.

5- Mohammed Nabi – senior Taliban figure and security official:

He was a senior official and served in multi leadership roles. He held weekly meetings with al Qaeda operatives to coordinate attacks against U.S. led forces.

What about the six American soldiers that lost their lives looking for Bergdahl when he left his post? According to a 35 page report, Bergdahl had wandered away from his post on two other occasions, once in California and the other in Afghanistan. When he left the third time, he left all of his equipment behind except for his compass, knives and water. He evidently had shipped home his laptop and journal before he disappeared.

According to Nathan Bradley Bethea, the soldiers who were involved with Bergdahl were forced to stay silent about the disappearance and search for Bergdahl, but now he tells his story. Nathan served as an infantry officer in the U.S. Army from 2007 to 2014 and is now a creative writing MFA student at Brooklyn College. You can read the entire transcript at The Daily Beast, in an article titled: We Lost Soldiers in the Hunt for Bergdahl, a Guy Who Walked Off in the Dead of Night. I have posted a paragraph below from this article in which he describes the death of his fellow soldiers.

“Though the 2009 Afghan presidential election slowed the search for Bergdahl, it did not stop it Our battalion suffered six fatalities in a three week period. On August 18, an IED killed Private first class Morris Walker and Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen during a reconnaissance mission. On Augusrt 26, while conducting a search for a Taliban shadow sub-governor supposedly affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Kurt Curtiss was shot in the face and killed. On September 4, during a patrol to a village near the area in which Bergdahl vanished, an insurgent ambush killed Second Lieutenant Darryn Andrews and gravely wounded Private First Class Matthew Martinek, who died of his wounds a week later. On September 5, while conducting a foot movement toward a village also thought affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Michael Murphrey stepped on an improvised land mine. He died the next day.”

Should President Obama have released these five terrorists in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl? Was Bergdahl a prisoner of war or was he just a deserter? Did he aid the terrorists during his time with them? According to the UK Daily Mail report in 2010,

“Afghan intelligence told the British newspaper that one of Bergdahl’s captors has gone on the record of saying that Bergdahl taught him how to dismantle a mobile phone and turn it into a remote control for a roadside bomb. He also claimed that he received basic ambush training from the U.S. soldier.”

According to the late Michael Hastings in Rolling Stone Magazine, Bergdahl told his fellow infantrymen that he no longer supported the U.S. effort in Afghanistan,

“The future is too good to waste on lies, and life is too short to care for the damnation of others, as well as to spend it helping fools with their ideas that are wrong. I have seen their ideas and I am ashamed to even be an American. The horror of the self-righteous arrogance that they thrive in. It is all revolting. The horror that is America is disgusting.”

Oh what a tangled web we weave!! Do you remember Michael Hastings? He was the reporter with Rolling Stone that was investigating the disappearance of Bowe Bergdahl. Hastings was killed in a controversial car accident in Los Angeles in June of 2013. Accusations were flying as to the possibility of foul play in Hastings fatal car accident. His death was never proven to involve foul play, but there are those who believe otherwise. Hastings was also a critic and a very vocal critic of President Obama’s investigation of reporters. His last story was titled, “Why Democrats Love to Spy on Americans.”

Hastings did speak with several men in Bergdahl’s unit, who were forced to sign non-disclosure agreements forbidding them from discussing Bergdahl’s disappearance. The FBI was paying quite a bit of attention to Hastings investigation and his article, “America’s Last Prisoner of War.” The FBI file, which was released after Hasstings death in request to a lawsuit, said that Hastings got caught up into an “international terrorist investigation,” into Bergdahl’s disappearance. In a statement by the FBI following Hastings death, it was said,

“Hastings was never directly under investigation by the agency, despite having pissed off a lot of people in very high places.”

The fact that the FBI was looking into the files of Hastings’ sources should definitely raise some serious questions about the reasons there was such an interest in Bergdahl in the first place. Why was President Obama so determined to trade 5 top terrorist for a possible deserter? Questions that remain uninsured, but will, no doubt, cause quite a stir when Bergdahl returns home.

In moving back to President Obama, we need to ask ourselves, “What is the current law that the President was obligated to follow?”

President Obama signed into law Congressional restrictions that require him to notify Congress 30 days before transferring prisoners.
In an interview with CNN on Sunday, Representative Buck McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said,

“Despite Obama’s plan to close Guantanamo, Congress has passed a law and he has signed a law that he will not close Guantanamo. Whatever his desires are, that does not conform to the law and he is the chief administrator of the law of the nation and should uphold his constitutional obligation to follow the law.”

When President Obama signed the restrictions, he attached a notice saying he reserved the right to bypass the notification requirement if there was a national security interest. The President cannot change the law with a signing statement. Interestingly enough, back in May of 2008, then Senator Obama made the following comments,

“When a bill comes to the oval office, the President can either veto it or he can sign it. What George Bush has been trying to accumulate more power in the Presidency is to say that I can change what Congress passed by attaching a letter saying I don’t agree with this part or that part…I’m going to choose to interpret it this way or that way….I don’t agree with that. I taught constitutional law for 10 years and I believe in the constitution and I will obey the constitution.”

Would you say that the powers at be have changed their colors? If attaching a letter saying you disagree with a portion of the bill does nothing to change the bill, then why would Obama call out former President Bush on the power grab and then expect Congress and the American people to accept his letter as a legal change to the very bill he signed into law?

An interesting story that has a long way to go. Somehow, I feel like Bergdahl’s homecoming will definitely disturb the hornet’s nest!
__________________________________________________
Leigh Bravo blogs at The Trumpet. • (1332 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Obama, Bergdahl, and the Hornet’s Nest!

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    There were 2 basic problems with the Obama Gang’s handling of the Bergdahl case. The deal could be justified as a harsh necessity, but they had to oversell it as freeing hero, which led to Bergdahl’s platoon mates telling the truth. (Teddy Bear made the same mistake at Chappaquiddick, trying to sell himself as the hero who tried several times to rescue Mary Jo Kopechne.)

    The other problem is that his sycophants, in their desperation to defend what could not legitimately be defended, chose to smear all the critics — especially those genuine heroes who were the source of the harshest criticism. They called them “swift-boaters” (even though the Swift Boat Vets forced John Fresno Kerry to take back his absurd claim that Nixon sent him into Cambodia for Christmas 1968). Even worse, a former vet turned Benedict Arnold named Brandon Friedman (a public relations official) called them “psychopaths”. (Q: What is the difference between an Obama sycophant and a pile of dung? A: There’s something good to be said about the dung — if nothing else, it can be used for fertilizer.)

    Addendum: Eric Erickson has an article that just appeared on Town Hall discussing the Taliban Schweinhunde Feckless Leader traded away. He refers to them as foot soldiers in the real War on Women, which is a very reasonable way of putting it (and would also be ironic if such behavior weren’t expected of most liberals today).

  2. David Ray says:

    At first, I thought how it’d be poetic justice if one of the six fallen had a mother that’d make Cindy Sheehan look sane, then it occurred to me . . .

    It wouldn’t matter.
    The press would never give that grieving mother the time of day – as demonstrated the way they dropped Sheehan after B. Hussein took office.

  3. Timothy Lane says:

    I’ve read and heard some interesting comments on the Bergdahl deal. Someone on Hot Air or Town Hall pointed out that he was held by the Haqqani network (who are officially recognized as terrorists), yet 4 of the prisoners were Taliban — whose release was of no interest to the Haqqani. This leads to the possibility that some additional (probably monetary) recompense has been made to the latter — and, even worse, that the release of the Talibanis was gratuitous, and indeed the whole point of the trade. When we discussed this, Elizabeth suggested that Feckless Leader was getting very close to the constitutional definition of treason: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” He clearly has given our enemies aid and comfort, and an excellent case can be made that his sympathies (like those of many liberals, cf. Pinch Sulzberger’s reported attitude on the Vietnam War) are with them as well (certainly not with the US).

    I will note that Judge Jeanine Pirro suggested on Justice tonight that releasing the terrorists may have been the purpose, and asked viewers to comment on the subject. There is a great deal of cynicism, suggesting that he wanted to deflect attention away from the VA scandal (and for that matter, some have suggested that he also wanted to do the same with his dubious war on US energy) as well as that he actually wants to harm the country.

    People have also noticed that all his “no one left behind” blather is belied by his behavior regarding the Benghazi attacks as well as his evident uninterest in rescuing the Marine jailed in Mexico for taking a wrong turn. (Similarly, all his eagerness to let criminal aliens loose isn’t reflected in trying to save Americans being victimized by Islamist governments, such as Meriam Ibrahim in Sudan.)

    • David Ray says:

      Of course B. Hussein doesn’t give a rat’s ass about some Marine detained unlawfully in Mexico. His distain for other evil white Christians is manifest via Holder trying to deport the Romeike family back to Germany.

      Little Barry policy is simple . . .
      America-hating losers welcome; Innocent hard-workers need not apply.

  4. NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

    I think perhaps the most interesting detail in this account is the non-disclosure agreements reportedly signed by the soldiers – is this anything like standard practice, one has to wonder? Why should they be silenced that way? There would seem to be two obvious possibilities: that there was concern about the possible prosecution of Bergdahl for collaboration or desertion, which would be all right, or the exact opposite, that someone was trying to cover up the facts of Bergdahl’s possible crimes.

    As for the Michael Hastings car accident, it might bear more looking into, although it doesn’t seem to fit this administration’s M.O. (use of government agencies to spy or harass).

  5. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    if in fact, Bergdahl is a deserter and collaborated with the enemy?

    I had a fellow (a customer) come into my office the other day and he erupted into mild dissatisfaction on this issue…until I assured him I was a conservative, and then he opened up even more.

    He wanted to know why Obama would do this. I told him it was because he was a Marxist. This fact, however, did not at all resonate with the person, which is 3/4 of the problem in this country. People just have no idea who this guy is or just how mch the Leftist/Cultlural Marxist ideology has infiltrated this country.

    When otherwise good Americans don’t understand the problem, they can’t do anything about it, thus one of the functions of this site.

    Obama has a grudge against this country. He does not like this country. To him, we gained our wealth off the backs of “the poor.” We are an imperialist country that needs to “give back” our wealth.

    The man is a Marxist clown. And until people understand what Leftism/Marxism is, they will be like a white blood cell that can never attach to the invading virus because it doesn’t have a clue what markers to look for on that virus.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      There’s a good reason why, in discussing this issue in several places, I’ve quoted the Constitution’s definition of treason. The Fascist Messiah has always been a traitor at heart; now, for the first time, a case can be made (though probably not proven) that he is actually committed treason. (“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”)

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Without a doubt the idea of trading a traitor to this country for the release of 5 deadly combatants against this country is seen as a twofer.

        Now, getting your average low-information voter to understand the depth of the depravity at the highest levels is the trouble…if only because many common Americans have come to share that same depravity, if in a less concentrated form. That is, in the fishbowl, you can’t see the water that you are swimming in.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          Aside from depravity or lack of information, most voters simply don’t want to realize that we are currently ruled by an enemy of this country — particularly, of course, those who helped elect him.

  6. Leigh Bravo says:

    Unfortunately, too many Americans depend on mainstream media for their news. Also, unfortunately, they tend to believe what the media spoon feeds them. It is so hard to educate people, especially today. If you start up a conversation with a liberal, they shut down and call you names because they have nothing to add to the conversation. Any form of discussion with the opposite side ends in a fight or ruined relationships, dissent among family members or lost friends. Obama has really done his job well…dividing this country. I have never seen people so mad…..Let’s hope that the events of late, the VA and this terrorist trade will open the eyes of more Americans to the fact that Obama is definitely doing what he promised..to fundamentally transform the United States. Let’s hope we can take the Senate and proceed with impeachment proceedings…if the RINOS have the spine to walk the walk and not just talk the talk!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *