Get PJ Media on your Apple

5 Indications that Bowe Bergdahl Is a Traitor

“I am ashamed to be an American. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools. I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting.”

by
Robert Spencer

Bio

June 6, 2014 - 9:28 am
Page 1 of 5  Next ->   View as Single Page

It is well established now that Bowe Bergdahl, the Army sergeant for whom Barack Obama traded five top Taliban jihad commanders to get him out of captivity in Afghanistan, is a deserter. But there are also numerous indications that Bergdahl is something even worse: a traitor to the United States of America.

Although the White House continues to ignore the evidence that Bergdahl deserted, every day new revelations make the case increasingly compelling. According to Colonel David Hunt, Bergdahl “called his unit the day after he deserted to tell his unit he deserted.”

Nathan Bradley Bethea, a former infantry officer who served with Bowe Bergdahl, wrote in the Daily Beast on Monday that “Bergdahl was a deserter, and soldiers from his own unit died trying to track him down.” Bethea refuted reports that Bergdahl got separated from his unit while on patrol:

Make no mistake: Bergdahl did not “lag behind on a patrol,” as was cited in news reports at the time. There was no patrol that night. Bergdahl was relieved from guard duty, and instead of going to sleep, he fled the outpost on foot. He deserted. I’ve talked to members of Bergdahl’s platoon — including the last Americans to see him before his capture. I’ve reviewed the relevant documents. That’s what happened.

Army intelligence several times discovered where Bergdahl was being held, but special forces commanders declined to rescue someone they considered to be a deserter.

The Pentagon concluded the same thing in 2010: “Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit, and after an initial flurry of searching the military decided not to exert extraordinary efforts to rescue him, according to a former senior defense official who was involved in the matter.” This official said that the evidence that Bergdahl had deserted was “incontrovertible.”

But is he a traitor as well? Here are five reasons to think so:

5. The precision of post-desertion IEDs.

Former Army Sgt. Evan Buetow, who served with Bergdahl and was present the night he disappeared, says flatly:

“Bergdahl is a deserter, and he’s not a hero. He needs to answer for what he did.” Even worse, Buetow recounted that days after Bergdahl vanished from the U.S. base, there were reports that he was in a nearby village looking for someone who spoke English, so that he could establish communications with the Taliban. Soon afterward, Buetow recalled, “IEDs started going off directly under the trucks. They were getting perfect hits every time. Their ambushes were very calculated, very methodical.”

Bergdahl knew where the trucks would be going and when; said Buetow: “We were incredibly worried” that the Taliban’s “prisoner of war” was passing this information on to his captors in order to help them place their bombs most effectively.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I would listen to his former soldiers as you call them before even contemplating any of your BS. Tell us, does DT in your screen name mean you are suffering from Delerium Tremens? That might explain your attitude to a traitor who needs and deserves to be on the receiving end of a firing squad.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
The most obvious sign that Bergdahl was and is a traitor to this country is the fact that he was rescued, and is defended and protected, by Buraq Hussein Obama and his regime. Like calls to like.

Subotai Bahadur
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Where are the Generals? Are they going to 'shut up and salute' while
The surrender-in-chief turns America into Dhimmitude?
Are there no George Pattons or Douglas McArthurs in the
Military willing to sacrifice their stars and military pensions
For the sake of our nation? Shame on them.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (59)
All Comments   (59)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
to the libs that are so concerned about this man, and not to judge, didn't seem to hear any such concern with a minor situation involving the Clippers and their owner.

but now who are we going to believe, his unit and the reports after he Deserted, or the rantings of a man that hated the miltiary and has the libs telling us that we shouldn't believe those that were there, and had the first hand info.

So tell me again what he is going to say to defend leaving the base.

In my view, there are only two scenarios, he is a deserter, and needs to be tried and executed, or he is a deserter who turned traitor and needs to be tried and executed.

As to not being worried about a fair trial, I seem to recall that Holder wanted a public trial in NYC for one of the detainees so that they could try him and execute him as well.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
@Brian..

Gee...I dont know where the idea that he deserted surfaced from...it's not like a dozen members of his platoon all have cogently testified to that fact.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
But all the members of his platoon are psychopaths.

A White Hut spokesman said so.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
The first sign of a red flag was in viewing all of the various videotapes we have of Bergdahl , while in captivity, none of it shows him distressed....and more telling. ..he is never forced to wear a blindfold.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
The roaches, the doubters, the "Cut the Bad Guys Some Slack", the porcine Leftists, the Michael Moore wannabees are showing up on PJM in increasing numbers.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
They have their marching orders from Jesse Lee and Media Matters.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Just imagine what the American WW2 public would have said and done to TALIBAN DADDY if he had coverted to SHINTO or became a NAZI. How unlike today where the PRESIDENT himself and his White House, the DemocRATS and the Lame Stream EneMedia defend the TRAITOR and his TALIBAN DADDY and attack his American HERO comrades for daring to tell the TRUTH.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Does this man know NOTHING about DIPLOMACY and INTERNATIONAL LAW? Memo to King OBOZO the USURPER the White House WIMP War cannot be declared over 'UNILATERALLY' it requires two parties you and the ENEMY to do that.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
UKExpat, but didn't you hear B.O. tell us this is how you end a civilized war in the 21st century. You cut tail and run, and hope that the enemy won't come after you, but will only show how weak, impotent and not to be trusted you are.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
The White House is either STUPID or it thinks that YOU are when they reported that ARABIC speaking TALIBAN DADDY was speaking Pashto. KING OBOZO the USURPER of course who was BORN, SCHOOLED and RAISED as a DEVOUT Mosque going MUSLIM knew exactly what language TALIBAN DADDY was talking . Which make the WH LIES all the more astounding, insulting and DISGUSTING.
Lets put the Ballet Dancer and TRAITOR Bergdahls TALIBAN DADDY in to perspective shall we. How many Fathers of WW2 POW's learned German or Japanese and became NAZIS or converted to SHINTO or grew HITLERIAN moustaches or wore National Health glasses. My guess is NONE whatsoever their generation were PATRIOTS not Left Wing America hating Politically Correct Multi Culti MOONBATS that are the average Low Info morons of today
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
I am waiting for Democrats in government, to decide this republic is more important than the reputation and legacy of this racist, marxist affirmative action preezy
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
>>I am waiting for Democrats in government, to decide this republic is more important than the reputation and legacy of this racist, marxist affirmative action preezy
You've got a long, long wait. Like never.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
It doesn't help that the backdrop for this is a 10 year war where "The Enemy" with a capital E, and the mission were not clearly defined.

As near as I can tell, "The Enemy" is ANY Afghan that opposes Karzai. I'm not clear on how immoral it is to oppose Karzai. Glad I'm not an Afghan.

Where Obama should really be pounded into the ground involves the way the whole thing was presented.

The White House characterized the capture of Bowe Bergdahl as “on the battlefield” after serving “with honor and distinction.” Pending a formal hearing which needs to take place one can still conclude that these remarks are, to say the least, in doubt. And people, particularly our fighting men and women, have every right to be angry about it. Inexplicable incompetence.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Howdy SteveJ1
The enemy in Afghanistan can be hard to define. But we know the Taliban is part of the enemy.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
I appreciate the greeting.

With respect, I cannot go along with your pronouncement.

"The Enemy" should have been persons running or participating in Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan and any Afghan warlords, taliban or otherwise, who allowed them to operate in their village. And the "Enemy" status should have existed up until there were no more camps.

That enemy was taken care of, in very impressive fashion, within months of 9/11. And we have means available to us to flatten any village that permits such training camps in the future.

What happened instead involved the use of our troops for social engineering projects.

24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Conservatives mobbing up to condemn Sgt. Bergdahl have been downright ugly and, frankly, Un-American … you who do so should be ashamed of yourselves, convicting a young man of one of the most serious crimes a uniformed soldier can commit, all on the basis of media stories and facebook posts and complaints from his fellow soldiers. Without any benefit of a Courts Martial and all that it entails to bring out the truth … via sworn testimony, hard evidence, court rules designed to protect the innocent from mobbery, and all that.

There are indeed other sides to the “story” as has been “reported” on Fox News and the internet. Check this one out on an interview today with Marine General Mattis who was in charge of the Bergdahl investigation back in 2010 when he was Commander, CENTCOM (essentially our military commander for most of our war on terror actions at the time).

http://tbo.com/list/military-news/mattis-no-evidence-of-bergdahl-collusion-20140606/

Bergdahl may well indeed be guilty, or innocent, of various offenses. But nobody can know that today based upon what’s got everybody on the right up in arms this week. Going after Bergdahl as a means of politically discrediting Obama is both absurd and dastardly. This young man VOLUNTEERED to serve his country in uniform, and served in a hot war zone, and then spent five years in captivity held by murderous jihadists not knowing whether he would ever live to see another day.

Most of those here on this website and throughout the world of conservative politics who have taken to personally trash Sgt. Bergdahl – including the disgustingly cowardly author of this post on pjmedia – are not fit to condemn him, or any other serving soldier. Unless and until he is proved guilty in a Courts Martial as having committed crimes, he is not guilty.

Bergdahl may or may not have been meant or “cut out” to serve as an American soldier – many who enter service are not, and that has always been true going back to the Revolutionary War. Every war has had its share of misfits, washouts, and deserters. Maybe he started out with the best intentions and then became disillusioned. Maybe he had naïve expectations coming into his Army service. Maybe he is just weird.

I cannot defend his actions because I do not know the facts – and neither do most others who are flapping their jaws on his case this week.

You want to go after Obama, then go after Obama – he certainly deserves widespread criticism for politicizing the prisoner trade, and for failing to consult with at least the leaders of Congress. Almost certainly Obama was more concerned with taking the VA scandal off the news with this action – and because of the sorry bass-ackwards and wrongheaded focus of so many on the right this week, HIS TACTICS HAVE WORKED TO DO JUST THAT.

Nobody in the House or Senate is going to win or lose an election based upon this incident – after all, Obama effectively insulated all of Congress from this decision. Much better for us to refocus our criticisms on matters that will matter to voters this fall, where it can do us some good in taking back the Senate.

And then simply let the US Army determine what is fit and just with respect to Sgt. Bergdahl’s actions. There will be plenty of opportunity to chatter about him – as if he actually matters to our politics, anyway - after the Courts Martial has come to a verdict.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Nobody has convicted Bergdahl of anything. There is good reason to think he deserted. The question is will he be tried or will this be swept under the rug to avoid embarrassing Obama. Let's hope for his sake that he can explain his actions to the satisfaction of a military court. Personally, I doubt that he can.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
You lefties finally found a soldier you can embrace; a deserter, possibly a collaborator, and he trashes his country in e-mails to his weirdo hippie father. No wonder you Marxists love him.
23 weeks ago
23 weeks ago Link To Comment
So what is your criteria for being fit to comment on Bergdhal? Since 3 members of my immediate family, including myself, served in a shooting war, are we fit to comment? Fit to comment that desertion is a high crime? Fit to condemn his own actions, his own comments, his own writings?

Unlike in the civilian world, excuses such as stress and other such psycho-babble don't fly, since his actions endangered the lives and very well cost the lives of others.

So yes, lets have a court martial and hope it isn't a farce, like everything else this administration touches. But the whole point of my service, my husband's service, and my son's service was to give us the freedom to comment on things like this without needing permission to have an opinion from establishment tools such as you.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
nice response ti DT Florida and his liberal rant.

Thank you.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
We cannot trust a Court Martial. The US Army promoted Bergdhal from private to sergeant even though the Army knew better than anyone that Bergdhal did not deserve a promotion. No one who goes AWOL deserves a promotion. Ditto for a deserter. Ditto for a man who shows signs of madness. Ditto for a man who is accused to have helped the enemy fight better. The accusations are from people who hold responsible positions in the US Army. For the Army to ignore the people who have evidence and instead listen to politicians with an anti-military bias shows that the Army has been corrupted. No Court Martial of Bergdhal can be trusted to reveal the truth, because the Army has been corrupted by Obama. Only in Obama's army can you walk over to the enemy and get a promotion. What a joke! Obama is playing us for suckers! The whole would be laughing if it wasn't deadly serious.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
probably some faceless bureaucrat did that, in order to get his bonus, you know sort of like the VA stuff, and to try and make the military look more friendly, while protecting their own sorry butts.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
The next time you correspond with Valerie, DT, tell her that your attempt to portray Bowe Bergdahl as a psychological misfit who succumbed to the pressures of the battlefield didn't fly! As you yourself said, you cannot defend his actions because you don't know the facts. The reality is that you have rejected the facts that have been made available because they don't support your personal view of military service. Suit yourself, but remember that opinions are like noses - everyone has one.

Perhaps you would be happier commenting on the New York Times website, since your views seem to align themselves with the NYT reporting on the Bergdahl saga.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Granting that we need a judicial [UCMJ] determination of charges, guilt or innocence of SGT. Bergdahl. However, every indication from the chain of command is that such determination is, at best, highly unlikely. And even if there is a trial, one of the possible faults of the court-martial system is one of command influence.

What information we have, subject to disproof but noting that the volume of separate data pieces that coincide have a weight of their own in the absence of disproof:

1) We have his own written and witnessed verbal statements about his detestation of the military, the mission, and the country.

2) While they are not [yet] deposed under oath; members of his platoon including his platoon SGT and at least a dozen of his platoon mates have stated publicly [including on TV] that they believe from knowing him then, that he had deserted.

3) He left behind notes indicating that a) he was deserting and b) that he renounced his citizenship. Central Command reported that it knew within days that Bergdahl was not captured but had gone over voluntarily.

4) Officers and men from other units engaged in the search for him have indicated that the nature of the search changed from trying to recover a captured comrade to a 'Kill on Contact" order when intelligence was received that he was with the Haqqani voluntarily.

5) We have had people captured before. We have had people desert and collaborate with the enemy before, Robert Garwood coming to mind. I don't recall [but I am more than willing to be corrected, with proof] that the members of their unit were given orders "to lie" about the incident. And his platoon members are consistent in saying that they were ordered to lie about his disappearance. So what was different here?

6) There are reports that he had walked off AWOL in Afghanistan twice before. Not the actions of a soldier.

7) The last time he walked off, he only took water and a compass, leaving all weapons behind. If he had been captured, I assume the enemy would take the weapons.

8) While reports differ about the early period of his absence, he eventually ended up in the hands of the Haqqani. The Haqqani are NOT Taliban, and the two do not like each other much. As in occasional open warfare. During his time with the Haqqani, they broadcast that he was teaching them how to make bombs and was helping them. This is subject to confirmation, but does not help his case.

9) The trade itself makes no sense, and leaves a great deal in doubt. For one thing, Bergdahl was with the Haqqani. Yet the trade was for what was functionally a General Staff for the Taliban and Al Quada. They were supposedly to be held for a year by Qatar, and in fact were apparently released yesterday or the day before to move about freely. And today, the ones released started announcing that they were going back to war with the US. Already, the Taliban have broken their side of the deal, but we are left with the question; "What did the Haqqani get for releasing Bergdahl?". They had to have gotten something, or they would not have released him. So we know that the US government is lying to us right now.

10) There are at least a dozen Americans, civilian and military, who are without a doubt neither deserters nor guilty of any crimes against the US being held by hostile foreign governments. The US government of Buraq Hussein Obama has not, and is not, doing squat to help them. In fact, if the regime were to act to help an innocent American in distress overseas, it would be the first time. So why did they give away the farm for Bergdahl, who is at best compromised?

11) From the moment of his release, Obama has tried to characterize him as a hero. White House spokesmen have tried to characterize him as a hero. Leftist news outlets that follow the White House line as religiously as they follow Marx have claimed he was a hero, and that the army and the soldiers who knew him are all slandering him. The New York Times editorialized today that Bergdahl was a "free spirited young man" who was let down by the Army. Their columnist David Brooks [who is only a conservative in his own mind, and whose love for Obama's "pant's creases" cannot speak its name] claims that even releasing terrorists to attack the United States is a fair trade for Bergdahl.

12) Given the credibility of Obama, the White House, and their minions in the media; based on past performances we know with a near certainty that they are lying, baldly.

So, granting the need for a trial, granting the need to confirm the truth, and noting that it is likely the exact same people who are praising Bergdahl who will be the ones to prevent both a trial and confirming the truth if it is in their power; we are faced with a choice. We can make our preliminary judgments based on the information available, credible information from witnesses who were there. Or we can take the word of officials and their minions who we know have lied to us
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Apparently PJM cut off my last words.

Or we can take the word of officials and their minions who we know have lied to us consistently and baldfacedly in the past, and are apparently doing so now.

The burden of proof in the court of public opinion is on Bergdahl and the Obama regime. Despite the heartache it causes the Left, the regime, the Democrat Party, and yes the Institutional Republicans; Americans are yet still free to examine the evidence as it appears, to discuss it openly and freely [except when PJM is acting squirrelly :-)], and to draw and express their own conclusions about it without let, leave or hindrance.

Subotai Bahadur
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Your remarks are fair enough as far as they go, DT.
How many similar comments did you post to defend George Zimmerman?
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
@MT Geoff....your deflecting! !!
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
nicely put, when libs have nothing they deflect, amazing that he didn't personally attack you, as that is normal for the lib playbook, the conservatives have let go for far too long.

Well done, have a good one.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
I would listen to his former soldiers as you call them before even contemplating any of your BS. Tell us, does DT in your screen name mean you are suffering from Delerium Tremens? That might explain your attitude to a traitor who needs and deserves to be on the receiving end of a firing squad.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Gerri, I would not use traitor at this time, muddies up the issue.

DESERTER is what is known, and can't be refuted. I even think that members of his unit had problems with TRAITOR, but none had any problem with DESERTER

Best to you.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Does this include conservatives who served with him in his unit? Should they just shut up, too?
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All