It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bergdahl could get 350k tax free, if cleard by Army

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: milomilo

There has been no trial as of yet. They are still in the investigation stage.



as long as the investigator have no prejudice and they really fair , im sure this honorable soldier will get a just reward for all his trouble. So many lies and hate been thrown to this guy without understanding why he did what he did. His teammates should confess all the horrible things their group did to the afghanis.. One of the horrible thing that made bergdahl snapped was his teammates intentionally want to ran over an afghani kid.. What kind of organization is today's US ARMY ? is all of them immoral and intoxicated by their 'american exceptionalism' ???




posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: tsingtao

That link sources to the New York Post. Not exactly a shining example of a credible source. What's next you going to link me to a story saying that Bat Boy enlisted into the Army now?



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: wutang717

Deserters deserve a public trial. Not money.

Deserters deserve public scorn.

And I am being incredibly polite here. I wouldn't spit on this piece of trash if he were on fire. He abases every single person that has ever worn a uniform and has served with honor and dignity.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

correction : ALLEDGED deserters deserve a fair trail



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

and what is the OP based on?????? - oH yes - a massive " IF "



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

And you spit on our Constitution by judging and convicting him in your head without him having had a trial.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: beezzer

correction : ALLEDGED deserters deserve a fair trail



Yeah, and Major Hassan was the "alledged" Fort Hood shooter also.

(rolling eyes)



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: beezzer

And you spit on our Constitution by judging and convicting him in your head without him having had a trial.


Maybe we should all just hug this deserter and give him a damned trophy.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Don't put words in my mouth. I just said that you are in the wrong for judging him prematurely. I never said he was a saint or a hero.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: beezzer

Don't put words in my mouth. I just said that you are in the wrong for judging him prematurely. I never said he was a saint or a hero.


I'm not judging him prematurely. His actions have already done just that.

The rest is just paperwork.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: milomilo

The military judicial system is similar to the civilian side. Investigations, prosecution and judicial are essentially separate. Since its military there are some areas that are different however that's based on the UCMJ and procedures. When a person enlists / commissioned as an officer the differences are spelled out.

Appeals process is in place as well as the ability to appeal from the top judicial person in the military to the US Supreme Court.

We would be jumping the gun to assume it will be an invalid / unfair investigation though. We just need to keep in mind that military procedures apply, so there will be differences.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: beezzer

Don't put words in my mouth. I just said that you are in the wrong for judging him prematurely. I never said he was a saint or a hero.


I'm not judging him prematurely. His actions have already done just that.

The rest is just paperwork.


And what evidence have you looked at? News reports? That isn't evidence, that's hearsay. I guess someone is only entitled to their Sixth Amendment right when the public decides they can have it. Good to see mob rule and kangaroo courts are alive and well in this country...

Quick history lesson, did you know that the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre were given a fair trial and despite everyone being CONVINCED they were guilty, they were acquitted? It turned out that the crowd caused their own misfortune and one of them probably crept around behind the soldiers and yelled fire to confuse them.

ETA: If this man is truly guilty of desertion and it is beyond obvious, then it will be an open and shut case. Nothing further to worry about. If not, then stop pretending like you have all the facts of the case and decide this man's guilt from just reading newspaper accounts.
edit on 15-7-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Until there is a court marshal and investigation, he is innocent. Just cause he is in the military, does not mean that he is guilty until proven innocent. The investigation is on going, and technically he is still a member of the US Army. So until the investigation is done, he is innocent, unless they find something, then it is to court martial to determine how guilty and the punishment of him will be.

If he is innocent, then they will have to show such and conclude the investigation of such. If not, then he will go to trial. And for those interested, he can request a closed trial, which means no one is going to be allowed to be in there during the proceedings.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Tell you what.

If he is tried under the UCMJ, and found innocent, then I'll say I'm sorry and apologise.

Maybe bake him a fracking cake with hearts and flowers on it.

Until then, he's a deserter in my humble opinion and deserves nothing but what the UCMJ says he deserves.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: wutang717

Deserters deserve a public trial. Not money.

Deserters deserve public scorn.

And I am being incredibly polite here. I wouldn't spit on this piece of trash if he were on fire. He abases every single person that has ever worn a uniform and has served with honor and dignity.


And above all they deserve the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Until he is convicted he is a member of the military and as a prisoner, still earned pay, including the pay that goes along with his promotion while in captivity.

Personal feelings aside, we should think twice about putting the cart before the horse. If you or I were in a similar situation we would want to be be treated as innocent.

btw not lecturing - just been giving this some thought and offering my opinion.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   
I also want to point out that my opinion was shaped NOT by the media, but by those in his unit.

They say he deserted.

Ill trust those in service before I trust and politician or pundit or talking head.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Tell you what.

If he is tried under the UCMJ, and found innocent, then I'll say I'm sorry and apologise.

Maybe bake him a fracking cake with hearts and flowers on it.

Until then, he's a deserter in my humble opinion and deserves nothing but what the UCMJ says he deserves.


Guilty until proven innocent then? You're such a shining beacon of American Constitutionality. I'm going to go ahead and call you a hypocrite. I see you making huge fusses about the 1st amendment with the PC crowd and the 2nd amendment with the anti-gun crowd, but are quick to throw the 6th out when it suits your beliefs.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:39 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Those people aren't the jurors or the judges. They may be called as witnesses, but they aren't the ones who determine the man's guilt or not. For all we know, he may not have gotten along with those soldiers very well and they are throwing him under the bus. The military doesn't work like how Hollywood painted it with Band of Brothers. People can't tolerate each other just like everywhere else. There where many people in my unit when I was in the army that I didn't like as well.
edit on 15-7-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

He's entitled under the UCMJ.

He signed a contract agreeing to such.

I don't give a tinkers damn what you think of me either.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Well in UCMJ you are still innocent until proven guilty.

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) ART. 51. VOTING AND RULINGS


(1) that the accused must be presumed to be innocent until his guilt is established by legal and competent evidence beyond reasonable doubt;


So what's your point?
edit on 15-7-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join