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.

 

Bowe Bergdahl to face desertion charges: NBC

page: 1
23
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   

(Reuters) - U.S. Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl will be charged with desertion for disappearing from his base in Afghanistan in 2009, NBC News reported on Tuesday.


Source

There ya go folks.

DESERTER!

The current administration traded the taliban 5 for a deserter.

Here is a blast from the past:



After the Obama Administration tried to paint Bergdahl as a hero returning home, soldiers who served with him erupted in outrage, accusing him of desertion and suppressing the truth. Then the spin started: a State Department spokesperson suggested that those who came forward were not “credible witnesses;” an administration official called the troops who served with Bergdahl “psychopaths;” and just a few days ago an article in the New York Times referred to them as “raggedy misfits.” To set the story straight, those interviewed wanted Americans to know that they all disagree with these comments.


Source:

Who are the 'psychopath's' now eh ?

Seems to me those who trade terrorist's for deserter's.

Alternate Sources:

Bowe Bergdahl to be charged with desertion, against Obama’s wishes

Bowe Bergdahl to Be Charged With Desertion, Officials Say

Remember the White House red carpet treatment for his parents?

I do.

edit on 27-1-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Already been posted:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also, this is from the Army Times:
Army: Bergdahl reports are untrue, no decision made

Who do you think is more trustworthy in this case? NBC or the Army Times?



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Good...that's exactly what he was, but quite frankly, I'm surprised the Army has the balls to proceed with charges.

I wish I was the 27D working with the prosecutor on this case. I have zero sympathy for this jackass.

As for it being against Obama's wishes...that's very telling as to where his alliegences lie and what kind of a "Commander in Chief" he is when he refuses to back the proper use of the Manual for Courts-Marial to prosecute one of the--in my opinion--most egregious offenses against the country, his unit, and those who have died over there. He pissed on the military, and regardless of my disdain for the reason we're over there and still fighting and dying, no one forced him to join.

Deserters are the biggest POS types of people that I can think of--unrealiable, untrustworthy, and just plain cowards. What a worthless human being.

No wonder Obama likes him so much...he sees a little of himself in him, I guess.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Honestly...the Army Times can be forced to withhold stories until allowed to release them.

But, when you ask what's more trustworthy, Army Times or NBC...hell, I'll have to ponder that for a while...



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

Already been posted:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also, this is from the Army Times:
Army: Bergdahl reports are untrue, no decision made

Who do you think is more trustworthy in this case? NBC or the Army Times?


Sure enough missed that thread.

However other news outlets confirmed the Fox Report.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

By confirmed, you mean they rereported the Fox News story without doing their own fact checking as is the usual modus operandi with the media?

The story seems to be originating from an O'Reilly factor broadcast where he had a retired army officer on his show that claims to know that Bergdahl will be charged with desertion. Most media outlets are rereporting the Fox News story. It appears that NBC News is going with the story as if they also got a scoop as well (this time it is unnamed senior officials in the Army), though I kind of think that they just don't want to admit that they got the story from Fox News. Then again, since NBC news is presenting themselves as an independent source for this story other than Fox News, MORE media outlets are rereporting NBC news' story as well.

None of them seem to be addressing the article in the Army Times though. I think we should just wait for the official Army announcement before succumbing to media hype and hysteria like usual.

ETA: Your New York Post source changed their headline:
Army denies that Bowe Bergdahl is set to be charged with desertion

“The reporting from Fox News and NBC on Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is patently false. To be clear there have been no actions or decisions on the Sgt. Bergdahl investigation. The investigation is still with the Commanding General of U.S. Army Forces Command who will determine appropriate action – which ranges from no further action to convening a court martial. We understand the public interest in this case and once a decision has been made, the Army will be open and transparent in this matter.”

edit on 27-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You mean Reuters, and NBC, New York Post ?

Don't let that Foxophobia cloud common sense eh.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Read my edit, New York Post redacted their story and like I said, I think that NBC is just hiding the fact that they got their story from Fox News (can't be dipping into the right wing honeypot while manipulating your left wing viewer ship).

Reuters is rereporting the NBC story.

U.S. Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl will be charged with desertion for disappearing from his base in Afghanistan in 2009, NBC News reported on Tuesday.

edit on 27-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
We traded 5 terrorist for this guy.

Now we are going to shoot him.

Murica



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Deflect much?


originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

Already been posted:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also, this is from the Army Times:
Army: Bergdahl reports are untrue, no decision made

Who do you think is more trustworthy in this case? NBC or the Army Times?



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Granite

Deflect what? This story is a hoax. Even one of the sources that Neo put in his OP has since redacted this story and said that it isn't true.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Granite

Deflect what? This story is a hoax. Even one of the sources that Neo put in his OP has since redacted this story and said that it isn't true.


To be fair...

Lots of sources are making grumblings about possible charges.

Lots of powerful people are said to be delaying its release.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

To be fair, lots of sources are rereporting from two sources: Fox News and their interview with the retired officer and NBC News and their high level army informants (though I assume they are just rereporting Fox News since the retired officer's information is also coming from high level army informants, so NBC probably just dropped the part where they got those sources from).

The Army Times has posted clear evidence that this is a hoax and now the New York Post has redacted their story. So, explain to me why you think the standard media circle jerk of rereporting poorly sourced claims has credence over VALID sources like this? It couldn't possibly be because you agree with this indictment? Because that would be putting the cart before the horses.

Just do the honest thing, deny ignorance, and admit that we all just caught the media pushing another lie. It's the media for crying out loud! They don't deserve our defense. They deserve our suspicions and skepticism on EVERYTHING they say, regardless of how it makes us feel. THAT is how you handle the media.
edit on 27-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Okay, but key the Fox interview is "we are doing our duty"
Can you comprehend that?



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

There ya go folks.

DESERTER!




Well not yet.

He does need to get a trial or court martial first.
At the moment he is just charged



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Nothing odd about this at all.

The Obama Administration always does nutty things.

This was for show at the time.




posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Neo you are all about the first and the constitution, did this man not deserve his fifth?


And as already been said, even if the stories are true, he still has not been charged.
They may just be taking the next steps.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Because several soldiers were killed during search missions from his own unit COMPLICATES the issue greatly.


[Quote]originally posted by: xuenchen
Nothing odd about this at all.

The Obama Administration always does nutty things.

This was for show at the time.






posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Neo you are all about the first and the constitution, did this man not deserve his fifth?


And as already been said, even if the stories are true, he still has not been charged.
They may just be taking the next steps.


Dont be stupid the constitution only applys to them not other people....i mean duh



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I'm an active duty Marine..
In my opinion Bergdahl is a traitor and should have been left to rot with the Taliban.

One other thing I would like to point out to everyone, because service members also get confused about it.
Military Times is in no way affiliated with the Department of Defense it is owned by the same media corporation that owns USA Today.
It's pretty much just a military focused tabloid rag and not to be taken as any type of credible source.




top topics



 
23
<<   2 >>

log in

join