The Bergdahl verdict: a corruption of confidence

Barack Obama used the Bergdahl situation as a means to release serious high-ranking Jihadists, a Taliban army chief of staff, a Taliban deputy minister of intelligence, a former Taliban interior minister, and two other senior Taliban fighters. A good deal? Why not five low-level combatants?

Beaudry Robert “Bowe” Bergdahl is a US Army soldier who deserted his unit in Afghanistan on June 30th of 2009. He was later reported captured by Taliban-aligned forces and then apparently sold from tribe to tribe. Some said Bergdahl had become an Afghan sympathizer after arrival in country and, after learning some Pashto, spent more time with Afghans than with his own platoon, a loner in every sense. Some indicated he had become a Muslim. Sources indicated a note was left behind in his tent stating he was leaving to start a new life, after his desertion.

A little known point is that Bergdahl entered US Coast Guard basic training in 2006 but was discharged after 26 days for psychological reasons and received an “uncharacterized discharge,” given to people who separate prior to completing 180 days of service. This is called a clue, one that the USCG failed to share or the Army failed to recognize.

Thinking that he was smarter than the US Army or the Taliban, Bergdahl somehow failed to see that he would become, via his desertion, nothing more than a Taliban bargaining chip.

Bergdahl was released on May 31st of 2014. On June 2nd, Susan Rice made this statement.

Now listen to what Bowe Bergdahl’s platoon members said about him.

But here’s what you primarily did not hear, provided by, of all places, Newsweek in 2016.

WHAT THE ARMY DOESN’T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT BOWE BERGDAHL

by Michael Ames

Just days after U.S. Army Private First Class Bowe Bergdahl went missing from his base in Afghanistan in 2009, the men in his platoon were ordered to sign papers vowing to never discuss what he did or their efforts to track him down. Many of those men were already exhausted, searching endlessly in the hot dust and misery of the Afghan desert for a guy they knew had chosen to walk away. More than six months later, long after Army officials learned Bergdahl’s captors had smuggled him into Pakistan, commanders still had a sweeping gag order on thousands of troops in the battlefield. Some were told they could not fly home until they signed the nondisclosure agreements.

Oh my. NDAs. What secrets must be kept? Why?

And even now, six years later, as America’s most notorious prisoner of war faces an August court-martial that could put him in prison for the rest of his life, the Army is still hiding the truth, refusing to let the public see critical documents in the case.

The Pentagon finished its formal investigation, known as an Army Regulation 15-6, more than a year ago. That report, led by a two-star general and a team of 22 investigators, includes interviews with roughly 57 people, including Bergdahl. In 371 pages of sworn testimony, he told General Kenneth Dahl what he did, why he did it and what he endured during his five years as a hostage of the militant Haqqani network. The 15-6 is not classified, and at a September preliminary hearing on the case, Dahl testified that he does not oppose its release. But the Army won’t budge.

What secrets must be kept? Why?

Despite the Army’s relentless campaign to hide the facts about Bergdahl’s disappearance and five years in captivity, the truth has slipped from its grasp. It’s out there. You don’t need to read Army Regulation 15-6 to know what Bergdahl did and why. The mystery is why the military, ignoring the findings of its own investigation, as well as the unspeakable torture Bergdahl endured as a hostage, seems determined to crucify him.

Having read that, wasn’t Friday’s court sentencing of Bergdahl bubbling with just a tad bit of irony? From FoxNews.com:

No prison for Bergdahl in sentencing for walking off post

by Jonathan Drew

For the first time in eight years, Bowe Bergdahl doesn’t face confinement, or the threat of it, after a judge spared the soldier from a prison sentence for endangering his comrades by walking off his post in Afghanistan.

The sentence, which also includes a dishonorable discharge, was quickly condemned by President Donald Trump as a “complete and total disgrace.”

President Trump is correct. Read on to discover why.

The punitive discharge means the case will automatically be appealed to a higher military court. And a top commander will also review the case and consider arguments for leniency, as is standard in Army legal cases.

The judge also gave the 31-year-old a dishonorable discharge, reduced his rank from sergeant to private and ordered him to forfeit pay equal to $1,000 per month for 10 months.

The judge (Colonel Jeffrey Nancy) gave no explanation of how he arrived at his decision, but he reviewed evidence that included Bergdahl’s captivity and the wounds suffered by troops who searched for him.

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham responded:

FORT BRAGG, N.C. (AP) — The Latest on the sentencing hearing for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl (all times local):

3:45 p.m.

Sen. Lindsey Graham says he’s “incredibly disappointed” in the sentence Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl received from a military judge.

The South Carolina Republican, who served as an Air Force lawyer for more than 30 years, says Friday he has tremendous respect for the military justice system. But he says “this sentence in my view falls short of the gravity of the offense.”

Graham says, “an independent judiciary is the heart and soul of the rule of law but no one is beyond criticism.”

But perhaps the most honest and telling response to the “sentencing” is that of a man who served the United States with courage and integrity over and over, Rob O’Neill, who appeared on Tucker Carlson’s Friday show.

The entire event became a parody of itself, from the “serving” intonations of Susan Rice (a Useful Tool Obama initially pulled out his drawer for the application of the Benghazi Lies in 2012), to the subsequent White House ceremony involving Bergdahl’s parents.

To me it appears obvious that Bergdahl’s heart was not in military service and that he first “dabbled” with the military in 2006. Following the USCG interface Bergdahl stayed at a Buddhist monastery between 2007 and 2008. This indicates an individual whose resolve to serve was not present.

Honesty and clarity. Two aspects I admire in any person. Bergdahl was neither of those things, to himself or to the US Army. He and all would have been better served had he admitted the military was not for him. Time, effort and literally the lives of soldiers would have been saved but for the lack of Bergdahl’s honesty.

Bergdahl made a serious mistake and so did the Army in not noting his past apprehension in terms of service. A loner, perhaps too much the idealist, I suspect Bergdahl may have thought he could change the Army or his immediate situation once arriving on base. Both were wrong and because of that lives, good American lives, were lost.

It strikes me that Bowe Bergdahl was a jejune little Millennial dipping his toes into the soldier pool and thinking he could do anything he wished. Those thoughts got people killed. Not himself. He was saved. But the only person responsible for his own torture and the deaths associated with the search is Beaudry Robert “Bowe” Bergdahl.

He was finally saved by the US Army itself. The army for which he had so much disdain.

The sentencing, after the facts have emerged — present but tamped down from the very beginning — was an abrogation of common sense, a slap in the face to soldiers who serve and a complete dismissal of the significance of the brave lives laid down in search of Bowe Bergdahl.

The verdict was dismissive and terribly short-sighted. Those who serve now and have served in the past –Sheepdogs — know that in their gut.

This was wrong.

And therein lies a massive problem. One that needs to be addressed very soon.

That is this: the corruption of confidence in the US military. Friday’s verdict continues the corruption of confidence. It could, instead, have helped reverse same.

Corruption of confidence, crisis of confidence, call it what you will. It exists now and it is corrosive in ways we cannot yet even imagine. It’s as if you spilled a massive drum of acid into the street but most people think “oh well, that’s only water.”

We are nearing the proverbial Perfect Storm involving a lack of confidence in government. A corruption of confidence. A crisis in confidence.

Look at the FBI. If we cannot trust the FBI to do its job — the ultimate civilian federal law enforcement authority in the United States — then to whom do we go when the FBI fails?

If we cannot trust the alphabet agencies to do their job — the ultimate civilian federal law enforcement authorities in terms of surveillance, intelligence and collection — then to whom do we go when these 16 agencies fail?

If we cannot trust our US military to do the proper thing in terms of discipline and consequences, then to whom do we go when the US military fails?

Answer: there is no alternative.

No Plan B.

This cannot stand.

That is, if we wish to continue as a steady, forthright, strong, durable, proud, courageous and sovereign nation.

If the United States falls, so falls the rest of the planet.

Make no mistake.

BZ

 

Fake News 101

Frequently the American Media Maggots are so daft as to defy human ken.

This is one recent example from the past day that is altogether too chock full of buttery idiocy that even I cannot fail to make an immediate post about it.

Look at the above pictures. Stir, and add sarcasm to taste.

Then draw your own conclusions.

BZ

P.S.
Don’t forget this.

 

Hillary & Leftists: the Electoral College must go

Why?

Because it did not work to their advantage.

Immediate question: had Hillary Clinton won the presidential election, would she and fellow Demorats, Leftists and the American Media Maggots be calling for the obliteration of the Electoral College? You and I both know the obvious answer to that question.

Hillary has publicly stated she wants the Electoral College removed wholesale. From CNN.com:

Clinton: It’s time to abolish the Electoral College

by Dan Merica

New York (CNN) Hillary Clinton told CNN on Wednesday that it is time to abolish the Electoral College, part of a sweeping interview where the former Democratic nominee sought to explain why she lost the 2016 election.

Clinton, in the interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, displayed her animus for fired FBI Director James Comey, reflected on her love for the people — namely former President Bill Clinton — who helped her get through the crushing loss and blasted the arcane election body that she believes helped Donald Trump win the presidency.

I think it needs to be eliminated,” Clinton said of the Electoral College. “I’d like to see us move beyond it, yes.”

Hillary, of course, also referred to the 2000 election in which Al Gore lost to George Bush. But again, had Gore won and had Hillary won, would we be having this conversation? Of course not. Leftists won’t be honest and clear.

Tucker Carlson weighed in on the topic with a Demorat opponent.

Wanting the Electoral College gone, is that fanciful conjecture or is there more? From FoxNews.com:

Still bruised from Clinton loss, left takes aim at Electoral College in court

A liberal-led push to overhaul the Electoral College could be moving from the op-ed pages to the courtroom, as a Harvard professor who flirted with a dark-horse Democratic presidential bid last year vows litigation to change the system.

Criticism of the Electoral College was resurgent in the wake of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss. Clinton recently said she wants the system eliminated.

The latest effort isn’t aimed at dismantling the structure entirely – but rather, the winner-take-all system used by 48 states in awarding electors, which ends up focusing presidential races on a handful of battlegrounds.

With a winner-take-all, most of America is ignored,” professor Lawrence Lessig said in previewing his legal case – which, like any challenge to the Electoral College, faces a steep uphill climb.

Does the phrase “Constitutionally Federated Republic” mean anything to anyone any more? Because, after all, we are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. It’s in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These are the same documents that Leftists and Demorats wish to eliminate wholesale, when they gather sufficient power to do so.

Hillary Clinton, Leftists, Demorats and the American Media Maggots aren’t the only ones wishing to eliminate the Electoral College. So is a member of the US Supreme Court, and she makes no bones about it.

From TheHill.com:

Ginsburg: I would back changing the Electoral College

by Mark Hensch

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she would support changing the Electoral College.

“There are some things I would like to change, one is the Electoral College,” she said late Monday at Stanford Law School in California, according to CNN.

“But that would require a constitutional amendment, and amending our Constitution is powerfully hard to do,” she added.

Her words immured here.

Ginsburg’s remarks follow President Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court’s vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Gorsuch sits on Colorado’s 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

The Demorats don’t understand the Electoral College — with purpose and, in this instance, due to outright ignorance.

Top Democrat Wrongly Asserts Electoral College Isn’t in Constitution

by Henry Rodgers

The head of the national Democratic Party incorrectly said the Electoral College is not “a creation of the Constitution.”

In  a lecture at Indiana University Law School, Tom Perez, a lawyer who is chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said the Electoral College “doesn’t have to be there” and asserted that the national popular vote should be the principal standard.

Once again, because Demorats have a recent history of losing the Electoral College. Plain and simple.

The above map, if the Electoral College were to be eliminated, indicates which population areas would choose the president. The rest of the country could go to hell and would make no difference. Are you ready to cede a minuscule portion of the country such power? Did you not hear or read of what our Founding Fathers warned?

Are the clouds starting to part? But let’s continue with the lies of Perez.

“The Electoral College is not a creation of the Constitution. It doesn’t have to be there,” said Perez, who was secretary of labor during President Barack Obama’s second term and is a former assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights.

Gospel, right? Stated by Demorat/Leftist Leslie Marshall so it must be true, correct?

Article II of the Constitution, however, clearly outlines the electoral process, dictating that states must appoint electors who meet and vote for the president:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Damn. Those pesky laws again. Those terribly inconvenient founding documents. Oh how they get in the way of a true political coup. And in the way of Tom Perez. Are you beginning to identify some kind of a trend or pattern?

The House of Representatives provides small states with some serious concern, as 435 humans representing the so-called popular vote overwhelm small states. Then the Senate weighs in with true equanimity: one state, two Senators. No matter what. Checks and balances, anyone?

Isn’t it odd how Marshall purposely fails to mention this aspect?

Here is another aspect that Demorats and Leftists conveniently decide to avoid.

In the election of 1992, Bill Clinton received a majority of electoral votes and was the duly elected president, despite the fact that he received only a plurality (43 percent) of the popular votes. A third party candidate, Ross Perot, received almost 19 percent. In fact, Bill Clinton did not win a majority of the popular vote in either of his elections, yet there was never any doubt—because he won an Electoral College majority—that he had the legitimacy to speak for the American people.

No kvetching there, eh wot, from the Demorats? Was there?

Then:

This points to the reason why the Electoral College should remain as an important element of our governmental structure. If we had a pure popular vote system, as many people who are disappointed with the 2016 outcome are now proposing, it would not be feasible—because of third party candidates—to ensure that any candidate would win a popular majority. Even in 2016, for example, although Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, she only received a plurality (48 percent)—not a majority; third party candidates took the rest.

Uh-oh.

This means that, in California for example, Proposition 187 would have won. It would be the law of that land. Uh-oh.

It would also mean that Mexicans or Muslims could procreate to the extent that their sheer numbers overwhelmed the politics. Oh wait. That’s happening now in Europe and becoming entrenched in the US. Caucasoids are so free that they are choosing Free Cheese over procreation. Ain’t it great?

Demography is truly prophecy.

But what happens when demography overrules the Demorat Caucasoids now and in potential future power? How will they respond to the back of the bus?

Identity politics, y’all.

Even Slate.com, for fuck’s sake, advocates the retention of the Electoral College.

Can there be a true “democracy”? Of course there can’t. No one is thinking of dissolving the House or the Senate.

What we know now is: When Demorats and Leftist lose, every manner of cheating is back on the table.

Why do Leftists, Demorats and the American Media Maggots demand elimination of the Electoral College?

Simple. Because it is one of the final steps impeding their being elected in perpetuity and taking control of the United States once and for all.

Our Founding Fathers were wise beyond their years.

Even then they saw this issue brewing.

BZ

 

A reminder: the truth about Islam

Not a fake photo. This is clearly a book that reads right-to-left. A Koran.

I suspect we need a bit of a refresher course on Islam.

On any number of levels, from any number of GOWP sources, we are constantly barraged by the Leftist meme that violent Islamist individuals and groups who carry out bombings, killings, beheadings, spilling blood in the name of Islam, are the exception and not the rule.

Allen West provides some initial insight.

Back in 2015, this was revealed:

The Center for Security Policy released the following information on June 23rd of 2015.

Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad

Press Releases |  | The Muslim Brotherhood in AmericaUnderstanding the Shariah Threat Doctrine

According to a new nationwide online survey (Below) of 600 Muslims living in the United States, significant minorities embrace supremacist notions that could pose a threat to America’s security and its constitutional form of government.

Read this very carefully, Americans.  What is portrayed by your government and Leftists appears to be in direct contravention to the truth.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

But wait; those “moderate American Muslims” you’re told are good and tolerant people — and are in your community?

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah.Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

People who look upon Islam as nothing but another religion are duped and ignorant.  Islam is much more than a mere religion; it is a way of life, a duty, a political entity, a social, cultural, economic, military ideology, something that crosses all aspects of Muslim life.  It crosses every aspect and influences and informs every decision made by a devout Muslim.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

Understand this, however:

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

Note: please see the complete poll here.

Frank Gaffney wrote:

The findings of the Center for Security Policy’s survey of Muslims in America suggests that we have a serious problem.  The Pew Research Center estimates that the number of Muslims in the United States was 2.75 million in 2011, and growing at a rate of 80-90 thousand a year.  If those estimates are accurate, the United States would have approximately 3 million Muslims today.  That would translate into roughly 300,000 Muslims living in the United States who believe that shariah is “The Muslim God Allah’s law that Muslims must follow and impose worldwide by Jihad.”

These are all articles and issues and polls that have been purposely ignored by the American Media Maggots and GOWPs nationwide.

As WND.com wrote,

Poll: Most U.S. Muslims would trade Constitution for Shariah

‘Quran should be highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion’

by Leo Hohmann

Ben Carson’s comment that he would not support a Shariah-compliant Muslim for president because Islamic law is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution led to the former brain surgeon’s roasting among media talkers and politicians of all stripes.

He has been excoriated as “anti-Muslim,” “bigoted,” even “anti-American” and unfit for office.

Ignored by GOWPs and the American Media Maggots.

Further, where does the Muslim concept of “taqiyah” enter into the equation?  If you are unfamiliar with that term, you’d best click on the link.

This is important because Omar Ahmad, one founder of CAIR — and CAIR makes no bones about its representation of Muslims in the United States of America — has said, in “a conference hall packed with California Muslims in July 1998 that Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant.  The Quran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.” ”

CAIR denied Ahmad made the statement and said the newspaper that printed his statement retracted it, but that was proven false. In other words, Ahmad told the truth and CAIR lied.

This is another telling paragraph itself.

Ihsan Bagby of CAIR’s Washington office has said that Muslims “can never be full citizens of this country,” referring to the United States, “because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country,” Pipes reported in his 2006 article, “CAIR Islamists Fooling the Government.”

There are “moderate Muslims” in America, who would not survive their practice in the Middle East. Muslims who do not practice the Koran as strictly written. If you are a “moderate Muslim,” you’re not doing it right and you yourself may be in danger of an Islamic re-tuning.

Rand Paul points out the obvious: we need more extensive screening, but acceptance should also be based on allegiance. Are you, can you, be truly allegiant, considering your personal belief systems, to the United States of America? If not, you’re not accepted. How is that sensical?

If you point out a “moderate Muslim” to me, I’ll point out someone who cannot recite a minimum of five surahs and hasn’t been to a mosque in months or years, whose wife doesn’t wear hajib and who doesn’t not have a beard or fear Mohammad.  Someone the rest of non-moderate Islam would consider too Westernized.

I’ve recently found another clear-thinking individual who dares to speak not the politically-correct thing, but the factually-correct thing about Islam: there are no “moderate Muslims.” Those are merely MINOs who, according to the Koran and Mohammed, aren’t “doing it right.”

Then you have the CNN/Jake Tapper side of the coin: “Allahu Akbar is sometimes said under the most beautiful of circumstances.”

As I have said for some time and shall continue to say:

  • There is no such thing as a “moderate Muslim;”
  • There are simply Muslims who are not “doing it right;”
  • Islam is as Islam does, and
  • Islam is not a religion; it is instead a social, cultural, economic, military, and political ideology masquerading as a religion.

As it is not a religion, it is not due religious protections under our laws.

Now, discuss amongst yourselves.

BZ

 

Dan Butcher hosts BZ on the SHR Media Network

The SHR Media “internet service provider”– and I use that phrase very loosely — has been taking its merry time getting around to repairing our studio internet connection.

You see, customarily on Tuesday and Thursday nights I’d be featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia. I would continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly on those Tuesdays and Thursdays, thanks to my shameless contract, as well as my appearance on the Sack Heads Radio Show each Wednesday evening.

Such was not the case as the studio has been down for almost two weeks. Tuesday night Dan Butcher of High Plains Media fame was kind enough to step in and offer the use of his services and to run the Berserk Bobcat Saloon, such as it was.

Dan hosted the Saloon under his own aegis, and ran the board from Texas whilst ol’ BZ, in a twist of fate, called into his own radio program. Bizzareosity occurred.

Because of Tuesday events, it should come as no surprise that we spoke of the New York terror attack which killed 8 persons and injured over a dozen. No one was shocked when the suspect shouted “Allahu Akhbar” and it was shortly revealed that he was a Muslim who had links to ISIS.

Dan and I also contrasted and compared the NY terror attack to the Las Vegas mass shooting and illuminated the vast differences between both events — more differences than similarities.

When life settles down and the proper connections are made, please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives in podcast? Go here. Want to watch the past shows on YouTube? Please visit the SHR Media Network YouTube channel here. Want to watch the show live on Facebook? Go to the SHR Media page on Facebook here. Want to watch the show on Lone Star TV? Go here.

BZ