Fort Hood Lives Changed By Bergdahl's Captivity And Release

KCENTV ^ | Sophia Stamas

[lapsus calami]

 

*Video at the source link*

 

 

(KCEN) -- The wife of a Fort Hood soldier who helped search for Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl when he was taken prisoner by the Taliban is reacting to the circumstances of his recent release.

 

On Saturday, the White House traded Sergeant Bergdahl for five known terrorists formerly detained at Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp.

 

"When I met him, he seemed like a typical soldier," says Kimberly Harris.

 

She met Bergdahl at a party in Alaska, as he and her husband prepared for the deployment that would lead to Bergdahl's captivity.

 

Shortly after his disappearance on June 30, 2009, her husband was sent to find him.

 

"He messaged me saying, hey, I'm going to be gone for a while, I'm going on a mission, if you don't hear from me, this is why." Kimberly recalls.

 

Two months passed and so did a rest and recuperation leave scheduled around the birth of their first son, but there was still no word.

 

Finally, the day little Caleb was born, Kimberly gets the phone call, and the only reason her husband could give for his absence was that Bergdahl had failed to report for chow and walked off the base, and he had to go and look for him.

 

Kimberly says, "I was upset, I was scared, it was like oh my God, because I know a lot of soldiers in that unit had been injured, had perished, because they were out searching for this guy who made a choice to leave."

 

Now she learns of the price the Obama Administration paid for his freedom.

 

"I was very angry. I got very upset, because it's my understanding we don't negotiate with terrorists," says Kimberly.

 

As some of Bergdahl's comrades publicly label him, "deserter," one local veteran wants more answers.

 

"Well, I think there ought to be an investigation, number one, to find out if this guy is really a traitor, what the circumstances are, you know condemning somebody, calling them a traitor before you know all the facts, is not right," said Robert L. Stone, who served in the Air Force for 32 years.

 

Kimberly says her emotions are mixed, because she is relieved that Bergdahl is safe and sound with his family.

 

She's also looking forward to hearing what, if anything, Bergdahl will have to say.

 

"I would like to know his side, because there is always two sides to every story," she says.

 

[lapsus calami]

The wheels continue to come off.

 

I want to know who all the Traitor-In-Chief was meeting with before/after his jaunt to "visit the troops" in Afghanistan. He didn't visit out of concern for the troops, it was (attempted) cover for something else he was up to. The deal to release the high-profile Taliban thugs for a low-level deserter had to have been cinched on that trip. The exchange was a sham - it's obvious it was much more important to get the jihadi thugs loose than it was to get Bergdahl back.

 

[Vanders9]

The problem is that even though the wheels continue to come off, there are so many buses sliding around on their axles it doesn’t really matter if they do any more.

[leapfrog0202]

I hope the husband of the woman that spoke out is now out of the military. Otherwise I envision bad things for his career once the won hears of this. Full inside-out investigation of their lives coming.

[ImNotLying]

I expect that in the next day or two we will hear that all military personnel have been ordered to remain silent regarding the Bergdahl incident, citing that there is an investigation going on.

[cyn]

Perhaps that as the “new norm” as well as pc speech explains these perplexing comments:

// “Well, I think there ought to be an investigation, number one, to find out if this guy is really a traitor, what the circumstances are, you know condemning somebody, calling them a traitor before you know all the facts, is not right,” said Robert L. Stone, who served in the Air Force for 32 years. //

-AND- // Kimberly says her emotions are mixed, because she is relieved that Bergdahl is **safe and sound** with his family.

She’s also looking forward to hearing what, if anything, Bergdahl will have to say.

“I would like to know his side, because there is always two sides to every story,” she says. //

[mazda77]

What do you mean “will hear”? Do you have peanut butter in your ears? Several of those in his battalion have already come out and said they are disobeying orders to bring the truth out because he deserted, period. One of those soldiers was on Beck’s radio and TV shows yesterday and did not hide who he was at all.

Again, this criminal administration keeps forgetting that Veterans are all over the place and took their training on legal and illegal orders seriously. Some have even come out to report they were ordered to sign NDA’s shortly after the desertion.

[Bigg Red]

...much more important to get the jihadi thugs loose than it was to get Bergdahl back.

***
Sounds like a correct analysis.

[ImNotLying]

“Some have even come out to report they were ordered to sign NDA’s shortly after the desertion.”

I am not talking about “those” NDA’s which were null and void after Bergdahl was released. I am talking about an order to all current active duty personnel to not say anything about Bergdahl because of a pending investigation into the matter. This is SOP for the Obama administration now. And of course the “investigation” will go on for months and months or at least until after the 2016 election.

[paguch]

There is no reason to even wonder if the President knew this man was a deserter. Obama did this to intimidate the US Congress, daring them to respond. He has done dozens of unlawful things with no one taking him to task. He just keeps ratcheting up the atrocities to establish that he can do anything he wants. He has made the Congress mute and powerless.

[Bigg Red]

+1

[Vanders9]

I think those statements just make Stone and Kimberly fair-minded peoplw who believe in operating under the law. After all, there have been assertions that Bergdahl is a traitor, and from what I have heard he does have a case to answer. He and his family do seem to have "gone native" a bit. But, he is still "innocent until proven guilty". He still has the right to rebut allegations. Just because liberals jump to conclusions doesn't mean we should do the same.

My understanding (and legal experts on here may know more) is that a treason charge is a particularly difficult one to prove at the best of times. I believe the onus of proof is particularly high.

[Kickass Conservative]

-AND- // Kimberly says her emotions are mixed, because she is relieved that Bergdahl is **safe and sound** with his family.

She’s also looking forward to hearing what, if anything, Bergdahl will have to say.

“I would like to know his side, because there is always two sides to every story,” she says. //

THIS is why we end up with Democrats running the Country. Silly emotions replacing facts, speculating while empathizing with people rather than seeing who the person really is by looking at their past comments and deeds.

Makes me question giving Women the Vote, with apologies to the Conservative Women with common sense that may read this.

If it is proven this guy walked away and abandoned his Post, I wouldn’t shed a tear if he was strung up. Too bad Lord Obama let five murdering Jihadist’s free to get this Traitor back on U.S. Soil to deflect from his other Scandals.

[cyn]

PC cover was the only explanation that made sense.

Fortunately, I, in the privacy of my own home — oh, good morning Mr. NSA agent, want some coffee? — do not have such constraints.

For now ;-)

[TigersEye]

She’s also looking forward to hearing what, if anything, Bergdahl will have to say. “I would like to know his side, because there is always two sides to every story,” she says. //

I have heard this "don't rush to judgment, wait until the facts are in, he deserves a trial" line from quite a few libs and even a few hand-wringing FReepers. The absurdity of that is that I haven't heard anyone on the right say that he shouldn't have a trial. In fact a court martial is exactly what most of us want to see. But as far as prejudging him? There are no mitigating facts on his side. None! And there are loads of witnesses against him who all agree.

That said; I also want to hear his side. I want to hear him speak, and soon, to see how much English he has forgotten. I want to read his medical reports from Landstuhl to see how sick he was. (since that was one of 0bama's excuses) I want to hear what he thinks of America now. (not that any change of heart will mitigate what he did)

[cyn]

I’ve been seeking perspective in this very odd story.

1) I cannot imagine being in combat life-and-death situations. I have friends & family who have (WWII, Korea, *VietNam*, Desert Storm, Iraq/Afghanistan), and I deeply appreciate all those who have willingly served and suffered on my behalf. >> I can fathom someone having trouble and wanting ‘out’, but irresponsibility and endangering others I cannot excuse.

2) bowe, in following his “conscience” as his equally odd father urged, endangered his entire group, and ultimately 14 (+?) died as a result. Now he is being misrepresented by the liars in dc — is he obama’s useful patsy somehow? or am I overthinking it?

3) The greater evil, in a “don’t want to take my eye off the ball” sense, is the release of 5 hardened alquaeda thugs by the law-breaker-in-chief. Just when I wonder “what’s next?” — there it is!

[side note: Joshua Key 2003 deserter >>
http://rokdrop.com/2007/03/24/useful-idiot-joshua-key/
-and- http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=7411 ]

[TigersEye]

You sound as clear-eyed as can be about it to me, cyn. There are the things Bergdahl did and there are the things 0bungles has done. I think you have both of those things in proper perspective.

[cyn]

Knowing that obama can *always* go lower and that my worst expectations of “what’s next” will always be met is key!

[TigersEye]

“What’s next” is gonna really be a doozy then!

[Starstruck]

"innocent until proven guilty"

That is "presumed innocent until proven guilty". It's legalese and has nothing to do with anyone's opinion except those on the jury. OJ is guilty even though not convicted. Soldiers who were stationed with him have come forward and said he told them he was leaving. E-mails to his father indicated his disillusion. His actions of sending his personal effects home indicate something. Leaving a note indicating he was heading out say he was a deserter. Asking villagers directions to the Taliban is a red flag. I do not presume him to be innocent even if he says he is.

[Vanders9]

No, no-one here is saying he shouldnt have a trial, but there are plenty of people here who are already assuming his guilt. The absurdity of that is that if he IS proven to be completely righteous, all those who jumped to the conclusion that he is a deserter/secret jihadist are going to look ridiculous, and that might make every future double agent just that bit harder to nail.

I'm not hand-wringing. I'm just being careful. The Taliban must have had a reason to let him go, and the release of five known jihadists who have been out of the system for years is unlikely to be the only one. Maybe they WANT a huge show trial. Maybe they are just using him to feed false intel. Maybe its a subornation exercise. I dont know. There's going to be more to it than meets the eye though.