The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Obama’s Treasonous Taliban Tête à Tête

One
can reach a point in the business of political (and even cultural) commentary
where one gags at the latest episode of chicanery and blatant fraud. Living in
a constant state of crisis, outrage and doom, as we have been doing under
President Barack Obama’s tenure in the White House, is not psychologically
healthy. Gagging and revulsion are defense mechanisms, warning signs that one
is becoming jaded, numb, and dangerously desensitized.” News of the latest
White House adventure in nihilism, in this instance the premeditated
“swap” of an alleged deserter and traitor for five Gitmo hard-case
killer Islamists, begins as a cresting wave that looks squeaky clean – thanks
to government PR and Susan
Rice
– until it washes over you and you learn it’s packed with rocks, sand,
jelly fish, and what’s found in septic tanks.
That’s
what I felt when the Bowe Bergdahl news broke. Mentally paraphrasing Henry II
about Thomas Becket, “Who will rid me of this troublesome Progressive
priest
?,” I steeled myself to deal with it. While I contend that
Obama’s policies are politically fascist, in terms of his domestic policies, however,
beneath all the Alinsky-esque manipulation and subterfuge, he is fundamentally a
nihilist. His actions are consciously, deliberately, and purposefully nihilist.
He is bent on destroying this country.
Most
commentators and pundits do not grasp this, not even the brightest and most
perceptive ones, not even the ones imbued with such outrage and palpable
disgust with Obama that they are calling for his censure or impeachment. The
devil is not in the details of Obama’s actions. The devil is Obama himself. The
details don’t concern him. He is their author and the details are a
distraction.
Perhaps
it’s because the commentators and pundits are observing what they believe is
some mandatory decorum when it comes to judging Obama or anyone else in such
high office, and so pull that final knockout punch out of respect for an office
Obama clearly does not respect himself. But Obama’s malice and malignity are
there for the seeing. My well-paid colleagues won’t take that last step with a
moral condemnation and deem him a worse traitor than Bowe Bergdahl.
That
they very likely fear the wrath of a president and a government with unlimited
powers to harass, smear, persecute, and destroy is proof enough that they know that Obama is evil.
I’ve
been calling him evil from the very beginning, back in 2008. You can say that
only so many times.



Here is one way of
not grasping Obama’s evil. Charles Krauthammer in his Washington Post column of
June 5th, “Free
him, then try him
,” gets the essential details of the Bergdahl
“swap” and neatly presents them:
America doesn’t negotiate with
terrorists
.
Nonsense. Of course we do.
Everyone does, while pretending not to. The Israelis, by necessity the toughest
of all anti-terror fighters, in
2011 gave up 1,027 prisoners
, some with blood on their hands, for one
captured staff sergeant.
Krauthammer
might also have mentioned our negotiating with Hamas and the Muslim
Brotherhood, and wanting very badly to negotiate with Iran, if only the ayatollahs
would stop laughing at us. Not to mention the Taliban and Al Queda.
The administration did not give
Congress 30-day notice as required by law.
Of all the jurisdictional
disputes between president and Congress, the president stands on the firmest
ground as commander in chief. And commanders have the power to negotiate
prisoner exchanges.  Moreover, from where
did this sudden assertion of congressional prerogative spring? After five years
of supine acquiescence to President Obama’s multiple usurpations, Congress
suddenly becomes exercised over a war power — where its claim is weakest.
Congress does nothing in the face
of 23
executive alterations
of the president’s own Affordable Care Act. It does
nothing when Obama
essentially enacts
by executive order the Dream Act, which Congress had
refused to enact. It does nothing when the Justice Department unilaterally
rewrites drug laws
. And now it rises indignantly on its hind legs because
it didn’t get 30
days’ notice of a prisoner swap
?
This
is true. Congress has not done much to rein in Obama’s repeated abuses of the
office’s executive powers, except to complain about being bypassed, nor has the
Supreme Court. And it was that very same 30-day notice law Obama himself signed.  He has been flouting law since he assumed
office. It’s nothing new. Also worthy of mention is Obama’s habit of bypassing
Congress by simply ordering the various bureaucracies and enforcement agencies
to implement his agendas, for example, by ordering the EPA to enforce his new
coal emissions
regulations, or the IRS to target Tea Party and other
conservative groups for surveillance and delaying regulatory paperwork to
register as non-profits.
The
Taliban release endangers national security.

Indeed it does. The five
released detainees
are unrepentant, militant and dangerous. They’re likely
to go back into the field and resume their war against local and foreign
infidels, especially us. The administration
pretense
that we and the Qataris will monitor them is a joke. They can start
planning against us tonight. And if they decide to leave Qatar tomorrow, who’s
going to stop them?
NATO?
The EU? Electronic ankle bracelets? An unarmed, picture-taking drone with a
megaphone that would remind them not to venture from Qatar? None of the above. Krauthammer
scores Obama’s ventriloquist dummy, Susan Rice, current national security
advisor and former U.S. ambassador to the UN, for broaching the first “talking
points
“:
What is it with Susan Rice and
the Sunday morning talk shows? This time she said Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had served
in Afghanistan “with
honor and distinction
” — the biggest whopper since she insisted the Benghazi
attack was caused by a video
.
Krauthammer
cuts through all the speculation and second-guessing about Bergdahl’s status
and writes:
If he’s a defector — joined the
enemy to fight against his country — then he deserves no freeing. Indeed, he
deserves killing, the way
we kill other enemies
in the field, the way we killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an
American who had openly joined al-Qaeda. A U.S. passport does not entitle a
traitor to any special protection. (Caveat: If a POW is turned,
Stockholm-syndrome-like, after falling captive, these condemnatory
considerations don’t apply.)
Assume, however — and we will
find out soon enough — that Bergdahl was not a defector. Simply wanted out — a
deserter who walked or wandered away from his duty and his comrades for reasons
as yet unknown.
Two imperatives should guide the
answer. Bergdahl remains a member of the U.S. military and therefore is (a)
subject to military justice and (b) subject to the soldiers’ creed that we
don’t leave anyone behind. What to do? Free him, then try him. Make the swap
and then, if the evidence is as strong as it now seems, court-martial him for
desertion.
Paul
Waldman’s June 6th Washington Post article, “It’s
true: Bergdahl wasn’t a ‘hero.’ So what?
“reflects the cynical malaise
that governs the news media in an attempt to analyze the probity of the swap
and the legitimacy of the concept of heroism.
Some years ago, the country came
to a collective realization that the people who fight in a war don’t bear
personal responsibility for whether the war was a good idea in the first place.
This was an immensely salutary development, one that led to the important
acknowledgement of the risks that service members take on. The image of the
military improved dramatically, and Americans began looking at those in uniform
with new admiration. Service members couldn’t walk through an airport without a
dozen people walking up to them to thank them for their service. That’s all
good.
But along with it came a
devaluation of the idea of heroism. We began to regularly refer to any and all
members of the military as “heroes,” without any regard to what they had or
hadn’t done in their service. If we use the same term to refer to someone who
risked his life to save his fellow soldiers in a valley in Afghanistan as we do
for someone who effectively conducted data entry for personnel files at a base
in North Carolina, “hero” has lost nearly all its meaning.
Conservatives are up
in arms
over the fact that Susan Rice said Bergdahl “served with honor and
distinction” before he was captured by the Taliban. But how many times have we
heard that phrase? It’s become a meaningless throwaway line. These days, if a
soldier managed not to frag his commanding officer and drive his Humvee off a
cliff, we say he “served with honor and distinction.”
If
the concept of heroism, or claiming that someone “served with honor and
distinction,” has become a meaningless concept or a throwaway line,”
who made it so? It wasn’t Susan Rice alone. For example, Hillary Clinton’s
touted “accomplishments” while Secretary of State have become a
source of humor and mockery, those accomplishments having the character of a
helium balloon that deflates or explodes and falls to the earth every time it
rises to the sun of the truth that she accomplished absolutely nothing. Yet,
while the Left and most of the news media know that she achieved little else
but antagonism among our allies and enemies, few dare to state that publicly.
This
is self-censorship, if not tweaking news stories fit to print that overlay a
news medium’s own political agenda.
Sharyl
Attkisson, the reporter who resigned from CBS because of the network’s penchant
for self-censorship and for submitting to government pressure not to run
stories critical of Obama and his administration, wrote in a June 3rd
article, “Exclusive:
Journalism’s Very Dangerous Trend
,” in the Daily Signal:
Sharyl Attkisson, an award-winning
investigative reporter who resigned from CBS
News earlier this year
, says the news media are heading down a dangerous
path with attempts to “censor or block stories” that don’t align with their
preferred agenda.“There’s a tendency in the news media, on the part of some
managers, to censor or block stories that don’t fall in line with the message
they want sent to the viewers,” Attkisson said in an exclusive interview with
The Daily Signal.
“I think that’s really a very
dangerous perspective to have.”In the first of three segments, Attkisson shared
her views on journalism and life after CBS News. Her newest investigative
report—about
oxygen trials conducted on premature babies
—was published by The Daily
Signal today. She will serve as a senior independent contributor to the news
organization, which made its debut Tuesday.
Attkisson made headlines in March
when she left CBS News after a 20-year career at the TV network. In subsequent
interviews, she cited her inability
to get her stories on the air
.
On
her own blog
site
, Attkisson comments on the Bergdahl/Taliban “swap,” and,
like Charles Krauthammer, cautions calm in rushing to judgment on Bergdahl’s
behavior five years ago:
Diana
West, in her WND article of June 5th article, “‘No Men Left Behind’?,  bursts the balloon of Obama’s assertion about
the purported American “tradition” of not leaving behind captured
soldiers.
It is probably the poisonous reek
of government lies breaking open that has ignited this passion – so many lies
and so much subterfuge that a clear story has yet to take shape. But this
collective outrage over Afghanistan – a first in the history of our long war
there – shouldn’t all be spent on Bergdahl, or even on Obama. But I will save
that story for another day.
In the meantime, it’s worth
noting that the nation’s wrath is as understandable as it is real. Bergdahl
wasn’t captured as the government vaguely led us to believe, even going so far
as to prevent some of Bergdahl’s platoon-mates from talking about what happened
by having them sign nondisclosure agreements. We now know that as many as 14
American soldiers were killed trying to rescue Bergdahl. …
The president has invoked lofty
ideals to explain his decision to release five high-risk Taliban leaders from
Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Bergdahl. “The United States,” Obama said, “has
always had a pretty sacred rule and that is: We don’t leave our men or women in
uniform behind, and that dates back to the earliest days. Regardless of the
circumstances, whatever those circumstances may turn out to be, we still get an
American soldier back if he’s held in captivity. Period. Full stop. We don’t
condition that.”



It’s
a lie, writes West, or a statement made from nearly criminal ignorance of the
truth of American actions and policies in the past. She writes that the
“United States has routinely left huge numbers of our POW/MIAs behind.”
A widely renowned expert in
U.S.-Soviet relations, [Joseph D.] Douglass passed away on May 23 at age 78. It
was his searing 2002 book “Betrayed” that focused my attention on the most
ghastly betrayal of all: the betrayal by the U.S. government of literally thousands
of American POWs and MIAs who were left behind in Communist prisons after every
war America fought in the 20th century, from World War I (against the new
Bolshevik regime) to Vietnam.
In assessing the available
research, including a landmark 1990 report by the Republican minority staff of
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Douglass concluded that as many as
2,000 Americans were left behind after the Vietnam War, 5,000 to 8,000 after
the Korean War, 1,000 throughout the Cold War, and, staggeringly, between
15,000 and 20,000 after World War II. (I discuss this gruesome subject in my
book “American
Betrayal.”
)
These giant numbers are not only
shocking, they are numbing to the point of sounding fantastic to those among us
who have only heard politicians such as Sen. John McCain or Secretary of State
John Kerry on the subject, or followed mainstream media coverage thereof. Such
coverage is one of consistent denial of the existence of these men, plus
ridicule for their advocates. A breakthrough of sorts came in 2005 when Norman
Kass, the American chief of the U.S.-Russia Joint Commission on POW/MIAs, told
CNN that he would be “comfortable” acknowledging that “hundreds” of American
servicemen in the 20th century had actually ended up in the Soviet-era
slave-labor camps known as the Gulag Archipelago. I can hardly think of a more
sickening admission.

And, as West details in American Betrayal,
the Soviets, our itinerant ally against Nazi Germany, denied it had any
American POWS or even British POWs “captured” from German prisoner of
war camps, and our State Department, FDR and later Harry Truman went along with
the Soviet lie in order to placate a totalitarian régime which we had let
conquer and ravish half of Europe. It was only after the collapse of the Soviet
Union that the truth began to emerge when Soviet archives were opened to
Western writers and scholars.
Daniel
Greenfield connects the VA “waiting list” scandal with the timing of
Bergdahl’s “quick” release from captivity by the Taliban in his June
1st FrontPage article, “Secretary of Defense:
After 5 Years, We Acted ‘Quickly’ to Bring Bowe Bergdahl Home
“:
Secretary of Defense Hagel appears
a bit confused by the word
“quickly”. After 5 years and multiple releases
of Taliban commanders and Gitmo terrorists, this isn’t quickly. But I wonder
what the time overlap between the decision to make the deal and the VA scandal
was. Would Bergdahl still be held captive if Obama’s poll numbers weren’t
taking a beating over the abuse of vets?
Commenting
on the deal brokered by Qatar, Greenfield noted:
The Qatari regime is entangled
with Al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists around the world. But at least Hagel knows
who his masters are.
Greenfield
quotes from a Washington
Post
article of May 31st that details the career resumes of the
five Taliban creatures released by Obama back to combat duty against this
country. He posits in another column that the freeing of these killers is but
an overture to closing
down Gitmo
.
George
Will, in his June 4th Washington Post column, “When
a president goes rogue
,” comes closest to condemning Obama for what he
is, a power-lusting demagogue with an agenda to humiliate and demote this
country to the status of just another sniveling, European welfare state
knock-off, beholden to an all-powerful, humongous, unelected bureaucracy and
climate changers and submitters to Islam. Opening with a remark about Susan
Rice’s yadda yadda about Bergdahl’s alleged service with “honor and
distinction”:
Perhaps she did not know, in
advance of the swap of five
terrorists
for Sgt.
Bowe Bergdahl
, the, shall we say, ambiguities about Bergdahl’s
departure from his platoon
in Afghanistan and the reportedly deadly
consequences of his behavior. If so, then she has pioneered a degree of
incompetence exotic even for this 10-thumbed administration. If, however, she
did know and still allowed Obama to present this as a mellow moment of national
satisfaction, she is condign punishment for his choice of such hirelings.
Perhaps this exchange really is,
as Obama said
in defending it
, an excellent thing “regardless of the circumstances,
whatever those circumstances may turn out to be.” His confidence in its
excellence is striking, considering that he acknowledges that we do not know
the facts about what would seem to be important “circumstances”….
Obama did not comply with the law
requiring presidents to notify Congress 30 days before such exchanges of
prisoners at Guantanamo. Politico can be cited about this not because among the
media it is exceptionally, well, understanding of Obama’s exuberant
notion of executive latitude but because it is not. Politico headlined a story
on his noncompliance with the law “Obama
May Finally Be Going Rogue on Gitmo
.” It said Obama’s “assertive” act
“defied Congress” — Congress, not the rule of law — in order “to get that
process [of closing the prison at Guantanamo] moving.” It sent “a clear
message” that “Obama is now willing to wield his executive powers to get the
job done.” Or, as used to be said in extenuation of strong leaders, “to make
the trains run on time.”
 Hitler and Mussolini got their trains running
on time, too. But, at what price?
And
about Bergdahl himself? Michelle Malkin broke the story about him five years
ago, as she reports in her latest Townhall column, “Exclusive:
The Story You Haven’t Yet Heard About Bowe Bergdahl’s Desertion
,” of June
4th:
Five years ago, I publicly raised
questions about Bowe Bergdahl’s desertion from Blackfoot Company, 1-501
Infantry (Airborne), 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry
Division.
A few weeks after his so-called
“capture” in late June 2009, three conflicting accounts surfaced:
U.S. officials told the Associated Press Bergdahl had “walked off”
the base with three Afghans; the Taliban claimed on its website that “a
drunken American soldier had come out of his garrison” and into their
arms; and Bergdahl claimed in his Taliban “hostage video” that he had
“lagged behind a patrol” before being captured.
Five years ago, one of the brave
soldiers who risked his life to search for Bergdahl answered my questions, and
I published his statement on July 20, 2009: “I know the story and the
accounts that he was drunk or that he was lagging behind on patrol are not true
— this soldier planned this move for a long time. He walked off the post with
a day’s supply of water and had written down before that he wanted to live in
the mountains. … He is an embarrassment to everyone who has worn the
uniform.”
After news broke this weekend of
President Obama’s trade of five high-level Taliban commanders at Gitmo for
Bergdahl’s “freedom,” I heard from another soldier who served on the
search team. “Many of my brothers died because of Bergdahl’s actions, and
this has been a very hard day for all Geronimos,” he told me after documenting
his proof of service. Other journalists ignored his attempts to get the truth
out.
Finally,
Fox News on June 6th ran a
detailed but cautionary story
on Bergdahl’s dubious status as a
“captive” American soldier.
U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl at
one point during his captivity converted to Islam, fraternized openly with his
captors and declared himself a “mujahid,” or warrior for Islam,
according to secret documents prepared on the basis of a purported eyewitness
account and obtained by Fox News.
The reports indicate that
Bergdahl’s relations with his Haqqani captors morphed over time, from periods
of hostility, where he was treated very much like a hostage, to periods where,
as one source told Fox News, “he became much more of an accepted
fellow” than is popularly understood. He even reportedly was allowed to
carry a gun at times.
The documents show that Bergdahl
at one point escaped his captors for five days and was kept, upon his
re-capture, in a metal cage, like an animal. In addition, the reports detail
discussions of prisoner swaps and other attempts at a negotiated resolution to
the case that appear to have commenced as early as the fall of 2009.
Such
stories are certainly of immeasurable value and serve to reveal to Americans the
extent of Obama’s feckless but premeditated policies in dealing with Islamic jihadists
and supremacists.
Such
stories will accrue strength when they identify, without reservation, the
precise nature of Obama’s character and actions. Until their authors man up and
throw caution to the winds, thinking – “How much more White House enmity
can we earn, anyway?” – I will continue to gag.

Previous

Shutting Us Up For Our Own Good

Next

Season Two of Fear and Loathing: A Review

1 Comment

  1. Charles T.

    "Living in a constant state of crisis, outrage and doom, as we have been doing under President Barack Obama's tenure in the White House, is not psychologically healthy."

    You got that right. I've had to step back for a while. It's just one thing after another with this nation's government, and it's overwhelming sometimes. And living among so many people who do not understand their own rights/nature as human beings only compounds the frustration.

    Thanks for your writings and for explaining the truth of things.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén