A ‘Black Heart’ medal for Bergdahl’s No-Show Officers
This Bergdahl swap is emitting a growing stench that is more apparent to those who are serving and those who have served. A huge question is why those who served in Bergdahl’s squad, platoon and company may have been intimidated into silence by being required to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements by their superiors. My take on that is that the Army and the Obama administration were embarrassed by the desertion and probable defection of an American G.I. in Afghanistan. Knowing what I have learned in the past five years about this “most transparent” administration, they were eager to avoid the negative publicity such an event might generate.
Bergdahl’s squad members have ignored the looming threat of those non-disclosure agreements to appear on the FOX News Channel and openly express their views that Bergdahl is clearly a disaffected young soldier who deserted his post. They are right to speak their minds because those Non-Disclosure Agreements were worthless from the get-go. NDA’s are used to insure that people who are about to enter into proprietary or classified environments will not reveal anything regarding the information to which they are about to be given access. They are not sworn to reveal that which they already know to be fact and may be called on to testify about. That would be an ex-post-facto NDA.
Further, an NDA is a contract binding the signatories. Basic contract law will tell you that no contract is valid if one of the contracting parties is doing so under duress. The very fact that these enlisted men in Bergdahl’s squad were asked by their superiors to sign such a document implies duress because of the reality that the signatory’s continued successful service and promotion, within his unit and beyond, is totally dependent upon the approval and recommendation of those requesting his acquiescence. Those unequal bargaining positions also raise the issue of inequality of parties, another legal doctrine that can invalidate a contract when one party has power and position so as to overwhelm the other.
So Bergdahl’s enlisted brothers have come forward with first-hand testimony to prevent the Obama administration and the Democrat party from embracing another false hero, as they too frequently have done in the past. They are the party of Stolen Valor, embracing and protecting those who disgrace their service with phony medals and awards. Those Democrat politicians who have ridden that terrible lie into office deserve nothing but icy contempt from the honest veterans in America.
I have saved the last couple of paragraphs to shame the officers of Bergdahl’s unit. They, just like their enlisted men, had to know Bergdahl was a deserter, but in this battle for the honor of the 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, the very first paratrooper organization America ever fielded, with many battle ribbons and a proud heritage earned around the world, those officers are silent. Rather than support those troops they led into battle, they sit back and let the enlisted men carry the load. That abandonment of their paratroopers in a time of high crisis is disgraceful and should plague their souls to their graves. They quit. That is the ultimate disgrace in Airborne units where the motto, “All the Way,” carries a very special meaning, that the unit, its officers, its non-coms and the troops are committed to doing whatever it takes to achieve the mission, and if it brings death, so be it, I will have died honorably with my paratrooper brothers. And yet, when their men need them most, the officers of the 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment quit; they have deserted the battlefield every bit as much as PFC Bergdahl. For them I propose an award:
The Black Heart, a flat-black medal with the point of the heart upwards to be awarded to deserters, whether they be those who go out through the wire or those who silently desert their responsibilities by shrinking into quiescent anonymity, leaving their men out there, as the only troopers bearing the colors of the regiment.
Call them the no-shows.
Crossposted at American Thinker.
Category: Terror War
It is never wrong to do the RIGHT thing.
It can, however, be very painful; in this instance, the men who come forward can expect nothing less than censure, with a potential loss of promotion and possibly loss of their military careers. In the current political climate, it could go further than that, with possible legal ramifications. And who knows just how far it could follow them outside the military? It is said that the pen is a long arm from the grave. It is not a light choice or an easy thing that these men have chosen to do.
I’m sure it’s nothing personal, those men have careers to protect after all, namely their own. Honor and brotherhood be damned.
Courtney Massingale is back and serving as a mentor and role model.
Yes, career is important, but what of your responsibilities toward those you lead? I risked promotion, in my time, to support those under me. Just one reason why I retired as an O-4.
I think military brass is pissing themselves over anyone in the administration noticing them so they don’t get the dreaded “lack of confidence”.
After King Obama is out of office the balls will start dropping and books being released.
I’m going to add this here, instead of to my own post below:
“Let’s see how this symbolism actually unfolds over the next two weeks. At least now you are prepared. And while you wait for a situation to manifest, why not go out to a movie, the theatre, boating, or just go out and have fun dancing or listening to music (like a concert). Neptune is good for enjoyment and romance. But be careful what you say to your date or dancing partner, especially if you are in an alternative reality (that’s Neptune too!). If you don’t tell the truth, the whole truth, you may be called out, and that could prove embarrassing. Especially if you are living in an alternate reality.”
— Source: MMA Weekly Preview Comments, 6/2/2014
Thankfully I am not in the position these officers find themselves in. However, being a Mustang, and an old one at that, I know I’ll never make it past O-4 (and I’d be lucky to get that far). The saving grace there is that I don’t have to play the political game. I get to focus on the mission and my soldiers. It’s a liberating feeling and I’m thankful for it every day.
Well said. Sadly, yours is an attitude not universally found in our Armed Forces.
I’ve posted this in a number a threads and while I may nieve and still trust in officers or at least the system as a whole but I think the whole NDA thig was part and parsal as a result of the ‘on-going criminal investigation’. As I have said it is not uncommon in such cases to issue NDAs or more lokely gag orders. Usually done to prevent witness tampering and jury nulification. This may be especially true since the party under investigation was not available (not gonna touch thw reasons why). Again I could be wrong and there could be deeper hidden agendas at work, but having been involved for the investigative side and administrative side of cases being invesitgated its not an uncommon practice.
Granted gag orders can only hold for so long and since most only cary the weight of the UCMJ in most cases, any who have left the military should be free and clear to say what ever they want unless a new order was obtained and served via a civilian court.
I am positive that I read somewhere that the NDAs were required for OPSEC reasons. Something about not making the deserter seem more important than he was. I never heard of anyone in the military signing NDAs before this incident. When I was in, the phrase “I can neither confirm nor deny (whatever)” was drilled into my skull. I was also expected to follow orders.
I don’t know. The whole NDA thing just seems weird.
Completely agree usually its a ‘gag order’ not an NDA, so this maybe the case of the press getting their terminology wrong. All I am saying is lets see how this plays out. Though the characterizations of the unit members who did serve honorably has gotten out of hand.
The lack of public approval and scrutiny by a part of the mainstream media that no longer sucks up to bodaprez is rattling his idiotness.
I have seldome seen such a lack of simple common sense displayed in public, even during the Carter administration.
I think this proves that you can’t be a glad-handing sack of shit politician and get away withe it forever. And yes, the balls will drop, bounce and drop again when this administration hears its swan song.
So the officers from Bergdahl’s unit decided not to offer him the defense avenue of undue command influence? You know what that makes them? Good officers.
Having seen the effect of undue command influence (it got a POS out of jail time) I am very inclined to agree.
Chris, since when do second or first lieutenants and captains have command influence in general court martial proceedings in the military? Even if the former company commander is now an O-5,he’s too far down the chain of command to have any influence. Plus, you’re assuming that every officer serving in that company at that time is still on active duty.
If you want to consider the effect of command influence on this situation, it is most likely being exerted upon any still-serving officers from that company from very high up in the chain of command, perhaps all the way the the staff of the C in C.
If that is in fact what is keeping them from coming to the aid of their men then that is indeed the expedient course to follow.
But it is not the honorable one…
Poetrooper:
“Plus, you’re assuming that every officer serving in that company at that time is still on active duty.”
That’s what I would like to know. How many of those officers are still active, and under the gun of Hagel, and the other thugs who tow the Obummer party line. Those who are still active take a big risk to tell the truth about Bergdahl.
Remember the show “Branded” with Chuck Connors? In the beginning of every show he was stripped of everything military on his uniform and his Sabre broken because he was accused of cowardice. If anyone deserves this it is Bergdahl. Would love to see this done to him publicly.
A few things: 1 It is an officer’s duty to accomplish his mission and look out for his soldiers while doing it. If he thinks they are wrong, he has no obligation to support them, his highest loyalty is to the Constitution (which says you are innocent to proven guilty in a court room) not his soldiers. Trying to assess who demands more loyalty is at what time is not as easy as you seem to suggest. have i fallen on my sword for my Soldiers, and yes it made work a little rough for a while (ironically the person most upset was the CSM)but i have also shut up and saluted because i owe my BN CO and BDE commander and the army my loyalty as well. I know that enlisted never see the moral dilemmas a lot of officer do go through trying to determine who has a higher claim on their loyalty in situations like this but from personally experience we do. I wish it was as easy as also giving your enlisted support no matter what but it isn’t sometime you owe that to the unit, mission, nation or constitution. Is it possible that maybe, just maybe the officers involved both don’t think it is as clear cut as you do, still feels a little loyalty to his Soldier who was captured for whatever reason and to the concept in the constitution saying you are innocent to proven guilty? 2. If they are still in the military then going public using the title of the military would be in effect lending military support to a political position. So far as i have seen no one saying anything is still in. but i could just not have seen them. 3. Maybe the officers involved feel guilty for allowing a Soldier for being captured whatever the circumstances. I made a vow to myself before i deployed that i would do everything possible to bring home every single one of my Soldiers no matter who they were, good Soldier, bad Soldier, POS, they were my responsibility. I thank god… Read more »
Redleg JO, much of what you say is true. Because I was an RTO for several infantry company commanders I saw first hand that their job was anything but easy and their decision-making far more complex than for those under them. In fact, I often found myself explaining to pissed-off soldiers in the platoons why the old man had made a particular decision that caused them grief.
That being said, this is no run-of-the-mill leadership decision. The enlisted men of Bergdahl’s squad and platoon are being unfairly attacked in the media by members of the C in C’s staff. The very highest level of command is using it’s unlimited power and authority to attack the very lowest and that’s as unfair a fight as is possible. To leave them hanging out there fighting on their own is the very antithesis of “Leave no man behind.”
Redleg JO…First thank you sir for serving and bringing your troops home. I also understand your issues with this. I was not an officer but understand they are held to different, legal and command standards than enlisted troops are. If every officer in Bergdahl’s unit agree with the reports of his squad members on Fox News but their public statements could taint a proper investigation and trial, then they should keep quiet until it is over. If Bergdahl is guilty of desertion, which all indicators point to, I want him punished to the full extent allowed under the UCMJ. If an officer speaking out sabotages the prosecution of that, then again, officers please keep quiet until called to testify under oath. If they are never called to testify and they muster out, then speak their mind. I want to see full justice served and not messed up by anything. Just an old enlisted, troop here with my one ass hole’s worth of opinion.
My troubling thoughts are that Obama and his influence over the Pentagon will prevent a trial or even in depth investigation. Obama is riding the “he’s suffered enough”, sympathy train with the rest of the left and an ill informed American. This is a case where Obama will insist the Pentagon, “Stand and Salute”, then take their seats and shut up. Forever. After that is all said and done, it will be time to obscure, deflect, confuse, conflict and otherwise muck with the truth, just like Benghazi until, “what difference does it make now” is heard. Well, we’ve actually already heard those words from Reid about when the Congress was notified about the swap.
Is there a statute of limitations on prosecuting desertion? Would it be possible to wait on charges until 2017?
Sparks, something to consider. When members at the highest level of the chain of command are publicly impugning the integrity of the members of Bergdahl’s squad in the national media, is that not prejudicial to any future prosecution?
The former platoon leader, XO or CO doesn’t have to do any more than say he stands behind his men and will resist any attempts by the administration to dishonor their service.
The Dear Reader has a phone and a pen. He has used his phone to get all of his sycophants chirping the same song and I have no doubt that if things go badly for his co-religionist he will use his pen. I predict that on his last day in office he will issue more Presidential pardons than any president in our history. Bowe will be among those named in this tsunami of pardons. Look for a lot of newly released drug dealers on your streets along with the Soldier of Islam.
If his command chain is being (re)interviewed as part of the investigation, it’s probably better they not make public comments yet.
At least one former officer in his battalion has spoken out, though I don’t think he was in his direct chain of command-http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/02/we-lost-soldiers-in-the-hunt-for-bergdahl-a-guy-who-walked-off-in-the-dead-of-night.html
What info could his officers add now? Or any of the soldier in his unit that haven’t made a public statement yet for that matter? At this point the only info anyone could add would be to defend or justify what he did; if that was going to be the case it would’ve happened already, and we’d definitely know because the admin and media would’ve seized on it quick.
I’m coming to the conclusion that I did a piss-poor job of getting my main point across in the above piece. So many of you are leaving comments to the effect that it’s best not to do anything that might jeopardize the prosecution of Bergdahl, etc.
My beef is that Bergdahl’s fellow soldiers have demonstrated the courage to do their part to keep this dishonest administration from making a hero out of Bergdahl. Are all of you forgetting the Rose Garden special for Bergdahl’s parents or Liar Rice’s public pronouncements regarding Bergdahl’s service as being with honor and distinction? Those events weren’t just by happenstance; they were part of a publicity campaign to exonerate that son of a bitch and make him a hero in America’s eyes.
So I’m damned proud of those young paratroopers who said, “Nope, not gonna let ’em get away with that shit!” and spoke up. My disappointment with their officers is that they’re leaving the enlisted men out there to be attacked by the full might and power of the Obama administration and their lapdog media.
One officer, not in their chain of command but on the scene in Afghanistan at that time, as the director of the Special Forces Tactical Operations Center South, MAJ Rusty Bradley, author of the Lions of Kandahar, just appeared on the Huckabee show and stated his belief that Bergdahl deserted.
So, my point is these enlisted men should not be left out there to be overrun by this disgusting Obama administration and its in-house media. As I said earlier, everybody is yacking about leaving no man behind with regard to Bergdahl.
Well how about we don’t leave these courageous paratroopers behind?
Completely agree 100%. The administration should never have gone the route they did with out checking all the facts. Then again I also think that they were so desperate to get the VA scandle off the front page that they weren’t thinking clearly. Also think that they probably thought this was going to be a Jessica Lynch type moment and figured none of their sycophants in the media would call them on it. They fact that they keep having to try to change the naritve behind this just lends more weight to these feelings.
As I also said before the unjust treatment of the soldiers/vets who are speaking out is just plain wrong and the people conducting said smear job need to be held to account. I.e. Hindering prosecution by calling into question the honor of potential witnesses in the court of public opinion is just as wrong imoo as not allowing the recently release to be innocent until proven guilty by a court. As long as he gets his day in court that is.
It makes sense that the officers are leaving the enlisted troopers hanging if it was the officers who opted to ignore the problems Bergdahl created prior to his final walkabout. Had they properly addressed the earlier infractions we would not be in this mess now. They had the option of doing the right thing but apparently chose to do the easy thing instead.
As a former officer I’d risk breaking an NDA. ITS CALLED TESTICULAR FORTITUDE.
If you gave accounts of something that occurred five years ago and one account was given about five years ago and another given presently, which would you trust more? Re-interviewing soldiers who were interviewed five years ago only serves the administration’s desire to muddy the waters and cast doubt on the accounts. All it takes are a few discrepancies between accounts (added or onitted words) from the same soldiers and the admisinistration will leak them to show that their accounts can’t be trusted. I guarantee it.
IANL (I’m not a lawyer), but if it was me being reinterviewed I’d specifically request a copy/transcript of the one from 5 years ago. If the investigators say no, then my response would be something to the affect: I have nothing to add to the information I have already provided.