USMC deserter

[whitehall]

Cpl Wassef Ali Hassoun USMC disappeared from his post in Iraq in 2004. He was immediately listed by the Marine Corps as a deserter. A month later he turned up unharmed in Beirut Lebanon claiming to have been kidnapped. The Marines didn't buy the story and he was transported to Camp Lejeune to await court martial when he disappeared again. Apparently he surfaced last week and the Marines will charge him with desertion and the theft of US property (the pistol in his possession) among other charges. It's interesting to note that the Army did not list Pvt. Bergdahl as a deserter and apparently promoted him twice while he was AWOL.

 

[Mad Scientist]

The Military has been promoting it's servicemen and women along with their peers if the Military thinks they are in captivity or M.I.A. This goes back to at least Vietnam.

Perhaps Bergdahl wasn't listed as deserter because the Military knew where he was the whole time? Maybe he was an Asset? He has been cleared of wrong doing you know.

What does THAT tell ya'?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The Military has been promoting it's servicemen and women along with their peers if the Military thinks they are in captivity or M.I.A. This goes back to at least Vietnam.

Perhaps Bergdahl wasn't listed as deserter because the Military knew where he was the whole time? Maybe he was an Asset? He has been cleared of wrong doing you know.

What does THAT tell ya'?

That the President Influenced the decision and the case against him will be a white wash.

 

[Sig_Sauer]

The Military has been promoting it's servicemen and women along with their peers if the Military thinks they are in captivity or M.I.A. This goes back to at least Vietnam.

Perhaps Bergdahl wasn't listed as deserter because the Military knew where he was the whole time? Maybe he was an Asset? He has been cleared of wrong doing you know.

What does THAT tell ya'?

That the President Influenced the decision and the case against him will be a white wash.

I wonder about that also. The administration has a lot riding on him being cleared. Thin is everybody has a right to due process. The UCMJ is recognized as seperate but equal to the civilian justice system.

 

[The Professor]

The Military has been promoting it's servicemen and women along with their peers if the Military thinks they are in captivity or M.I.A. This goes back to at least Vietnam.

Perhaps Bergdahl wasn't listed as deserter because the Military knew where he was the whole time? Maybe he was an Asset? He has been cleared of wrong doing you know.

What does THAT tell ya'?

Bergdahl has not been cleared of all wrong doing. I don't know where you got your information but you need to find more reliable news sources. You need to quite listening to your present news source and start reading the Drudge Report. If you had read the Drudge Report regularly you would know better. Here's the link that will keep you better informed on current events:

DRUDGE REPORT 2014®

If you had read Drudge you would know that Bergdahl was cleared ONLY of misconduct DURING CAPTIVITY subsequent to his desertion; in other words, it was determined that there was insufficient evidence that he assisted the enemy in any way AFTER he deserted. However, whether or not he was a deserter is still to be decided.

There are a lot of links out there that explain that Bergdahl was not cleared of desertion. I really don't know how you missed them all. Here is just one of the many, many links:

“As the Army continues to investigate whether Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is guilty of deserting his unit, this afternoon they said there is no reason to believe that Bergdahl engaged in any misconduct during his five years in captivity.”

Army Clears Bergdahl of Any Misconduct During Captivity

As for me the evidence of his desertion is beyond a reasonable doubt, in fact beyond the possibility of any doubt. If they find him not guilty of desertion a lot of military men and women are going to be really pissed.

PS: I really would know where you got the idea that Bergdahl was cleared of all charges including desertion. Would you please tell me your source(s).

 

[Camp]

The Military has been promoting it's servicemen and women along with their peers if the Military thinks they are in captivity or M.I.A. This goes back to at least Vietnam.

Perhaps Bergdahl wasn't listed as deserter because the Military knew where he was the whole time? Maybe he was an Asset? He has been cleared of wrong doing you know.

What does THAT tell ya'?

Bergdahl has not been cleared of all wrong doing. I don't know where you got your information but you need to find more reliable news sources. You need to quite listening to your present news source and start reading the Drudge Report. If you had read the Drudge Report regularly you would know better. Here's the link that will keep you better informed on current events:

DRUDGE REPORT 2014®

If you had read Drudge you would know that Bergdahl was cleared ONLY of misconduct DURING CAPTIVITY subsequent to his desertion; in other words, it was determined that there was insufficient evidence that he assisted the enemy in any way AFTER he deserted. However, whether or not he was a deserter is still to be decided.

There are a lot of links out there that explain that Bergdahl was not cleared of desertion. I really don't know how you missed them all. Here is just one of the many, many links:

“As the Army continues to investigate whether Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is guilty of deserting his unit, this afternoon they said there is no reason to believe that Bergdahl engaged in any misconduct during his five years in captivity.”

Army Clears Bergdahl of Any Misconduct During Captivity

As for me the evidence of his desertion is beyond a reasonable doubt, in fact beyond the possibility of any doubt. If they find him not guilty of desertion a lot of military men and women are going to be really pissed.

PS: I really would know where you got the idea that Bergdahl was cleared of all charges including desertion. Would you please tell me your source(s).

Why is the way you or Drudge embellishes the story any different than the way news organizations did by using "clears" in the titles to their stories. "Subsequent to his desertion" makes an assumption that he in fact deserted. "Insufficient evidence" indicates that there is evidence but not enough.
The Army stating there is no reason to believe the guy engaged in misconduct during his captivity, in fact, clears him. Unless and until the Army determines and announces otherwise, he has been cleared of any misconduct while being held.

 

[Mad Scientist]

PS: I really would know where you got the idea that Bergdahl was cleared of all charges including desertion. Would you please tell me your source(s).

I didn't say he was "cleared of all charges including desertion". I said he was "cleared of wrong doing".

I read that same report YOU did. I got it from the same source YOU did.

Bergdahl not interviewed yet by Army investigator

The tenuous legal line is that the reintegration team is focusing on the five years he spent in captivity, not how he got there. And Army officials said there is no suggestion that Bergdahl was guilty of any misconduct while he was held captive, so there is no reason yet to read him his legal rights.

"No suggestion that he was guilty of misconduct" reads like "cleared of wrongdoing".

They're not interested in how he go there. Why you suppose that would be? Because they already know how he got there! They let him go! The guy comes back speaking perfect, what is it, Farsi? His Dad ALSO speaks perfect Farsi? (Or whatever language/dialect they speak over there) Are you guys blind or what?

Besides, the burden of proof is on the Military in this little "show trial" and unless Bergdahl waives his 5th Amendment Rights, you guys are gonna' have to find someone else to hate. Or just wake up.

 

[The Professor]

The Military has been promoting it's servicemen and women along with their peers if the Military thinks they are in captivity or M.I.A. This goes back to at least Vietnam.

Perhaps Bergdahl wasn't listed as deserter because the Military knew where he was the whole time? Maybe he was an Asset? He has been cleared of wrong doing you know.

What does THAT tell ya'?

Bergdahl has not been cleared of all wrong doing. I don't know where you got your information but you need to find more reliable news sources. You need to quite listening to your present news source and start reading the Drudge Report. If you had read the Drudge Report regularly you would know better. Here's the link that will keep you better informed on current events:

DRUDGE REPORT 2014®

If you had read Drudge you would know that Bergdahl was cleared ONLY of misconduct DURING CAPTIVITY subsequent to his desertion; in other words, it was determined that there was insufficient evidence that he assisted the enemy in any way AFTER he deserted. However, whether or not he was a deserter is still to be decided.

There are a lot of links out there that explain that Bergdahl was not cleared of desertion. I really don't know how you missed them all. Here is just one of the many, many links:

“As the Army continues to investigate whether Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is guilty of deserting his unit, this afternoon they said there is no reason to believe that Bergdahl engaged in any misconduct during his five years in captivity.”

Army Clears Bergdahl of Any Misconduct During Captivity

As for me the evidence of his desertion is beyond a reasonable doubt, in fact beyond the possibility of any doubt. If they find him not guilty of desertion a lot of military men and women are going to be really pissed.

PS: I really would know where you got the idea that Bergdahl was cleared of all charges including desertion. Would you please tell me your source(s).

Why is the way you or Drudge embellishes the story any different than the way news organizations did by using "clears" in the titles to their stories. "Subsequent to his desertion" makes an assumption that he in fact deserted. "Insufficient evidence" indicates that there is evidence but not enough.
The Army stating there is no reason to believe the guy engaged in misconduct during his captivity, in fact, clears him. Unless and until the Army determines and announces otherwise, he has been cleared of any misconduct while being held.

I suggest that you do not know the difference between "he has been cleared" and "the matter is being investigated."

Bergdahl has not been cleared of desertion. Perhaps the difference between us is that I have a JD (Juris Doctorate) and I know what it means to be "cleared" of something. To be cleared of something means that the matter has been investigated and there is insufficient evidence of guilt. I don't know what you think it means and frankly I don't care.

You think Bergdahl has been cleared of the charge of desertion? good for you.

I am done with you and this thread.

 

[whitehall]

Ali Hassoun abandoned his post and the Marines declared him a deserter. Bergdahl did the same thing and the Army promoted him...twice while he was AWOL.

 

[Camp]

Bergdahl has not been cleared of all wrong doing. I don't know where you got your information but you need to find more reliable news sources. You need to quite listening to your present news source and start reading the Drudge Report. If you had read the Drudge Report regularly you would know better. Here's the link that will keep you better informed on current events:

DRUDGE REPORT 2014®

If you had read Drudge you would know that Bergdahl was cleared ONLY of misconduct DURING CAPTIVITY subsequent to his desertion; in other words, it was determined that there was insufficient evidence that he assisted the enemy in any way AFTER he deserted. However, whether or not he was a deserter is still to be decided.

There are a lot of links out there that explain that Bergdahl was not cleared of desertion. I really don't know how you missed them all. Here is just one of the many, many links:

“As the Army continues to investigate whether Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is guilty of deserting his unit, this afternoon they said there is no reason to believe that Bergdahl engaged in any misconduct during his five years in captivity.”

Army Clears Bergdahl of Any Misconduct During Captivity

As for me the evidence of his desertion is beyond a reasonable doubt, in fact beyond the possibility of any doubt. If they find him not guilty of desertion a lot of military men and women are going to be really pissed.

PS: I really would know where you got the idea that Bergdahl was cleared of all charges including desertion. Would you please tell me your source(s).

Why is the way you or Drudge embellishes the story any different than the way news organizations did by using "clears" in the titles to their stories. "Subsequent to his desertion" makes an assumption that he in fact deserted. "Insufficient evidence" indicates that there is evidence but not enough.
The Army stating there is no reason to believe the guy engaged in misconduct during his captivity, in fact, clears him. Unless and until the Army determines and announces otherwise, he has been cleared of any misconduct while being held.

I suggest that you do not know the difference between "he has been cleared" and "the matter is being investigated."

Bergdahl has not been cleared of desertion. Perhaps the difference between us is that I have a JD (Juris Doctorate) and I know what it means to be "cleared" of something. To be cleared of something means that the matter has been investigated and there is insufficient evidence of guilt. I don't know what you think it means and frankly I don't care.

You think Bergdahl has been cleared of the charge of desertion? good for you.

I am done with you and this thread.

Well while you were getting that law degree you should have brushed up on your reading comprehension. The news paper headlines used the word cleared in the title to their stories and the stories made it clear that the Army statements dealt only with Bergdahl's time as a captive and had nothing to do with how he became a captive. Less time ego boosting, bragging and jumping to conclusions and more time paying attention would help you a bunch.

 

[Howey]

Bergdahl has not been cleared of all wrong doing. I don't know where you got your information but you need to find more reliable news sources. You need to quite listening to your present news source and start reading the Drudge Report. If you had read the Drudge Report regularly you would know better. Here's the link that will keep you better informed on current events:

DRUDGE REPORT 2014®

If you had read Drudge you would know that Bergdahl was cleared ONLY of misconduct DURING CAPTIVITY subsequent to his desertion; in other words, it was determined that there was insufficient evidence that he assisted the enemy in any way AFTER he deserted. However, whether or not he was a deserter is still to be decided.

There are a lot of links out there that explain that Bergdahl was not cleared of desertion. I really don't know how you missed them all. Here is just one of the many, many links:

“As the Army continues to investigate whether Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is guilty of deserting his unit, this afternoon they said there is no reason to believe that Bergdahl engaged in any misconduct during his five years in captivity.”

Army Clears Bergdahl of Any Misconduct During Captivity

As for me the evidence of his desertion is beyond a reasonable doubt, in fact beyond the possibility of any doubt. If they find him not guilty of desertion a lot of military men and women are going to be really pissed.

PS: I really would know where you got the idea that Bergdahl was cleared of all charges including desertion. Would you please tell me your source(s).

Why is the way you or Drudge embellishes the story any different than the way news organizations did by using "clears" in the titles to their stories. "Subsequent to his desertion" makes an assumption that he in fact deserted. "Insufficient evidence" indicates that there is evidence but not enough.
The Army stating there is no reason to believe the guy engaged in misconduct during his captivity, in fact, clears him. Unless and until the Army determines and announces otherwise, he has been cleared of any misconduct while being held.

I suggest that you do not know the difference between "he has been cleared" and "the matter is being investigated."

Bergdahl has not been cleared of desertion. Perhaps the difference between us is that I have a JD (Juris Doctorate) and I know what it means to be "cleared" of something. To be cleared of something means that the matter has been investigated and there is insufficient evidence of guilt. I don't know what you think it means and frankly I don't care.

You think Bergdahl has been cleared of the charge of desertion? good for you.

I am done with you and this thread.

If you really were a JD, you certainly wouldn't be telling people to read Drudge for their daily intake of news.

lol...

 

[freedombecki]

Cpl Wassef Ali Hassoun USMC disappeared from his post in Iraq in 2004. He was immediately listed by the Marine Corps as a deserter. A month later he turned up unharmed in Beirut Lebanon claiming to have been kidnapped. The Marines didn't buy the story and he was transported to Camp Lejeune to await court martial when he disappeared again. Apparently he surfaced last week and the Marines will charge him with desertion and the theft of US property (the pistol in his possession) among other charges. It's interesting to note that the Army did not list Pvt. Bergdahl as a deserter and apparently promoted him twice while he was AWOL.

It fits in with the Alinsky theory of demoralizing the military, but it also fits in with the failure to communicate that Bergdahl was believed by his peers to be a deserter. It's hard to say exactly what happened, with the possibility that omuerta oaths override justice.

Something about the Berghdahl "event" smells like a dead fish on a muggy day.

 

[whitehall]

Cpl Wassef Ali Hassoun USMC disappeared from his post in Iraq in 2004. He was immediately listed by the Marine Corps as a deserter. A month later he turned up unharmed in Beirut Lebanon claiming to have been kidnapped. The Marines didn't buy the story and he was transported to Camp Lejeune to await court martial when he disappeared again. Apparently he surfaced last week and the Marines will charge him with desertion and the theft of US property (the pistol in his possession) among other charges. It's interesting to note that the Army did not list Pvt. Bergdahl as a deserter and apparently promoted him twice while he was AWOL.

It fits in with the Alinsky theory of demoralizing the military, but it also fits in with the failure to communicate that Bergdahl was believed by his peers to be a deserter. It's hard to say exactly what happened, with the possibility that omuerta oaths override justice.

Something about the Berghdahl "event" smells like a dead fish on a muggy day.

"Believed by his peers"? Bergdahl's "peers" were fellow Soldiers who were witnesses. Testimony of a single member of his platoon left no doubt that Bergdahl intended to desert his post. Why didn't the Army simply declare him a deserter and why the hell did they promote him while he was AWOL? Is there something going on in the Army that we don't know about?