Posted on 06/03/2014 4:34:09 PM PDT by dagogo redux
In all the controversy of the past few days, one of the most disturbing aspects of the Bergdhal scandal was the requirement that GIs who knew the truth firsthand had to sign nondisclosure documents not to discuss it.
My questions:
Is this a legitimate tactic that anyone in power in the military or the government at large can demand anytime to keep a scandal from emerging?
Does one's oath of office for the military include honoring such orders when "following orders" goes against their conscience and?
This civilian had to sign one of those returning from Iraq in 2010.
Can they talk about, not being able to talk about it ?
In my four years in the Marine Corps I never had to sign anything like that. But that was a different world, the 1960s....
What was the result if you refused to sign a non-disclosure document?
I’ve never served, but I do know you don’t have to follow illegal orders.
When did the NDA’s happen? Early, when the military may have been trying to protect the captive, or recently, when it would obviously be about protecting Obama?
And documents that are signed under duress are worthless documents. Any legal document signed under duress.
Didn’t ask. Could have included at least a reprimand or dismissal...
In my mind it is wholly illegal and contrary to open and above board standard of government
Bump cause this process bothers me also.
Soldiers are required to execute the orders of their superiors faithfully and without question or hesitation so they are unable to enter into an NDA of their own free will ( a requirement for executing an NDA )if they are ordered to do so.
Otherwise they are entering into the NDA under duress or due to improper command influence by their superiors.
I seriously doubt such an NDA would be held valid, especially if the information that they were being forced to seal under non disclosure concealed illegal activities or wrong doing or if the NDA restrictions were in place to obstruct justice or frustrate a lawful investigation on a topic that was central to National Security.
If the NDA is interpreted as protecting classified information, then it is certainly valid. If the NDA only serves narrow political ends, then it is probably not valid (small comfort when a corrupt thug like Holder will be the enforcer coming after those who violate any NDA).
If they cleverly redefine Top Secret to “information or material the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national government” instead of “. . . exceptionally grave damage to the national security,” then they can make the pretense of classification stick.
Or they can relocate anyone who talks - Gitmo now has five vacancies!
Bump...cause this process bothers me also. No military lawyers on board FR this evening?
“What was the result if you refused to sign a non-disclosure document?”
That is a VERY interesting point, if you are in the military.
Ditto. There has to be some proviso for this or against it under the UCMJ. They can’t make you sign an NDA for a cover-up. That isn’t right.
I could not make it in the military today. I pity those who try.
I agree that it would be great to get some military attorneys to weigh in on this. It seems a bit obnoxious to BTTT my own thread, but I hope someone keeps it visible until such an attorney comes along who can explain this. It seems rife with potential for abuse in an age where loose lips might sink dictatorships.
[PS - sorry to have misspelled this loser’s last name twice: I’ve other names for him that are probably not printable here.]
BTTT
bttt
When this Bergdahl character WENT AWOL and SHOULD have been declared a DESERTER from the gitgo, he left behind emails and notes saying he was “disgusted” with the United States and talked about RENOUNCING HIS CITIZENSHIP. (During my 4 years in the USAF in the Vietnam era, I wasn’t all that thrilled about how the government was mishandling a war that was getting so many of our folks unnecessarily KIA but never once thought about doing what THIS clown did!)
Despite obozo’s desire to keep all this hush-hush, MORE will come out as his former comrades defy orders to shut up and do speak out.
Now, here are the $64,000.00 questions that may have already been asked:
After 5 years with the Taliban, just how many IEDs and other “devices” did they teach him how to construct?
And, once he’s set out and about in the US population, how many other similarly disaffected malcontents, black muslims, radical Bill Ayers/Bernadine Dohrn wannabes will he teach everything the Taliban taught him?
Think Boston Marathon bombers X 10 to the 10th power on steroids!!
And we can all thank the TRAITOR in the Spite House, his lackeys in the bureaucracy, congress,the Pentagon and the lapdog media!
Doesn’t bother you, you say? It may if one of YOUR loved ones happens to be in a shopping mall when one of those devices goes off
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.