Skip to comments.NYT Goes After Bergdahl's 'Raggedy' Unit Again, This Time in a Sunday Page A1 Report
Posted on 06/09/2014 7:01:34 AM PDT by chessplayer
On Thursday, the editorial board at the New York Times, reacting to the growing firestorm over the release of five hardened terrorists from Gitmo in return for the Army's Bowe Bergdahl, went after Bergdahl's "army units lack of security and discipline." It then incredibly claimed that a classified army report described in a separate Times dispatch that day suggested that those alleged conditions were "as much to blame for the disappearance" of Bergdahl as ... well, the sloppy editorial didn't specifically say.
On Sunday, two Times reporters continued the offensive against Bowe Bergdahl's platoon and its members, apparently wanting readers to believe that the unit's occasionally "raggedy" attire and alleged poor leadership somehow explain Bergdahl's "disappearance."
Thanks for the trenchant analysis, NYT.
The commies in the state controlled “media” working hard to defend their boy.
This unit actually served with honor and distinction,
unlike that traitor.
Is there ONE dissenting member of Bergdahl’s unit? A soldier who will stand up for the honorable serviceman of Susan Rice’s description?
I hate liberals, I really do.
Gee, NYT, what is your source for this information?
First guess: Rhymes with Meau Mergdahl.
Boy, this is from a playbook dating back to the Viet Nam War. Too bad Bruce Dern has gotten old. He could play all the various “psychos” in this unit. The psychos who risked their lives trying to find this bozo.
It kinda has that feel like the media is “blaming the rape victim.”
If you boys weren’t wearing those silly uniforms we (the lame stream media) wouldn’t have had to rape you, now you see that this is all your fault, right...we (the media) wouldn’t have had to rape you, but you wore those provocative uniforms and made us do it, so...it’s your fault. Now scamper along so we can continue to spin crazy without you confusing everyone with those pesky facts of yours.
It is time to treat the New York Times as you would any sworn enemy of America.
One thing for sure— the fitreps for the members of the unit are available through the former members, and they reflect the assessments of the military chain of command on their individual and group performance. The members through the internet and Army Times, have spilled the beans on this BS about bergdahl, and the muzzie in chief.
The Pentagon’s report on bergdahl was that he was a deserter, and hence they did not list him as a POW, because... he wasn’t.
This article is like a college rumor sheet approach.... a sort of “people have said” type sourcing. That is, no sourcing of any validity. The horses are already out of the barn. And THIS rates page A1 coverage trashing the unit as
raggedy? The times would rather support whatever elitist heroin addict distributors in the demo party who supply the liberal elite with their chemical dependency and keep them happy and hooked—since the country source gang/govt. in afghan is changing over to a different tribe than Karzai. One can never discount the effect of the number one export product of afghan in all this. Always consider whom the times are speaking to— moral reprobate drug financed lefties and their mob pals in labor and much else (vegas). The French Connection all over again.
This is totally insane!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Probably the same source that is claiming the traitor was tortured, beaten, and and kept in solitary confinement for 5 years. The making of a victim to support obammy's agenda.
Just like in the old days.
The UK Daily Mail web site has a similar hit piece highlighted by a photo of Pvt Bowe with tan scarf and his kewl shades. The Mail chose to use a red circle to identify one of his “raggedy” comrades sitting with a bandana on his head. Unremarked was the cigarette in his hand. Oh! The horror!
Whose fault is that? Isn't Obama the CIC who makes those types of decisions?
Even if I accept this story as true, so what?
Dopes being in a ‘raggedy unit’ exonerate a soldier from violating the code of conduct?
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and to aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.
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.