Berdgahl Declared Himself a Holy Warrior, Joined Terrorists in AK-47 Target Practice


You can put some of it down to Stockholm Syndrome, but I don’t see his captors putting a weapon into his hands and giving him this much freedom unless they at some point believed that he was one of them.

Clarridge said Eclipse SITREP # 3023, dated Aug. 23, 2012 — in which a member of the Haqqani network, said to be close to Bergdahl’s captors, reported that the American prisoner had declared himself a “mujahid” — was among the reports provided to Ashley.

“Conditions for Bergdahl have greatly relaxed since the time of the escape. Bergdahl has converted to Islam and now describes himself as a mujahid. Bergdahl enjoys a modicum of freedom, and engages in target practice with the local mujahedeen, firing AK47s. Bergdahl is even allowed to carry a loaded gun on occasion. Bergdahl plays soccer with his guards and bounds around the pitch like a mad man. He appears to be well and happy, and has a noticeable habit of laughing frequently and saying ‘Salaam’ repeatedly.”

At one point — in late June 2010, after Bergdahl succeeded in one of his escape attempts — the Haqqani commanders constructed a special metal cage for him, and confined him to it.

The [source] confirmed that the soldier had been missing for five days and when he was recovered, he was a little worse from wear (lack of food; a bit slimmer) but otherwise in good health.

We have some confirmation of the escape attempt. It’s probably safe to say that Bergdahl never became a Homeland style covert Jihadist. His brain, which was already scrambled, led him to various extremes.

He can’t be described as a committed terrorist, but neither was he remotely a patriotic soldier. Bergdahl had according to reports flirted with joining the Taliban and may have fallen into their hands by trying to do so. It’s also fairly certain that he had little idea of what he was in for.

Converting to Islam is not uncommon for prisoners and hostages especially since it’s fairly easy, but alternative reports had him celebrating Christmas.

Like his father, I don’t think Bergdahl knew what he wanted. Both men are sympathetic to Islam, but like most liberals, have very little clue as to its reality. I don’t think that he has come home all the wiser and I wouldn’t be too surprised if a year from now he’s on the lecture circuit urging us to befriend the Taliban like he did.

  • Texas Patriot

    But was Bowe Bergdahl merely pretending to convert to Islam in order to save his own life? If he was so gung ho to join the Taliban, why did he try to escape, and why did he break down and start crying when he realized that he was finally free and safely in the hands of American Special Forces?

    • Bamaguje

      “If he was so gung ho to join the Taliban, why did he try to escape” – Texas Patriot.

      Because he soon found out that Islam is not the “perfect religion” Muslim Taqiyya propagandists make it out to be… And I bet living in caves – constantly on the run – was no fun for someone used to easy American way of life.

      By the way I disagree with DG on his Stockholm syndrome postulate. Bergdahl was not captured or abducted… he voluntary left his army unit and willingly joined the Taliban.
      He was a traitor from the get-go!!

      • Texas Patriot

        There are necessarily many levels of complexity in the context of oounter-insurrgency operations and asymmetrical warfare in the context of “nation-building” operations on foreign soil, and there are still way too many unanswered questions in this case to reach an adequate level of certainty regarding Bergdahl’s guilt or innocence of any particular crime. The good news is that Bergdahl is being thoroughly questioned and debriefed by American intelligence experts in Germany, and we’ll know a lot more about the facts of this case when they finish their work. Unless and until he is charged, tried, found guilty of specific crimes, Bergdahl is entitled to a presumption of innocence like any other soldier or citizen of the United States of America. I think it’s fair to say that lynch mobs and local sharia courts are the order of the day in Islamic societies, and that[’s one of the reasons we don’t want to see that form of justice become the norm for the entire world.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          On one issue, Senator McCain was absolutely right, in 2008 (and he was taken to task, for it). If we are going to re-build nations, we have to stay there … a long time. He said about 50 years. I would think it’s closer to 100 years.

          This is why my current attitude towards such actions is that if we deploy troops for ground combat in any nation, we need to destroy the real enemy in that nation … a punishment for international lawlessness, if you will … and then get out.

          There should have been a Declaration of War in Iraq and Afghanistan, if we were going in to stay, and we needed to stay until both nations were stable, democratic, contributing members of the international community.

          This brings up the question of whether we should nation-build, at all. That’s a subject for a dissertation!

          • Texas Patriot

            Nation-building is fine, but charity begins at home. Once we get to the point of building up and perfecting America as the best hope and brightest star of all the nations, that’s when we can afford to think about building up any other nation, and not a minute before!

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I agree with assessment, now. That, from an old neoconservative …

            The nerve of this Administration saying that all jobs lost in the Recession have been regained. Anyone who believes this is a commie …

          • Texas Patriot

            I know what you mean. Many former globalsts, including yours truly, are in reassessment mode at this point. We’re so lucky to have America as a home base, and there really is no place like home to start rebuilding the American Dream.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            “A House divided against itself cannot stand”. It is not Obama that is destroying America. Rather it is so-called Conservatives demonizing and vilifying other Americans, referring to them as “socialists” and “communists”. We are in a post-9-11 world. 8 radical Islamists brought down the World Trade Center under Republican watch and murdered over 3,000 of our citizens. Bin Laden was pissed about American intervention in Kuwait (and we were only there for the oil just like Iraq). Now you so-called “hawks” want to piss off Putin and have him view America as a true enemy when Crimea is more Europe’s problem than ours. Russia has plenty of Nukes to “leak” to our various enemies. All it would take is one EMP to bring this country to it’s knees. After that, you “conservatives” will probably take the opportunity to “purge” this country of it’s “communists”. In the meantime, Russia and China will have probably seized the oil reserves in the Middle-East. It was the failed policies of George W. Bush that allowed Obama to get into office in the first place. So, amongst breaking the U.S. military by invading Iraq (and not finishing the job in Afghanistan), strengthening Iran’s influence in the Middle-East as well as crashing the banking system (and Bush’s “bail-out” did nothing to reverse it), you can thank him for Obama being elected President. And you can’t thank Bush for killing Osama Bin Laden. When America is brought to it’s knees and we are fighting each other instead of our true enemies, look in the mirror. You will be part of the cause.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Everything’s Bush’s fault, after six years. I’m surprised people like you still aren’t blaming Nixon …

            Weakness always invites aggression, and your president is the weakest president in my memory. Like those who wanted Neville Chamberlain to be Prime Minister, all those who support Obama need to “look in the mirror” and see themselves as enablers of worldwide aggression by minor states, major states … such as China and Russia … and jihadists of all stripes.

            Communist/socialist is as communist/socialist does. Obama? He’s on the cutting edge of the so-called “progressive movement”. This guy would create the world of George Orwell’s 1984 in a heartbeat, if he could. He’s a dictator-in-the-making, but he’s not intelligent enough to pull it off. He’s a minor character in a plot against the American way of life that is over a hundred years old.

            Buy yourself a gun, if you don’t already own one. Because if Hitlery Clinton is elected in 2016, there will be civil war, in this country. I’m ready. And when this war that I’ve fought against for so long happens, look yourself in the mirror. You will be part of the cause.

            (With apologies to Neville Chamberlain, who at least was a gentleman …)

          • Buffalo Springfield

            If you think that a Civil War is going to make America look strong in the face of it’s enemies, then you are seriously misinformed. If you think obstructionism by Conservatives and Tea Baggers discourages America’s enemies from being aggressors then you have misread your history books. Every world superpower destroyed itself from within including the Soviet Union. When the United States of America is no longer united, we have weakened ourselves. If you think George W. Bush strengthened America’s influence in the world by splitting our forces between Afghanistan and Iraq, you just don’t understand warfare. All of this obstructionism and talk of civil war and secession is weakening America’s influence world-wide both economically and militarily. Once you get your wet dream of a civil war, America as a world superpower will cease to exist. This is not 1861. And it is not 1938. It’s 2014. We are in a post-Nuclear Age. And the wars being waged are asymmetrical. Just know that you Conservatives with your continued divisive rhetoric are contributing immensely to the destruction of this Democracy. And you are strengthening and encouraging our enemies as they know that while we are fighting each other, we will be in no position to fight them.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            It might surprise you to learn that I have been speaking out against a civil war, in the United States. I know that such a conflict will leave the nation physically divided, with parts of the nation under military control of foreign powers, and will result in millions of deaths. He who hasn’t seen civil war is most enthusiastic for it. I’ve seen it, and it isn’t pretty.

            It might also surprise you to learn that the only divisive rhetoric on this website comes from people like you.

            Lastly, it will surprise you to learn that we don’t live in a democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic, and those who agree with your position will destroy that Republic, and usher in age of peril for everyone who lives here.

            I know the world I live in. I’ve seen it in places like Vietnam and Rwanda, Nigeria and Central America. You,however, don’t seem to have a clue where your rhetoric, and the people you support, will take this nation. Therefore, I will inform you, as often as I can stomach you …

            I don’t know warfare? 2/501/101st, Vietnam, 1968-69. And that was just the beginning. Where have you served the “democracy” you purport to love?

          • Buffalo Springfield

            It is most accurate to describe our form of government as a “democratic republic” or a “representational democracy” in that our representatives (such that they are), are democratically elected. Madison preferred the term “Republic” to differentiate it from “pure democracy” which we are not. I do bristle at the term “republic” because that term had been co-opted by the USSR as well as the “People’s Republic of China”. The terms “republic” and “democracy” here are rendered meaningless as our elected officials from both parties are representing big business. We are currently living in an oligarchy. These multi-national corporations who have bought our politicians have no allegiance whatsoever to this Republic and have sold us all out. Even our foreign policy is dictated by these Corporatists. The Republican Party has been co-opted by these Corporatists and now the tail is wagging the dog. And they bombard the electorate with propaganda and get us to fight each other instead of fighting them. I believe in free enterprise but that is not what we have here. You have the very wealthy buying influence and politicians serving the interests of the very wealthy and no one else.

            Insofar as being divisive, I have not and will not demonize follow Americans who simply disagree with me. I do not refer to Republicans as “the enemy” or being “Nazis” or “Fascists”. Nor would I advocate taking up arms against fellow Americans (not even in jest). Disagreeing with someone is not being divisive. If we could drop the hyperbole, people may not be so entrenched in their positions. You might find that we agree more than we disagree.

            I was too young to serve in Vietnam. However, my father served 20 years, since the end of the Korean War and towards the end of Vietnam, most of that time as part of SAC. He flew 100’s of missions over Vietnam.

            As a military man, you are well familiar with the strategic blunders of dividing our forces. Hitler’s biggest mistake was opening a second front. We can only thank God he was that stupid. He bit off more than the German’s could chew. You as a military man understand that pulling our forces out of Afghanistan to invade Iraq (under false pretenses, no less) insured that we would not be able to prosecute either war effectively. By removing Saddam Hussein when we did, we strengthened Iran’s influence in the region while weakening our own. Had Bush re-enacted the draft, he may have been able to pull that off. But he, and Rove, knew that Bush probably would not have had a second term as President had he done that. He should have done it anyway. At least Bush #1 understood how to fight a war (with overwhelming force). He also knew not to remove Saddam Hussein from power. But the Corporatists wanted Iraq’s oil so they got Bush #2 to do their bidding. Too bad Bush #2 didn’t volunteer to serve in Vietnam with you.

          • Texas Patriot

            Hey Buff. Welcome to the discussion. You make some great points. Hang in there and keep hammering home the themes of unity and common purpose among the American People, and I think you will find a sympathetic ear among many of us, including Wolfie.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            TexPatriot, thanks. It might shock Wolfie but I like him. He seems intelligent and reasonable and someone who I would refer to as a “true Patriot.” It might also shock all of you, but as a registered Democrat, I believe in the 2nd Amendment as sacrosanct to this Republic and not up for debate. I also believe in “peace through superior firepower.” And it might also shock all of you that should the Republican Party ever come to it’s senses and nominate a candidate who is truly like Ronald Reagan, I would switch parties in a heartbeat. The problem is that in the current political climate, Ronald Reagan could not win the nomination of his party as Mike Huckabee pointed out a while back. There are many real challenges that America is facing. And there are real enemies plotting our destruction. In the past, Americans have always pulled together even as late as 9/11. But there are people in this country who make money (and lots of it) by dividing us and pitting us against each other. And the divisions and resentment are growing. People are understandably frustrated. If we keep letting “talking heads” exploit our differences (for ratings and market shares) and we keep electing Corporate shills (on both sides) to represent us, America’s prominence will continue to fade. But if we could put politicians in high office who actually give a damn
            about “We, the People”, (instead of their Corporate Masters), America could prosper and lead the free world and be a beacon of
            hope for all who are truly oppressed. I am just waiting for the Republican Party to come to it’s senses.

          • Texas Patriot

            I couldn’t agree more, and I think Wolfie would agree with you as well. I think we have allowed ourselves to be seduced by inflammatory rhetoric of newsmen across the political spectrum who are much more interested in creating controversy and increasing their ratings (and therefore their advertising revenue) than they are about highlighting real problems facing the American people and discussing alternative solutions that actually have a chance of working.

            And what’s even worse, the political parties with their preoccupation with large special interest contributors are perhaps even more unconcerned about actually solving problems for the benefit of the American people, and as a result, the best interest of the American people has gone to hell in a hand basket beginning with the death of John Kennedy and the subsequent defeat of Barry Goldwater by Lyndon Johnson. In terms of real productivity and real prosperity for the American people as a whole, it’s been downhill all the way since then, and more than anything else, that’s what we need to turn around.

            You/‘re right about Wolfie being a true patriot. There’s no one you’d rather have as a friend, and there is no one you’d less rather have as an enemy, and more patriots like that is exactly what America needs.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            If Patriot listens to you, so will I.

            This does not mean that we will always agree, and I seriously do not believe that it is the GOP, or the talk show hosts, who are dividing us. I believe … after a lifetime of watching politics … that the DEMs and their corporate masters, along with their billionaire contributors, and the media, and the unions (who are starting to learn that Mr. Obama is not their friend) are the New Spaniards. They have learned the Saul Alinsky’s central principle of “divide and conquer”.

            But like both parties, those who head the democrat party haven’t the slightest idea of what really matters to all of the American people … that single principle is liberty.

            So, why don’t I break away, and vote for a third party?

            Voting “3rd” is a good way to always ensure the election of DEM candidates. Also, unlike you, I cannot vote for any Democrat from the state level to national (I have voted for local candidates … people I knew). The reason I can’t do this is because I believe that the Democrat Party has been captured by the hard Left. It would take a grassroots rebellion in the DEM ranks to change this.

            You and I got off to a bad start. I’m willing to try again.

            By the way, you want the GOP to come to its senses. There is a grassroots movement to draft Dr. Ben Carson for President, in 2016. That gives me hope …

          • Buffalo Springfield

            Wolf, if the Founding Fathers did not agree on everything, it is unlikely that we will fare any better. It is where they did agree that is important. And so long as Americans can agree insofar as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution is concerned, the Republic will remain. The biggest problem is one of ignorance. Most Americans do not even know what is in either, how unique they are and what they actually mean to them as free individuals.

            While the talk show hosts are not causing the divisions, they are exploiting and exacerbating them with vitriolic rhetoric. They are the ones who are using the divisive language such as referring to Democrats as “the enemy” or as “Communists” and they encourage their listeners to join the groupthink. The talking heads do it because outrage is a commodity in the talk radio business and it equals ratings and talk is cheap. They all talk a good game now but when it was their turn to fight the Communists (in Vietnam), they were nowhere to be found. So they have no credibility as far as I am concerned. Wolf, you have far more credibility then they do because you walked the walk. They are a bunch of on-air hucksters who will say whatever will get them ratings and not cause them to lose sponsors.

            Dr. Ben Carson is someone I could get behind. Let’s hope that the GOP gets behind him. This country needs a man of principle.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Let’s talk about the so-called “chicken hawks” …

            Rush Limbaugh received his draft notice, reported, and did not pass his physical.

            Sean Hannity was born in 1961. When the Vietnam War was over and done with, he would have been 14-15 years of age.

            Glen Beck was born in 1964.

            The latter two could have joined the military in peacetime, but they chose not to. Someone who doesn’t join the military still has the right to express their support for the troops, and their admiration of them.

            Bill O’Reilly was born in 1949, almost two months to the day after I was. He started college in 1967, and went all the way to two Master’s Degrees, one of them from Harvard.

            Why didn’t O’Reilly serve? I don’t know. I think I’ve watched his show about two times. I joined the Army on the day that I turned 18, in 1967, and lied convincingly during my physical ( was six feet tall, muscled like an Adonis, and ready to rumble, but I had a condition that would have prevented me from service had I not lied).

            Personally, I’m glad that Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and O’Reilly are there. When I grew up, there was not an opposing viewpoint, except for Bill Buckley, and he didn’t host a network news broadcast. No matter how extreme their rhetoric may seem, it’s the only way to get through the lock that the MSM has on information.

            By the way, without ratings, they’re not on air, are they?

          • Buffalo Springfield

            Wolf, notice that NONE of the people that you mentioned voluntarily enlisted like you did. There was nothing preventing these Commie killers from joining up to kill commies. Limbaugh could have enlisted, if he believed so strongly that Communism was the great evil. And it is the great evil (note that I used present tense). That is historical fact. The USSR was still intact in 1979 (when Hannity would have turned 18). In fact, the USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979 and Carter re-instated the Selective Service registration. Why didn’t that chicken-*** join up then? The Soviets were still there in 1982 when Beck turned 18. Are you telling me these jokers who speak so fervently against Communism couldn’t spend two years of their lives serving their country and actually fighting Communism? Please don’t let these guys off the hook. They are an insult to every vet that served. Same with Ted Nugent. He could have volunteered just as you did. He did the opposite. He was able-bodied and he faked a medical deferment to get out of serving. I cannot tell you how insulting it is for these guys to come out now talking the talk when they had the chance to walk the walk. That is the sure sign of a bullsh*tter. The only thing lower than them are the guys who lie and say they served when they didn’t.

            Wolf, you are the real-deal. I would listen and, more importantly, respect what you have to say over and above these cowards any day of the week.

            Now I didn’t volunteer not because I’m a pacifist. I’m not. I didn’t join up because I was sickened by how the Vietnam vets were treated by their fellow countrymen when they returned home. More importantly, I was appalled at how our government (via the VA) treated it’s servicemen (and women) once they returned stateside. I told my Dad, if that is how this country is going to treat it’s soldiers, then count me out. (I did later see a recruiter about flying the Apache Helicopters but only because I wanted to fly them. My vision wasn’t correctable to 20/20 and that is the only thing that kept me out of the Army at that point).

            To this very day there is a problem with how our vets are treated and it is scandalous and shameful beyond measure. The problem that the vets are experiencing now with the VA spans all political parties and it predates the Obama Administration. But the hot potato is in his lap. If we can’t agree on anything else, we have got to agree to take care of our war veterans. That is the very least that we owe them. We owe them our very freedom.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I think that it’s important to realize that people can fail to voluntarily join the service, and still admire those who do, and thank them for their service.

            My heroes in Vietnam were the draftees … these guys didn’t volunteer, but got ripped away from their homes, families, and jobs, and sent to ‘Nam, thousands of miles from home. Most of them served with honor and distinction. Guys like me were double volunteers … for the services, and for Vietnam. But the draftees put their “a** in the grass” like the rest of us.

            You mentioned Limbaugh, and once again, I state that he received his draft notice, reported, and did not pass the physical (the reason was likely obesity).

            Millions of American conservatives value Rush, and the insights he provides into what is happening in America. Will we ever bridge the gap between us when people are attacking … not only the real deal … but in his time, the ONLY deal, for conservatives. I admire him, and he has talked incessantly about the need to care for our veterans properly, long before the recent scandal.

            I have no figures to back this up, but left-leaning moderates probably account for about 25% of the Democrat Party. They are Kennedy & Humphrey Democrats. The rest of the party is irrevocably committed to the far Left. They cannot be reasoned with. They must be defeated.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            Wolf, I agree that people can fail to serve (for whatever reasons) and still admire those who do serve. I admire those who have honorably served, especially in unpopular wars such as Vietnam. Especially the draftees. The problem with the chicken-hawks is that they are advocating a new war a day it seems. Every time there is a crisis around the globe, they are ready to send Americans into a new war zone such as Crimea. But this hawkishness was nowhere to be found when it was their turn to fight. The way they talk, you’d think they would have to had been dragged away kicking and screaming from the induction center during Vietnam. No. Simply put, they were cowards. And they feel shame for their cowardice and they are over-compensating for it by being super-hawks. It’s easy to advocate for war when they won’t be the ones having to fight it. They proved that.

            I know that Limbaugh holds a special place in every Republican’s heart because he provided them with a voice. However, he is a propagandist and a liar. To label every Democrat as a Communist and “the enemy” is irresponsible and is contributing the divisions in this country. He has to demonize Democrats because, hell, every good American is against Communism. So, if Democrats = Communism, then we all need to be against Democrats.

            And it is a sign that he believes that Republicans can no longer win
            elections by simply stating what they are for. When they state honestly what
            they are actually for, people start tuning out. He recognizes that the Republican Party has moved so far out of the mainstream that Ronald Reagan, himself, could not win the Republican nomination today.

            Reagan raised taxes. Reagan negotiated with terrorists in Iran, and shipped them arms in trade for the hostages. Reagan signed gun control legislation. Reagan gave amnesty to illegals. And yet Ronald Reagan was one of the best Presidents this country ever had.

            The Republican Party is spiraling out of control. And that is not good for America. Part of the cause of that spiral is the vitriol, the demonizing and the vilifying that has come from Right-Wing talk radio.

            Here is a quote from Limbaugh: “Communism today, in large part, is the Democrat Party. Communism today
            is in large part the feminist movement. Communism today is found in most
            of the AFL-CIO-type unions. As such, it seems just a political point
            of view. It’s just an alternative political point of view. It’s just
            the Democrats, and it’s a much tougher thing to identify and target,
            because it can be your neighbor. It’s not some foreign country easily
            identified as “the Evil Empire.” Communism has a much different face

            This is McCarthyism all over again and it is sad that in 2014, this is going on. Is every registered Democrat going to have to state, “I am not a Communist nor have I ever been”? Should I start telling everyone that Republicans, in large part, are Fascists and Nazi’s? It is absurd.

            Limbaugh, like every great propagandist, sprinkles in his poison with the truth. You know, mix a little anti-freeze with the Gatorade and those that drink are none the wiser. A lot of what he says is true. A lot of what he says are outright misrepresentations. I am a Democrat and I am no Communist. My father is a Democrat and he dropped tons of ordnance on the real Communists. His bomber carried nukes to drop on real Communists if the call ever came.

            Anyone who knows anything about Communism knows that Democrats are not Communists. The problem is, there are a lot of ignorant people out there who don’t know what true Communism is and will simply take Limbaugh at his word. And again, “A House divided against itself cannot stand”.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            I replied to this post and the “moderator” deleted it. So much for faith in the 1st Amendment. It contained some very uncomfortable truths and “the truth” is something that people are less and less interested in hearing. Anyway, perhaps the same could be said for 25% of the moderates in the Republican Party and that the other 75% cannot be reasoned with. I suppose the biggest difference is that Democrats do not view those Conservative extremists as the enemy. Democrats are not arming themselves and preparing to kill fellow Americans who simply have a different political ideology nor are they advocating it. Isn’t that what Communists do? Isn’t that what Stalin, Mao and Ho Chi Minh did? Didn’t they arm themselves and kill anyone who did not agree with their political ideology? Is that not what Hitler did? Is that not what any totalitarian regime did through out history? If you don’t agree with us, we’re going to kill you. Again, the only crime committed by Democrats is that they were able to garner more electoral votes. If the President is truly a “dictator” and a “Communist”, who is not abiding by the Constitution, are there not two other co-equal branches of the Government to deal with him? Do not the Republicans control the House of Representatives? Wolf, I like you, I really do. And I understand your frustration. As I told you, I am ready to break ranks and vote for a reasonable Republican candidate like Ronald Reagan. Like George H.W. Bush. Hell, I’d even vote for someone like Nixon. (Grown-ups in the room know that Nixon got caught doing what every President did). But the real problem is that Republicans cannot put forth a candidate who middle America will vote for. Limbaugh et al cannot blame Democrats for that.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            Wolf, I found this interview with Jesse Ventura by Donny Deutsch. He was making the same point that I was about chickenhawks. He is not beholden to either party and he tells it like it is:
            Deutsch: I want to talk to you about the media. We have a lot of packaged media these days. Bill O’Rielly , what’s your thoughts on him?
            Ventura: They are all the same. Most of these media guys are all a bunch of chickenhawks. You know what a chickenhawk is, don’t you?
            Deutsch: Tell our audience what a chickenhawk is.
            Ventura: A chickenhawk is a person when it was their time to serve and go to war and be in the military, they were chicken. But they come back 20 to 25 years later and now their hawks. They want to got to war, they want to kick everyones butt because they don’t have to do it now. That’s a chickenhawk.
            Deutsch: Bill O’Rielly and I are not friends but in fairness to him, did he ever duck out on service or anything? Do we have any proof of him being a chicken?
            Ventura: He never served. Neither did Hannity, neither did Limbaugh, do you want the list to go on and on with the list of these guys that support the war and support kicking butt and none of them ever did it themselves.
            Deutsch:: That is kind of the Colin Powell school of thought. There is a difference between guys who weren’t called to serve and guys who avoided serving.
            Ventura: Weren’t called? Everyone turns 18.
            Deutsch: O.k. the fact that they didn’t volunteer.
            Ventura: Where do you get the fact that (they) weren’t called? It’s called go down and enlist and serve your country. You call it. Not someone else.
            Deutsch: But there’s a difference. Just because someone doesn’t volunteer for the military doesn’t mean they’re a chicken versus someone who was drafted and avoids the draft. That’s a little bit of a different discussion, I think.
            Ventura: No it isn’t.
            Deutsch: No?
            Ventura: Someone that doesn’t volunteer for the military comes back 20 years later and wants to go kick everyones butt with the military, that’s a chickenhawk.
            Deutsch: O.k. Fair point.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            “He never served. Neither did Hannity, neither did Limbaugh, do you want
            the list to go on and on with the list of these guys that support the
            war and support kicking butt and none of them ever did it themselves.

            And your point is?

            I thought that I had covered O’Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh. I notice that Leftists who never served are conveniently and conspicuously absent from your list.

            Whether a person serves, or not, does not deprive him or her of the fundamental right to express their opinion on matters of war and peace.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            Wolf, I agree that the country needs dissenting viewpoints. Healthy debate is what we need. So, Limbaugh et al gives the Conservatives a much needed voice in this Republic. All I am asking for is that they tone down the vitriol and the inflammatory rhetoric mentioned by Texas Patriot. That is having some very negative and unhealthy effects on some people out there who do not realize that it is hyperbole. (At least I hope it is hyperbole. It’s hard to tell sometimes).

          • Texas Patriot

            We can work this out, Wolfie, and with patriotic Democrats like Buffalo Springfield, we can start a new American Renaissance to build up the American people and the American Homeland, and if we really want the rest of the world to come around to the American Way of thinking, leading by example is probably the best way of making it happen. American ingenuity, innovation, and hard work as exemplified by guys like Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, and Jimmy Doolittle are what made America great, and those are the qualities we need to encourage and restore as the American norm if we want the American Dream to have any chance of being the leading light of the 21st Century and beyond. It’s not too late, Wolfie. We just need to find a way to come together as a nation and make sure that government of the American people, by the American people, and for the best interest of the American shall not perish from the earth. And in order to do that, we’re going to have to people in the driver’s seat who are willing to look out for our interests above all other interests, and even more importantly, we’re going to have to make sure that we never go to sleep again and assume they are looking out for our interests when in fact they’re not.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            TexPatriot, I am with you 100% on that. There is something happening here. And we do need to be eternally vigilant. This Republic will undergo another period of testing. If we stick together, we will prevail. If we turn on each other, this great American experiment in self-governance will be over.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            BTW, the last time Republicans were “distracted” by a Democrat President, Bin Laden was plotting to take down the World Trade Center. Republicans were obsessively focused on taking down Bill Clinton. When they finally got a Republican back in as President, he was too focused with stealing Iraq’s oil to worry about the warning about Bin Laden looking to strike inside America. The situation today is similar. The Republicans are running around crying wolf trying to turn everything into a scandal and opposing and criticizing Obama no matter what he does. Meanwhile, America’s real enemies are plotting our destruction. And you chicken-hawks are helping them by not putting up a United Front. Our enemies cannot destroy us. Only we can destroy ourselves and you Tea Baggers and Conservatives have consented to that destruction. Do not think that America will emerge again as a super power once you modern-day “Confederates” destroy America. China already has all of our wealth. And they have the largest standing army on the planet. After you Conservatives destroy the United States of America with a Civil War, China might want to step in to fill the Super Power void. And they will be able to do so without firing a single shot. Conservatives will have done all of the hard work for them.

          • Texas Patriot

            There’s been no economic recovery, Wolfie. We both know that. Obama has restored financial liquidity to the system by pumping in 7 trillion dollars of borrowed money. Bush started it in, and Obama has continued it throughout his tenure. Unfortunately, neither President has done anything to address the underlying cause of the recession and the continuing loss of high paying jobs in America. Instead, their approach has been the equivalent of giving a dying patient massive blood transfusions without doing anything to stop the bleeding and restore the patient to health. As Dr. Rob Atkinson points out, the problem is that other countries are doing a better job of creating the environment necessary to attract and retain high value-added manufacturing industries, and until we turn that around, things will continue to get worse.


  • unionville

    I think his brain was scrambled too. And after seeing and hearing things that have been attributed to his father, I can understand why. What I find really curious is that he hasn’t spoken to his parents yet. If I were in his shoes, that would be one of the first things I’d want to do.

    • liz

      Yes, seems to be very confused. Takes after his father, apparently.

  • Gregory Smith

    I watched several episodes of Locked Up Abroad, I’ve never seen Muslims trust their kidnapped victims with weapons. Did Bergdahl convinced the terrorists that he was one of them? Was his hatred of America so much that he could fit in perfectly? If so, why did he try to escape? Crazy or not, he’s no hero, and shame on Obama for not apologizing.

  • Anukem Jihadi

    Bergdahl knows what he wants and has gone about getting it.

  • tickletik

    I think our brains are more scrambled than his. He’s just a neurotic loser, but we are the ones that gave that traitor the lives of 6 honorable men, and on top of that gave him a parade for surrendering to an enemy

  • Jason P

    I’m more concerned with what this says about Obama. Given Obama’s milieu we can understand why the President wouldn’t be suspicious of Bergdahl’s behavior before and during the “capture.” Obama studied under Rev. “God D@mn America” Wright who hated his country. He grew up in Chicago politics with Bill “should have bombed the Pentagon more” Ayers and he appointed John Kerry … well, you know the story.

    Obama doesn’t regard hatred of America as dishonorable. He doesn’t see giving aid and comfort to the enemy as disloyal. He would never entertain the notion that Bergdahl did anything dishonorable. This is about Obama … and it gives us an opportunity to review his ideological upbringing, his influences, etc.


      Obamas Rev. Wright and Michelle BOTH hate America too.

      • Jason P

        I was going to mention her telling statement after the ’08 election: “now I can be proud of my country.”

  • Atikva

    I would like to know why such an obviously feeble-minded recruit was ever accepted as a US soldier in the first place. Just looking at his gaunt, irresolute, strained face should have raised questions. Don’t they give them physical and mental check-ups, don’t they look at their antecedents and background before enlisting them?

    • Americana

      You’re kidding about looking at his face in captivity and saying he looked weak and feeble-minded, right? You’re not comparing his official U.S. army photos w/his photos in captivity by the Taliban? You must not remember just how awful the Americans looked while in North Vietnamese custody and you must not remember that most of them admitted to having done things of which they’re not proud. That doesn’t make them less American and it doesn’t make them less human.

      Neither he nor his father were Muslims prior to Sgt. Bergdahl’s capture. So to be fair to both of them, we’ve got NO WAY to tell if they would EVER have considered converting to Islam unless the son’s capture had occurred. I’ve certainly not experienced a need to convert to Islam out of the blue but I would have had a major reason to convert if my oldest sister had been captured by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula while she was in Saudi Arabia.

      • Texas Patriot

        Good point. American prisoners on the Bataan Death March looked more or less the same way.

      • Atikva

        Hold your breath, I was talking about his pictures before he deserted.

        Before he wrote: “I am ashamed to be an American. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools.” “I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting.”

        Before he picked up a knife, water, his diary and a camera and left camp in spite of his team leader refusing permission to let him walk outside the camp.

        Before Afghan locals informed Taliban fighters of this American soldier walking alone, acting abnormally and cursing his countrymen. “As we never saw American soldiers patrolling alone”, one of the Taliban commanders said, “we asked him how he managed to walk out of his base, and he said that it was a personal issue.”

        If, as his father said, he went to Afghanistan to build homes and help the Afghans instead of to fight for his country, I am wondering how the recruiting staff missed that delusional attitude. Unless, of course, he just lied to them about his motives to join the military to avoid being rejected, as he was when he tried to enter the French Legion.

        And I haven’t even evoked his possible conversion to islam, which is irrelevant as far as I am concerned. If he wanted to help the Afghans and convert to islam, fine, but he should have done it by risking his own life and not by endangering the security of his country and the lives of his fellow Americans.

        Frankly, I am not concerned by what happened to him after is desertion, he simply is very lucky to be alive, because if he had been really captured against his will, he would have been tortured and killed by his Taliban friends like the others.

        His six comrades in arms who lost their lives to try and find this misguided lunatic, that’s what I am concerned about.

    • Habbgun

      True but sometimes you just don’t know what you are going to get.
      People are different and the military has to select them for their
      abilities and hope they turn out okay. You can’t put thousands of people
      into the field and not get some bad actors. Colleges have nuts,
      businesses have nuts. They are everywhere.

      Here is someone you
      wouldn’t bet on for being an elite soldier It is a truly great story. The thing is you just don’t know. Stress hits people and they react
      from deep inside.

  • Americana

    At this point in time, I’d say that just about everyone above the age of 10 has as much knowledge about what Islam, and the Taliban in particular in this instance, represent, regardless of their own religion or political leanings. You don’t need to read more than several dozen news stories about corporal punishment of theives and executions for capital-offense crimes like apostasy under Islam and the socio-religious mayhem these Muslim terrorists believe in dishing out to understand what threat Muslim jihadists represent. And you certainly don’t need to read every single freakin’ hadith that elevates Muslims over everyone else to understand Islam and its concepts of superiority and religiosity.

    As for Sgt. Bergdahl being an unpatriotic American soldier, he had begun to be disillusioned over what we were doing as Americans in that conflict. But he didn’t participate in any attacks on American forces or the Taliban would have advertised that to a farethewell via propaganda films. Bergdahl escaped his captors once, what that indicates won’t be clear until his debriefings. Greenfield can hint at Bergdahl being occasionally handed a gun as if that is proof positive that the Taliban had accepted him as one of them, I’d say it’s proof that the Taliban knew they didn’t have anything to fear from him while he was imprisoned. If Bergdahl did not participate in any attacks on American soldiers, then he was NEVER TURNED to the extent Greenfield and a whole bunch of others are implying regardless of whether he converted to Islam or not. If my sister had ever been taken hostage, she’dve been welcome to convert to Islam to remain alive until we were able to free her. The fact the Taliban wouldn’t have known her precise agnostic feelings about Islam would have suited her situation just fine.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      It’s way too early to judge what actually happened to Bergdahl, while in captivity. It’s not too early to listen to his fellow-soldiers, including his squad leader, who stated categorically that he deserted. But the final word on that is up to a military court.

      Since Mr. Obama has rid the US military of 200 of its most senior officers … and that leaves me questioning how free of Obama’s influence the remaining officers are … will there be military justice, in Bergdahl’s case, or a military whitewash of the Commander-in-Chief’s policies, all for political reasons?

      Converting to Islam is a dangerous practice, if you’re just trying to save your life. Apostasy is a crime punishable by death, to be effected by all Muslims. If he comes back after having “converted”, and says that he really didn’t, it’s just a matter of time before someone kills him.

      • Texas Patriot

        Right you are, Wolfie. There are many unanswered question in the Bergdahl case, and only a military court can properly determine if he is guilty of any crimes. But, if Bergdahl was just trying to save his own life by converting to Islam while in captivity, then you and I and every other American should stand up to defend him if he wants to “unconvert” now. Freedom of religion is one of the hallmarks of American democracy, and every American has the right to convert and unconvert to any religion they want any time they want. As French Ambassador Charles Tallyrand once said, “In France we have one religion and a thousand sauces. In America you have one sauce and a thousand religions.” Islam is the only religion I know of that threatens its own members with death if they decide to leave. As Merle Haggard once said, telling an American citizen they don’t have the right to join and leave any religion they want any time they want is walking on the fighting side of me.

  • Habbgun

    You couldn’t script this better for the Muslim Brotherhood and ask any Egyptian how much Obama and the MB are allied.

    5 high level terrorists swapped for a questionable soldier. A clear victory for the Taliban. There is also the possibility that Bowe and his father will turn out to be little ambassadors for Islam. It would be a great victory for the Left if an American soldier and his father both portrayed as heroes by the admin went around saying you can be a Moslem convert and just as American as before while uttering Leftist and Jihadist agitprop. A lot of closeted leftist Islamic converts will start coming out probably on campuses. It will be interesting to see feminist doctrinaire Moslems. They will be an entertaining piece of work.

    • Texas Patriot

      It doesn’t bother me if every Islamic radical on earth thinks they’re winning. In fact, I want them to think they’re winning until they’re all hanging from the rafters with their feet dangling above the ground. When Odysseus finally came home from the Trojan Wars, he found his house full of suitors living off his wealth and cavorting and partying with his female servants. When it was all over, the suitors were all dead, and the disloyal servants were hung from a clothesline with their feet dangling just above the ground. The civilizational struggle we are engaged in today is a fight to the death, and things will not go well with the losers, whoever they may be.

      • Habbgun

        I think the war on Islamic terror will be won on Kickstarter anyway. Getting the right people to the right places at the right time and away from corrupt governments. In a sense that is how Islam lost the first time around. They muscled the weak governments and the weak people until natural selection found those that could meet them head on. Meet them they did. First as underdogs and then as conquerors. There is a lot of money in defending the defenseless.

        • Texas Patriot

          I think you are seriously underestimating the challenge facing Western Civilization. If Islamic terrorists are successful in their efforts to mass produce “suitcase nukes” which can be smuggled into all the major cities and remotely detonated at a time of the terrorists’ choosing, it would result in a gutcheck like the civilized world has never seen before. How many cities would have to be blown up before the world capitulates to the demands of terrorists?

          • Habbgun

            Actually I am not. The Kickstarter comment sounds flippant but it isn’t. Historically Moslems do not fear governments. They believe that government is weak and can be bribed and bullied and they have a formula for that.

            What they fear is a real hard nosed opposition that can survive and thrive in the environment radical Islam creates. They fear an opposition that is more religious than they are. That values the lives of its followers. Islam fears men and not governments. It has characteristically lost to highly motivated groups. Islam itself forms weak governments and a weak organized military. The raider is its preferred form.

            They believe that the West is categorized by weak merchants afraid of losing trade. They believe that Western governments are their very best weapon against the infidels. They would not want to see a West outraged by atrocities against Jews in Israel and Christians in the Middle East and Africa. They have been lucky that they haven’t seen it. They will be more afraid of a movement that is able to grow in defiance of the goverrnment’s opposition. That will show belief, ability and religiousness. Sure they can put a bomb in a suitcase but we can also put pissed off believers in the field like they can. They won’t like an outfit that doesn’t have government mandated rules of engagement. They won’t like people who aren’t hamstrung by the Moslem collaborating Left. The more Islam destabilizes the West the more it creates the environment for its destruction.

          • Texas Patriot

            Interesting analysis. I guess we’ll just have to see how it plays out.

          • Habbgun

            I’ve read a mix of non-fiction and fiction. Don Quixote, Robert E Howard’s historical fiction and With Fire and Sword are interesting places to start with fiction.They let you know what living with the heyday of Islam was like. I’m basing this on how Islam lost the first time although it was at one point far more powerful.

            The professional soldier was the undoing of Islam. Kings and ministers might be weak. Citizens might be betrayed. There might be slavery and forced conversions but there were those who met it head on and like they say what killed them made them stronger. They also countered the Jihadists goal of dying with some very miserable ways to die especially the spike. It took a lot of the joy out of martyrdom. When there arose real leaders they had a ready supply of battle hardened soldiers. The Isamicists of the day came to admire their opposition more than their easier to subdue and bribe allies. Very hard to really see how successful Islam would be without its Leftist allies. It is the Left that runs interference, provides the propaganda and gets the bribes.

          • Texas Patriot

            My view is that there will come a moment when even the most extreme Leftist will wake up and say “What are we doing? Are we really supporting these guys? They don’t stand for any of the things we believe in and have fought for.” And a video like this one from Anjem Choudary is the kind of thing that might help things along.


  • Dyer’s Eve

    Shoot him.

  • thanhzenhth82

    Interesting analysis. I guess we’ll just have to see how it plays out.

    Đồ sơ sinh , giường cũi cho bé</a, Sữa bột cho bé

  • Buffalo Springfield

    TexPatriot, well said. There are plenty of Conservative Democrats as well as Moderate Republicans who are waiting for the Republicans to nominate another Ronald Reagan. If that happens, I believe that there will be a new American Renaissance. I also agree that it won’t happen on the Democrat side. If the Republicans are able to do this, they will probably hold the White House for the next 8 to 16 years.

    • Texas Patriot

      I agree, but that’s a tall order, and I really don’t see anyone of the caliber of Ronald Reagan on the immediate horizon. Are there any current Republican candidates that you could support?

      • Buffalo Springfield

        TexPatriot, had Republicans nominated Jon Huntsman, Jr. I would have voted for him over Obama with no problem and the country would have been better for it. Huntsman was the only grown up in the room of Republican candidates. He had the experience as well as the intelligence. He worked under Reagan as well as Bush #1. He was a great Governor for Utah. He was a businessman. He was a diplomat. I just don’t get why Republicans chose stuffed-suit Romney over Huntsman.

        The problem with Romney is that he was not a straight shooter (which Reagan was). Romney always said what was expedient not what he actually believed. Had he said his “47 percent” speech in front of a microphone instead of at a private meeting (and a little but more articulately), it would have never been an issue. Essentially, what he said was true. (His percentage was off but there are takers in this country who feel entitled and they contribute absolutely nothing). The worse thing that ever happened to this country was ending the draft. Every generation since 1973 has not felt the obligation whatsoever to serve this great country in some way. It does not have to be in the Armed Forces. But every American should feel obligated to give at least 1 year of their lives to the greatest Republic in the history of mankind. They can pick and choose when and how to give back to this country but the greatest gift that Bush #2 could have given to this nation would have been to re-instate the draft after 9/11. (And he would have had the manpower to pull off Afghanistan and Iraq at the same time. Iran should have been included but they should have been 2nd after Afghanistan).

        • Texas Patriot

          Thanks, Buff. I think that’s an excellent analysis and probably reflects how a lot of Conservative Democrats feel about the issues you raise. However, from my point of view as a Barry Goldwater Conservative, nothing is more important than the preservation of the right of an individual to act in accordance with the dictates of his own conscience, and as long as the powers that be are willing to misrepresent the nature and extent of the existential threats to our nation, I would not like to see the reinstitution of the draft in the absence of a Declaration of War in accordance with the powers delegated to Congress by the Constitution of the United States.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            TexPatriot, that is very astute and that has been the most controversial legacy of Vietnam. I think that committing U.S Forces to Vietnam was a mistake. But if the Commander-in-Chief made the decision that the war needed to be fought, then there needed to be a Declaration of War and Hanoi and North Vietnam needed to be bombed back into the Stone Age at the beginning of the war not at the end.

            Every military engagement since then has been questionable except for 9/11. The AUMF is as close to a formal declaration as we are going to get. And the full might of the United States should have been brought to bear against Al Queda. The draft should have been re-instituted and anything resembling an Islamist should have already been sent to meet Allah. I think the biggest lapse of leadership with Bush #2 is that he did not
            ask ALL of America to contribute in some way toward the war effort. I think that most of us expected to be asked to contribute and most of us wanted to contribute.

            Had the draft been re-instated right after 9/11 and the AUMF, I think Congress as well as America would have and should have been far more deliberative regarding the invasion of Iraq. In short, I think the calculus would have been different on the part of Bush (not so much Cheney). Especially, if his daughters might have been sent off to fight in Iraq.

            Iraq created the same public mistrust as Vietnam did. Both wars were justified by misrepresentations of intel, either intentional or unintentional. When you cannot trust your Commander-in-Chief on matters of war, you really cannot trust him on anything else.

            You are probably right about the importance of the individual to act in accordance with the dictates of his own conscience. Perhaps it is a matter of uninspired leadership, but Romney was right about a large percentage of Americans feeling entitled (and unjustifiably so).

            Since JFK, most Americans have not been asked to do anything for their country. And we are raising generations of takers (far beyond the welfare cheats) who feel no obligation or inclination whatsoever to give anything back at all.

            That is resulting not in American Exceptionalism. It is resulting in American mediocrity.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            TexPatriot, I have a question. How come Republicans chose Romney over Huntsman? Huntsman was infinitely more qualified to be President. Was it simply because Huntsman accepted a position (that he was infinitely qualified for) in the Obama administration? Or is there something else about Huntsman that I’m missing?

          • Texas Patriot

            I don’t know, Buff. As you may have gathered from my discussions with Wolfie, Ive been a very enthusiastic Republican Conservative for as long as I can remember. I campaigned for Eisenhower in ’52 (yes, i distinctly remember telling everyone in my neighborhood that “I Like Ike” when I was still three years old) and ’56, Nixon in ’60, and Goldwater in ’64.

            However, except for a brief period when James Baker and my soul brother Lee Atwater were running things, I really haven’t really understood the thinking of the RNC for a long, long time. The gentlemanly and wise philosophical qualities of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Dwight Eisenhower seem all but completely lost on most modern day Republicans.

            As you have noted in previous posts, another kind of psychology seems to have taken over the political process in America, to the great detriment of the American people. The hard process of waking up from the long national nightmare since the death of John Kennedy doesn’t seem to be happening quite yet, but if and when that finally happens, it won’t be a moment too soon.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            TexPatriot, there was a time when Republicans told you what they are for (without mincing words). Whether you liked Ronald Reagan, or hated him, he always told you what he believed. You always knew where he stood. He never equivocated. And I think people respected him for that. Today, Politicians on both sides, including Obama, say one thing and then do another. You never get the sense of what they actually believe. That was the problem with Romney. I never knew what it was that he actually believed because his words were always in conflict with his past words and actions.

            You are so right. There is another kind of psychology that has taken over the political process to the detriment of us all. We need men (and women) of character and principle. I wonder if there any left who would actually run for high office.

          • Texas Patriot

            Peter Ueberroth is the only one I can think of who is really of that caliber, but I’m not sure he would be willing to run. He ran for governor in the California Republican primaries against Arnold Schwarzenegger, but he couldn’t match The Teminator’s name recognition (and poll numbers). Seeing the handwriting on the wall, he dropped out of the race, but in typical Ueberroth fashion, he returned every dime he received as a political contribution even though in some cases the amount returned was less than the postage it cost him. That’s the kind of honesty and integrity we need!

          • Buffalo Springfield

            TexPatriot, That is a shame. You’re right, we need someone like that. I can only hope that one day the Republican Party will return to it’s roots. Right now, there are life-long Republicans who no longer recognize their own Party.

          • Texas Patriot

            Don’t hold your breath. Entrenched ideological partisans be have a hammerlock on both political parties, and they’re not about to let go. It’s way too lucrative, and they’ve become way too powerful. In that regard I think it’s noteworthy that Peter Ueberrroth, a life-long conservative, ran as an independent in ‘03.

            Personally, I’d like to see a guy like Michael Bloomberg give it a shot. He could pump a billion or two of his own money into the race without thinking twice about it. Bill Gates could do that as well.

            Basically, we need someone who can run independently without any financial assistance from either political party. It’s probably our only chance of finding a leader who truly represents the best interest of the American people as a whole.

          • Buffalo Springfield

            TexPatriot, that is an accurate assessment of the current political arena. I think we all know what the problem is. I certainly don’t know what the solution is. I don’t know how one would go about getting money out of politics. They’ve tried in the past. And the lobbyists are an even bigger problem. And we all know the Golden Rule. The man with the gold makes the rules. And I don’t think that will ever change. I do have faith that eventually, the American People will start to throw the bums out of both political parties. Apparently, that is what happened to Cantor. There is a glimmer of hope there that Americans will wake up and start ending the careers of career politicians.

          • Texas Patriot

            Buffalo, I think you/re right to say that the problem will eventually correct itself. As long as the major political parties continue to advance agendas and candidates that do not reflect the best interests of the American people, I think they will continue to see a drop in interest in what they are doing as well as a drop in the all-important level of political contributions from individual donors.

  • maz hess

    To write about somebody who nobody met since his deliberation besides some doctors and about whom you hardly can find any real true informations makes you looking a little strange.

  • Joe Theisen

    Islam is based on a lie.