Here is a policy statement, followed by all modern day presidents preceding Obama. In his "infinite wisdom," H Obama has decided this policy is crap.

39 share

Understand that in March of 2012,  H Obama paid 5 million to Egyptian rebels during the Muslim Brotherhood inspired takeover of Egypt after H Obama destabilized that country with his betrayal of President Mubarak.  There are increasing rumors that he paid a ransom (again) in addition to giving the Hagganis network (and the Taliban)  its top five terror generals.  In fact,  Hagganis,  the group which actually held Bergdahl as captive,  only wanted money for the exchange,  not the GITMO FIVE.   

The document,  below, is dated for May of 1999,  in the last days of the Clinton Administration,  and was accepted policy for all presidents,  preceding Mr. Obama.  Understand that this Administration has been trying to negotiate a "peace treatise" since 2011.  Part of those negotiations included the Taliban's request  (not the government of Qatar,  not Pakistan,  not Karzi and the government of Afghanistan,  not the Hagganis terror group) for the top six terror "generals" held in GITMO.  Since that time,  one of these killers has died while in GITMO.  You should be reminded that during the 2011 negotiations,  the Taliban rejected Obama's offer for a "negotiated peace"  (what the heck is that?),  and the Senate subcommittee charged with oversight of such things and headed by Diane Feinstein,  told Obama not to make this hostage trade.   

Obama's claim that he had to make this deal because of the deteriorating  health of the American deserter AND, recent threats on his life  (proven to be untrue as a claim),  has actually been his plan for nearly three years.  

Why now,  not then  (2011)?  Obama knows he will face no penalty from an impotent Congress of fools and self-serving hacks,  AND, more specifically,  he has nothing - personally - to lose except the opportunity to build his legacy as [our most failed] president.  He wants to be remembered for this trade.  In the intervening two and half years before the end of his feckless time as president,  if any of these five men join the battle and kill opposition forces,  he will,  most definitely,  be remembered for this event.   

Sympathizing State Department girl spokesman sets up Administration defense on their prisoner exchange.

37 share

Update #1:  Fox News has just reported (8 am pt,  June 4) that the Administration had decided to pursue a prisoner exchange,  in December of 2013.  This news  makes its claim that this decision was made because of revelations within the past two weeks, showing Bergdahl's health as failing, to be only part of hack-kneed cover-up  --  something this Administration seems to enjoy pursuing.  

It is incredible that Obama and the Kerry/Hillary State Department was so unaware or miscalculating,  as to the Qatar allegiance against the US,  American opinion,  the opposition of our intelligence community (all 16 agencies),  and noteworthy Democrats including the likes of Diane Feinstein.  We know,  for a fact,  as an aside to the Fox storyline,  that Obama had it in his mind to trade GITMO prisoners for Bergdahl,  since 2011,  and was rebuffed in bi-partisan style,  for this opinion  (see that story, here, at the NY Daily News).    

In the video,  Fox News reporter Lucas Tomlinson asks, “Does the State Department consider Sergeant Bergdahl to be a deserter?” 

State Department girl spokesman:   “The State Department — no, Lucas. Look, what we’ve said is we are going to learn the facts about what happened here.   He’s been in captivity, Lucas. I think he’s probably the person who knows best what happened on that night,” 

Editor's note:  Never mind the fact that the military did a review,  back in 2010,  in which it found Bergdahl to have deserted his post,  in the dark of night.  

Tomlinson:   “Well, I think his squad mates have the best indication what happened that night.”

State Department girl spokesman:  “I don’t think that that’s the case,” Harf responded.


Editor's notes:  There is reason to believe that the Congressional law,  passed in 2012 and signed by Obama, requiring the president to give 30 day notice to Congress of its intentions to trade prisoners for hostages,  is not constitutional.  Having said that,  understand that it is the law,  unless and until it is challenged and over-turned in Federal Court.  Did Obama violate this law.  Of course.  Does he care?  Of course not.  

But more than this,  Obama did what no other president has done  -  deal with the enemy, making a hostage exchange,  during wartime.  What makes this historic failure even worse,  is the fact that he gave the enemy exactly what it wanted,  the release of the 5 top Taliban leaders in American custody.  This is not the first time this president has surrendered to the enemy.  In March of 2012,  he paid 5 million dollars for the release of 7 American hostages captured by the Muslim Brotherhood (or related) rebels in Egypt.  The American Press did not cover this story and its historic fact is or will be completely lost,  as a matter of the passing of time.  That Obama is a Muslim sympathizer is well beyond question,  and this prisoner exchange is more proof of that reality.  

Before any choose to disagree,  consider Obama's words to the UN,  on September 18, 2012,  just days following the Muslim murder of our Ambassador,  in Benghazi:  "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam"  (a murderer in his own rite).  Or,  his pledge to the Muslim World,  found in his book,  The Audacity of Hope  (p261):  "I will stand with the Muslims  . . . . ."  Or, his Cairo speech to the Muslim world,  in which he praised Islam for being a "religion of tolerance" while making it clear that he believed Israel was the "occupier" in its conflict with the PLO.  

Understand, that Obama has never embraced a "victory" strategy for Afghanistan,  preferring to work for a "negotiated peace"  (reader "surrender") with the Taliban,  a move emphatically rejected by this band of killers.  Expect more of the same,  as Obama stands above the law,  and,  even,  members of his own party,  working on behalf of the Muslim community,  as he has throughout his presidency.