After the lies about Pat Tilman's death and the saving Private Jessica Lynch story, I've learned
not to trust what our U.S. government has to say when it comes to war time activity. Having
worked in the media for as long as I have, I also know how things can be twisted, edited,
and exaggerated to influence public opinion.
With that said, does anybody really know what exactly happened with Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl?
Do we know for sure why he left his post or the reason the government decided to pull
off a seemingly ridiculous 5-for-1 swap with the Taliban for his release?
I certainly don't. And don't pretend to.
But I do know, whether it be from age or experience or probably a little of both, I don't stand
among the masses in this knee-jerk, rush-to-judgement world that we live in. The media and
court of public opinion have already cast Bergdahl as a sell-out and deserter who shacked up
with the Taliban for the last five years. They see his father with the long beard and tweeting to
the Taliban and believe he's a terrorist and traitor.
I'm sure if you had a child in the hands of the Taliban for five years, you'd have many sleepless
nights and do just about anything to keep your kid alive and get him home safely. Imagine the
stress of dealing with having a son not only in a war, but in the hands of the deadliest people in
the world. Do you think Mr. Bergdahl wanted to see his son's head cut off or hanging
from a rope on a bridge? We seen that before, haven't we?
I'm not defending Bergdahl's father, but unless I know for sure he was sleeping with the
Taliban and ready to commit some heinous crime on American soil, I'm not condemning him.
I'm not condemning his son, either.
I've read where Bowe left his post and wandered into the hands of the Taliban. Do we really
know that for sure? Do we really know all the details and circumstances surrounding the event?
Right. His own troops have even said that Bowe sold them out. And of course, that would make
them the first and only soldiers to ever be confused, misunderstan, or misinterpret an event
that happened during a war. Stress would never affect their rationale or thinking, would it?
Most people read, hear, or see a comment by all the experts on Facebook and believe something
to be true. I don't quite understand why, but that seems to be the case more often than not.
Yeah, we heard then President George Bush tell us the Iraqis had weapons of mass destruction and
most of us believed it because, after all, why would the president lie? (We've known that answer
for quite some time. Most of them do to satisfy their own agendas).
And how bout all those weapons of mass destruction? Nothing. All those high-powered
satellites and inspectors on the ground and there was nothing.
I believe very little the media tells us. They've certainly been wrong before, haven't
they? John King of CNN was more than a little off when he told the world the Boston police
had "arrested a light-skinned black male" in the marathon bombing case. Ooops, my bad.
King didn't bother to double-check his sources but instead just kept looking at his Blackberry
as he told Wolf Blitzer the marathon bomber had been caught.
The media was way off the mark in its initial information in the Newtown case. They gave
us wrong names, wrong death counts, and a wrong timeline. saying Adam Lanza killed his
father in New Jersey, went back to Newtown to shoot his mother who had been a part-time
teacher at the school (she wasn't) and then went on a rampage at the Sandy Hook Elementary
Lara Logan of CBS just returned to '60 Minutes' after a seven-month leave of absence for
botching a story. Logan anchored a report in which security contractor Dylan Davies claimed
to have been present and active at the Sept. 11, 2012, raid on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi. He wasn't.
'60 Minutes' wrong about something? No way! Way.
So, we should believe everything we've heard in this Bergdahl case? Really? Why?
Has anybody heard from Bergdahl on why he left his post? Have we heard his side of the
story? Man, the NBA had Donald Sterling on tape making racist comments but they still
allowed him to give his side of the story and explain what happen.
For some reason, the court of public opinion thinks Bergdahl is a sell-out and traitor who
allegedly cost six of his fellow troops their lives in the hunt for him. How the heck do we
know what went on a world away in a place we know absolutely nothing about?
Let the guy have his say. Get the facts, get the truth, and then feel free to condemn him.