06-02-2014, 07:36 PM
(06-02-2014, 07:23 PM)aussiefriend Wrote: HoTD, I am surprised, because I didn't think service people were allowed to talk to the media. That rationale I can completely understand for security purposes.
Yeah, there are restrictions on what service people can share publicly, but they still have the right to freedom of speech when it comes to discussing non-classified or non-confidential experiences in the field, when it doesn't compromise national security.
Reportedly, members of his troop had been asked not to speak out about Bergdahl's actions and statements that led up to his capture. But, now that he's home and some are labeling him a "hero", some of those soldiers are choosing to speak out -- I don't think there's any national security risk or breach in doing so (though I imagine some US officials would rather they didn't).
Anyway, here's a snip from another article. Not all of it is verified, but it's consistent with what other soldiers have alluded to over the last couple of years in various statements and leaks that I've seen.
Snip:
Nathan Bethea, a former soldier who says he served in Bergdahl’s unit, recently wrote that he and his colleagues had been forced to stay quiet about the truth of Bergdahl’s case.
"And that the truth is: Bergdahl was a deserter, and soldiers from his own unit died trying to track him down," Bethea wrote in The Daily Beast Monday. “Bergdahl was relieved from guard duty, and instead of going to sleep, he fled the outpost on foot. He deserted. I’ve talked to members of Bergdahl’s platoon—including the last Americans to see him before his capture. I’ve reviewed the relevant documents. That’s what happened.”
“We were attacking the post, he was sitting taking expletive[.] He had no gun with him,” said a “traffic report” apparently capturing a conversation between two members of the Taliban.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/controvers...d=23961090