If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gawker)   Sgt Bowe Bergdahl, who was first a missing American hero, then AWOL, then a peaceful man trying help Afghans who got caught, then a traitorous deserter Muslim, is now a Randian objectivist who was mentally unfit to serve in the first place   (gawker.com) divider line 198
    More: Weird, Bowe Bergdahl, Atlas Shrugged, conservative media, Taliban  
•       •       •

1991 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jun 2014 at 4:02 PM (19 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



198 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-11 12:36:30 PM  
Uh, well, this seems like it's based on more evidence than any other theory I've seen so far.
 
2014-06-11 12:39:17 PM  
I don't care about his words or actions. The important thing is his father's Talibeard.
 
2014-06-11 12:43:19 PM  
All these "revelations" that come and go seem to have conspired to make me feel the exact same way:
1. We as a country get our POWs back and sometimes that takes an unpleasant prisoner swap
2. If he's got personal, legal or professional problems, the solution to them didn't involve leaving him with the Haqqani Network.

Simple as that.
 
2014-06-11 12:44:15 PM  
"According to Coast Guard records, Bergdahl left the service with an "uncharacterized discharge" after 26 days of basic training in early 2006."

Not the first guy to have that happen to them in the service, won't be the last. Hopefully some penicillin was able to help.
 
2014-06-11 12:49:06 PM  
I heard that Bergdahl once burped and didn't say "excuse me."
 
2014-06-11 12:50:26 PM  
"No, Mr. President, a soldier expressing horrid anti-American beliefs - even boldly putting them in writing and unabashedly firing off his messages while in uniform, just three days before he left his unit on foot - is not 'honorable service.' Unless that is your standard."

Ms Palin, you really are the most giving person on the planet
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-06-11 12:54:39 PM  
Randian objectivist who was mentally unfit to serve in the first place

I think those are prefect qualifications for cannon fodder.
 
2014-06-11 01:03:30 PM  
Farking afghans...

www.knittingpark.com
 
2014-06-11 01:06:09 PM  
Who the fark cares? Bring him back and try him if the facts warrant.
 
2014-06-11 01:07:02 PM  
That dude wears more hats than N0bummer.
 
2014-06-11 01:10:49 PM  
I swear his middle name must be "Rorschach".
 
2014-06-11 01:15:14 PM  

21-7-b: "No, Mr. President, a soldier expressing horrid anti-American beliefs - even boldly putting them in writing and unabashedly firing off his messages while in uniform, just three days before he left his unit on foot - is not 'honorable service.' Unless that is your standard."

Ms Palin, you really are the most giving person on the planet


Didn't her son only go into the Army under the "Enlist or Go to Jail" option?

/Yes, I know that that no longer "officially" happens.
 
2014-06-11 01:15:54 PM  

SphericalTime: Uh, well, this seems like it's based on more evidence than any other theory I've seen so far.


We need to create an app game.

It gives you a beard only and you have to match it with the face of either Ted Nugent, Duck Dynasty cast memeber or a terrorist
 
2014-06-11 01:21:01 PM  

dittybopper: I swear his middle name must be "Rorschach".


Ooo! Ooo! Mr. Kotter, Mr. Kot-

Oh, sorry. I read that wrong.
 
2014-06-11 01:23:02 PM  

Sgt Otter: 21-7-b: "No, Mr. President, a soldier expressing horrid anti-American beliefs - even boldly putting them in writing and unabashedly firing off his messages while in uniform, just three days before he left his unit on foot - is not 'honorable service.' Unless that is your standard."

Ms Palin, you really are the most giving person on the planet

Didn't her son only go into the Army under the "Enlist or Go to Jail" option?

/Yes, I know that that no longer "officially" happens.


Cite? Never heard that.
 
2014-06-11 01:23:58 PM  

Diogenes: That dude wears more hats than N0bummer.


Indeed.  And there's only one way to approach this conundrum.  It's time to befart his name.   It's the only way to be sure.  Fartgent Blowe Buttdookhl!
 
2014-06-11 01:25:41 PM  
Yeah, sorry, I refuse to engage in any of this "Real American" bullsh*t. No Americans are "realer" than other Americans and therefore more deserving of services and aid from our government. The very idea that some people think this is appalling.
 
2014-06-11 01:28:27 PM  
Seeing as how this is based on stuff that he actually allegedly wrote, it would seem a bit more credible. But Rand may not have been his only influence, and he's still unable to make any statements or respond to critics, so perhaps its still best to leave him the hell alone until he's out of the farking hospital. Doesn't change the fact that the exchange was a good thing.
 
2014-06-11 01:28:53 PM  
No wonder the GOP didn't want us to bring him home.
 
2014-06-11 01:30:40 PM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: Who the fark cares? Bring him back and try him if the facts warrant.


Its a terrible book, but you still can't prosecute someone for reading  Atlas Shrugged.
 
2014-06-11 01:31:02 PM  

Somacandra: Seeing as how this is based on stuff that he actually allegedly wrote, it would seem a bit more credible.


That, and the fact that he wrote the Ayn Rand email just THREE DAYS before he left. It gives us insight into his frame of mind right before he disappeared, and his frame of mind was "Fark this shiat. Atlas Shrugged, biatches. I'm looking out for #1 from now on."
 
2014-06-11 01:31:55 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: Diogenes: That dude wears more hats than N0bummer.

Indeed.  And there's only one way to approach this conundrum.  It's time to befart his name.   It's the only way to be sure.  Fartgent Blowe Buttdookhl!


Bergfart.

Not to be confused with

Fartghazi.
 
2014-06-11 01:35:10 PM  

Somacandra: Doctor Funkenstein: Diogenes: That dude wears more hats than N0bummer.

Indeed.  And there's only one way to approach this conundrum.  It's time to befart his name.   It's the only way to be sure.  Fartgent Blowe Buttdookhl!

Bergfart.

Not to be confused with

Fartghazi.


BeardBergfartghazigate!
 
2014-06-11 01:41:06 PM  

Somacandra: Doctor Funkenstein: Diogenes: That dude wears more hats than N0bummer.

Indeed.  And there's only one way to approach this conundrum.  It's time to befart his name.   It's the only way to be sure.  Fartgent Blowe Buttdookhl!

Bergfart.

Not to be confused with

Fartghazi.


Bergfart abondoned his post at Fartghazi to join the Talifart. Fartbama.
 
2014-06-11 01:42:10 PM  

Somacandra: Doesn't change the fact that the exchange was a good thing.


That of course remains to be seen.

I'm withholding judgement, because I think there is too much that we really don't know at this point about the events of the day that he was captured, and what he was thinking at the time.

Also, it could be looked at from different angles.  From a perspective of "we never leave our own, even deserters", then it's a good thing.  From a perspective of "We don't negotiate with terrorists*", it's a bad thing, especially since we traded a single Private First Class for five upper management types.

But like I said, I really do think the jury is out on this one still.

*Stupid statement to make.  Of course we negotiate with terrorists, when it suits us.  We just like to pretend that we don't.  But if you make the statement, you have to follow through 100% or you look bad.
 
2014-06-11 01:48:18 PM  
I'm confused. This guy's dad has a beard that makes him look like a terrorist. But it also makes him look like he should be on Duck Dynasty. I don't know if I'm supposed to praise this guy as a hero, or piss my pants.
 
2014-06-11 01:49:46 PM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: Sgt Otter: 21-7-b: "No, Mr. President, a soldier expressing horrid anti-American beliefs - even boldly putting them in writing and unabashedly firing off his messages while in uniform, just three days before he left his unit on foot - is not 'honorable service.' Unless that is your standard."

Ms Palin, you really are the most giving person on the planet

Didn't her son only go into the Army under the "Enlist or Go to Jail" option?

/Yes, I know that that no longer "officially" happens.

Cite? Never heard that.


There was an incident of vandalism in the Wasilla school district, where the brake lines of a bunch of school buses were cut, as a "prank."  IIRC, there was four teens arrested.  Three 18 year old seniors, and one unnamed 17 year old minor.  The three seniors were Track's best friends and hockey teammates, and they were basically a joined-at-the-hip deal, so it widely assumed he was the "unnamed minor."  The damage was in the tens of thousands, so it wasn't waved off as "boys will be boys," even when your mom is the Governor.

I remember hearing about it around the election from a few Alaska farkers who said it was the worst kept secret in town.  I did some googling, and it only pops up on loony left-wing blogs.  Take it with a large grain of salt.
 
2014-06-11 01:54:35 PM  

Sgt Otter: 21-7-b: "No, Mr. President, a soldier expressing horrid anti-American beliefs - even boldly putting them in writing and unabashedly firing off his messages while in uniform, just three days before he left his unit on foot - is not 'honorable service.' Unless that is your standard."

Ms Palin, you really are the most giving person on the planet

Didn't her son only go into the Army under the "Enlist or Go to Jail" option?

/Yes, I know that that no longer "officially" happens.


there was a rumor that he had vandalized a bunch of buses in 2005, but never verified afaik.
WebRepcurrentVotenoRatingnoWeight
 
2014-06-11 01:57:16 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: I'm confused. This guy's dad has a beard that makes him look like a terrorist. But it also makes him look like he should be on Duck Dynasty. I don't know if I'm supposed to praise this guy as a hero, or piss my pants.


blog.chewxy.com
 
2014-06-11 01:58:15 PM  

factoryconnection: All these "revelations" that come and go seem to have conspired to make me feel the exact same way:
1. We as a country get our POWs back and sometimes that takes an unpleasant prisoner swap
2. If he's got personal, legal or professional problems, the solution to them didn't involve leaving him with the Haqqani Network.

Simple as that.


This is what even the right wing fellow veteran friends of mine don't get. We always have tried to get our POWs back. For John McCain to come out and decry this, when he was freed as part of a prisoner exchange laid out in farking writing in the Paris Peace Accord, is the height of either hypocrisy or being a pure douchenozzle. Or in his case maybe both at the same time.
 
2014-06-11 02:03:23 PM  

Sgt Otter: Three Crooked Squirrels: Sgt Otter: 21-7-b: "No, Mr. President, a soldier expressing horrid anti-American beliefs - even boldly putting them in writing and unabashedly firing off his messages while in uniform, just three days before he left his unit on foot - is not 'honorable service.' Unless that is your standard."

Ms Palin, you really are the most giving person on the planet

Didn't her son only go into the Army under the "Enlist or Go to Jail" option?

/Yes, I know that that no longer "officially" happens.

Cite? Never heard that.

There was an incident of vandalism in the Wasilla school district, where the brake lines of a bunch of school buses were cut, as a "prank."  IIRC, there was four teens arrested.  Three 18 year old seniors, and one unnamed 17 year old minor.  The three seniors were Track's best friends and hockey teammates, and they were basically a joined-at-the-hip deal, so it widely assumed he was the "unnamed minor."  The damage was in the tens of thousands, so it wasn't waved off as "boys will be boys," even when your mom is the Governor.

I remember hearing about it around the election from a few Alaska farkers who said it was the worst kept secret in town.  I did some googling, and it only pops up on loony left-wing blogs.  Take it with a large grain of salt.


Thanks!
 
2014-06-11 02:06:01 PM  

Rapmaster2000: I don't care about his words or actions. The important thing is his father's Talibeard.


You're working with outdated information, it's a Duck Dynabeard.
 
2014-06-11 02:08:24 PM  

dittybopper: Somacandra: Doesn't change the fact that the exchange was a good thing.

That of course remains to be seen.


No, it doesn't.  The exchange was good.

I'm withholding judgement, because I think there is too much that we really don't know at this point about the events of the day that he was captured, and what he was thinking at the time.

^^At that is why^^

Without making the exchange, we would never know.  If you want answers to those questions, the exchange is necessary.
 
2014-06-11 02:10:40 PM  

Irving Maimway: This is what even the right wing fellow veteran friends of mine don't get. We always have tried to get our POWs back. For John McCain to come out and decry this, when he was freed as part of a prisoner exchange laid out in farking writing in the Paris Peace Accord, is the height of either hypocrisy or being a pure douchenozzle. Or in his case maybe both at the same time.


There is a difference between the two:  McCain was shot down by the enemy in combat over enemy territory, and subsequently captured.

As near was we can tell with Bergdahl, so far (and this is subject to change), he simply walked off post and started wandering around the Afghan countryside, asking people if they spoke any English.  We don't know his motivation for that yet.

Even though we really don't know much solid about the Bergdahl case yet, we know enough to realize that there is a fundamental difference between the two  situations.  And if any one of us is in a position to judge, McCain is, having been there.

Don't mistake this as support for that position, however:  I'm just pointing out the problem with your argument.
 
2014-06-11 02:13:41 PM  

dittybopper: And if any one of us is in a position to judge, McCain is, having been there.


Except that McCain supposedly OK'd the deal a couple of years ago when this was first set in motion, after speaking with then-Senator John Kerry. After the deal was done, he went two-faced and started the public outrage act.
 
2014-06-11 02:16:19 PM  

dittybopper: Even though we really don't know much solid about the Bergdahl case yet, we know enough to realize that there is a fundamental difference between the two  situations.


If we don't yet know enough to state the facts regarding the loss/capture of Bergfart, then by definition we do not know enough to tell whether there is a fundamental difference.
 
2014-06-11 02:20:15 PM  

dittybopper: There is a difference between the two:


No, they were both American POWs. Until they return home and answer for their actions before and during captivity, there is no difference between any POWs.
 
2014-06-11 02:25:39 PM  
For those that really dig into the right-wing sphere, and I guess the left-wing sphere as well... is there a perception that "the left" is hailing Bowe Bergdahl as a bona-fide hero or something?  I've not seen that.  That Obama had a Rose Garden speech with the Bergdahl parents has more to do with us getting our last POW back, but I didn't even hear that address so maybe accolades were issued that I've not heard of.

Because I'm not supporting getting Bergdahl back because he was or is a hero; I'm supporting getting him back because that's what we should do.
 
2014-06-11 02:33:54 PM  
Drink?
 
2014-06-11 02:38:39 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Without making the exchange, we would never know.  If you want answers to those questions, the exchange is necessary.


That's not necessarily true.  Just because *WE* don't know, that doesn't mean that the information isn't out there.  I'm sure the NSA has been vacuuming up every communication it possibly could relating to Bergdahl.  We got to see some summaries of that sort of thing in the Wikileaks document about his capture, but that almost certainly isn't the sum total.

Plus, we don't know what the initial military investigation found.  Often it's best to interview people immediately after the events in question.  We don't know if he left a note or not.

That's all stuff that "we", meaning the Farkers discussing it here and now, don't know, but that's not necessarily stuff that "We", in the context of the United States, don't know.

But in the end, your argument sounds suspiciously like "we have to pass it to find out what's in it".  Maybe it was a good deal.  Maybe it wasn't.  But if you're going to ask me to buy a pig in a poke, you have to have some pretty compelling evidence that it's a Wilbur-level of porcine pulchritude.

Right now, neither you nor I have that.
 
2014-06-11 02:40:12 PM  

factoryconnection: is there a perception that "the left" is hailing Bowe Bergdahl as a bona-fide hero or something?


It certainly looks that way. But remember, this is a political ideology that views being "neutral" as the diametric opposite of its own positions. For example, being secular - government neutrality on and non-involvement in religious matters - is to them anti-religion. So if you challenge any aspect of their narrative, whether a fact or an opinion, then you are de facto taking the diametrically opposed opinion.

Bergdahl hasn't been proven to be a deserter? Oh, well, then I guess you think he's a hero! These Taliban guys weren't hardcore, inveterate killers, but politicians or bureaucrats who may have been involved in decision-making that led to people being killed? Oh, well then I guess you'd be happy to hang out with them in Qatar for a few weeks!
 
2014-06-11 02:45:35 PM  

Somacandra: dittybopper: Even though we really don't know much solid about the Bergdahl case yet, we know enough to realize that there is a fundamental difference between the two  situations.

If we don't yet know enough to state the facts regarding the loss/capture of Bergfart, then by definition we do not know enough to tell whether there is a fundamental difference.


Sure we do.  We do know one walked away from his post and spent at a minimum at least 5 hours, and quite likely more, wandering around the Afghan countryside.

TIMELINE: 0430z BLACKFOOT TOC REPORTS SOLDIER IS MISSING
...
UPDATE: 1012z GUARDRAIL REPORTS PICKED UP LLVI TRAFFIC AT GRID VB 6597 3366 THAT STATES (UIM INDICATES THAT AN AMERICAN SOLDIER IS TALKING AND IS LOOKING FOR SOMEONE WHO SPEAKS ENGLISH. INDICATES AMERICAN SOLDIER HAS CAMERA)


So he goes missing sometime before 0430 Zulu time, and at 1012 Zulu a Guardrail aircraft reports "low level voice intercept" traffic about an American soldier who is walking around with a camera and looking for someone who speaks English.

This is a Guardrail RC-12 aircraft:

dev.defense-update.com

It's specifically designed to intercept communications at a tactical level.  I have friends that have flown them (including missions in Iraq and Afghanistan).
 
2014-06-11 02:48:45 PM  

dittybopper: Lionel Mandrake: Without making the exchange, we would never know.  If you want answers to those questions, the exchange is necessary.

That's not necessarily true.  Just because *WE* don't know, that doesn't mean that the information isn't out there.  I'm sure the NSA has been vacuuming up every communication it possibly could relating to Bergdahl.  We got to see some summaries of that sort of thing in the Wikileaks document about his capture, but that almost certainly isn't the sum total.

Plus, we don't know what the initial military investigation found.  Often it's best to interview people immediately after the events in question.  We don't know if he left a note or not.

That's all stuff that "we", meaning the Farkers discussing it here and now, don't know, but that's not necessarily stuff that "We", in the context of the United States, don't know.

But in the end, your argument sounds suspiciously like "we have to pass it to find out what's in it".  Maybe it was a good deal.  Maybe it wasn't.  But if you're going to ask me to buy a pig in a poke, you have to have some pretty compelling evidence that it's a Wilbur-level of porcine pulchritude.

Right now, neither you nor I have that.


I have enough evidence to say it was good to make the exchange.

If he is found to be a deserter and even a traitor, I will support punishing him,  Severely.  But I will still support having made the deal

Some people will disagree, of course, but I do not believe it is even possible that any further information would have the ability to cause me to change my mind and force me to conclude "we should have left him there"
 
2014-06-11 02:56:54 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: I have enough evidence to say it was good to make the exchange.

If he is found to be a deserter and even a traitor, I will support punishing him,  Severely.  But I will still support having made the deal

Some people will disagree, of course, but I do not believe it is even possible that any further information would have the ability to cause me to change my mind and force me to conclude "we should have left him there"


And that is where we disagree.  I'm open to welcoming him home as a "hero" if the situation warrants it.  I'm also open to the idea that leaving him there could have been the best option, or the "least bad" option, depending.
 
2014-06-11 02:59:56 PM  

dittybopper: I'm withholding judgement, because I think there is too much that we really don't know at this point about the events of the day that he was captured, and what he was thinking at the time.


This implies that the he might not have been deserving of rescue, or that the cost of his freedom depends on his personality. Both of those things are things I would protest.

It's one thing to argue that the price was too high. We certainly would not have traded him for a nuclear weapon, and we absolutely would have traded him for a piece of Bazooka bubble gum, so where in the middle you draw the line is one of policy that is certainly debatable.

What I don't believe is debatable is whether the price is freedom should somehow be dependent on how deserving he is. Freedom from capture is not something one should deserve, it's something the government owes it's citizens. So whether the five prisoners for him was a worthwhile trade is arguable (I think yes), but it would be debatable regardless of who Bergdahl is, what his motivations were, or what happened that caused his capture. All of this claptrap about what he was thinking is, to my mind, completely irrelevant, and is just being used for people to justify being angry at Obama for something they would applaud from anyone else.
 
2014-06-11 03:11:15 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: Farking afghans...

[www.knittingpark.com image 850x1275]


No thanks, they can get kinda scratchy. I prefer terrycloth, myself.
 
2014-06-11 03:13:35 PM  

dittybopper: Lionel Mandrake: I have enough evidence to say it was good to make the exchange.

If he is found to be a deserter and even a traitor, I will support punishing him,  Severely.  But I will still support having made the deal

Some people will disagree, of course, but I do not believe it is even possible that any further information would have the ability to cause me to change my mind and force me to conclude "we should have left him there"

And that is where we disagree.  I'm open to welcoming him home as a "hero" if the situation warrants it.  I'm also open to the idea that leaving him there could have been the best option, or the "least bad" option, depending.


Yes.  I understand that we disagree.
 
2014-06-11 03:14:56 PM  

nmrsnr: dittybopper: I'm withholding judgement, because I think there is too much that we really don't know at this point about the events of the day that he was captured, and what he was thinking at the time.

This implies that the he might not have been deserving of rescue, or that the cost of his freedom depends on his personality. Both of those things are things I would protest.

It's one thing to argue that the price was too high. We certainly would not have traded him for a nuclear weapon, and we absolutely would have traded him for a piece of Bazooka bubble gum, so where in the middle you draw the line is one of policy that is certainly debatable.

What I don't believe is debatable is whether the price is freedom should somehow be dependent on how deserving he is. Freedom from capture is not something one should deserve, it's something the government owes it's citizens. So whether the five prisoners for him was a worthwhile trade is arguable (I think yes), but it would be debatable regardless of who Bergdahl is, what his motivations were, or what happened that caused his capture. All of this claptrap about what he was thinking is, to my mind, completely irrelevant, and is just being used for people to justify being angry at Obama for something they would applaud from anyone else.


I think regeardless, getting him back was the right thing to do.

I also think that if there is substance to the charges we've been hearing in the press, that he deserves a court martial so he can get his due process. I think it's absolutely awful that he's getting this trial in the press because some people don't like Obama.
 
2014-06-11 03:29:00 PM  

SurfaceTension: nmrsnr: dittybopper: I'm withholding judgement, because I think there is too much that we really don't know at this point about the events of the day that he was captured, and what he was thinking at the time.

This implies that the he might not have been deserving of rescue, or that the cost of his freedom depends on his personality. Both of those things are things I would protest.

It's one thing to argue that the price was too high. We certainly would not have traded him for a nuclear weapon, and we absolutely would have traded him for a piece of Bazooka bubble gum, so where in the middle you draw the line is one of policy that is certainly debatable.

What I don't believe is debatable is whether the price is freedom should somehow be dependent on how deserving he is. Freedom from capture is not something one should deserve, it's something the government owes it's citizens. So whether the five prisoners for him was a worthwhile trade is arguable (I think yes), but it would be debatable regardless of who Bergdahl is, what his motivations were, or what happened that caused his capture. All of this claptrap about what he was thinking is, to my mind, completely irrelevant, and is just being used for people to justify being angry at Obama for something they would applaud from anyone else.

I think regeardless, getting him back was the right thing to do.

I also think that if there is substance to the charges we've been hearing in the press, that he deserves a court martial so he can get his due process. I think it's absolutely awful that he's getting this trial in the press because some people don't like Obama.


If for nothing else than respect for the family, you think they could chill the fark out.
 
2014-06-11 03:31:47 PM  

dittybopper: Somacandra: dittybopper: Even though we really don't know much solid about the Bergdahl case yet, we know enough to realize that there is a fundamental difference between the two  situations.

If we don't yet know enough to state the facts regarding the loss/capture of Bergfart, then by definition we do not know enough to tell whether there is a fundamental difference.

Sure we do.  We do know one walked away from his post and spent at a minimum at least 5 hours, and quite likely more, wandering around the Afghan countryside.

TIMELINE: 0430z BLACKFOOT TOC REPORTS SOLDIER IS MISSING
...
UPDATE: 1012z GUARDRAIL REPORTS PICKED UP LLVI TRAFFIC AT GRID VB 6597 3366 THAT STATES (UIM INDICATES THAT AN AMERICAN SOLDIER IS TALKING AND IS LOOKING FOR SOMEONE WHO SPEAKS ENGLISH. INDICATES AMERICAN SOLDIER HAS CAMERA)

So he goes missing sometime before 0430 Zulu time, and at 1012 Zulu a Guardrail aircraft reports "low level voice intercept" traffic about an American soldier who is walking around with a camera and looking for someone who speaks English.

This is a Guardrail RC-12 aircraft:

[dev.defense-update.com image 520x347]

It's specifically designed to intercept communications at a tactical level.  I have friends that have flown them (including missions in Iraq and Afghanistan).


From that statement where do you get that he is walking around free?
 
Displayed 50 of 198 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report