Apocolyptic military survey? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Apocolyptic military survey?


Lakota
07-11-2012, 14:09
A 30 year service retired Navy Aviator Seal just told me that there is unconfirmed word that the military at large has submitted a survey to all military personnel, with the question:

"Would you be willing to fire on American citizens?"

This information was openly described as 'unconfirmed'.

If it is true, for what it's worth, I personally don't think there would be many - if any - affirmative answers to such a question, since, firstly - it is a contradiction of the oath every military person is obliged to conform to ('to protect the Constitution from all her enemies, be they foreign or domestic, whomsoever').

Secondly, the question inevitably involves an issue of whether or not military (and police) personnel are willing to fire on their own parents, uncles, aunts, children, cousins, wives, husbands, grandparents, etceteras.

It appears that what we have here, is a handful of crack smoking, blood-thirstiy high-rollers, making up a mad schematic charter to conquer the United States, and the world.

If this 'survey' is true, the very fact that it exists reveals a neo-fascist state of the union's key leaderships and their nightmare motivations.

All readers are cordially invited to confirm, nullify, or otherwise comment on this missive.

Best wishes,
- Lakota

Zulu_Tango
07-11-2012, 14:25
I have not received that survey.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Lakota
07-11-2012, 14:36
A thirty year retired Navy Aviator Seal recently told several people that an 'unconfirmed survey' is - or soon will be - distributed to all military (and police) personnel, with the key question:

"Would you be willing to fire on American civilians?"

Firstly - if this unconfirmed report is true, it petitions military and police ranks to compromise the very oath they took - "... to defend the Constitution from all of her enemies, be they foreign or domestic, whomsoever".

Secondly, it petitions military and police personnel to fire on their brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, cousins, children, grand parents, friends, etceteras.

Moreover, this tentative initiative (calling for modifications on all future manufacted firearms and ammunition) would require dramatic changes and adjustments of huge steel, rubber chemical, electronics industries (etceteras).

Furthermore, if this proposed survey is - or soon will be - distributed to American Armed Forces (and police) personnel - if such survey does indeed become factual - it proffers an ominous initiative generated by a despotic huddle of neo-fascist bogeyman enemies of the state, clearly intending to conquer the entire world by Constitution trashing force: imposing fear of the government within 'We the people', rather than the converse: of projecting fear within the government by 'We the people' - as many key founders of this nation very specifically emphasized.

It seems 'the public servant' role of 'government' may furthermore entangle itself in its own 'anti-terrorist' web.

Reader response is cordially invited, to nullify, confirm or otherwise comment on the content(s) of this missive.

Best wishes,
- Lakota

series1811
07-11-2012, 15:09
A thirty year retired Navy Aviator Seal

All I needed to read, right there.

Bren
07-11-2012, 15:10
A 30 year service retired Navy Aviator Seal just told me that there is unconfirmed word that the military at large has submitted a survey to all military personnel, with the question:

"Would you be willing to fire on American citizens?"

This information was openly described as 'unconfirmed'.

If it is true, for what it's worth, I personally don't think there would be many - if any - affirmative answers to such a question,
If that's all there is to the question, I'd answer "yes." I expect most soldiers I know would.

Why wouldn't I - don't you carry a gun? Don't you carry it to shoot people who will, most likely, be American citizens?


since, firstly - it is a contradiction of the oath every military person is obliged to conform to ('to protect the Constitution from all her enemies, be they foreign or domestic, whomsoever').

Nothing uncosntitutional about shooting a US citizen, or at least you'll need to show me that part. City, state and federal law enforcement do it every day and the military has shot a few high profile American citizens as well.


Secondly, the question inevitably involves an issue of whether or not military (and police) personnel are willing to fire on their own parents, uncles, aunts, children, cousins, wives, husbands, grandparents, etceteras.

Depends on what my relatives are doing, I guess. You seem to see the question as asking whether they will open fire on civilian neighborhoods as a form of population reduction. It didn't ask that. There are plenty of reasons that you, me or anybody else would shoot American citizens.


It appears that what we have here, is a handful of crack smoking, blood-thirstiy high-rollers, making up a mad schematic charter to conquer the United States, and the world.

If this 'survey' is true, the very fact that it exists reveals a neo-fascist state of the union's key leaderships and their nightmare motivations.

All readers are cordially invited to confirm, nullify, or otherwise comment on this missive.

Best wishes,
- Lakota

You jumped to a ridiculous conclusion based on absolutely nothing. It says more about you and reading comprehencion, than about the survey or the soldiers.

John Rambo
07-11-2012, 17:34
The survey wasn't recent. And it was very poorly received by the troops, because for every Bren who would mow us down without reservations, theres a soldier ready to shoot him in the back and protect us. I say this with such certainty because this specific topic has come up before both online and in person, and theres a lot of soldiers who have given both answers.

Lakota
07-11-2012, 17:47
All I needed to read, right there.

We don't read minds here and mysteriously abbreviated and unexplained codification doesn't explain your intended meaning either.

It may only be speculated that you are ignorant of the fact that Navy Seals can be - and often are - usually carrier based aviators. Until you clarify your smug response it is meaningless. :wavey:

Falling Crow
07-11-2012, 17:57
And they will all be equipped with belt fed DD214s too....:rofl:

NMG26
07-11-2012, 18:14
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny"

A bumper sticker I saw once.

Attributed to Thomas Jefferson.

BOOSTED12A
07-11-2012, 19:25
All I needed to read, right there.
unicorn

R4lf
07-11-2012, 19:30
Hmm........ That's a well written post, it has sources and credible evidence and is displayed with official seals and everything. However, after I read it for some incredibly odd reason my phone started to stink of bull****. Wonder why that is?

Lakota
07-11-2012, 20:00
Only guessing, but it sounds like 'Bren's' #3 entry is oblivious to the ongoing, increasing controversy regarding the (our) president's decision - whether or not he should or not sign a United Nations document which threatens to invade the United States with blue helmet garnished, armed military soldiers and steal all private property ordnance and ammunition from the law abiding American citizens that own it; at hazard of being obliged to protect your property, fighting fire with fire.

The proposed document also specifys that all Americans owning firearms or ammo prior to the possible passing of the new law (entailing the manufacture of billions of rounds of uniquely marked cartridges, per round, and, likewise unique marking of all the firearms that accomodate all such ammunition), will be obliged to surrender their incumbent weapons and ammo, or, be labeled - and treated - like a 'criminal'.

Bren's one dimensional perspective seems to embrace the parameters of self defense shootings by American CCWs, and/or the murder of Americans by Americans.

That is to say, it sounds like Bren doesn't know what he's talking about. :wavey:

id1otbox
07-11-2012, 20:10
Bren, what would be the purpose of asking that question? When and why would that be acceptable?

6StringGeek
07-11-2012, 20:17
I would imagine if it were true that they might be asked to fire on american terrorists. Still kind of creepy to think about though.

deadday
07-11-2012, 20:37
A 30 year service retired Navy Aviator Seal just told me that there is unconfirmed word that the military at large has submitted a survey to all military personnel, with the question:

"Would you be willing to fire on American citizens?"

This information was openly described as 'unconfirmed'.

If it is true, for what it's worth, I personally don't think there would be many - if any - affirmative answers to such a question, since, firstly - it is a contradiction of the oath every military person is obliged to conform to ('to protect the Constitution from all her enemies, be they foreign or domestic, whomssoever').

Secondly, the question inevitably involves an issue of whether or not military (and police) personnel are willing to fire on their own parents, uncles, aunts, children, cousins, wives, husbands, grandparents, etceteras.

It appears that what we have here, is a handful of crack smoking, blood-thirstiy high-rollers, making up a mad schematic charter to conquer the United States, and the world.

If this 'survey' is true, the very fact that it exists reveals a neo-fascist state of the union's key leaderships and their nightmare motivations.

All readers are cordially invited to confirm, nullify, or otherwise comment on this missive.

Best wishes,
- Lakota

The email you copied this from is bull****, there is no survey. More importantly, when did the Navy start training sea animals to fly?

Jeff82
07-11-2012, 21:00
I think someone is confused over Cunningham's "29 Palms Survey."

Lakota
07-11-2012, 21:37
"More importantly, when did the Navy start training sea animals to fly?" - deadday, in post #8...

Apparently you are completely unaware - and with an attitude - about the fact that 'Aviator Seals' exist and furthermore, they are almost invariably stationed on aircraft carriers piloting combat fighter planes. :wavey: <!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

Lakota
07-11-2012, 21:43
Brush your tongue daily.

:wavey:

Best regards,
-Lakota

Bren
07-12-2012, 04:44
Bren, what would be the purpose of asking that question? When and why would that be acceptable?

Just one of endless examples would be that we have U.S. citizen terrorists who are members of Al Qaeda. Never heard of a soldier who wouldn't shoot them. Civil war? Yep. Espionage? yep.

In short, the "oath" the OP mentioned doesn't say anything about not shooting U.S. citizens - in fact, it says the opposite: "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." In afct, the same right wing nuts who make up genocied fantasies out of a question like "Would you be willing to fire on American citizens?" usually quote that part when they talk about klilling American citizens in our own government/military/law enforcement.

Bren
07-12-2012, 04:46
The email you copied this from is bull****, there is no survey. More importantly, when did the Navy start training sea animals to fly?

I thought he intended "30 year service retired Navy Aviator Seal" as a joke, like the typical joke fake vet description, but looking back, maybe he didn't.


Apparently you are completely unaware - and with an attitude - about the fact that 'Aviator Seals' exist and furthermore, they are almost invariably stationed on aircraft carriers piloting combat fighter planes. :wavey: <!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/web05/2011/6/9/17/anigif_not-sure-if-serious-gif-to-be-used-on-forums-22779-1307655858-12.gif

series1811
07-12-2012, 04:50
We don't read minds here and mysteriously abbreviated and unexplained codification doesn't explain your intended meaning either.

It may only be speculated that you are ignorant of the fact that Navy Seals can be - and often are - usually carrier based aviators. Until you clarify your smug response it is meaningless. :wavey:

No, SEALs are not carrier based aviators. And, there probably aren't a half a dozen who have 30 years of service (most are lucky to do 20 years because of the physical demands). And, yeah, I know more than a few because of where I've worked.

Let me guess. That got sent to you in an e-mail, probably forwarded a hundred times before you got it, and with absolutely no idea of who actually wrote it or sent it orginally. It's okay to admit it. I already know.

GRIMLET
07-12-2012, 05:18
As a leo I would defend myself from bodily harm, or others, to include deadly force while upholding the law.

Jerry
07-12-2012, 10:49
As has been stated, I believe what is being spoken of is the 29 Palms Survey.

Anyone that doesn't believe American troops would/will fire on Americans need a history lesson. When Vets went to Washington in the 30's asking for money promised them for fighting in the war (can't remember if if WW I or Spanish American) Patton had his troops attacked their camp. How about the collage students killed at Kent State during the demonstration in the 60's.

ATF and FBI killed woman and children a Ruby Ridge and Waco. Don't doubt for a minute that our own military and law enforcement agents will kill you if order to. After all they will just be following orders.

Edited to add:

As a leo I would defend myself from bodily harm, or others, to include deadly force while upholding the law.

Even if that law was unconstitutional, IE, disarm all citizens. There you go boys and girls the proof is in the pudding. :bringiton:

Jerry
07-12-2012, 11:03
This may are may not be the "real" survy. I received it by E-mail back in the late 90's.

29 PALMS SURVEY

The following survey was given to U.S. Marines at the 29 Palms Marine Corps base in California:
DD Form 3206 (Rev 2/96)

JOINT SERVICES TRAINING COMBAT ARMS SURVEY

Part A (Confidential when filled in)

This questionnaire is to gather data concerning the attitudes of combat trained personnel with regard to non-traditional missions. All responses are confidential and official. Write your answers directly on the form. In Part II, place an "X" in the space provided for your response.

Date:_____________

Part 1. Demographics.

1. Branch of Service: Army ( ) USAF ( ) Navy ( ) Marines ( ) ANG ( ) NG ( ) USCG ( ) Other: ( )

2. Pay Grade: (E-6, O-4, etc) ( )

3. MOS, AFSC or Specialty Code and Description: ( )

4. Highest level of education: Less than 12 ( ) 13 ( ) 14 ( ) 15 ( ) (16) ( ) More than 16 ( )

5. How many months did you serve in Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield?( )

6. How many months did you serve in Somalia? ( )

7. Where did you spend most of your childhood?

City: ( ); County: ( ) State: ( )

Part II. Attitude:

Do you feel that U.S. combat troops should be used within the U.S. and bordering countries for any of the following missions?

(Strongly Disagree) (Disagree) (Agree) (Strongly Agree) (No Opinion)

8. Drug enforcement

9. Disaster relief (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

10. Security at national events (e.g. Olympic Games, Super Bowl)

11. Environmental disaster clean-up including toxic and nuclear

12. Substitute teachers and school workers in public schools

13. Community assistance programs (e.g. landscaping, environmental clean-up,road repair, animal control)

14. Federal and State prison guards and auxiliary police

15. National emergency police force/international security force

16. Advisors to SWAT units, the FBI, or the BATF

17. Border Patrol (e.g. prevention of entry of illegal aliens into U.S. territory)

18. Drug enforcement and interdiction

19. Disaster relief in bordering countries (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes, etc.)

20. Environmental disaster clean-up in bordering countries including toxic and nuclear.

21. Peace keeping and local law enforcement and internal security forces

22. National building (reconstruct civil governments, develop public school system, develop or improve public transportation system, etc.)

23. Humanitarian relief (e.g. food and medical supplies, temporary housing and clothing and domestic care).

Do you feel that U.S. combat troops should be used in other countries, under command of non-U.S. officers appointed by the U.N. for any of the following missions?

24. Drug enforcement.

25. Disaster relief (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

26. Environmental disaster clean-up including toxic and nuclear.

27. Peace keeping including local law enforcement and internal security forces

28. National building (reconstruct civil government, develop public school system, develop or improve public transportation system, etc.

29. Humanitarian relief (e.g. food and medical supplies, temporary housing and clothing and domestic care)

30. Police action (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm but serving under non-U.S. officers)

31. The U.S. runs a field training exercise. U.N. combat troops should be allowed to serve in U.S. combat units during these exercises under U.S. command and control.

32. The U.N. runs a field training exercise. U.S. combat troops under U.S. command and control should serve in U.N. combat units during these exercises

33. The U.N. runs a field training exercise. U. S. combat troops should serve under U.N. command and control.

34. U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N.missions as long as the U.S. has full command and control.

35. U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N. missions under U.N. command and control.

36. U.S. combat troops should be commanded by U.N. officers and non- commissioned officers at battalion, wing and company levels while performing U.N. missions.

37. It would make no difference to me to have U.N. soldiers as members of my team.

38. It would make no difference to me to take orders from a U.N. company or squadron commander.

39. I feel the President of the U.S. has the authority to pass his responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief to the U.N. Secretary General.

40. I feel there is no conflict between my oath of office and serving as a U.N. soldier.

41. I feel my unit's combat effectiveness would not be affected by performing huminatarian and peace keeping missions for the U.N.

42. I feel a designated unit of U.S. combat soldiers should be permanently assigned to the command and control of the U.N.

43. I would be willing to volunteer for assignment to a U.S. combat unit under a U.N. commander.

44. I would like U.N. member countries, including the U.S., to give the U.N. all the soldiers necessary to maintain world peace.

45. I would swear to the following code:

"I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain world peace and every nation's way of life. I swear and affirm to support and defend the Charter of the United Nations and I am prepared to give my life in its defense."

46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-approved firearms. A 30-day amnesty period is established for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of irregular citizen groups and defiant individuals refuse to turn over their firearms to authority.

Consider the following statement:

"I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the United States government."

End of Survey

Bren
07-12-2012, 11:19
45. I would swear to the following code:

"I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain world peace and every nation's way of life. I swear and affirm to support and defend the Charter of the United Nations and I am prepared to give my life in its defense."

46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-approved firearms. A 30-day amnesty period is established for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of irregular citizen groups and defiant individuals refuse to turn over their firearms to authority.

Consider the following statement:

"I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the United States government."

End of Survey

Pretty nutty - however, it is not the question asked by this thread.

series1811
07-12-2012, 12:10
Maybe this will make the OP feel better.

Firing on U.S. Citizens?

We have talked at length with the author of this survey, Navy Lieutenant Commander Ernest Guy Cunningham, and about his motivation in creating it. He provided us with a copy of the 197-page thesis he wrote after analyzing the responses given by the Marines. His thesis helped him to earn a Master of Science degree in the area of manpower, personnel, and training analysis from the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.


While all of the questions in this survey should have stimulated concern, the survey’s final question has generated an enormous amount of attention:



The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.


The survey results: 42.3 percent strongly disagreed with this statement; 19.3 percent disagreed; 18.6 percent agreed; 7.6 percent strongly agreed; and 12.0 percent had no opinion. In one of the footnotes appearing in his thesis, Cunningham quotes comments placed by some of the Marines next to their answers to this question: "What about the damn Second Amendment? … I feel this is a first in communism! … Read the book None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen." "I would not even consider it. The reason we have guns is so that the people can overthrow the gov’t when or if the people think the gov’t is too powerful." "Freedom to bear arms is our Second Amendment. If you take our Amendments away then you can take this job and stick it where the sun don’t shine! … It is a right to own firearms for defense (2nd Amendment); I would fight for that right!"

Based on the disagreement expressed by 61 percent of the Marines, Cunningham concluded that "a complete unit breakdown would occur in a unit tasked to execute this mission."

http://jpfo.org/articles-assd/29palms-mcmanus.htm

Jerry
07-12-2012, 13:26
Pretty nutty - however, it is not the question asked by this thread.

Correct! :cool: That's why its posted separately from my/the previous post. I posted then went digging in my computer. I though I had save it but wasn't sure. Anyway, looks like there at it again. I could have give them the answer without them doing the survey. :whistling:

Now all will not join in the fun but most WILL FOLLOW ORDERS.

Lakota
07-12-2012, 13:47
series 1811, entry #21 and whomever else it may concern:

The intel that Navy SEALs are also carrier based fighter pilots was not extracted from the net or any email, it was told to me by my 30 years of service (late) uncle (twice shot down in Vietnam by SAM missiles and made it back via ground based SEALs he was in radio contact with) - a Navy SEAL Captain (equivalent to a full bird Colonel in all other branches of the service). I have read his unclassified military records which corroborate all of this and more, namely, he was also qualified for several types of helicopters and vertical ascending and descending fixed wing aircraft.

Why not just make contact with a ranking Naval Officer or maybe a Navy recruiter and learn for yourself instead of branding yourself with blind ignorance and an unfounded arrogant attitude on the net?

Bren: Thank you very much for your unexpected and entirely vigilant observation as to what this thread is and is not about.

Regarding the extensive list of would-be documented contradictions of this thread: have and intend nothing whatsoever to do with a national invasion and 'confiscation' of all firearms and ammo, by 'whomsoever'.

series 1811: I read all of your provided url http://jpfo.org/articles-assd/29palms-mcmanus.htm
For this reason I retract my chastizement of you:
"... branding yourself with blind ignorance and an unfounded arrogant attitude on the net?"

I commend and respect your political courage.

Post Script:
61% is a landslide victory in any election of magnitude.

:wavey:

Best regards,
- Lakota

GRIMLET
07-12-2012, 18:27
As has been stated, I believe what is being spoken of is the 29 Palms Survey.

Anyone that doesn't believe American troops would/will fire on Americans need a history lesson. When Vets went to Washington in the 30's asking for money promised them for fighting in the war (can't remember if if WW I or Spanish American) Patton had his troops attacked their camp. How about the collage students killed at Kent State during the demonstration in the 60's.

ATF and FBI killed woman and children a Ruby Ridge and Waco. Don't doubt for a minute that our own military and law enforcement agents will kill you if order to. After all they will just be following orders.

Edited to add:



Even if that law was unconstitutional, IE, disarm all citizens. There you go boys and girls the proof is in the pudding. :bringiton:



My dept would not accept unconstitutional laws. Trust me.
However, keep sounding like the Patriot Movement and find yourself being on THE LIST.....

You are being watched.....right now!!!!
Adjust your foil....they are reading your thoughts.......

SERIOUSLY, relax. Most cops are all about gun rights. Your best bet is to educate and inform others.

The MAN isn't going door to door. One will be singled out due to intel. It won't be a mass uprising.

expatman
07-12-2012, 19:02
Holy Cow! SEALS are not pilots. While it is possible for a person to be a "pinned" SEAL and later become/change his rating/reclass and then become one, it is not part of any TO&E. It would also be possible for a pilot to reclass and/or attend BUDS and achieve a rating as a SEAL. I think there is some honest confusion here about how it all works.

There are no personnel assigned as "SEAL aviators". Two totally different tasks as well as units. I work with former SEALS all day long (currently home on leave rotation). They would assuredly laugh in my face if I even asked them about this.

Hef
07-12-2012, 19:38
I think it's been about 8 years since I first read that. I saved a copy of it on my old desktop.

deadday
07-12-2012, 20:32
No, SEALs are not carrier based aviators. And, there probably aren't a half a dozen who have 30 years of service (most are lucky to do 20 years because of the physical demands). And, yeah, I know more than a few because of where I've worked.

Let me guess. That got sent to you in an e-mail, probably forwarded a hundred times before you got it, and with absolutely no idea of who actually wrote it or sent it orginally. It's okay to admit it. I already know.

The only way this could even be remotely possible would be that a SEAL was injured, then went to OCS (whatever the Navy equivalent is), and became a pilot. It most certainly would not be flying fighters, and even this scenario is sketchy as it would be pretty damned difficult to pass a flight physical with injuries that forced him out of NAVSPECWAR..

Jerry
07-12-2012, 21:16
My dept would not accept unconstitutional laws. Trust me.
However, keep sounding like the Patriot Movement and find yourself being on THE LIST.....

You are being watched.....right now!!!!
Adjust your foil....they are reading your thoughts.......

SERIOUSLY, relax. Most cops are all about gun rights. Your best bet is to educate and inform others.

The MAN isn't going door to door. One will be singled out due to intel. It won't be a mass uprising.

First I'm not worried about "a list". If there is one I'm already on it and could care less.

As to your department not accepting unconstitutional law... there in lies the rub. If The Obomination signs it into law your department WILL SAY its the law.... enforce it.

I gave my tinfoil hat to a friend and now I can hear all the chatter from the :ufo: :tongueout: :rofl:

Jerry
07-12-2012, 21:23
Holy Cow! SEALS are not pilots. While it is possible for a person to be a "pinned" SEAL and later become/change his rating/reclass and then become one, it is not part of any TO&E. It would also be possible for a pilot to reclass and/or attend BUDS and achieve a rating as a SEAL. I think there is some honest confusion here about how it all works.

There are no personnel assigned as "SEAL aviators". Two totally different tasks as well as units. I work with former SEALS all day long (currently home on leave rotation). They would assuredly laugh in my face if I even asked them about this.

Yah, but Rambo was a Green Barret and he did it all. Flew helos, drove tanks and not only American stuff but Russian stuff to. He's the man! :rofl:

Lakota
07-12-2012, 21:32
Dear espatman, and whomever else may be concerned:

Your's sounds like the most tenable resolution.
Uncle John (R.I.P.) was seen in full uniform by myself on only one occasion - just after the Persian Gulf War, in which he participated by way of deployment and landing LZs of Harriers (and other classified aircraft) from clear touraine and/or river & lake barges. He was a full Four Striper then; wearing a rich decoration of fruit salad, including aviator's wings, and, the 'Buds' brass denoting SEAL status which he'd earned years earlier; of whch he was very proud.

(For the uninitiated, the 'Buds' colloquialism refers to the brass Navy Seal icon, which somewhat resembles the 'Budweiser' emblem on the famous beer; though the beer icon does not feature Neptune's Trident of the SEAL icon.)

Thank you very much, espatman and all other contributors to & of this thread.

P.S.
I, myself was a Navy Coxswain beginning at age 17 through '58 to '62. Because I had considerable experience with fresh water boat handling in northern Minnesota, I escalated from Bowhook to Coxswain (Whaleboats, Gig, Launch & LCVP) very quickly, after making E-3 I did pass the E-4 test three times, but the rate was (frozen - no vacancies), due to the extant WW II vet Boatswain Mates from WW II.

I worked with what we then called 'UDT Frogmen' (now called SEALs) and Merc operatives, in Cuba, on classified recon missions just prior to the Bay of Pigs debacle. I was neither a SEAL nor 'merc' (mercenary) 'operative, but held 'command' (E-3) authority when they were doing recon from my LCVP.

Half of the thirty combat troops who deployed inland from my (triple canopy concealed, river ensconced) boat were ambushed and perished.

Castro's people knew where and when we would be - Allen Dulles was Director of C.I.A. then, and was compromised with Castro, the two of whom were running and otherwise trading and buying weapons and drugs. * JFK fired *Allen Dulles for compromising Cuban revolutionaries - including Che Guevera - (* Not to be confused with John Foster Dulles who was a good guy and Democratic Speaker of the House for 47 years).

* Notably, Allen Dulles was appointed among those who sat on the Warren Commission to determine the preposterously asserted, ongoing propaganda: that 'Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the murder of JFK.

Allen Dulles' treasonous motive in March and April of '61 (two months before the 6/'61 - 20/'61 Bay of Pigs 'incident' - not to be confused with the 'missile crisis' of 10/'62, where there was not a shot fired) was to insure that Cuba was not annexed, say, like Puerto Rico, since such U.S. annexation would deprive the drug & gun runners of free reign they enjoyed then (due to Cuba as a sovereign state and Soviet extension) and are still profiting from (across the mere 90 miles seperating Cuba from the souther tip of the Florida peninsula - especially Miami).

Upon informing 'upper' (by radio) that we were only about 20 yards from the fire-fight - we did not have a 'visual' on the enemy - due to very heavy foliage - and could not therefore back them up; while simultaneously under stringent orders not to leave the boat; such orders then issued: that we abandon all possible KIAs and WIAs. The remainder of the unit did that (on my boat, flying no colors, with the ID chipped off and painted over) on my boat.

After over fifty years, last March, then C.I.A. Director Leon E. Panetta accessed my classified/sealed records and thereby enabled the Bureau of Veterans Affairs to grant me 100% PTSD disability. Mister Panetta is now the recently promoted Secretary of Defense - I've known him since he was the 17th District Congressman, in '81. :wavey:

Best wishes,
- Lakota

expatman
07-12-2012, 22:28
Thank you for the short and interesting history lesson. I am very familiar with Leon Panetta as well as his replacement, Mr. Petraeus. In fact, I have served under Gen. Petraeus while assigned to the 504th and have met him in theater recently while working for my current company in a civilian capacity. I am sure there are others on this site whom may be similarly familiar with the afore mentioned gentlemen.

Thank you for your service.

The Fist Of Goodness
07-12-2012, 23:10
"More importantly, when did the Navy start training sea animals to fly?" - deadday, in post #8...

Apparently you are completely unaware - and with an attitude - about the fact that 'Aviator Seals' exist and furthermore, they are almost invariably stationed on aircraft carriers piloting combat fighter planes. :wavey: <!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

Dude. Seriously?

Navy SEALs do one thing, and Naval Aviators do another. They don't train super SEALs that fly F18s or drive Nuclear Subs. I am sure that there are former SEALs that have become Aviators, but they are not SEAL Aviators. It is one or the other.

The Fist Of Goodness
07-12-2012, 23:21
Dear espatman, and whomever else may be concerned:

Your's sounds like the most tenable resolution.
Uncle John (R.I.P.) was seen in full uniform by myself on only one occasion - just after the Persian Gulf War, in which he participated by way of deployment and landing LZs of Harriers (and other classified aircraft) from clear touraine and/or river & lake barges. He was a full Four Striper then; wearing a rich decoration of fruit salad, including aviator's wings, and, the 'Buds' brass denoting SEAL status which he'd earned years earlier; of whch he was very proud.

(For the uninitiated, the 'Buds' colloquialism refers to the brass Navy Seal icon, which somewhat resembles the 'Budweiser' emblem on the famous beer; though the beer icon does not feature Neptune's Trident of the SEAL icon.)

Thank you very much, espatman and all other contributors to & of this thread.

P.S.
I, myself was a Navy Coxswain beginning at age 17 through '58 to '62. Because I had considerable experience with fresh water boat handling in northern Minnesota, I escalated from Bowhook to Coxswain (Whaleboats, Gig, Launch & LCVP) very quickly, after making E-3 I did pass the E-4 test three times, but the rate was (frozen - no vacancies), due to the extant WW II vet Boatswain Mates from WW II.

I worked with what we then called 'UDT Frogmen' (now called SEALs) and Merc operatives, in Cuba, on classified recon missions just prior to the Bay of Pigs debacle. I was neither a SEAL nor 'merc' (mercenary) 'operative, but held 'command' (E-3) authority when they were doing recon from my LCVP.

Half of the thirty combat troops who deployed inland from my (triple canopy concealed, river ensconced) boat were ambushed and perished.

Castro's people knew where and when we would be - Allen Dulles was Director of C.I.A. then, and was compromised with Castro, the two of whom were running and otherwise trading and buying weapons and drugs. * JFK fired *Allen Dulles for compromising Cuban revolutionaries - including Che Guevera - (* Not to be confused with John Foster Dulles who was a good guy and Democratic Speaker of the House for 47 years).

* Notably, Allen Dulles was appointed among those who sat on the Warren Commission to determine the preposterously asserted, ongoing propaganda: that 'Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the murder of JFK.

Allen Dulles' treasonous motive in March and April of '61 (two months before the 6/'61 - 20/'61 Bay of Pigs 'incident' - not to be confused with the 'missile crisis' of 10/'62, where there was not a shot fired) was to insure that Cuba was not annexed, say, like Puerto Rico, since such U.S. annexation would deprive the drug & gun runners of free reign they enjoyed then (due to Cuba as a sovereign state and Soviet extension) and are still profiting from (across the mere 90 miles seperating Cuba from the souther tip of the Florida peninsula - especially Miami).

Upon informing 'upper' (by radio) that we were only about 20 yards from the fire-fight - we did not have a 'visual' on the enemy - due to very heavy foliage - and could not therefore back them up; while simultaneously under stringent orders not to leave the boat; such orders then issued: that we abandon all possible KIAs and WIAs. The remainder of the unit did that (on my boat, flying no colors, with the ID chipped off and painted over) on my boat.

After over fifty years, last March, then C.I.A. Director Leon E. Panetta accessed my classified/sealed records and thereby enabled the Bureau of Veterans Affairs to grant me 100% PTSD disability. Mister Panetta is now the recently promoted Secretary of Defense - I've known him since he was the 17th District Congressman, in '81. :wavey:

Best wishes,
- Lakota

So, you landed troops (UDT/SEALs?) in Cuba before the Bay Of Pigs, and half that force was wiped out? You were then ordered to abandon the dead, and remaining wounded?

Leon Panetta then unsealed your super secret records 50 years later?

Lakota
07-12-2012, 23:37
Dear mb5417:

Yes. :wavey:

Best wishes,
- Lakota

dpadams6
07-13-2012, 06:54
The survey wasn't recent. And it was very poorly received by the troops, because for every Bren who would mow us down without reservations, theres a soldier ready to shoot him in the back and protect us. I say this with such certainty because this specific topic has come up before both online and in person, and theres a lot of soldiers who have given both answers.

Your screen name. Lol lol lol. Thanks. I laughed my a$@ off.

Bren
07-13-2012, 07:19
The survey wasn't recent. And it was very poorly received by the troops, because for every Bren who would mow us down without reservations, theres a soldier ready to shoot him in the back and protect us. I say this with such certainty because this specific topic has come up before both online and in person, and theres a lot of soldiers who have given both answers.

Did you see the thread on "straw man arguments"? You should study it, because this entire thread, and your response, are examples. I doubt I've ever met a soldier who would refuse to shoot someone just because they are an "American citizen," as is the subject here.

As I mentioned - if you carry a concealed weapon, then aren't you also willing to shoot American citizens?

Chesafreak
07-13-2012, 07:59
I wouldn't listen to anything a "Navy Aviator Seal" says because those don't exist. I recently retired from Navy Aviation, and the helo squadrons I worked in flew SEALS and EOD among other missions. I also have known two SEALS.

The only possibility that comes close is if they guy has the EAWS (Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist) pin or was an aircrewman before going SEAL. That still wouldn't make him an aviator SEAL. Officers who are pilots or NFO's are usually referred to as Aviators, enlisted as Aircrew. And no, if you were a pilot, they aren't going to let you change over to special warfare. They don't put that much money into your training to be an aviator just to let you switch.

I wouldn't trust this guy. Any chance you could get a picture of his shadowbox for us so we can see his warfare pins and insignias?

Bren
07-13-2012, 09:45
I wouldn't listen to anything a "Navy Aviator Seal" says because those don't exist. I recently retired from Navy Aviation, and the helo squadrons I worked in flew SEALS and EOD among other missions. I also have known two SEALS.

The only possibility that comes close is if they guy has the EAWS (Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist) pin or was an aircrewman before going SEAL. That still wouldn't make him an aviator SEAL. Officers who are pilots or NFO's are usually referred to as Aviators, enlisted as Aircrew. And no, if you were a pilot, they aren't going to let you change over to special warfare. They don't put that much money into your training to be an aviator just to let you switch.

I wouldn't trust this guy. Any chance you could get a picture of his shadowbox for us so we can see his warfare pins and insignias?

Considering the OP claims he was the guy driving the boat at the Bay of Pigs invasion, this could all be a CIA disinformation campaign.:whistling:

The Fist Of Goodness
07-13-2012, 09:47
Considering the OP claims he was the guy driving the boat at the Bay of Pigs invasion, this could all be a CIA disinformation campaign.:whistling:

Don't forget that Leon Panetta personally intervened to unseal his records.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

deadday
07-13-2012, 10:29
And they ratedyou a100SoDear espatman, and whomever else may be concerned:

Your's sounds like the most tenable resolution.
Uncle John (R.I.P.) was seen in full uniform by myself on only one occasion - just after the Persian Gulf War, in which he participated by way of deployment and landing LZs of Harriers (and other classified aircraft) from clear touraine and/or river & lake barges. He was a full Four Striper then; wearing a rich decoration of fruit salad, including aviator's wings, and, the 'Buds' brass denoting SEAL status which he'd earned years earlier; of whch he was very proud.
1. ...and landing LZs of Harriers? What the hell does thatevenmean, are you just throwing random words together? 2. The only classified a/c at the time bel0nged to the Air Force. 3. Not only was he SEAL pilot, he was an enlisted SEAL pilot? The Navy ended the enlisted pilot program in 1948, the last product of that program retired in 1981.
(For the uninitiated, the 'Buds' colloquialism refers to the brass Navy Seal icon, which somewhat resembles the 'Budweiser' emblem on the famous beer; though the beer icon does not feature Neptune's Trident of the SEAL icon.)
No it doesn't. It is not now, nor has it ever been called a 'Buds'. It is called a budweiser. BUD/S refers to the first school prospective SEALs attend, Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL.
Thank you very much, espatman and all other contributors to & of this thread.

P.S.
I, myself was a Navy Coxswain beginning at age 17 through '58 to '62. Because I had considerable experience with fresh water boat handling in northern Minnesota, I escalated from Bowhook to Coxswain (Whaleboats, Gig, Launch & LCVP) very quickly, after making E-3 I did pass the E-4 test three times, but the rate was (frozen - no vacancies), due to the extant WW II vet Boatswain Mates from WW II.

I worked with what we then called 'UDT Frogmen' (now called SEALs) and Merc operatives, in Cuba, on classified recon missions just prior to the Bay of Pigs debacle. I was neither a SEAL nor 'merc' (mercenary) 'operative, but held 'command' (E-3) authority when they were doing recon from my LCVP.

Half of the thirty combat troops who deployed inland from my (triple canopy concealed, river ensconced) boat were ambushed and perished.

Castro's people knew where and when we would be - Allen Dulles was Director of C.I.A. then, and was compromised with Castro, the two of whom were running and otherwise trading and buying weapons and drugs. * JFK fired *Allen Dulles for compromising Cuban revolutionaries - including Che Guevera - (* Not to be confused with John Foster Dulles who was a good guy and Democratic Speaker of the House for 47 years).

* Notably, Allen Dulles was appointed among those who sat on the Warren Commission to determine the preposterously asserted, ongoing propaganda: that 'Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the murder of JFK.

Allen Dulles' treasonous motive in March and April of '61 (two months before the 6/'61 - 20/'61 Bay of Pigs 'incident' - not to be confused with the 'missile crisis' of 10/'62, where there was not a shot fired) was to insure that Cuba was not annexed, say, like Puerto Rico, since such U.S. annexation would deprive the drug & gun runners of free reign they enjoyed then (due to Cuba as a sovereign state and Soviet extension) and are still profiting from (across the mere 90 miles seperating Cuba from the souther tip of the Florida peninsula - especially Miami).

Upon informing 'upper' (by radio) that we were only about 20 yards from the fire-fight - we did not have a 'visual' on the enemy - due to very heavy foliage - and could not therefore back them up; while simultaneously under stringent orders not to leave the boat; such orders then issued: that we abandon all possible KIAs and WIAs. The remainder of the unit did that (on my boat, flying no colors, with the ID chipped off and painted over) on my boat.

After over fifty years, last March, then C.I.A. Director Leon E. Panetta accessed my classified/sealed records and thereby enabled the Bureau of Veterans Affairs to grant me 100% PTSD disability. Mister Panetta is now the recently promoted Secretary of Defense - I've known him since he was the 17th District Congressman, in '81. :wavey:

Best wishes,
- Lakota

Panetta personally accessed your classified/sealed records after over 50 years so that you could file a VA claim? And they rated you 100% due to PTSD? So you don't own any firearms, right? Because a 100% PTSD rating means you cannot own/purchase/possess due to the fact that there is a persistent danger of you hurting yourself or others. And you're unable find/hold a job, right? Because of the persistent hallucinations and delusions along with your grossly inappropriate behavior of course..

Jerry
07-13-2012, 12:17
Did I ever tell you guys that I knew I guy who's brother dated a girl who knew the cousin of a doctor who treated a seal for a harpoon wound? I believe he said the seal got harpooned during the Normand invasion. Or maybe it was Guam. :dunno:

Lakota
07-13-2012, 14:57
"Panetta personally accessed your classified/sealed records after over 50 years so that you could file a VA claim? And they rated you 100% due to PTSD? So you don't own any firearms, right? Because a 100% PTSD rating means you cannot own/purchase/possess due to the fact that there is a persistent danger of you hurting yourself or others. And you're unable find/hold a job, right? Because of the persistent hallucinations and delusions along with your grossly inappropriate behavior of course.."

********************************

The issue of personal responsibility "competence' and autonomy has been subjected many times by various individuals and institutions, since PTSD became a medical and academic part of the educational cirriculum, since 1981, where a few pages addressing it can be found in *DSM I - IV (*Disorder Symptoms Manual), it is has been known for centuries, perhaps millennia, that persons who've absorbed or othewise witnessed or experienced severe physical and/or psychological trauma exhibit symptoms of depression, disturbed sleep, flash & panic attacks, etceteras.

Your assertion that individuals diagnosed with 100% PTSD cannot own or carry firearms, due to PTSD is patently incorrect. Those who seek confirmation of this are invited to allude to the expertise of care-givers who hold Master's degrees and Ph.Ds on this new medical science (since '81).

Thousands of military and police personnel are so diagnosed and maintain their right to keep and bear arms - this includes high ranking government officials.

If and when an individual is diagnosed as 'incompetent' and/or a threat to self and others, then their right to keep and/or bear arms is nullified.

Moreover, in this thread, the issue of CCWs 'shooting civilians' has come up several times, whereas, such isolated actions are stringently scrutinized and the same evaluation and circumspection of whether or not such incidents are justified by reasonable grounds of 'self defense' and/or 'protecting the lives of others' is applied to LEOs (and high ranking government officials diagnosed with 100% PTSD) just as they are CCWs: none of these kinds of diversions from the issues of this thread are cogent or otherwise germane to the featured subject of a scenario of American military waging what amounts to anti-Constitutional war upon law abiding citizens.

Note the date on the below DD 215 document (September 1985) - a quarter century after the covert/then classified event it confirms - having been excluded from my DD 214, along with a host of other awards, citations, etceteras. My unit was doing reconnaissance (by international law, we were all 'pirates', literally) in preparation for the failed Bay of Pigs, for the reasons previously provided in this thread.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/mb/at.asp?webtag=Kaidupuppy&guid=89AB9BB9-3516-47D3-AA58-39D0EBC70B2B&frames=no


<TABLE style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-SPACING: 2px; WIDTH: 315px; FONT-SIZE: 90%" class=infobox><TBODY><TR><TH style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #b0c4de; VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle" colSpan=2>Navy Expeditionary Medal</TH></TR><TR><TD style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.5em; FONT-SIZE: 90%" colSpan=2>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/Navexpmed_front.jpg/125px-Navexpmed_front.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Navexpmed_front.jpg)</TD></TR><TR><TD style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #b0c4de; VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle" colSpan=2>Awarded by United States Navy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy)</TD></TR><TR><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 1em; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Type</TD><TD>Medal</TD></TR><TR><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 1em; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Awarded for</TD><TD>"awarded to the officers and enlisted men of the Navy and Marine Corps who shall have actually landed on foreign territory and engaged in operations against armed opposition, or operated under circumstances which, after full consideration, shall be deemed to merit special recognition and for which service no campaign medal has been awarded."</TD></TR><TR><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 1em; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Status</TD><TD>Currently Awarded</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/Navexpmed_front.jpg/314px-Navexpmed_front.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Navexpmed_front.jpg)

<TABLE style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-SPACING: 2px; WIDTH: 315px; FONT-SIZE: 95%" class=infobox><TBODY><TR><TH style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; BACKGROUND: lightsteelblue" colSpan=2>Boatswain's Mate</TH></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Below is the 'Cross of Malta' icon of the VFW, of which I have been a member (Chief Warrant Security Officer, Ordained Chaplain) since 1981; then, under the sponsorship of congressman Leon E. Panetta, since he had yet to ascend from congressman to White House Chief of Staff, to C.I.A. Director, enabling him to access otherwise classified information, which has since then been 'declassified', though the mainstream media isn't talking about the mortal loss of scores if not hundreds of Americans, contingent to their presence and perishment in Cuba, prior to and during the Bay of Pigs - where the continuing cover up and denial is that 'their were no Americans in the Bay of Pigs'.

Presently I am preoccupied to learn the names of the other losses (whose families were told they were 'lost at sea'), and thereby authorize a Memorial in Washington, D. C.

http://www.smom-za.org/images/vfwcros2.gif

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"></TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>317.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/Kaidupuppy/messages?msg=317.1) </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD id=msgtxt_1 class=msgtxt>Dated, 24 September 1985
http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy90/Kaiduorkhon/Scanpg372-1.jpg?t=1258868898

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


:wavey:

Best regards,
- Lakota
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

TactiCool
07-13-2012, 15:20
If what you say is true, why on earth would post any detail at all of your personal service history on a gun forum? I know a couple individuals who did spooky stuff for 3-letter agencies and they would never even talk about it to people they trusted, let alone post it on the interwebs for the whole world to see. That's just plum crazy IMO.

NMG26
07-13-2012, 15:34
Best regards,
- Lakota
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

:wow::supergrin: They can eat crow. Game looks good to me.

t4terrific
07-13-2012, 16:05
As a leo I would defend myself from bodily harm, or others, to include deadly force while upholding the law.
veryone knows "LEO's" kill Americans for many reasons.

The Fist Of Goodness
07-13-2012, 18:40
:wow::supergrin: They can eat crow. Game looks good to me.

I'll admit to skepticism about Lakota's story. His writing style, and the use of terms like Navy Seal Aviator, the presumably classified information in his posts, and name dropping Panetta certainly conform to the type of things the posers and tin foil hat wearers say (I was reminded of a guy who used to write letters to me asking for assistance with his troubles with George Bush (41) and the Prince of the Mafia).

It appears that Lakota is a Navy vet, (and he isn't claiming to be a super secret SEAL, just involved in a classified operation) and the ship he served on was in the area of Cuba in the early 60's. I don't know if UDT/SEALs were involved in the Bay of Pigs operations, but they did infiltrate Cuba (read First Seal by Roy Boehm) during the missile crisis, and were landed by ship or sub, which would involve their crews. I also don't know if they sustained any casualties in Cuba, but it is certainly possible.

It's a shame that the posers have made it impossible to know when someone is telling the truth. There were some truly hairy operations during the cold war, and many of the participants have never come forward. I hope Lakota is one of the real ones.

deadday
07-13-2012, 19:18
"Panetta personally accessed your classified/sealed records after over 50 years so that you could file a VA claim? And they rated you 100% due to PTSD? So you don't own any firearms, right? Because a 100% PTSD rating means you cannot own/purchase/possess due to the fact that there is a persistent danger of you hurting yourself or others. And you're unable find/hold a job, right? Because of the persistent hallucinations and delusions along with your grossly inappropriate behavior of course.."

********************************

The issue of personal responsibility "competence' and autonomy ha7s been subjected many times by various individuals and institutions, since PTSD became a medical and academic part of the educational cirriculum, since 1981, where a few pages addressing it can be found in *DSM I - IV (*Disorder Symptoms Manual), it is has been known for centuries, perhaps millennia, that persons who've absorbed or othewise witnessed or experienced severe physical and/or psychological trauma exhibit symptoms of depression, disturbed sleep, flash & panic attacks, etceteras.

Your assertion that individuals diagnosed with 100% PTSD cannot own or carry firearms, due to PTSD is patently incorrect. Those who seek confirmation of this are invited to allude to the expertise of care-givers who hold Master's degrees and Ph.Ds on this new medical science (since '81).

Thousands of military and police personnel are so diagnosed and maintain their right to keep and bear arms - this includes high ranking government officials.

If and when an individual is diagnosed as 'incompetent' and/or a threat to self and others, then their right to keep and/or bear arms is nullified.

Moreover, in this thread, the issue of CCWs 'shooting civilians' has come up several times, whereas, such isolated actions are stringently scrutinized and the same evaluation and circumspection of whether or not such incidents are justified by reasonable grounds of 'self defense' and/or 'protecting the lives of others' is applied to LEOs (and high ranking government officials diagnosed with 100% PTSD) just as they are CCWs: none of these kinds of diversions from the issues of this thread are cogent or otherwise germane to the featured subject of a scenario of American military waging what amounts to anti-Constitutional war upon law abiding citizens.

Note the date on the below DD 215 document (September 1985) - a quarter century after the covert/then classified event it confirms - having been excluded from my DD 214, along with a host of other awards, citations, etceteras. My unit was doing reconnaissance (by international law, we were all 'pirates', literally) in preparation for the failed Bay of Pigs, for the reasons previously provided in this thread.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/mb/at.asp?webtag=Kaidupuppy&guid=89AB9BB9-3516-47D3-AA58-39D0EBC70B2B&frames=no


<TABLE style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-SPACING: 2px; WIDTH: 315px; FONT-SIZE: 90%" class=infobox><TBODY><TR><TH style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #b0c4de; VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle" colSpan=2>Navy Expeditionary Medal</TH></TR><TR><TD style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; LINE-HEIGHT: 1.5em; FONT-SIZE: 90%" colSpan=2>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/Navexpmed_front.jpg/125px-Navexpmed_front.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Navexpmed_front.jpg)</TD></TR><TR><TD style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #b0c4de; VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle" colSpan=2>Awarded by United States Navy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy)</TD></TR><TR><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 1em; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Type</TD><TD>Medal</TD></TR><TR><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 1em; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Awarded for</TD><TD>"awarded to the officers and enlisted men of the Navy and Marine Corps who shall have actually landed on foreign territory and engaged in operations against armed opposition, or operated under circumstances which, after full consideration, shall be deemed to merit special recognition and for which service no campaign medal has been awarded."</TD></TR><TR><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 1em; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Status</TD><TD>Currently Awarded</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/Navexpmed_front.jpg/314px-Navexpmed_front.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Navexpmed_front.jpg)

<TABLE style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-SPACING: 2px; WIDTH: 315px; FONT-SIZE: 95%" class=infobox><TBODY><TR><TH style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; BACKGROUND: lightsteelblue" colSpan=2>Boatswain's Mate</TH></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Below is the 'Cross of Malta' icon of the VFW, of which I have been a member (Chief Warrant Security Officer, Ordained Chaplain) since 1981; then, under the sponsorship of congressman Leon E. Panetta, since he had yet to ascend from congressman to White House Chief of Staff, to C.I.A. Director, enabling him to access otherwise classified information, which has since then been 'declassified', though the mainstream media isn't talking about the mortal loss of scores if not hundreds of Americans, contingent to their presence and perishment in Cuba, prior to and during the Bay of Pigs - where the continuing cover up and denial is that 'their were no Americans in the Bay of Pigs'.

Presently I am preoccupied to learn the names of the other losses (whose families were told they were 'lost at sea'), and thereby authorize a Memorial in Washington, D. C.

http://www.smom-za.org/images/vfwcros2.gif

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"></TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>317.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/Kaidupuppy/messages?msg=317.1) </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD id=msgtxt_1 class=msgtxt>Dated, 24 September 1985
http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy90/Kaiduorkhon/Scanpg372-1.jpg?t=1258868898

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


:wavey:

Best regards,
- Lakota
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

The people with the masters and doctoral degrees are the ones that wrote the VASRD which I was quoting...

And you failed to address anything else I mentioned...

I won't waste the time pointing out all of the stupid in what you just posted, let's stick with the enlisted SEAL aviator, then we'll get back to your secret squirrel days during the BoP incident and you 100% PTSD rating

expatman
07-13-2012, 22:49
I will admit. The Enlisted SEAL aviator thing still bugs me.

Lakota
07-14-2012, 01:03
deadday: "The people with the masters and doctoral degrees are the ones that wrote the VASRD which I was quoting... (So, what is your point of contention here?what 'quote' of yours do you allude to?)

And you failed to address anything else I mentioned...

(Please make your case regarding your proclamation that I 'failed to address anything else you mentioned', what purported remission are you referencing here?)


I won't waste the time pointing out all of the stupid in what you just posted (You allege 'all of the stupid' and that your 'won't waste your time pointing it out' : Please make your - notably skipped over - case: once again you are obliged to clarify what you vacantly allude to), let's stick with the enlisted SEAL aviator, then we'll get back to your secret squirrel days during the BoP incident and you 100% PTSD rating.

There is no mention of any 'enlisted SEAL aviator' in any of my posts, consequently you are (consistently) obliged to fulfill your redundantly vacant intention of "then we'll get back to your secret squirrel days during the BoP incident" - never mind your 'squirrel', or plural usage of "then we'll get back"; it's your singularly self-imposed objective to 'get back to' the mystery of what you're referring to, all by yourself; since that information has already been abundantly conveyed by Truly Yours in the preceding posts in this thread, while some entries have rolled out, augered in and evasively reduced this seriatim dialogue to criticisms of grammar, vocabulary and word usage.

Your monologue - and that of several others in this thread - reveals a pattern of casting flaming - off topic - issue-diverting aspersions ('The first method of war is deception'. - Sun Tzu); ignoring or nullifying forensic evidence, while asserting unsubstantiated argument(s) and making conspicuously fictitious statements and bankrupt predictions as though they are true and/or tenable.

"Sometimes a constructive argument may become the unwelcome realisation that unwarranted aggression reveals the vulnerability of those who practise it." - R.D. Laing

<HR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000; COLOR: #000000" SIZE=1>
Last edited by deadday; Today at 19:47..
_________________________________________________
<!-- / edit note -->
I will *admit. The Enlisted SEAL aviator thing still bugs me.

Your *'admission' is duely noted, expatman. Both you and deadday are consequently and mutually obliged to point out whenever and wherever I alluded to or otherwise subjected an 'Enlisted SEAL aviator' in this thread.

As this content is presented, it appears that deadday prefers his potatoes under his gravey, while expatman innovatively chooses gravey over his potatoes. :wavey:


Best regards,
- Lakota

deadday
07-14-2012, 05:21
Post 35 hoss. You referred to him as an aviator SEAL, then you mention he is a four-striper referring to Navy rank....

Bren
07-14-2012, 06:50
I'll admit to skepticism about Lakota's story. His writing style, and the use of terms like Navy Seal Aviator, the presumably classified information in his posts, and name dropping Panetta certainly conform to the type of things the posers and tin foil hat wearers say (I was reminded of a guy who used to write letters to me asking for assistance with his troubles with George Bush (41) and the Prince of the Mafia).

It appears that Lakota is a Navy vet, (and he isn't claiming to be a super secret SEAL, just involved in a classified operation) and the ship he served on was in the area of Cuba in the early 60's. I don't know if UDT/SEALs were involved in the Bay of Pigs operations, but they did infiltrate Cuba (read First Seal by Roy Boehm) during the missile crisis, and were landed by ship or sub, which would involve their crews. I also don't know if they sustained any casualties in Cuba, but it is certainly possible.

It's a shame that the posers have made it impossible to know when someone is telling the truth. There were some truly hairy operations during the cold war, and many of the participants have never come forward. I hope Lakota is one of the real ones.

I agree with you. Lakota's story sounded like a poser, but he gave a good explanation and I am tempted to buy it.

The only questions I still have are
(1) why the service dates on the USS Great Sitkin are a month after the Bay of Pigs invasion (happened in April, 1961). Lakota claimed to have been there before, and possibly during, the invasion.

(2) Why it's the USS Great Sitkin, which was apparently involved in the Cuban missile crisis blockade in 1962, but not the Bay of Pigs invasion.

GRIMLET
07-14-2012, 09:48
My father in law was a UDT/SEAL back in the 60's.
There was a recent documentation thing for retirees and he found his records had been cleansed of certain things. The VA rep told him he had a few guys from special ops with the same problem.

I am not making a comment on Lakotas posts.

I am stating the government appeared to wash some of its laundry.

expatman
07-14-2012, 11:34
Dear espatman, and whomever else may be concerned:

Your's sounds like the most tenable resolution.
Uncle John (R.I.P.) was seen in full uniform by myself on only one occasion - just after the Persian Gulf War, in which he participated by way of deployment and landing LZs of Harriers (and other classified aircraft) from clear touraine and/or river & lake barges. He was a full Four Striper then; wearing a rich decoration of fruit salad, including aviator's wings, and, the 'Buds' brass denoting SEAL status which he'd earned years earlier; of whch he was very proud.

(For the uninitiated, the 'Buds' colloquialism refers to the brass Navy Seal icon, which somewhat resembles the 'Budweiser' emblem on the famous beer; though the beer icon does not feature Neptune's Trident of the SEAL icon.)

Thank you very much, espatman and all other contributors to & of this thread.

P.S.
I, myself was a Navy Coxswain beginning at age 17 through '58 to '62. Because I had considerable experience with fresh water boat handling in northern Minnesota, I escalated from Bowhook to Coxswain (Whaleboats, Gig, Launch & LCVP) very quickly, after making E-3 I did pass the E-4 test three times, but the rate was (frozen - no vacancies), due to the extant WW II vet Boatswain Mates from WW II.

I worked with what we then called 'UDT Frogmen' (now called SEALs) and Merc operatives, in Cuba, on classified recon missions just prior to the Bay of Pigs debacle. I was neither a SEAL nor 'merc' (mercenary) 'operative, but held 'command' (E-3) authority when they were doing recon from my LCVP.

Half of the thirty combat troops who deployed inland from my (triple canopy concealed, river ensconced) boat were ambushed and perished.

Castro's people knew where and when we would be - Allen Dulles was Director of C.I.A. then, and was compromised with Castro, the two of whom were running and otherwise trading and buying weapons and drugs. * JFK fired *Allen Dulles for compromising Cuban revolutionaries - including Che Guevera - (* Not to be confused with John Foster Dulles who was a good guy and Democratic Speaker of the House for 47 years).

* Notably, Allen Dulles was appointed among those who sat on the Warren Commission to determine the preposterously asserted, ongoing propaganda: that 'Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the murder of JFK.

Allen Dulles' treasonous motive in March and April of '61 (two months before the 6/'61 - 20/'61 Bay of Pigs 'incident' - not to be confused with the 'missile crisis' of 10/'62, where there was not a shot fired) was to insure that Cuba was not annexed, say, like Puerto Rico, since such U.S. annexation would deprive the drug & gun runners of free reign they enjoyed then (due to Cuba as a sovereign state and Soviet extension) and are still profiting from (across the mere 90 miles seperating Cuba from the souther tip of the Florida peninsula - especially Miami).

Upon informing 'upper' (by radio) that we were only about 20 yards from the fire-fight - we did not have a 'visual' on the enemy - due to very heavy foliage - and could not therefore back them up; while simultaneously under stringent orders not to leave the boat; such orders then issued: that we abandon all possible KIAs and WIAs. The remainder of the unit did that (on my boat, flying no colors, with the ID chipped off and painted over) on my boat.

After over fifty years, last March, then C.I.A. Director Leon E. Panetta accessed my classified/sealed records and thereby enabled the Bureau of Veterans Affairs to grant me 100% PTSD disability. Mister Panetta is now the recently promoted Secretary of Defense - I've known him since he was the 17th District Congressman, in '81. :wavey:

Best wishes,
- Lakota

I added the bold to the part I am curious about.

Regards:wavey:

Lakota
07-14-2012, 17:34
deadday:

A 'four striper' is a Navy Captain (Equivalent to a full bird Colonel in all other services. 'Four striper alludes to the four gold stripes on a Navy Captains sleeve. His collar devise is an eagle, as that of all other 'bird Colonels.

Ask any Sailor, which obviously you are not.

Is this where the 'enlisted SEAL Aviator' barb originates? (Twice)?

Bren:
You fault 'name dropping Panetta'. How could I not mention him while making statements that were questioned:

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR sizcache012713432759695825="0"><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%" nodeIndex="1"></TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right nodeIndex="2">317.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/Kaidupuppy/messages?msg=317.1) </TD></TR><TR sizcache012713432759695825="0"><TD height=8 nodeIndex="1"></TD></TR><TR sizcache012713432759695825="0"><TD id=msgtxt_1 class=msgtxt nodeIndex="1">Dated, 24 September 1985
<TABLE id=ncode_imageresizer_warning_1 class=ncode_imageresizer_warning width=525><TBODY><TR><TD class=td1 width=20>http://glocktalk.com/forums/images/statusicon/wol_error.gif</TD><TD class=td2 unselectable="on"></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy90/Kaiduorkhon/Scanpg372-1.jpg?t=1258868898 (http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy90/Kaiduorkhon/Scanpg372-1.jpg?t=1258868898)

Bren: The only questions I still have are
(1) why the service dates on the USS Great Sitkin are a month after the Bay of Pigs invasion (happened in April, 1961). Lakota claimed to have been there before, and possibly during, the invasion.

You allege that the BoP invasion happened in April, 1961, while the fact of the matter is that it's chronological event window is May 6 to May 26 as plainly documented in the above letter to Panetta, from the Navy Department.

I was in indeed in and around major portions of the island of Cuba, before the invasion, doing reconaissance in preparation for the May 6 to May 26 invasion window.


(2) Why it's the USS Great Sitkin, which was apparently involved in the Cuban missile crisis blockade in 1962, but not the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Bren:
The immediate above question is officially answered in the provided document, (received in September of '85). My Expeditionary accredation was for the Bay of Pigs, May 6th - May 26th - my honorable discharge was 13 July '62 - about three months before the so called 'missile crisis'.



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
(2) Why it's the USS Great Sitkin, which was apparently involved in the Cuban missile crisis blockade in 1962, but not the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Bren:
Why do you ask the above question?
_______________________________________

expatman: You said you highlighted the Bold excerpt from my previous missive because you are 'curious about that' ('bold part' below):
* JFK fired *Allen Dulles for compromising Cuban revolutionaries - including Che Guevera - (* Not to be confused with his brother, John Foster Dulles who was a good guy and Democratic Speaker of the House for 47 years).

Apparently you are unaware of the history of the firing of Allen Dulles by JFK - for compromising the BoP invasion, and the later appointment of him (Allen Dulles) to chair in the Warren Commission which determined that 'Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone', in thetriangulated murder of JFK.

Misinformation, misunderstaning and argument for its own sake emerges prevalent in the this superfluously continuing skunk fight.


Is it resolved yet? :wavey:


Post Script:
Readers are cordially invited to access and read a 'faction story'
(fiction based on fact) approximating the issues of this thread.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/waboose2/

****************************

The following urls are for whomever chooses to consider them.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/42821561/Total-Field-Theory (http://www.scribd.com/doc/42821561/Total-Field-Theory)
***********

<A href="http://forums.delphiforums.com/mollyspup" target=_blank>http://forums.delphiforums.com/mollyspup (http://forums.delphiforums.com/mollyspup/messages/?msg=2.1)/messages/?msg=2.1

TV THAT WATCHES YOU
**************
http://forums.delphiforums.com/DemureDragon/messages/?msg=2.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/DemureDragon/messages/?msg=2.1)
HAPPY NEW YEAR: 1968
*************
<A href="http://forums.delphiforums.com/charlie1968/messages/?msg=3.1" target=_blank>http://forums.delphiforums.com/charlie1968/messages/?msg=3.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/charlie1968/messages/?msg=3.1)
Old Spice & Napalm - Hollywood & Vietnam
__________________________________________

Best regards,
- Lakota


<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

NMG26
07-14-2012, 17:44
Misinformation, misunderstaning and argument for its own sake emerges prevalent in the this superfluously continuing skunk fight. :wavey:

Best regards,
- Lakota


<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->


Best skunk fight I have read in a while. Keep it up!

deadday
07-14-2012, 18:29
deadday:

a 'four striper' is a navy captain (equivalent to a full bird colonel in all other services. 'four striper alludes to the four gold stripes on a navy captains sleeve. His collar devise is an eagle, as that of all other 'bird colonels.

Ask any sailor, which obviously you are not.

Is this where the 'enlisted seal aviator' barb originates? (twice)?

yup, i'm a soldier not a sailor, and stripes to me mean nco, my apologies. Now we're just left hashing out how he was a seal and an aviator.

bren:
you fault 'name dropping panetta'. How could i not mention him while making statements that were questioned:

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 width="100%"><tbody><tr sizcache012713432759695825="0"><td class=msgleft rowspan=4 width="1%" nodeindex="1"></td><td class=wintiny nowrap align=right nodeindex="2">317.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/kaidupuppy/messages?msg=317.1) </td></tr><tr sizcache012713432759695825="0"><td height=8 nodeindex="1"></td></tr><tr sizcache012713432759695825="0"><td id=msgtxt_1 class=msgtxt nodeindex="1">dated, 24 september 1985
<table id=ncode_imageresizer_warning_1 class=ncode_imageresizer_warning width=525><tbody><tr><td class=td1 width=20>http://glocktalk.com/forums/images/statusicon/wol_error.gif</td><td class=td2 unselectable="on"></td></tr></tbody></table>http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy90/kaiduorkhon/scanpg372-1.jpg?t=1258868898 (http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy90/kaiduorkhon/scanpg372-1.jpg?t=1258868898)

bren: the only questions i still have are
(1) why the service dates on the uss great sitkin are a month after the bay of pigs invasion (happened in april, 1961). Lakota claimed to have been there before, and possibly during, the invasion.

you allege that the bop invasion happened in april, 1961, while the fact of the matter is that it's chronological event window is may 6 to may 26 as plainly documented in the above letter to panetta, from the navy department.

i was in indeed in and around major portions of the island of cuba, before the invasion, doing reconaissance in preparation for the may 6 to may 26 invasion window.


(2) why it's the uss great sitkin, which was apparently involved in the cuban missile crisis blockade in 1962, but not the bay of pigs invasion.

bren:
the immediate above question is officially answered in the provided document, (received in september of '85). My expeditionary accredation was for the bay of pigs, may 6th - may 26th - my honorable discharge was 13 july '62 - about three months before the so called 'missile crisis'.



</td></tr></tbody></table>
(2) why it's the uss great sitkin, which was apparently involved in the cuban missile crisis blockade in 1962, but not the bay of pigs invasion.

bren:
why do you ask the above question?
_______________________________________

expatman: you said you highlighted the bold excerpt from my previous missive because you are 'curious about that' ('bold part' below):
* jfk fired *allen dulles for compromising cuban revolutionaries - including che guevera - (* not to be confused with his brother, john foster dulles who was a good guy and democratic speaker of the house for 47 years).

apparently you are unaware of the history of the firing of allen dulles by jfk - for compromising the bop invasion, and the later appointment of him (allen dulles) to chair in the warren commission which determined that 'lee harvey oswald acted alone', in thetriangulated murder of jfk.

misinformation, misunderstaning and argument for its own sake emerges prevalent in the this superfluously continuing skunk fight.


is it resolved yet? :wavey:


post script:
readers are cordially invited to access and read a 'faction story'
(fiction based on fact) approximating the issues of this thread.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/waboose2/

****************************

the following urls are for whomever chooses to consider them.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/42821561/total-field-theory (http://www.scribd.com/doc/42821561/total-field-theory)
***********

<a href="http://forums.delphiforums.com/mollyspup" target=_blank>http://forums.delphiforums.com/mollyspup (http://forums.delphiforums.com/mollyspup/messages/?msg=2.1)/messages/?msg=2.1

tv that watches you
**************
http://forums.delphiforums.com/demuredragon/messages/?msg=2.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/demuredragon/messages/?msg=2.1)
happy new year: 1968
*************
<a href="http://forums.delphiforums.com/charlie1968/messages/?msg=3.1" target=_blank>http://forums.delphiforums.com/charlie1968/messages/?msg=3.1 (http://forums.delphiforums.com/charlie1968/messages/?msg=3.1)
old spice & napalm - hollywood & vietnam
__________________________________________

best regards,
- lakota


<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->


Interesting, nothing I capitalized in the quote above is now that I've submitted it (SEAL, NCO, Soldier)....weird...

Bren
07-14-2012, 18:42
Bren: The only questions I still have are
(1) why the service dates on the USS Great Sitkin are a month after the Bay of Pigs invasion (happened in April, 1961). Lakota claimed to have been there before, and possibly during, the invasion.

You allege that the BoP invasion happened in April, 1961, while the fact of the matter is that it's chronological event window is May 6 to May 26 as plainly documented in the above letter to Panetta, from the Navy Department.

I was in indeed in and around major portions of the island of Cuba, before the invasion, doing reconaissance in preparation for the May 6 to May 26 invasion window.

(2) Why it's the USS Great Sitkin, which was apparently involved in the Cuban missile crisis blockade in 1962, but not the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Bren:
The immediate above question is officially answered in the provided document, (received in September of '85). My Expeditionary accredation was for the Bay of Pigs, May 6th - May 26th - my honorable discharge was 13 July '62 - about three months before the so called 'missile crisis'.

(2) Why it's the USS Great Sitkin, which was apparently involved in the Cuban missile crisis blockade in 1962, but not the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Bren:
Why do you ask the above question?

Ths is not a debatable topic; the Bay of Pigs invasion was launched on April 17, 1961 and was over the next day. You didn't do preliminary recon for it or participate in it in May, since it was long over by then.

That leads me to believe both the story and the document are false.

I ask about the ship because the document says you were on the USS Great Sitkin. That ship did not take part in the Bay of Pigs invasion. Its Cuban service was in the blockade, after you were discharged.

Now some other issues:

How come you, Kent Robertson, aren't even on the roster of sailors who served on the Great Sitkin in the 1960's? Turns out there is an organization that keeps track of the history of the USS Great Sitkin and they have the rolls of all the Navy personnel who ever served on it. No Kent Robertson. I likewise couldn't find a Kent Robertson US Navy vet using the "Bufddy Finder" at military.com.

Obviously those things aren't perfect, but when a story is fishy...and keeps getting fishier...

Here is the USS Great Sitkin crew list for the "R"s for the 1960's. (http://www.greatsitkin.org/60s_Roster.html#jump_R)

Angry Fist
07-14-2012, 18:56
YGBSM.... :faint:

The Fist Of Goodness
07-14-2012, 19:23
Ths is not a debatable topic; the Bay of Pigs invasion was launched on April 17, 1961 and was over the next day. You didn't do preliminary recon for it or participate in it in May, since it was long over by then.

That leads me to believe both the story and the document are false.

I ask about the ship because the document says you were on the USS Great Sitkin. That ship did not take part in the Bay of Pigs invasion. Its Cuban service was in the blockade, after you were discharged.

Now some other issues:

How come you, Kent Robertson, aren't even on the roster of sailors who served on the Great Sitkin in the 1960's? Turns out there is an organization that keeps track of the history of the USS Great Sitkin and they have the rolls of all the Navy personnel who ever served on it. No Kent Robertson. I likewise couldn't find a Kent Robertson US Navy vet using the "Bufddy Finder" at military.com.

Obviously those things aren't perfect, but when a story is fishy...and keeps getting fishier...

Here is the USS Great Sitkin crew list for the "R"s for the 1960's. (http://www.greatsitkin.org/60s_Roster.html#jump_R)

Interesting. I actually found another sight that did list Kent Robertson as a crewmember on the Great Sitkin, though it appeared to be a user generated list, as opposed to an official roster. I will have to look it up when I get home.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Lakota
07-14-2012, 19:26
Bren:
I am entirely aware of the USS Great Sitkin AE-17 forum on the net as entered in Google. Look in the * third listing of that ship: "Crew list of the USS Great Sitkin" (there are eleven listings). The list for the '60s & '70s excluded the era between '58 and '62.

Not only does the Navy Department letter posted in this thread prove that was my ship (25,000 tons of every kind of ammunition), and that it was in fact in the Bay of Pigs (May 6 to May 26) moreover, having done your consistently failed homework for you again: enter USS Great Sitkin AE-17 in Google, where you will find an alphabetically ordered * 'Crew's List'. Look under 'R' (if you can manage that?) and you will find my alphabetically ordered name.

There are literally hundreds of my comrades on that ship between '58 and '62 who will confirm not only that I served on her as a Boatswain's Mate Coxswain, but was also commeded four times at Dress Muster, for four different occasions of Life Saving, and was also recommended for a Bronze Star by the late Roger C. Branch, my 2nd Division E-5 Petty Officer, when I disarmed a potentially disastrous 'hang fire on a hot gun', since I was also a 3" 50 1st loader (Army designated 105mm howitzer) at General Quarters.

Judging from your most recent post (above) Bren, you are advised to take your hallucinatory differences about the Bay of Pigs, to the Navy Department or Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, since you have desperately, repeatedly and hysterically resorted to direct accusations of fraud and prevarication; while those adjectives are in fact found to be applicable to yourself and your name-calling huddle of cronies.


Are you and the most recently arrived despot ('Angry Fist' is it? That 'girl' is indeed a time bomb - 'she' is a he, and is reputed all over the net as an enthusiastically bubbling specialist (costumed in the raiments of a medical authority - while the first law of Medicine is 'Do no harm' ) - in rubber gloving children and making entertaining efforts to blame his specialty on others.) through making a fool of yourself yet?


:wavey:


Best regards,
- Lakota

deadday
07-14-2012, 20:20
Bren:
I am entirely aware of the USS Great Sitkin AE-17 forum on the net as entered in Google. Look in the * third listing of that ship: "Crew list of the USS Great Sitkin" (there are eleven listings). The list for the '60s & '70s excluded the era between '58 and '62.

Not only does the Navy Department letter posted in this thread prove that was my ship (25,000 tons of every kind of ammunition), and that it was in fact in the Bay of Pigs (May 6 to May 26) moreover, having done your consistently failed homework for you again: enter USS Great Sitkin AE-17 in Google, where you will find an alphabetically ordered * 'Crew's List'. Look under 'R' (if you can manage that?) &and you will find my alphabetically ordered name.

There are literally hundreds of my comrades on that ship between '58 and '62 who will confirm not only that I served on her as a Boatswain's Mate Coxswain, but was also commeded four times at Dress Muster, for four different occasions of Life Saving, and was also recommended for a Bronze Star by the late Roger C. Branch, my 2nd Division E-5 Petty Officer, when I disarmed a potentially disastrous 'hang fire on a hot gun', since I was also a 3" 50 1st loader (Army designated 105mm howitzer) at General Quarters.

Judging from your most recent post (above) Bren, you are advised to take your hallucinatory differences about the Bay of Pigs, to the Navy Department or Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, since you have desperately, repeatedly and hysterically resorted to direct accusations of fraud and prevarication; while those adjectives are in fact found to be applicable to yourself and your name-calling huddle of cronies.


Are you and the most recently arrived despot ('Angry Fist' is it? That 'girl' is indeed a time bomb - 'she' is a he, and is reputed all over the net as an enthusiastically bubbling specialist (costumed in the raiments of a medical authority - while the first law of Medicine is 'Do no harm' ) - in rubber gloving children and making entertaining efforts to blame his specialty on others.) through making a fool of yourself yet?


:wavey:


Best regards,
- Lakota


...so, about this SEAL aviator....

Lakota
07-15-2012, 00:36
deadday:

"...so, about this SEAL aviator.... "

What about him?

The answer to your (faux) question is yet another statement of the obvious: he was a SEAL first and an aviator later - a Bird Colonel aviator who did 30 years distinguished Navy service and ostensibly, having grown out of the youthful demands required of SEALs, proceeded into aviation. You do the math.

The fact of his 30 years of active service has likewise been 'evaluated' as questionable.

Your (presumed) 'question' doesn't even meet the definition of any kind of 'interrogative'.

Your posts in this thread reveal you as a creative problem generator.

"...so, what about your axe-grinding, noxious presence in this thread..."

Indeed, you prodigiously insist on finding and defending your low pay-grade coordinates, from which you apparently and obsessively enjoy being publicly pee'd on, from a higher place.

Incidentally, your paramour, 'Angry Fist', excels in impersonating rogue operants, killing cops, lewd poetry, lurking around pediatric wards, and digging the pain.

You go, boy.

:wavey:

Best regards,
-Lakota

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

Bren
07-15-2012, 05:09
Interesting. I actually found another sight that did list Kent Robertson as a crewmember on the Great Sitkin, though it appeared to be a user generated list, as opposed to an official roster. I will have to look it up when I get home.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

You are correct, I actually found another list that does say he was on the Great Sitkin - http://www.greatsitkin.org/CrewList.html#jump_R

So that just leave the whole thing about how the Great Sitkin wasn't at the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Invasion didn't happen in May of 1961.

Chesafreak
07-15-2012, 07:41
deadday:

"...so, about this SEAL aviator.... "

What about him?

The answer to your (faux) question is yet another statement of the obvious: he was a SEAL first and an aviator later - a Bird Colonel aviator who did 30 years distinguished Navy service and ostensibly, having grown out of the youthful demands required of SEALs, proceeded into aviation.


There has never been any such rank in the Navy. The Navy doesn't have and never has had a "Colonel" listed in the ranks.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

CDR_Glock
07-15-2012, 08:25
A 30 year service retired Navy Aviator Seal just told me that there is unconfirmed word that the military at large has submitted a survey to all military personnel, with the question:

"Would you be willing to fire on American citizens?"

This information was openly described as 'unconfirmed'.

If it is true, for what it's worth, I personally don't think there would be many - if any - affirmative answers to such a question, since, firstly - it is a contradiction of the oath every military person is obliged to conform to ('to protect the Constitution from all her enemies, be they foreign or domestic, whomsoever').

Secondly, the question inevitably involves an issue of whether or not military (and police) personnel are willing to fire on their own parents, uncles, aunts, children, cousins, wives, husbands, grandparents, etceteras.

It appears that what we have here, is a handful of crack smoking, blood-thirstiy high-rollers, making up a mad schematic charter to conquer the United States, and the world.

If this 'survey' is true, the very fact that it exists reveals a neo-fascist state of the union's key leaderships and their nightmare motivations.

All readers are cordially invited to confirm, nullify, or otherwise comment on this missive.

Best wishes,
- Lakota

In the case of a terrorist threat where the general public is being harmed by one of our own American Citizens, what do you think the answer should be?

We as a group of armed citizens think about that on a daily basis. Protecting ourself or loved ones in the threat of a felony or deadly force. Certainly, in the policing of a group of people, such as a riot, non-lethal force or crowd control is the answer. However, how about a group of snipers killing our fellow Americans? If called upon, our military may have to take the role of taking them out.

What if there were another terrorist threat of a plane headed for another major center, like a crowded football stadium? Do you think the dispatched F-18s have to think twice about limiting casualties? Several dozen people sacrificed for the fate of thousands if not a hundred thousand, like the cowardice act upon our WTCs in NYC?

No easy answer. I don't think the question posed is for genocide. It is posed for those who have to make one of the toughest decisions in someone's life.

Jerry
07-15-2012, 10:09
In the case of a terrorist threat where the general public is being harmed by one of our own American Citizens, what do you think the answer should be?

We as a group of armed citizens think about that on a daily basis. Protecting ourself or loved ones in the threat of a felony or deadly force. Certainly, in the policing of a group of people, such as a riot, non-lethal force or crowd control is the answer. However, how about a group of snipers killing our fellow Americans? If called upon, our military may have to take the role of taking them out.

What if there were another terrorist threat of a plane headed for another major center, like a crowded football stadium? Do you think the dispatched F-18s have to think twice about limiting casualties? Several dozen people sacrificed for the fate of thousands if not a hundred thousand, like the cowardice act upon our WTCs in NYC?

No easy answer. I don't think the question posed is for genocide. It is posed for those who have to make one of the toughest decisions in someone's life.

That makes perfect sense and I have no problem with it. However confiscating firearms from US citizens for the UN... not so much.

GRIMLET
07-15-2012, 10:39
What exactly does the UN want confiscated? I really don't know the actual terms.

Jerry
07-15-2012, 11:33
What exactly does the UN want confiscated? I really don't know the actual terms.

All firearms that are in private hands.

Have you ever seen the "work of art" :upeyes: in front of the UN building in NYC? It's a pistol with the barrel tied in a knot.

Angry Fist
07-15-2012, 12:51
Incidentally, your paramour, 'Angry Fist', excels in impersonating rogue operants, killing cops, lewd poetry, lurking around pediatric wards, and digging the pain.

You go, boy.

:wavey:

Best regards,
-Lakota

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->Is that you, mommy? :wavey: