WHY ARE YOU SILLY ASS HAMMIE POO'S ENTERTAINING SILLILAND?
WE RAN HIS ASS FROM THE CB GROUP. THE ONLY USEFULL THING ABOUT
SILLILAND IS "HER" MOUTH...........# 1 CUM DEPOSIT BOX.
Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 24 Nov 2005 05:36:11 -0800, "Major Dud" wrote in
. com:


Frankie of Silliland wrote:
On 23 Nov 2005 22:12:36 -0800, wrote in
.com:
Frankie of Silliland wrote:
On 23 Nov 2005 04:47:35 -0800, wrote in

Address the issues, Steve

Already done.

You didn't know that avionics techs (your alleged MOS) are regularly
deployed with the FMF.

Still lying and still not explaining from where you got that,
Frankie.

From this specific conversation (that you abruptly dropped):

=====================================

On 21 Aug 2005 20:33:22 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:

snip
because he allegedly spoke with a couple of "buds"
who are in the Air Wing.

Wrong again. I didn't say they were in the "Air Wing", although I did
know a few Marines that were stationed at Cherry Point (just a stone's
throw from Geiger -- we used to hang out at the Second Front area).

You said they were in Avionics.

So...How many Avionics Technicians do fleet units have, Frank?

=====================================

To which I replied:

=====================================

Quite a few. Back when I was active, the three batallions of the 8th
regiment were rotated into the 22nd and 24th MAUs. I was deployed with
the 24th MAU on The USS Nassau. This ship is an LHA -- basically it's
a small aircraft carrier with a massive well deck. It can accomodate a
lot of different aircraft including the Cobra, Huey, CH-46, CH-53,
OV-10 and Harrier. Being a Marine in the avionics field you should
have already known this. In fact, if you -were- USMC for 18 years it's
more than likey that you would had served aboard an LHA or a similar
amphibious assault ship. Either way you would have known of both their
existence and their capabilities.

=====================================

You never would have asked that question if you had been in the Corps
because every Marine knows that FMF units are assembled from parts of
units that cover almost the entire spectrum of the Corps capabilities.

SNIP

No...

A Regimental Combat Team, BLT or MEU is "assembled" from those
units, Frankie.

YOUR unit had NO avionics personnel in it.


Amazing. With google and the entire internet at your disposal, you
-still- don't know how the Marine Corps operates -- which really isn't
so amazing since you were never in the Corps. The amazing thing is
your determination to avoid the obvious conclusion that you are wrong.
So I guess I'll have to dumb -this- down as well.....

When the 24th MAU was formed (when I deployed with it) the Third
Batallion of the 8th Marine Regiment was temporarily detached from the
regiment (with me so far?) and attached to the 24th MAU as 'BLT 3/8',
a designation which distinguishes it as a deployed unit instead of a
unit standing in garrison. There were other units that were -also-
temporarily attached to the 24th MAU at the same time, including units
from the 2nd MAW. It's the assembly of those -diverse- units that
comprised the MAU.

BTW, here's the ship on which I was depoloyed (the largest of the
three ships in the group that carried the 24th MAU; the other two were
the Ponce and the Saginaw):

http://www.nassau.navy.mil

Make sure to click on "History" and look at the bottom pic. See all
the aircraft? If you can't, here's a better pic:

http://www.icehouse.net/wirenut/nassau01.jpg

See the CH-46 in the air? The CH-53's on the flight deck with the
Harriers? If you look close you can see the Phalynx (nicknamed "R2D2"
for obvious reasons) on the island above and centered between the two
large radar domes (domes are near the base of the island). The R2D2 is
an automatically controlled, six-barrel, 20mm gattling gun that rips
out 3600 rounds/minute and has it's own radar system. Sounds real cool
from the chow hall. Anyway, back to the subject.......

Do you see the space between the flight deck and the raised door to
the well deck? That's the hangar deck, which runs almost the entire
length of the ship. I walked through there just about every day since
our tech shop was a cubby-hole located on the port side of the hangar
deck and two decks down (one deck below the SNCO food locker, and
right next to a 12" ballast pipe which makes a heck of a racket).
That's also where the Comm Platoon stored the VINSON gear, so the shop
was manned 24/7 by the techs (all seven of us including your's truly),
as we were the only Marines on the ship with the security clearance to
do so.

And just for ****s and grins, here's a pic of the ship anchored in a
fjord when we were in Norway in early '83:

http://www.icehouse.net/wirenut/nassau12.jpg

See the CH-46's and CH-53's? Okay. So don't tell -me- that my unit
didn't have any avionics personnel. The 24th MAU most certainly -DID-
have avionics techs, and that was my unit while I was on float (not on
"cruise"). We had quite a bit of contact with those techs due to the
close proximity of our tech shop with the hangar deck -- we learned
quite a bit about avionics, including those helmet-targeted 20mm guns
on the Cobras. And they learned quite a bit about our fields (radio,
teletype, wire-line systems, etc).

Now..... got any more ignorant remarks on the subject?


For example, when I was with 3/8 we were deployed as BLT (Batallion
Landing Team) 3/8, the infantry unit that was attached to the 24th MAU
for that float. The 24th MAU also consisted of components from tanks,
amtracks, artillery, etc, etc. The BLT that was attached to the 24th
MAU just prior to my deployment was BLT 1/8, on an expedition that
should strike a chord if you know your Marine Corps history.

How many Avionics Technicians were in YOUR GROUND UNIT, Frankie?


Focus, Dud -- there aren't any doctors that live in my neighborhood
but that doesn't mean I don't know any or know anything about them.


Better yet, how many AVIATION UNITS were YOU attached to?


Just as many as you, Dud.


You didn't know about the VINSON system. To wit: "I know who Col
Vinson was and I know where Ft Gordon is. Never served with him/for
him/within 100 miles of him." Neither did you know that the VINSON
system replaced almost all outdated crypto systems in the late '70's,
including the old punch-pin monsters (KY-28/38 of the NESTOR system,
which had been almost completely replaced by the VINSON system by the
early '80's).

JULIETT in helos. OV-10's, too.

As of early 1992 the KY-58's had not been installed in the -53
series helos.

Nice try, though.

The KY-58's were installed in aircraft in the early '80...(SNIP)

(UNSNIP....They were there, Dud. You weren't.

Wrong...Again...


http://www.jproc.ca/crypto/ky57.html
http://hereford.ampr.org/millist/m25.html
http://www.pacificsites.com/~brooke/KY38.shtml
http://www.jproc.ca/crypto/ky28.html


You didn't know the difference between a 'hitch', a 'cruise', and a
'float'.

You're the one with knowledge deficit, Frankie.

I even posted URL's for you to follow, but it seems you ignored
them.

I didn't see any URL's. But if you want a definitive reference, why
don't you just take a look in the Marine Corps Manual (i.e, the green
one, although I'm sure the red one has the same info).

And an overseas deployment is STILL refered to as a cruise and an
enlsitment is STILL refered to as a "hitch", no matter what you try to
amke from it, Frankie.


Oops, I forgot -- you never got a Marine Corps Manual in boot camp
because you were never in the Marines. Here you go, Dud:

http://www.1stbn1stmarines.org/hs/fs15dictionary.htm


You mistakenly assumed the origination of the phrase "One Shot One
Kill" was from the Army Sniper School; wrongfully presumed that it is
a tactic taught to all Marine recruits; then proceeded to demonstrate
your ignorance about basic combat tactics, the use of shotguns, and
the very common 40mm grenade launchers (M-79 & M-203).

No mistake.

One shot, one kill.

Wasn't Billy Zane in that movie?

Don't you wish YOU were?

He was closer to being a Marine than you were, Frankie.

At least by the end of the movie, his character had learned
something about honor.

You had four years and never did.


You remind me of that Bugs Bunny cartoon where he helps load wood on
the fire burning beneath the pot where he's about to get turned into
rabbit stew.


You claimed that "the only targets used to train Marine riflemen (and
all recruits) [are] head shots and 'center mast', or chest shots", but
didn't know that the standard round marksmanship-type targets are also
used, and much more often than "dog" targets. In fact, most of rifle
qualification is done with the round targets. But you didn't know that
despite your claim to have "[taken] home an 'Rifle Expert' on each and
every trip to the range".

And you continue to try an misrepresent what I said as somehthing
else.

What I said was 100% accurate.

You said, "the ONLY targets used" (emphasis added). Your statement was
wrong.

No, it was not.

I can post pics of the rifle range from my boot-camp 'yearbook'
if you need further proof.

Ahhhhhh yes...Just slightly less tacky than the average junior
highschool "yearbook", pack full of "stock" boot camp pictures,
interspersed with a few "activities" shots of out platoon, and rounded
out with our "Dress Blues" shots...The ones where they have several
white tops on a table along with the "coat" that was only the top half
and had a snap in the back...

Of course when I went through, most of the "stock" pics were from
the 60's...


Doesn't matter since my scanner needs a new bulb. But I did find this
(scroll down to part 29):

http://www.grunt.com/forum/topic.asp...TOPIC_ID=29346

Wasn't much different in 1981 -- by then we had M16A1 rifles and rapid
fire was done from both 200 and 300 yards. That's about it.


And your claim is even more wrong for the
simple fact that human bodies are not the only targets in warfare.
Recruits are taught marksmanship, not just "head shots", and not "one
shot one kill".

Argue the semantics all you care to, Frankie.

You're still a liar and you're still a coward.


You're probably right, Dud..... I'm sure those grapes -are- sour!


You didn't know that only the results of an Article 15 proceeding are
recorded, not the entire proceedings; and you don't even know what
page in the SRB they are recorded.

And a record IS kept.

Contrary to your original claim, no transcripts are made during an
Article 15 hearing. Only the results are recorded. And every Marine,
NJP or not, knows on which page of the SRB those results are recorded.
It's common knowledge in the Corps because it's discussed frequently.
The only way you wouldn't know this bit of info is if you were never
in the Corps. Maybe Hans can help you out here.....

Maybe.

But I sat in on many Office Hours. Records were kept, along with
charges, statements, any mitigating evidence, and the disposition.

Maybe they were a bit slacker in the ground side...


If that was true then you would be familiar with the punishments that
are authorized from an Article 15 hearing, and firewatch -isn't- one
of them. Yet that's exactly what you previously claimed. You missed
the target again, Dud.


You didn't know that Marines are often prohibited from taking any
off-duty employment, nor did you know that such a decision is usually
made by the CO, not HQMC.

Again, you're blatantly lying, Frankie.

Wrong.

Not wrong.

Marines MAY be prohibited from taking certain off-duty employment,


True. Where did I say any different?


and ARE prohibited from participating in criminal activities or
partisan politics wherein their role as a Marine may be inferred as
establishing a political preference.


......uh, where did -that- come from?


You -begged- me to cite an MCO that prohibits such activities,
yet after I educated you on the issue you claimed that your CO granted
you permission to work as an EMT. You have been caught making up your
'career' as you go, Steve.

Nope.

And you've STILL not quoted a Marine Corps order that prohibited
my working as an EMT.

Not one.


Still begging and still missing the point. Idiot.


You didn't know that outside communications can be prohibited during a
base lock-down or unit activation.

Even more mistruths.


Wrong again, Steve.

When confronted with the scenario about not being
able to make your shift as an EMT due to base lockdown or unit
activation, you made the ignorant excuse that you could simply give
them a phone call, which often times is -not- possible because of
restricted outside communications during such situations. Again, you
were caught improvising your imaginary 'career'.

I was in the Marine Corps a heck of a lot longer than you,
Frankie.

In those 18 years, not once was I prohibited from making "that
call".


Yet I was in for only four years and it happened to me on more than
one occasion. Three, in fact. And all in the 2-year span while I was
at Lejeune. Gee, what are the odds, Dud?


Again, pretty slim picking on YOUR part, and STILL proactive
deceit from you...


......yawn..... So where were you stationed when you claim to have
been active duty and living in Tennessee?


You defined a 'chit' as "A Naval term for a 'permission
slip'", when in fact it means -any- piece of paper with something
written on it.

Again...Incorrect.

Marine Corps Manual. Need the page number?

A "chit" is not ANY peice of paper, Frankie.


http://www.goatlocker.org/trivia.htm


You didn't know that a dishonorable discharge can only be given as a
result of a conviction in a General court-martial, and is usually
given after a few years at Leavenworth and a reduction to Private.

Again deceitful.

Wrong. I openly admitted that my initial discharge was a 'General
under Honorable Conditions', yet you proclaimed in several posts that
I received a "dishonorable" discharge.

It WAS dishonorable.

You lied. You cheated. You misbehaved.

And you got busted for it.

Twice.

That IS dishonorable.

I served over four times longer than you and didn't get a single
Office Hours.

THAT is Honorable.


So you are claiming that you used the word 'dishonorable' only to
express your own personal opinion? That's about the lamest excuse I
have heard from you yet, Dud!!!!! If you -really- want to impersonate
a Marine at least you could bone up on the UCMJ before you start
running off your mouth!!!


That was a demonstration of
gross ignorance on your part, since the types of discharges are
pounded into your head during boot camp. And they are never forgotten
because Marines read about others getting such discharges all the
time.....(SNIP)

Obvioulsy it did little to keep you out of trouble.

Or perhaps they didn't "pound" hard enough on you?

(UNSNIP)....or are you now going to claim that you never read the same
periodical that published those alleged stories about active duty
Marines working as EMT's?

"Marines". "Leatherneck" before it.

Anyway, what you didn't know (because you were never a Marine)

And once again another intentional lie by Frankie.

was that a "dishonorable" discharge is a specific
type of discharge -- the worst, actually. It's -not- a term that is
generally applied to any discharge that is less than honorable. You
ignorantly referred to my discharge as "dishonorable", proving that
you didn't know the types of discharges (which was apparent from the
beginning since you didn't know the difference between a 'medical' and
an 'honorable', neither of which you received).

Suck it up, punk.


Have you been drinking, Dud? Are you even reading any of this?


You didn't know that the Corps doesn't use cutting scores for
promotions.

SURE they do! W H Y do you keep lying about this, Frankie?

Marine Corps Manual. Marines -pride- themselves on having a promotion
system that's based on merit, not on cutting scores as used by the
other military services.

Uh huh...

And that MERIT is a composite of proficiency, performance and
conduct.

Commonly called "cutting scores".


Wrong. They are commonly called "pro" (proficiency) and "con"
(conduct) marks. And they are not definitive tests for promotion, just
things to be considered. I only knew one Marine who ever called them
"cutting scores", but that was probably because he did 3 years in the
Army before joining the Marines.


You misquoted your SIX alleged promotion certificates (a misquote that
I later found on google verbatim).

I missed one word, Frankie...

So two points here...

First of all, by your own words YOU had to go find it on Google
yourself.

No, I just had to look at one of my five promotion certificates.

Five?

Was that one each up to Staff Sergeant?

Or a couple to the same rank over, which is more like it.


Yep. Made LCpl twice, left as a PFC, and one month shy of being
eligible for LCpl for a third time, which I probably would have made
if I had extended for that West-Pac float (not "cruise") when they
asked. And it would have upped my conduct mark by at least the tenth
of a point needed to get my Honorable without the hassle. 20/20
hindsight.....


I searched google to see if anyone had misquoted it in the same way you
did. Someone did, which leads me to believe that your misquote was the
result of a google search (or from some source other than your memory
or your alleged promotion certificates).

And since the last time I stood infront of someone to hear
those words recited to me was 1988, I think one word is pretty
acceptable.

I was discharged three years earlier and promoted fewer times, yet I
knew your quote was incorrect. Odd, wouldn't you say? And what did you
do with all your paperwork from the Corps? Did it mean so little to
you that you threw it all away?

Nope. Right here. My bust for not "reviewing" it first.


Right where? And why "it" and not "them"? You have six of "them",
right?


Secondly, when was YOUR last promotion, and how many of them DID
you manage to get?

My fifth and last promotion was 1 October 85, and authorized by
Lt.Col. C. C. Riner III, CO of 2nd AAV. I can scan the promotion
certificate if you like. And I was promoted five times in my four
short years. So while I may refer to myself as a '****bird', I must
have been doing -something- right!!!

No...You weren't.


Well Dud, you're a little too late to have your personal opinion
recorded in my SRB. And BTW, it would have been recorded on page 11,
which is right next to page 12 where crimes and punishments are
recorded. But of course you knew that, sitting in on all those Office
Hours, right? LOL!!!


If anyone other than the Commandant of the Marine Corps
"authorized" a promotion, then it was to a rank less than Staff
Sergeant.

That means you had to ride that ride twice at least once.

I only went up.

Too bad for you.


Even if you -had- been in the Marines I couldn't care less -how- often
you were promoted. But if you had made Sergeant in 5 years but only
promoted twice in the following 13 years then -you- must have been
doing something -wrong-....... or else doing nothing at all!!!


If you HAD "...been doing -something- right!!!..." You would have
had all one way promotions...not ups-and-downs!


That's so illogical it's scary. "Doing something right" is not the
same as "never doing something wrong", which I never claimed. On the
contrary, I have openly admitted making mistakes. Just because a
person does something wrong doesn't mean that -everything- he does is
wrong. If that were the case I never would have been promoted after my
first court-martial. But I was, so you are wrong.


You didn't understand that "years and months in specialty" (box 11 on
the DD-214) is not the same as time in service, yet claimed that you
have -several- DD-214's.

You skipped this one, Steve.

Nope.


You skipped it again. Are you waiting for me to quote your ignorance?
Ok, here you go:

================
On 27 Aug 2005 07:19:01 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:

snip
He was in an expensive technical MOS (Ground Radar Repair).
You've got to go out of your way to get the USMC to send you home as a
PFC with 3 1/2 years of service..."####bird" was an understatement on
Frankie's part.

The rank of PFC and the less-than-four year tour lends one to
believe that the reason he didn't publish the other 3/4ths of his -214
was that somewhere on that form it said "LESS THAN HONORABLE", or one
of those categories of discharge.
================

".....a PFC with 3 1/2 years of service...", taken directly from my
DD-214 box 11. But that's not where your ignorance ended, Dud. Notice
where you suggested that "somewhere on that form it said 'LESS THAN
HONORABLE'", totally unaware that the newer (post '79) DD-214 doesn't
state character of service, even though you claim to have six of them
and been discharged in 1992.

You don't have a single DD-214 to your credit.


You claimed that time on the delayed entry program was considered to
be time in reserve status but never was.

Sure it was.

I was on the delayed entry program myself. Signed the contract on
Friday, Feb. 13, 1981 (yeah, pretty stupid).

Obvioulsy your SECOND error.


"Obviously"


The first was electing to enlist when you hadn't made up your mind
to BE a Marine.


Really? Gee, and here I thought I had made up my mind when I was in my
early teens..... but I guess there's no point in refuting Major Dud,
Master Psychologist, Premier Soothsayer, Amateur radio operator and
Hollywood-educated Marine imposter.


My total obligation was
six years; four active and two inactive reserve. So if my time on
delayed entry counted as reserve time then my final discharge would
have been Feb. 13, 1987 (plus bad time). It wasn't. It was six years
after my -actual- entry date (plus bad time, of course). Again, you
are wrong.

Well, Frnakie, all I can say is that somewhere between 27 April
1974 and 13 February 1981 something changed.


Actually the change was in 1985. Regarless.....


I got credit for the delayed entry time.

Sorry you didn't.


Time served in the delayed entry program counts as inactive reserve
only for retirement benefits, and then only if you signed up before
1985. I didn't retire. You only served 17 years 9 months, so you
didn't retire either. You didn't get credit for time on delayed entry.


You stated that "My DD-214 says 'Honorable'...", yet after 1979 there
is no box on the form to designate character of service. The DD-214 is
only a "release or discharge from active duty", not a final discharge
certificate. Only that latter will denote the character of service.

Sorry that yours doesn't say "Honorable", Frankie.

Mine does.

You didn't read that very carefully, Steve. The DD-214 after 1979
DOESN'T STATE CHARACTER OF SERVICE. And if you really have "several"
DD-214's as you claimed, you would have replied with "mine do", not
"mine does". Yet another discrepancy, Steve.

Mine says Honorable.


Then you were discharged prior to 1980.


Sorry yours doesn't, Frankie.


In what box does your alleged DD-214 say "honorable"?


You claimed to have served from 03 September, 1974 to 29 May, 1992.
That's only 17 years and 9 months. Yet you also claim to be retired,
which can only happen if you served 20 years.

Nope.

Yep. Maybe Hans can provide you with the MCO to refresh..... er,
educate you on the subject.

It seems you're the one with detail deficits, Frankie!


Then how did you retire with less than 20 years?


You also claimed to have
been discharged for medical reasons, having your discharge later
upgraded (a claim which you have both denied and acknowledged).

You still don't have all the facts, Frankie...but that's pretty
clear to just about everyone except Markie by now.

I was repeating -your- claims, Steve. If your claims are not factual
then you lied... but that's pretty clear to just about everyone by
now, no exceptions.

The only thing "clear" here, Frankie, is your cowardly attempts to
salve your wonded ego here at my expense.


"wounded"


You didn't know that medical discharges cannot be upgraded, nor that time
not served cannot be arbitrarily added to the end of an enlistment in
order to obtain retirement benefits.

Still...Not all of the facts.

If you call the fire department to put out a fire, but only -you- know
that the fire doesn't exist, you can't blame them for responding.
You've had seven years to provide the facts. All you have provided are
unsubstantiated and contradictory claims. Do you need -even more- time
to fabricate plausible details of your military 'career'?

Fabricate WHAT, Frankie?


Oh, gee, I don't know..... maybe a credible reason why you managed to
get your medical discharge upgraded and retire with less than 20 years
of service?


So far, all you've done is make stuff up.


So far, all -you've- done is make stuff up. I'm just exposing those
fabrications.


And with all your careers, activities and obligations, where do you
find the time to post as much as you do on Usenet?

Like I said, Frankie...It's a shame you didn't learn how to
prioritize obligations-vs-preferences and learn some time management
skills...

Funny tho, your posting frequency dropped after I first made that
comment. Coincidence? I think not.

Nope.

Flu season. Five and six 12 hours shifts a week.


Uh-huh.


And yesterday, a funeral for a friend.


Ok, whatever you say, Dud. At least I could find better things to do
on Thanksgiving.


Sorry to burst your bubble, but regardless whether I reply to
every post you make, or only once a week, YOU are STILL a liar, a
coward, and disgraced ex-Marine.

You might have BEEN the Marine you fancy yourself as being now....

Steve "wannabe-Marine" Robeson, K4YZ

Try again.

No need to, Frankie.

You're already "outted" for the liar you are, Frankie.

You just didn't know when to shut your mouth when you got out,
Frankie! It got you busted while you were in the Corps, it's proven
you to be the liar and coward I call you now.

Sucks to be you.

Steve "wannabe-Marine" Robeson, K4YZ


Your personal opinions don't carry any weight, Dud. Wanna disgrace me?
Put me in my place? Then post your DD-214. Otherwise, keep blowing
bubbles.









----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Just like mopeythetic's mouth

steve zero productions announces the greatest movie ever made about
ww2. Starring an all keyclown cast, who play roles of American soldiers



that operated ham radios illegally before the war. The keyclowns
portray their fathers and grandfathers as they fight their way through
Europe to meet up with German keyclown operators and start "piece"
negotiations. The truckstop and Venereal disease ward scenes will make
you laugh out loud, as these keyclowns show the cost of fighting to
meet with the German keyclowns. The scenes where the keyclowns capture
enemy keyclowns at rifle point as they order "PANTS DOWN!" are also
unforgettable!


Don't miss the epic production of "SAVING RYAN'S PRIVATES" Coming to a
gay porn theater near you!


PRE RELEASE REVIEWS:


"mopeythetic shows his versatility when seducing the french!"
-Gene Sicksel, Women's Wear Monthly


"landshark is flamingly unforgettable as the keyclown German General"
-twitlips, Sporadic Waves


"The hospital scenes, with the wrist flipping injuries and the sore
booties graphically portray the cost of keyclownism" -Scottiekins,
NAMBLA WEEKLY

"moparholic at hotmail dot com is a sissy"
wrote:
Just like mopeythetic's mouth

These cross-posted gay lames with my email addy attached, are coming to you
courtesy of the fugly felon, N8WWM.

http://n8wwm.4t.com