Published by the San Diego Rifle and Revolver Association
Contributor Commentaries
Who To Blame For Disarming Our Soldiers?
Saturday, 14 November 2009 09:15 | Author: Ralph Weller |
Despite the media, it isn't Clinton. The U.S. Army disarmed their soldiers at least 25 years before Clinton. The blame falls on our military leadership and today's politicians who don't recognize we are at war.
In my recent article “Stop the Silliness: Arm Our Soldiers and Marines” I pointed out soldiers in the U.S. Army are essentially unarmed on U.S. military installations, including Fort Hood. The only armed military personnel are law enforcement agencies, most notably military police, and if present, federal law enforcement officers who augment military police agencies on base.
Within a couple days after my article, the Washington Times posted an editorial calling for an end to the Clinton military gun ban on U.S. military bases.
The Washington Times and those who promulgated the above statement are simply wrong. The Army disarmed its soldiers at least 25 years earlier.
I entered active duty in 1971. The only non-MP military personnel that carried loaded firearms were those assigned to guard duty of sensitive base facilities, such as a centralized weapons armory, or the unit paymaster administering cash payments on payday.
On payday an officer of the unit was designated as the paymaster. He would draw a loaded 1911 .45 caliber handgun from the unit armory. His next act would be to receive the cash from the post finance center. He carried the loaded firearm on a pistol belt at all times while administering the pay process.
That was about it for armed soldiers on Fort Hood other than military police. In 1971 it was already illegal for military personnel to carry or store a personal firearm in any place other than a unit armory. Military firearms were only issued specifically for the activities described above, training, or periodic weapons qualification. Soldiers were not allowed to keep a personal or military firearm in either barracks or family housing. That was the case when I entered the army in 1971 and it was the case when I exited 20 years later in 1991 before Clinton.
I can appreciate the desire to blame someone for disarming our soldiers, and Clinton is as good a target as anyone. I didn’t like him then and I don’t like him now, but the army had already disarmed their soldiers long before Clinton. Weapon-less soldiers on U.S. military installations is a matter of fact since Vietnam. It is historical fact that prior to the Vietnam War, military officers, NCOs and, in some cases, soldiers carried firearms as a matter of routine going back to the formation of this country.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Army has become a “kinder and gentler” army. After all, who needs a firearm for protection on a U.S. military facility?
To that point, Fort Hood’s commanding general, Lt. Gen. Robert Cone on November 5 said in response to a reporter’s question, “As a matter of practice, we do not carry weapons — this is our home.”
If you didn’t hear General Cone’s response, he was not making a coy statement of disgust for not being allowed to arm his soldiers. His response was clearly a statement of disgust for someone even asking such a question and he placed emphasis on the words “… this is our home” to drive the point home that our soldiers should not be armed.
General Cone far exceeded the rank I achieved, but in my home at least I recognize that I have a duty to protect my family. My home is armed, politicians and political correctness be damned. The home of army soldiers and marines should be armed as well.
We are engaged in a war with an enemy that has infiltrated our country and by their own admission openly promote a ‘Jihad’ against our military. Military installations are primary targets. If they didn’t know before, now every Jihadist Muslim in this country knows how utterly vulnerable our military installations are. Disarming a primary target may be politically correct to appease the brass in Washington D.C. or politicians, but it foolishly makes targets of military personnel.
After September 11, 2001 our military should have been placed on maximum alert recognizing 9-11 as an act of war on our country. This should have been re-affirmed again after the arrest of the Muslim immigrants who plotted an attack on Fort Dix in recent years. Our military facilities and, most specifically, our military personnel are a prime target. Maintaining an anti-gun position of disarmament is nothing less than dereliction of an officer’s duty to protect the lives of their soldiers and incompetence on the part of our politicians.
Politicians and federal agencies are running for cover blaming each other while looking for the low-level scapegoats they can blame to protect political appointees, high level bureaucrats and politicians. The blame falls squarely on politicians and military leadership for allowing our military bases to be so vulnerable to attack. One person with a couple of handguns killed or wounded more people in one day on a U.S. military base than is generally seen in one day of combat in Iraq or Afghanistan combined. It’s easy to blame Hasan. After all he committed the terrorist act. But, don’t stop there. Start looking at the leadership of our military and those politicians who continue to support the notion that an unarmed soldier is a safer soldier.
What do you think? Take our GND Quick Poll that asks whether our soldiers should be armed on U.S. military bases.
Stop the Silliness: Arm Our Soldiers and Marines
Sunday, 08 November 2009 07:24 | Author: Ralph Weller |
In my last article I described what it’s like on Fort Hood, as well as all U.S. Army installations. It’s like Chicago. The only people armed are the post law enforcement agency such as Military Police or the Federal Police and those intent on criminal activity. Soldiers are not armed with loaded firearms ever, except during periodic weapons qualification. Private ownership of firearms is generally ok providing the firearm is locked up in a designated armory on post/base. The soldier does not have immediate access to their private firearms. Having a firearm in the sleeping quarters or military housing is against regulations and is subject to a court martial.
The bottom line solution is simple, arm officers and non-commissioned officers with side arms. When on duty, no matter the location, whether on post/base or off, commissioned and non-commissioned officers should be required carry a loaded pistol, either openly or concealed. When off-duty they should be allowed to secure their weapons within their quarters. It becomes a part of their uniform.
Soldiers who are not commissioned or non-commissioned officers, while on-duty and while on post/base property should be issued their M16 rifles with a full magazine compliment. The weapon and ammo should be turned in to the main armory when coming off-duty unless provisions to secure the weapons within each bay or room are provided.
If a soldier misuses a weapon for any reason, it’s grounds for a court martial with severe punishment to follow. Being a soldier or marine comes with responsibilities not unlike a law enforcement officer. There is no room for irresponsibility so the punishment for misuse of a weapon should be clearly defined, taught to the soldiers and enforced with vigor when abused.
The military’s job is to defend this nation first. Expeditionary forces are secondary to its mission. If our military cannot be armed while on duty within the borders of the U.S., it can hardly fulfill its primary mission of providing for the defense of the nation, let alone allow for maximum security of the installation and personal defense of soldiers and marines.
It is time to end this political correct nonsense of maintaining an unarmed military force.
Paul Helmke, Dumb As A Doorknob Award
Saturday, 07 November 2009 10:47 | Author: Ralph Weller |
This is the latest statement from Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign on the tragic Fort Hood shooting. He wins my “Dumb-As-A-Doorknob of the Year” award.
Helmke’s statement:
“This latest tragedy, at a heavily fortified army base, ought to convince more Americans to reject the argument that the solution to gun violence is to arm more people with more guns in more places.”
Having spent a combined 20 years of active and reserve service in the Army, I got to see what a “heavily fortified army base” is. I spent a couple of years at Fort Hood, the largest military installation in the free world and a few other installations, both Army and Marine bases, so I know a little bit more than Helmke does on this subject.
Fort Hood is hardly a “heavily fortified army base.” It’s like a small city of 50,000 people. It’s a typical army base with typical soldiers and their families. Military police function as local law enforcement officers for the base and provide services like most any small city, so they are armed. There may be federal law enforcement present, primarily civilians with either military or civilian law enforcement backgrounds that function as most any civilian police department in your home town. They are there to augment the military police, of which most are overseas in Iraq or Afghanistan. They are also armed like any civilian law enforcement officer.
But, that’s where the similarities end between your hometown and Fort Hood. When it comes to firearms ownership, Fort Hood, as do all Army installations in the U.S. resembles Chicago.
The Army practices a very strict form of gun control. Despite their military duties, training, and illusion that a place like Fort Hood is full of 45,000 armed troops, that is not the case. You can own a private firearm, but it must be stored in a designated armory where it is kept under lock and key, and in some instances under 24 hour guard. Firearms cannot be kept in barracks or military housing. If a soldier is caught with a firearm, it’s immediate grounds for a court martial.
Military firearms such as the M4 or M16 are kept locked up in the unit armory. Firearms are issued to soldiers for field exercises, at which point they may be given a blank adapter and blanks to simulate real ammunition being fired. The only time a soldier is in possession of a loaded military firearm is at a range for weapons qualification. It is very closely supervised, brass is collected and personnel are required to relinquish any unfired ammunition. When qualification is complete, the firearms used are returned and accounted for at the unit armory.
A personal experience with my own M16 points out how gun control works in the military. I was in a two-week field exercise at Fort Hood, an annual event that involved the majority of military personnel on the base. Fort Hood, at well over 200,000 acres can handle two complete combat divisions, approximately 30-40,000 personnel in the field at one time. The day before the end of the two week field exercise I was recalled back to my unit for some duties that needed to be fulfilled. A jeep (yes, I’m that old) hauled me, my gear and my M16 back to the unit. It had been a soggy two weeks with rain that was almost continuous. I wasn’t complaining. I was glad to get back to civilization at that point, even if was only one day early.
At some point later in the day, with my M16 at my side the entire time, I realized I needed to turn it into the armory. The armory for my unit was about one mile away. Now, instinctively I knew walking a mile alone on base with an M16 slung on my shoulder was not the brightest thing to do. It would draw the attention of the military police on base if not every officer and non-commissioned officer that passed me by. The result would be a very bad outcome. You see, I was essentially carrying a military weapon with no security for the weapon, other than me. I asked for someone to transport me to the armory in a military vehicle. None were available. They were all in the field. I was told to go on over there anyway and turn my weapon in by the Sergeant on duty. I wasn’t about to walk, so I dumped my M16 into the front seat of my car and headed on over. As I pulled into the parking lot, got out of my vehicle and pulled my M16 out, a relatively low ranking officer approached and bellowed, “What in the hell are you doing with an M16 in your car soldier?” I explained the situation and he came to the conclusion that I probably did the right thing and let me go to turn in the weapon. Needless-to-say, I heard from the sergeant the next day who sent me over to turn in my weapon. He got his butt chewed out. Despite being in the military, carrying an M16 around or throwing it my car is not the recommended method to control weapons in the Army.
For gun control advocates, gun crimes do occur on military installations. A fellow that I went through basic training with a few years earlier was sent from Germany to my unit pending a court martial that was to be held at Fort Hood. He was a witness to a crime in Germany by other soldiers. Apparently, the crime involved several military personnel engaged in a black market scheme of selling stolen military equipment to civilians in Europe. The civilians were most likely not your basic civilians but spies from other countries, most notably the Soviet Union.
Within two weeks of his arrival he was dead, shot in the head in the barracks one night as he slept. It was a hit to keep him from testifying. Organized crime and criminal activities are not the exclusive right of the civilian world. And, despite very strict gun control on base, if a criminal needs to use a gun, they can get one and they will use it. Everyone is armed who wants to be, and those who follow the rules are not. It’s no different than Chicago.
For all practical purposes on a U.S. Army installation, soldiers on any given day are completely unarmed and defenseless. That’s hardly a model of a “heavily fortified army base.” If anything, it’s a model of gun control that leaves our military personnel vulnerable to attack, either internally by nut cases like Hasan, or externally by terrorists hell bent on killing as many people as possible.
Oddly, just outside the gate is the town of Killeen. Civilians are allowed to carry concealed firearms, own firearms and use them for self-defense. But that all ends the moment you enter the gate of Fort Hood.
There is talk that the military may review its gun policies. If it’s anything less than allowing soldiers to defend themselves and their families, don’t bother with it. Don’t insult members of the military by banning privately owned guns that are already under lock and key and held by the military.
Gun control in the military has played an ugly role in making otherwise brave men and women nothing but victims. If the military can trust their men and women in combat, they should trust them 24 hours a day on any military base, over there or here.
Lastly, it only goes to show when the populace is disarmed, the only good that comes from it is tragedy. It’s simply too easy for people like Hasan to shoot with impunity at an unarmed group of military personnel. The ability to defend one’s life is paramount to our existence as human beings. It is ingrained in our DNA. It is instinctive for us as humans to protect our own lives. Yet, our brave soldiers in the U.S. Army are treated as something less than human when it comes to defending their own lives. That needs to change in order to keep nut cases like Hasan in check. Military personnel have the right to self-defense not unlike civilians. It’s insanity to disarm our military while civilians, some with no military training and living adjacent to a military base, are allowed the basic right of self-defense. Does that make sense to anyone? It didn’t make sense when I was in the Army, and considering the world situation, it makes less sense today.
No one stopped Hasan early in his attack because no one other than military law enforcement was armed on Fort Hood. That’s not the way to run an army.
Ft Hood Shooter. It Was All About Him.
Saturday, 07 November 2009 08:18 | Author: Ralph Weller |
The Fort Hood shooting by Major Hasan is profoundly shocking on many levels.
Hasan, who I will refer to by his last name only beyond this point, because he does not deserve the honor of being called by his rank, killed 13 fellow soldiers on November 5. The fact that it was Fort Hood, a place I spent some time at is one thing. Having been enlisted myself, and a non-commissioned officer, it is even more shocking that the shooter was a major. Officers of his rank are viewed as leaders, not killers of fellow soldiers.
In my years of active duty and active reserve in the Army, the last person you would expect to “snap” would be a senior officer. However, having heard enough about Hasan, it doesn’t surprise me.
Here’s a fellow that was basically handed a medical career by the Army. Folks like Hasan gain rank quickly and sometimes never assimilate properly as military officers.
Anyone who has spent time in the service just assumes that someone of Hasan’s rank, a major, probably has had some command time, went through significant leadership training and all that good stuff that military officers go through. Unfortunately, that may indeed not have been the case for Hasan. He was in a highly specialized field, where those around him have roughly the same rank, skill sets, and zero leadership skills training.
My take on Hasan was that he acted more like a disgruntled private that had been drafted into the Army. For those not old enough to remember, it was not uncommon to encounter herds of draftees with bad attitudes during the Vietnam War. They didn’t want to be in the army and couldn’t wait to get out. A lot of draftees served with honor and distinction, and a lot of them died in action, and they deserve to be honored with respect. But, the Army was also infected with a percentage of troops that were nothing but trouble. They had a profoundly negative effect on the army as a whole by the time the Vietnam War ended some 35 years ago. Hasan sounds like one of these people. This is a guy that has a good job in the military, a non-combat position, an education provided by the military and a career that some could only dream about compliments of the U.S. taxpayer. Yet, when it was time to serve in a non-combat position in the Middle East, he balked. There were a lot of things we didn’t like to do in the military. But shirking responsibilities is not something a commissioned officer does. Hasan has all the earmarks of a self-absorbed soldier. It was all about him, not the Army, not his fellow soldiers, not his duty as an officer, or his duty to the country.
Whether he was like that because he never assimilated into the Army system and was never provided the opportunity to be in a leadership position that distinguishes Army officers from enlisted or non-commissioned officers, or whether he had elevated his religious beliefs above that of his career and lives of fellow soldiers, is difficult to discern. Maybe it was a little of both. But, one thing is for certain. Whatever was going through Hasan’s head, it was not to ‘take care of his soldiers,’ which every Army officer who has been in a leadership position understands is a primary duty. Hasan was not of this mind-set, which I believe the Army needs to take a very hard look at. It’s one thing to train personnel in highly specialized fields, but to give them the rank and privileges of officers who command units consisting of hundreds of men in combat, has always been a sore spot with commissioned and non-commissioned officers alike.
Everyone knows that the highly specialized officer of the rank of captain (O-3) or major (O-4) earned his or her rank based on their technical merits, not their leadership skills. But, to the average enlisted man or woman or non-commissioned officer, they are an officer first, just as much as the hardened combat infantry officer.
No doubt this incident has placed some doubt in the minds of enlisted personnel. That’s not a good thing. Leadership is a fragile skill that can be lost in very short order in the military. The Army takes great pain to hone leadership skills of its officers. It is important that men in combat trust commissioned officers. It is important officers have the trust of their men. It’s a two-way street. It’s how the Army works. Hasan, with his rank and his dispicable act, broke that trust.
But, the story doesn’t end here. It gets even more insidious as information slowly comes out about those who lost their lives in this senseless tragedy.
It was announced last evening on November 6, one day after the tragedy, that one of the 13 killed was an army reservist from San Diego.
Major John Gaffaney, U.S. Army Reserves, left for Fort Hood on November 1. Major Gaffaney was a psychiatric counselor assigned to the 1908th Medical Detachment, a unit that specializes in combat stress counseling, with its headquarters based in the Midwest. Major Gaffaney, 56 years of age, had joined the Army Reserves in 2006 after retiring in 1999 from the National Guard. By all accounts, Major Gaffaney was a true citizen soldier, after originally spending his first enlistment on active duty in the U.S. Navy and eventually obtaining civilian credentials in psychiatric care, joined the Army National Guard in 1985. He obtained his commission after attending Army Officers Candidate School. He is the true definition of a citizen soldier. You can read about Major Gaffaney in the North County Times.
Major Gaffaney was not the only mental health officer killed at Fort Hood this week. It seems other members of the 1908th Combat Stress Detachment were processing through the building in preparation for deployment to the Middle East. Other experts in the field of mental health were present and a number of them were killed or wounded. Initial reports suggest as many as 5 or 6 of those killed were from the same command as Major Gaffaney.
It has been reported that Hasan had been notified of his pending deployment to Afghanistan or Iraq. Hasan spent time at Walter Reed Army Hospital as a psychiatrist and recently transferred to Fort Hood. According to various reports he did not want to go to the Middle East. It seems more than coincidental that Hasan was present in the building, the very day members of the 1908th were processing for deployment. Could it be that Hasan had been assigned to the 1908th to augment their deployment? It is not uncommon for highly specialized units like the 1908th to receive additional headcount from the active duty ranks prior to deployment to fill out vacant positions and bring the unit to full strength. If that is so, this makes the tragedy of this event even more compelling. If Hasan timed his killings to intentionally kill reserve members of the 1908th that he himself had been assigned to, and maybe ordered to deploy with, it takes this story to a new level.
Highly skilled units like the 1908th are few and far between. Based on my research, there appear to be only two combat stress units in the Army Reserve, making this type of capability rare to draw from. Could Hasan have timed his killings with the intent of specifically inflicting the most damage he could to the this unit's mission of providing mental health services to personnel in the Middle East?
We may never know answers to these questions, but I fear there is more to this than we have heard, and that Hasan’s appearance at the deployment facility at that date and time is more than coincidence. He may have indeed planned to take out his fellow psychiatric medical officers.
I hope Hasan recovers from his wounds and lives. I hope he is incarcerated in a military prison for the rest of his life. He will have to be isolated from the general population for obvious reasons, which means he will lead a lonely life in which he can fear for his own every single day. Military prisoners may not be the most savory bunch of people, but there is a code, even among military prisoners, that what he did was unforgiveable. If they ever get their hands on him it is not a matter of if he will live, it will be for how long.
May God be with Major Gaffaney and his family and the officers and enlisted who died so tragically at Fort Hood. They were only doing their job.
Hasan v Cook – A Contrast in Political Correctness
Friday, 06 November 2009 16:21 | Author: William M Lolli |
Was Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the killer of FortHood’s 13 people at last count, a victim? The major media outlets would have us think so.
It seems that the only thing Major Hasan really wanted was to get out of the racist, religiously bigoted Army. And when he couldn’t, he had no choice but to do the right thing and gun down as many of those bad Army people as he could while proclaiming how great God is [“Allahu Akbar”].
Contrast the press handling of Major Hasan with that of Army Major Stefan Cook, whose only crime was he was a “Birther”.
Yes, that’s right—one of those evil Obamabirth-certificate people who willing to serve our nation in combat, desirous of continuing a military career, not wanting out of overseas duty nor an end to their service; but whose only offense is that they dared to ask for clarification of the Commander in Chief’s Constitutional Article 2 Section 1 status.
As a result of his lawful questioning of authority, Cook was granted conscientious objector status, had his orders revoked (not of his choosing – the Army’s decision) and was fired from his defense department civilian contractor job. Major Cook still wants to deploy to Afghanistan – just not under potentially unlawful circumstances.
If Major Hasan wanted out of the military because he feared the awful pressure of his religious convictions in fighting the Bush-Obama War, all he would have had to do is go to his commanding officer and ask:
“Where’s the Birth Certificate?”
I can practically guarantee you that Hasan would have been granted a discharge the next day.
But then, he would not be the misunderstood “victim” of the press that he is today.
Don’t believe that Hasan is a victim? How about these quotes from news outlets:
“FortHood shooting suspect, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, wanted out of the Army after being constantly harassed by others in the military and was called a ‘camel jockey,’ his family said.
“As Hasan was about to be deployed to Iraq, he was suffering from some of the same stresses that he was trained as an Army psychiatrist to treat.
“Although the 39-year-old had just been promoted to major in May, his family says he had hired a lawyer to help him get out of the Armed Forces.
“Hasan is an American citizen of Palestinian descent and after the 9/11 attacks, his cousin says he was the target of constant harassment from others in the military. His tormentors called him a "camel jockey," said his cousin, Nader Hasan. He wanted out of the Army, so he paid back his military student loans and hired an attorney.”
“While the bullying irritated Hasan, Nader Hasan believes his upcoming deployment is what set him off”
And what a great guy. What sterling credentials.
Major Nidal Malik Hasan:
39 years old. Born in Arlington, raised primarily in southwestern Virginia, graduated from WilliamFlemingHigh School in Roanoke . Also attended Arlington's WakefieldHigh School for a year. U.S. Army psychiatrist. Graduated from Virginia Tech with honors in 1995. Studied at BarstowCommunity College in California and VirginiaWesternCommunity College in Roanoke. Received doctorate in psychiatry from the UniformedServicesUniversity of the Health Sciences in Bethesda. Resident and then a fellow at WalterReedArmyMedicalCenter in the District. Commissioned as a Captain, he was promoted to Major in May. Was awaiting deployment to Afghanistan, which was to be his first Army service overseas. He is listed by the Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress as a fellow for disaster and preventive psychology. As of Oct. 13, he had less than a year of clinical practice. He attended the MuslimCommunity Center in Silver Spring and is devout, according to Faizul Khan, former imam at the center. He attended prayers at least once a day, seven days a week, often in his Army fatigues, Khan said.
SOURCES: Army records and officials, Virginia Tech officials, Arlington schools officials, Washington Post staff writers
See? Hasan was a great guy that just got pushed too far.
And what about that evil Stefan Cook character?
Here is what the lib-press and blogosphere says:
“Army Reserve Major Stefan Frederick Cook Successfully Weasels His Way Out Of Afghanistan Combat Orders By Challenging President Barack Hussein Obama’s Eligibility As His Commander-In-Chief”
“Cook is anything more than a common coward who is frightened about going to a war zone one way and coming back a bit “altered” like so many of us have before him.”
“Huffpost - Stefan Frederick Cook: Soldier Won't Deploy Over Obama Birth Certificate”
“[Cook’s position is..] Boilerplate nutjobbery, sure. This man should be brought before a court martial, stripped of his rank, and dismissed from the service. Plain and simple”
“[Re]'Tard of the Week - Major Stefan Frederick Cook, USA”
Gee—I am almost convinced.
But wait! Let’s look at Major Cook’s record compared to the Religion of Peace Hasan:
Stefan Cook’s Decorations, Service Medals, and Badges:
Combat Patch Defense Meritorious Service Medal Joint Meritorious Unit Award with one Oak Leaf Cluster Joint Service Achievement Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster Army Achievement Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal with three Oak Leaf Clusters National Defense Service Medal with one Bronze Star device Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal Global War on Terrorism Service Medal Army Service Ribbon Armed Forces Reserve Medal with M device Reserve Component Overseas Training Ribbon
Educational Degrees: St. John’s University, Jamaica, New York, BS Economics 1983 Fordham University, New York, New York MBA Finance/Quantitative Analysis 1988 AnnaMariaCollege, Falmouth, Mass., MS Quality Management 1996
Military Schools Attended:Year Completed
NJ Military Academy, Officer’s CandidateSchool 1990 EngineerSchool, Engineer Officer Basic Course (Resident) 1991 DefenseMappingSchool, Mapping Charting & Geodesy Officer Course (Resident) 1991 EngineerSchool, Engineer Construction Course (Correspondence) 1992 EngineerSchool, Engineer Combat Support Course (Correspondence) 1993 NJ MilitaryAcademy, Instructor Trainer Course (Resident) 1993 PhysicalFitnessSchool, Master Fitness Trainer Course (Resident) 1994 MI School, Military Intelligence Officer Transition Course (Ph I Correspondence) 1995 EngineerSchool, Engineer Officer Advance Course (Ph I Correspondence) 1995 EngineerSchool, Engineer Officer Advance Course (Ph II Resident) 1996 C&GSC, Combined ArmsServicesStaffSchool (Ph I Correspondence) 1998 C&GSC, Combined ArmsServicesStaffSchool (Ph II a Resident) 2000 C&GSC, Combined ArmsServicesStaffSchool (Ph II b Resident) 2000 NJ Military Academy, Officer’s CandidateSchool 1990 EngineerSchool, Engineer Officer Basic Course (Resident) 1991 DefenseMappingSchool, Mapping Charting & Geodesy Officer Course (Resident) 1991 EngineerSchool, Engineer Construction Course (Correspondence) 1992 EngineerSchool, Engineer Combat Support Course (Correspondence) 1993 NJ MilitaryAcademy, Instructor Trainer Course (Resident) 1993 PhysicalFitnessSchool, Master Fitness Trainer Course (Resident) 1994 MI School, Military Intelligence Officer Transition Course (Ph I Correspondence) 1995 EngineerSchool, Engineer Officer Advance Course (Ph I Correspondence) 1995 EngineerSchool, Engineer Officer Advance Course (Ph II Resident) 1996 C&GSC, Combined ArmsServicesStaffSchool (Ph I Correspondence) 1998 C&GSC, Combined ArmsServicesStaffSchool (Ph II a Resident) 2000 C&GSC, Combined ArmsServicesStaffSchool (Ph II b Resident) 2000 TransportationSchool, Transportation Officer Advanced Course (Ph I Correspondence) 2001 TransportationSchool, Senior Transportation Officer Qualification Course Marine Terminal Track (Web Based Course) 2002 USARC Risk Management Train the Trainer Course (Resident) 2002 Signal School, Signal Officer Advanced Course (Ph I Correspondence) 2003 C&GSC, Command and General Staff officer Course (Ph I Correspondence) 2004 C&GSC, Command and General Staff officer Course (Ph II Correspondence) 2004 C&GSC, Command and General Staff officer Course (Ph III Correspondence) 2004 C&GSC, Command and General Staff officer Course (Ph IV Correspondence) 2004 JointForcesStaffCollege, Advanced Joint Professional Military Education 2005 EngineerSchool, Joint Engineer Officer Course 2006 Joint Special Operations Task Force (JSOTF) Level I course (Web-based) 2008 Improved Explosive Device Awareness Course (Web-based) 2009 Civil Military Relations in an Interagency Context (Web-based) 2009 Defense Against Suicide Bombing Course (Web-based) 2009 Pre-Deployment Cultural Awareness – Afghanistan Course (Web-based) 2009
Chronological Record of Duty Assignments:FromTo
Active Duty – USAF Cadet, USAirForceAcademy Jun 78 Jul 79 Company Clerk, Co B., 104th EN BN Sep 88 Mar 89 Officer Candidate, NJ MilitaryAcademy Mar 89 Jun 90 Platoon Leader, Co E, 104th EN BN Jun 90 Jan 91 Student, EngineerSchool, FortLeonard Wood Jan 91 May 91 Platoon Leader, Co E, 104th EN BN May 91 Aug 91 Student, DefenseMappingSchool, Ft.Belvoir Aug 91 Nov 91 Platoon Leader, Co E, 104th EN BN Nov 91 Dec 91 Platoon Leader, 554th EN BN, Honduras Jan 92 Mar 92 Platoon Leader, Co E, 104th EN BN Mar 92 Jun 92 Asst. S3, HHC 104th EN BN Jun 92 Apr 94 Student, USArmyPhysicalFitnessSchool, Ft. Benning, GA Apr 94 May 94 Asst. S3, HHC 104th EN BN May94 Nov 94 Individual Ready Reserve, (Control Group) Army Reserve PersonnelCenter, St. Louis, MO Nov 94 Dec 94 Engineer Staff Officer, HQ, State Area Command Jan 95 Nov 96 Student, EngineerSchool, Fort Leonard Wood, MO Nov 96 Dec 96 Engineer Staff Officer, HQ, State Area Command Jan 96 Jan 98 Engineer Staff Officer, HQ, State Area Command Jan 98 Jun 00 Student, C&GSC, Combined Arms and ServicesStaffSchool MacDill Air Force Base, FL Jul 00 Aug 00 Engineer Staff Officer, HQ, State Area Command Aug 00 Oct 00 Air Movements Officer, HQ, 32nd TRANSGROUP, Tampa, FL Oct 00 Aug 01 S3 Plans Officer, HQ, 32nd TRANSGROUP, Tampa, FL Aug 01 Feb 02 S3 Plans Officer, HQ, 32nd TRANSGROUP, Camp Doha, Kuwait Direct support to 143d TRANSCOM (FWD) Feb 02 Feb 03 Individual Ready Reserve, (Reinforcement) Army Reserve PersonnelCenter, St. Louis, MO Feb 03 Oct 03 Individual Mobilization Augmentee, Army Reserve, assigned HQ USSOUTHCOM SCEN as Regional Contingency Engineer Management Cell Liaison Officer for South America Team Oct 03 Jul 05 HQ USSOUTHCOM, Standing Joint Force Headquarters Miami, FL, Engineer Planner Aug 05 Jan 06 HQ USSOUTHCOM, SCEN Miami, FL Engineer Planner/Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Engineer SME Jan 06 Jul 07 Individual Mobilization Augmentee, Army Reserve, assigned HQ USSOUTHCOM SCEN as Regional Contingency Engineer Management Cell Central American Team Chief Jul 07 Present
Gee. I don’t get it.
Why would a decorated warrior like Major Cook be branded by the media as a coward, kook, and nut job when it is plain that he took a significant risk, ultimately jeopardizing and losing his sterling military career, simply to get the answer to the question “Is the current holder of the president of the United States lawfully eligible?”
Likewise, why would the media gush with confused astonishment and hand-wringing cries of compassion over a mass murderer?
I doubt the US Armed Forces would tolerate a practicing Nazi. Why did the command structure of the Army sustain and promote one such as Major Hasan?
The answer is simple. Shockingly simple:
Cultural-political correctness has infiltrated our Armed Forces so completely that it has now bred an explosive, deadly Jihadist-enemy culture within the very forces created for our protection.
And in the same morally twisted way, Major Cook was an enemy of the state and a threat to the cohesion of military authority, simply because he wanted proof that Barack Obama was Constitutionally eligible.
Somehow, “where’s the birth certificate?” is more of a threat to the United States than killing 10's of innocent Americans.
This is how bad things have become in America: Those who hold the Constitution as sacred are condemned, mocked, and destroyed, while those who murder in the name of Jihad have to be “understood” and cherished as “victims”.
Contributor Commentaries
Contributor Commentaries