From: Frank Gilliland on Sat 27 Aug 2005 19:44

On 26 Aug 2005 11:58:57 -0700, "
wrote in
s.com:
From: on Fri 26 Aug 2005 06:22

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Aug 25, 7:12 pm
wrote:
From: on Aug 25, 2:42 pm
K4YZ wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:

If fact,
Jimmie Noserve took me to task about being a "rear-area" type.
I guess all those books he read (to become an expert on warfare)
didn't tell him that NOBODY got to "choose" where they were
assigned.

But it is true, isn't it, that you were so far to the rear that you were
in a different country from where the Korean conflict was taking place?

Of course. If Jimmie say it true, it must be true!

Japan was not DIRECTLY involved in the Korean WAR, true. The
Occupation was over when I was assigned there. Was I supposed
to break rules, go against the UCMJ, to go to the "front?"

The point being that you never served in a forward area, let alone
a combat area. Matter of fact, the only thing "forward" about you is
bad manners and a propensity to deceive.

The point is that a low-ranking Marine knew enough to call you out on
your military service lies.

Tsk. The stealers of valor cry foul when their stealing is stolen.

Dudly has NO PROOF whatsoever of his "forward area" action. NONE.
Aircraft ground maintenance personnel are NOT in any "forward area."

If one is NOT in a "forward area," one is in the "rear area." Such
as an Okinawa MARS station where Dudly claimed to be "Assistant
NCOIC." [wow...lots of responsibility there...in a NON-commo role
if he was really there...MARS was never a part of the Defense
Communications System]

Dudly has never referred to any common small-unit land force radio
by nomenclature or familiar name. Neither has he done so for any
common avionics radio of the 1974-1992 period. That is unthinkable
for anyone who has really been IN the military involved in radio
communications of any kind.

Not only that, but when presented with -partial- information he can't
even fill in the blanks; i.e, VINSON, discharge upgrades, etc.

Frank, I gotta say I loved your question about "serving under
Colonel Vinson!" One of the gems of this newsgroup in my opinion!
:-)

Ergo, Dudly NEVER DID what he claimed.

Dudly has presented NO PROOF of this claimed military service. He
has presented nothing but verbal generalities that can be gleaned
from publications or entertainment shows. Anyone truly proud to
have served will have some sort of documentation which can be
scanned and presented for proof. Dog tags can be scanned.

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

I downloaded your previous three images. Now I know what a
"bluenose" is! :-)

Please tell me what a "TT" is...it is unfamiliar to one who has
never been to the Middle East.


Dudly says all who challenge him on his military claims should "call
the VA [Veteran's Administration]." The VA will not reveal details
to non-familiy members and must have assurance that a requestor is
legitimate. The VA cannot reveal details due to a federal law that
is almost three decades old.

OVER three decades old: The Privacy Act of 1974.

Thank you, correction noted. I seem to recall an amendment or
addition to that in 1976...but that may be my confusion with
several pieces of legislation done in 1976 such as a major
revision of the Copyright Laws and the Code of Etiquette on
The Flag. :-(

The same is true for NARA, the
National Archives and Records Administration, which has a large
records archive in St. Louis, MO. NARA has a website which
contains the form required to request details...the filled-in form
can be e-mailed for personal data, but must be sent surface mail
for full disclosure.

The only logical conclusion is that Dudly's claims to military
service are a FRAUD, a fabrication, a LIE. In his case, a "rear
area" is what he has been giving us.

Well, any proof he offers now will need to be pretty damn convincing.

If Dudly actually has any "proof" now and it is convincing, he
is then stuck with years of his insulting and demeaning behavior
in here, all nicely archived in Google. He will be NO better off
"with proof."

As is, I call him a POSEUR, a FRAUD, a SNOW JOBBER who wants others
to believe him even though he hasn't got a shred of evidence to
present for his proof.