wrote:
On 2 Nov 2005 09:52:29 -0800, "K4YZ" wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 20:36:22 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
On 1 Nov 2005 16:18:14 -0800, wrote in
s.com:
Frankie of Silliland wrote:
On 31 Oct 2005 06:18:22 -0800, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 02:04:36 -0700, Frank Gilliland
cut He can't.

Sure I can.

No...You can make silly allegations (hence your nick-name of
"Silliland") that are just pie-in-the-sky guesses.

"Proof" would be some document that actually showed my reserve
status above and beyond the Delayed Entry period...

The problem for YOU is that nothing of the sort exists.

Sure it does -- your own words.

Your DOD record confirms your service from '74 to '92 (yes, that's
only 18 years, not 20 years as you claimed when you wrote, "I spent 20
years in the Marine Corps to give people the right to exercise their
freedom of choice, and it hurts me to see so many people exercising
their choice to be apathetic!"), but it doesn't distinguish between
active or reserve. It -does- confirm your MOS as an avionics tech.It
-doesn't- indicate that you were in any medical field, in which case
you would have been a Navy Corpsman, not a Marine Gunny.

Uhhhh...Looking for that reg wherein US Marines are not allowedto
keep personal pursuits while on active duty...

If you were on active duty then you would know that moonlighting is
-strongly- discouraged.

so? a lot of things are strongly discouraged, some ilgeal some not
some against the regs and some not

This is but one of Frankie's sillier suggestions...that having a
part time job/pursuit is somehow "evidence" of having NOT done the
things I claim...

more evasion Stevie you are ducking the issue as usual

There's no "issue" here, twitless.

Frankie claimed my part time job was "evidence" that I was not an
active duty Marine.

That was ludicrous on the face of it...However HIS refusal to cite
even one MCO of the period that said "you can't be an EMT while you're
in the Marine Corps" pretty well proves MY assertion that he's full of
your "bovine excrement"...

if you were presueing something on the side say so, don't go about how
moonlighting is discouraged

(1) I already stated, YEARS AGO, that I worked part time as an EMT
in an ER...

(2) I am not the one going on about "moonlighting" being
"discouraged"...That's in your's and Frankie's ballpark! I already
stated that I complied with Group Orders for off duty employment.

deal with the issue

I did.

but then you can't deal with issues it seems

Sure I did.

I know it is legal to "moonlight" in the army it take a slain forest
of paperwork to do but so does almost evrything in the army

Right there you admit that moonlighting is acceptable, then I went
on to say....:
Not so in the Marine Corps. I had to sign a statement that stated
my USMC duties must never be compromised, and I was given a very short
list of "no no's" for part time work...Law enforcement, any "job" which
was in conravention to any local, state or federal law, and partisan
politics wherein my status as a member of the Armed Forces may lend the
appearence of that branch having any preference for any political party
or candidate.

Issue "dealt with".

admitng that Franks is correct in his base charge

"admitting" "Frank"

No, I did nothing of the sort.

Frankie claimed that by having "admitted" to being an EMT I was
somehow "proving" that I was "only" a reservist. Nothing of the sort
is even remotely factual.

BTW so much for strongly discouraged

It was NOT "strongly discouraged" when I was on active duty, except,
as previously noted, where it conflicted with official duties.

I already addressed that.

Took all of a day to walk the chit (A Naval term for a "permission
slip...Not an abbreviation for excrement) through. No big deal.

In some units it's even prohibited by the
commanding officer because the responsibilities of an outside job
usually conflict with the responsibilities of the unit. But you didn't
know that because you were never active duty; i.e, more proof from
your own ignorant words.

And you make reference as to what my "DOD" (properly DoD) record
states per my MOS's, but you and I BOTH know that that same record
shows nothing but active duty service (Delayed Entry
notwithstanding...)

Maybe you don't know -- your DOD (or DoD if you like) record doesn't
specify. I mentioned that befo ".....but it doesn't distinguish
between active or reserve." The reason is because military members
frequently change from active to active reserve, to inactive reserve,
to retired (in your dreams), etc, etc. The record states your total
time, not how it was served.

breaking out for coment

And BTW, your time in the delayed
enlistment program isn't considered active -or- reserve (active -or-
inactive). Read your contract if you don't believe me.

Frank dudly does not bother with facts you know that

Your buddy Frankie is the one short on facts here, Markie...

nope

Yep.

Like his "facts" about how my working part time as an ER tech
"proved" that I was "only" a reservist.

For two days now he's been insinuating that having a part time job
is "evidence" that I was not on active duty and was "nothing more" than
a reservist.

it is eveidence, not convincing in and off itself I agree but it is
eveidence when combined with your erros in equipment and such it
starts to add up

"evidence" "of" "evidence [again]" "errors"

No, it's nothing of the kind.

And what "equipment" errors?

You and Toiddie are the only one in this forum with "equipment
errors".

How assinine.

But this conflicts with your 1998 claim that you were a "former 10
year+ EMT", which would make you an EMT -prior- to 1988, more than
four years -before- you "retired" from the Corps.

Uh huh. Six, actually.

Thee are a LOT of Marines who are EMT's...Both as Crash-Rescue
personnel on MCAS's and as "off duty" pursuits.

My first EMT card was in Pennsylvania in February 1986. PA
EMT-MAST 014402.

cuting to move on to rest of Stevie ####

"cutting"

Ahhhhhhhh...So providing even MORE references is #### now, eh,
Markie???

no but all you were proiving to that point was #### so it is
reasonable to assume the rest was ####

"proving"

It was nothing of the kind.

And you broke your own "don't assume" rule...And it bit you.

Seems you don't LIKE facts, now do you...?!?!

wrong again

I just wish you proivde som

"provide" "some"

I have.

And as I have said before...Just because you can't/won't acccept
them does not negate them as such.

Steve, K4YZ