Frank Gilliland wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:23:00 GMT, Dave Heil wrote
in et:

Okay. Maybe you're a slow learner or perhaps you just have no sense of
remorse. You told us that you weren't a model Marine.

Feel free to speculate all you want about my service.

It's not speculation...You were incompetent.

But there's one big difference between me and Dudly
that you can't seem to comprehend: I'm telling the truth. And that's
something I am most definitely proud to admit.

So, the truth is, according to you, that Steve isn't a Marine or that
he's lying. That's an assumption made by you and you've offered no
proof, just accusations.

You haven't been paying attention, Dave. I tossed out several tidbits
of info that he would know if his claim was true, but he tripped up
and proved that he knew -nothing- of what I was talking about.

Bull. Just plain bull.

Now what I don't understand is why you are so passionate about Dudly
when this discussion has absolutely nothing to do with you. Is he your
butt-buddy? Or are you afraid that you are next in line to be exposed
as a military imposter? Why is his business -your- business, Dave?

I challenge you to expose me as a "military imposter", Frank. Make it
your life's work. As far as your last comment: read up on how usenet
works. After all, how did Steve's business become *your business*?

I see you missed that part, too. I was in here on a totally different
issue when someone mentioned that Dudly was a Marine. So I asked him
when he served and what units he was with -- a really simple question.
Heck, it's not like I was asking him his SSN or something. But that's
the way he acted. Up went the red flag. Ever since then he's been
tripping over his tongue and frothing like a rabid dog.

Now that I have answered -your- question, just why are you defending
him with such passion?

So far you've "proved" nothing except that YOUR trivia isn't
necessarilly someone elses, and even then you've so grossly discredited
yourself as to make ANY argument lost.

Loser. Hoser. Poser.

That's Frank of Silliland.

Steve, K4YZ

On 28 Aug 2005 05:54:46 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:


Frank Gilliland wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:23:00 GMT, Dave Heil wrote
in et:

Okay. Maybe you're a slow learner or perhaps you just have no sense of
remorse. You told us that you weren't a model Marine.

Feel free to speculate all you want about my service.

It's not speculation...You were incompetent.


Quite the contrary, Dudly: my proficiency marks were consistently
high; it was my conduct marks that took a couple nose-dives.


But there's one big difference between me and Dudly
that you can't seem to comprehend: I'm telling the truth. And that's
something I am most definitely proud to admit.

So, the truth is, according to you, that Steve isn't a Marine or that
he's lying. That's an assumption made by you and you've offered no
proof, just accusations.

You haven't been paying attention, Dave. I tossed out several tidbits
of info that he would know if his claim was true, but he tripped up
and proved that he knew -nothing- of what I was talking about.

Bull. Just plain bull.


Yada, yada, yada. See below.


Now what I don't understand is why you are so passionate about Dudly
when this discussion has absolutely nothing to do with you. Is he your
butt-buddy? Or are you afraid that you are next in line to be exposed
as a military imposter? Why is his business -your- business, Dave?

I challenge you to expose me as a "military imposter", Frank. Make it
your life's work. As far as your last comment: read up on how usenet
works. After all, how did Steve's business become *your business*?

I see you missed that part, too. I was in here on a totally different
issue when someone mentioned that Dudly was a Marine. So I asked him
when he served and what units he was with -- a really simple question.
Heck, it's not like I was asking him his SSN or something. But that's
the way he acted. Up went the red flag. Ever since then he's been
tripping over his tongue and frothing like a rabid dog.

Now that I have answered -your- question, just why are you defending
him with such passion?

So far you've "proved" nothing except that YOUR trivia isn't
necessarilly someone elses, and even then you've so grossly discredited
yourself as to make ANY argument lost.


Wrong again, Dudly. Neither of my disciplinary actions resulted in my
discharge. I fulfilled the full term of my contract. But after two
court-martials my conduct marks were just one tenth of a point too low
for an honorable discharge so I got a "General under Honorable". And
here is where I know that your claim to have upgraded your discharge
is bull**** -- because I -did- upgrade my discharge. (Warning: long
story.....)

Back in early '85 I injured my knee on a forced march. The corpsman
wrote me a light-duty chit that was to stay in effect until I could
get to the mainside (Lejeune proper) hospital to have it checked out.
But before that could happen we were to go on a field-op. Since I was
on light-duty I wasn't supposed to go on the op, but the shop chief
(comm shop, not the tech shop) took the chit, put it in his desk and
ordered me to go anyway. Since the chain of command was already in the
field I couldn't request mast, so I refused the order. He then ordered
me to serve on mess duty while awaiting office hours, which I also
refused (since I was supposed to be on light-duty). The result was a
summary court-martial, a month in the brig and reduction back down to
private. And a big hit on my conduct marks.

Shortly afterwards I was transferred to 2nd AAV where I was finally
allowed to get my knee examined at the hospital. Being an RN and/or
LPN you should probably know what a torn lateral -and- medial meniscus
means -- pain! Simple orthoscopic surgury fixed it up right as rain.
And it also vindicated me of the shop chief's "indiscretion" (as it
was called in his reprimand).

So after I got my 'general' discharge I challenged my conduct marks
based on getting shafted by 3/8's shop chief and won. In the process I
learned quite a bit about how a discharge is upgraded; i.e, a general
discharge cannot be upgraded to honorable unless there are mitigating
circumstances -- circumstances such as mine -- that caused the wrong
discharge to be issued. You can't get it upgraded just by asking, for
being a good citizen after your discharge, or for any other reasons
not related to having been given the wrong discharge.

Now a medical discharge is also a "general under honorable" discharge.
If you wanted to upgrade -your- discharge then you would have to show
that the reasons for your general discharge were wrong; which, in your
case, is utterly ridiculous since the reasons were medical. You even
went one step further and claimed that you are "USMC Retired", which
is absolutely impossible unless you served your full 20 years, which
you couldn't possibly do if you had been discharged prior to 20 years
for medical reasons. And it's impossible for you to have taken two
full years of terminal leave since a) you would have had to serve 24
years without taking -any- leave, and b) they didn't permit anyone to
accumulate more than 90 days leave on the books -- you either use it
or lose it.

So all those claims of yours about your discharge are completely
bogus, Dudly. They have absolutely no foundation in reality.


Loser. Hoser. Poser.

That's Frank of Silliland.


Coming from a retired Marine Corps gunny, that's pathetic. If you are
going to continue this "truth-by-repitition" charade then at least get
someone to ghost-write your posts so you don't sound like a 3rd grade
dropout.








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-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 =----

Frank of Silliland wrote:
On 28 Aug 2005 05:54:46 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:


Frank of Silliland wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:23:00 GMT, Dave Heil wrote
in et:

Okay. Maybe you're a slow learner or perhaps you just have no sense of
remorse. You told us that you weren't a model Marine.

Feel free to speculate all you want about my service.


Quite the contrary, Dudly: my proficiency marks were consistently
high; it was my conduct marks that took a couple nose-dives.

You were STILL incompetent.

COMPETENCY as a Marine is more than mastering the technical
aspects of your MOS.

Huge snip.

So far you've "proved" nothing except that YOUR trivia isn't
necessarilly someone elses, and even then you've so grossly discredited
yourself as to make ANY argument lost.


Wrong again, Dudly. Neither of my disciplinary actions resulted in my
discharge. I fulfilled the full term of my contract. But after two
court-martials...(SNIP)

TWO COURT MARTIALS...?!?!

IN ONE ENLSITMENT...?!?!?!

I didn't get ONE "Office Hours" IN NEARLY TWO decades of service!

(UNSNIP)...my conduct marks were just one tenth of a point too low
for an honorable discharge so I got a "General under Honorable". And
here is where I know that your claim to have upgraded your discharge
is bull#### -- because I -did- upgrade my discharge. (Warning: long
story.....)

There's nothing "bull####", Frankie, except YOUR suggestion that
you're some sort of valid point of reference as to what constitutes
having "served" in the Marines or not.

Back in early '85 I injured my knee on a forced march....(SNIP)

What happened to YOU happened to YOU, and is not indicative of how
EVERY Marine's case is handled, Frankie...Mine included.

Big snip of sob story.

Now a medical discharge is also a "general under honorable" discharge.

My original says "HONORABLE."

No qualifiers.

Sorry yours was otherwise.

So all those claims of yours about your discharge are completely
bogus, Dudly. They have absolutely no foundation in reality.

What has "no foundation in reality" is any suggestion that you are
a competent, reliable source of "corporate knowledge" on the Marine
Corps other than being a one-tour, sick-bay-commando discipline
problem.

Loser. Hoser. Poser.


Coming from a retired Marine Corps gunny, that's pathetic.

Sorry, Frankie.

I "call's em as I see's em"...

You come in here whipping up a storm making claims of who is a
"valid" Marine and who isn't, and you turn out to be the aforementioned
one-tour, sick-bay-commando discipline problem.

If you are
going to continue this "truth-by-repitition" charade then at least get
someone to ghost-write your posts so you don't sound like a 3rd grade
dropout.

"repetition"

And if you'e going to come at me with assertions of what is and
isn't "The Real Marine Corps", at least have the decency of having
Honorably served that same Marine Corps. YOU DIDN'T. You made a
PROMISE when you enlisted and you FAILED to keep up your end of the
bargain. Not once, but twice, by your own admission.

Loser.

Steve, K4YZ

On 29 Aug 2005 07:50:39 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:

snip
And if you'e going to come at me with assertions of what is and
isn't "The Real Marine Corps", at least have the decency of having
Honorably served that same Marine Corps. YOU DIDN'T. You made a
PROMISE when you enlisted and you FAILED to keep up your end of the
bargain. Not once, but twice, by your own admission.


Yes, by my own admission. Yes, I could have walked right up to the
commanding General, but I didn't. I chose a different course of action
based on the circumstances. If you had ever been in a grunt unit you
would understand those circumstances, but you weren't so don't try.

But this discussion isn't about me, Dudly -- it's about YOU and the
bogus claims you have made about your service (if you even served at
all).







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-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 =----

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 29 Aug 2005 07:50:39 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:

snip
And if you'e going to come at me with assertions of what is and
isn't "The Real Marine Corps", at least have the decency of having
Honorably served that same Marine Corps. YOU DIDN'T. You made a
PROMISE when you enlisted and you FAILED to keep up your end of the
bargain. Not once, but twice, by your own admission.


Yes, by my own admission. Yes, I could have walked right up to the
commanding General, but I didn't. I chose a different course of action
based on the circumstances. If you had ever been in a grunt unit you
would understand those circumstances, but you weren't so don't try.

But this discussion isn't about me, Dudly -- it's about YOU and the
bogus claims you have made about your service (if you even served at
all).

Sorry, Frankie of Silliland..it IS about you.

You "served" 1/4th as long as I did and got court martialed twice.
Then you want to come in here throwing your "reputation" around to try
and diminish MY service.

Sorry, putz...You don't add up to the top of my jump boots.

Steve, K4YZ

On 30 Aug 2005 02:05:50 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:


Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 29 Aug 2005 07:50:39 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:

snip
And if you'e going to come at me with assertions of what is and
isn't "The Real Marine Corps", at least have the decency of having
Honorably served that same Marine Corps. YOU DIDN'T. You made a
PROMISE when you enlisted and you FAILED to keep up your end of the
bargain. Not once, but twice, by your own admission.


Yes, by my own admission. Yes, I could have walked right up to the
commanding General, but I didn't. I chose a different course of action
based on the circumstances. If you had ever been in a grunt unit you
would understand those circumstances, but you weren't so don't try.

But this discussion isn't about me, Dudly -- it's about YOU and the
bogus claims you have made about your service (if you even served at
all).

Sorry, Frankie of Silliland..it IS about you.


I see you made your choice.


You "served" 1/4th as long as I did


You still haven't proven that you served -at all-!


and got court martialed twice.


"Court martialed" isn't even a word, Dudly.


Then you want to come in here throwing your "reputation" around


Wrong. I challenged you with facts. Once again, Dudly, it's not about
me -or- my "reputation" whether be it good -or- bad.


to try
and diminish MY service.


You haven't provided -any- proof that you served -at all-! Nor have
you described anything about your service that could be "diminished",
except for your few claims that resulted in you "diminishing" yourself
because they were contradicted by facts. It was YOU that lied about
your "service" -- don't blame me for the consequences of your lies.


Sorry, putz...You don't add up to the top of my jump boots.


"Jump boots"? LOL!








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-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 =----

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 30 Aug 2005 02:05:50 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:


Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 29 Aug 2005 07:50:39 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:

snip
And if you'e going to come at me with assertions of what is and
isn't "The Real Marine Corps", at least have the decency of having
Honorably served that same Marine Corps. YOU DIDN'T. You made a
PROMISE when you enlisted and you FAILED to keep up your end of the
bargain. Not once, but twice, by your own admission.


Yes, by my own admission. Yes, I could have walked right up to the
commanding General, but I didn't. I chose a different course of action
based on the circumstances. If you had ever been in a grunt unit you
would understand those circumstances, but you weren't so don't try.

But this discussion isn't about me, Dudly -- it's about YOU and the
bogus claims you have made about your service (if you even served at
all).

Sorry, Frankie of Silliland..it IS about you.

I see you made your choice.

No...YOU did.

You "served" 1/4th as long as I did

You still haven't proven that you served -at all-!

I missed the part where a disgraced ex-serviceman had any
"authority" to demand anything, Frankie...

and got court martialed twice.

"Court martialed" isn't even a word, Dudly.

Yet it's a common term in both military and civilian conversation,
Frankie.

Then you want to come in here throwing your "reputation" around

Wrong. I challenged you with facts. Once again, Dudly, it's not about
me -or- my "reputation" whether be it good -or- bad.

No, you have NOT "challenged (me) with facts"...

You've made allegations and barroom taunts meant only to salve your
disgraced ego.

to try
and diminish MY service.


You haven't provided -any- proof that you served -at all-!

I still haven't found the part that says I owe you one, Frankie.

Nor have
you described anything about your service that could be "diminished",
except for your few claims that resulted in you "diminishing" yourself
because they were contradicted by facts. It was YOU that lied about
your "service" -- don't blame me for the consequences of your lies.

I've not lied.

Sorry, putz...You don't add up to the top of my jump boots.

"Jump boots"? LOL!

I didn't designate the nomenclature, Frankie.

Steve, K4YZ

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 28 Aug 2005 05:54:46 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in

So far you've "proved" nothing except that YOUR trivia isn't
necessarilly someone elses, and even then you've so grossly discredited
yourself as to make ANY argument lost.

Wrong again, Dudly. Neither of my disciplinary actions resulted in my
discharge. I fulfilled the full term of my contract. But after two
court-martials my conduct marks were just one tenth of a point too low
for an honorable discharge so I got a "General under Honorable". And
here is where I know that your claim to have upgraded your discharge
is bull**** -- because I -did- upgrade my discharge. (Warning: long
story.....)

Back in early '85 I injured my knee on a forced march. The corpsman
wrote me a light-duty chit that was to stay in effect until I could
get to the mainside (Lejeune proper) hospital to have it checked out.
But before that could happen we were to go on a field-op. Since I was
on light-duty I wasn't supposed to go on the op, but the shop chief
(comm shop, not the tech shop) took the chit, put it in his desk and
ordered me to go anyway. Since the chain of command was already in the
field I couldn't request mast, so I refused the order. He then ordered
me to serve on mess duty while awaiting office hours, which I also
refused (since I was supposed to be on light-duty). The result was a
summary court-martial, a month in the brig and reduction back down to
private. And a big hit on my conduct marks.

It's all becoming very, very clear.

Was the shop chief an "A" NCOIC with a God complex?

wrote:
Frank of Silliland wrote:
On 28 Aug 2005 05:54:46 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in

Since the chain of command was already in the
field I couldn't request mast, so I refused the order. He then ordered
me to serve on mess duty while awaiting office hours, which I also
refused (since I was supposed to be on light-duty). The result was a
summary court-martial, a month in the brig and reduction back down to
private. And a big hit on my conduct marks.

It's all becoming very, very clear.

Was the shop chief an "A" NCOIC with a God complex?

It wouldn't matter.

Frankie took a spill over one of his own "trip ups".

A Marine has the RIGHT to Request Mast to HIGHER headquarters
irrespective of the consent or advice of the lower level command.

That his "chain of command" was "in the field" was irrelevent.

He had recource. He didn't pursue it.

Obviously the OIC of the Court Martial wasn't impressed with
Frankie's story, either. USMC Court Martials don't like having
judgements overturned on appeal anymore than civilian courts do, and
had Frankie had VALID reason for refusing an order, they would have,
at the very least, returned the issue back to his commander for Article
15 (Office Hours). Seemingly he HAD that reason. There's more to the
"big story" than Frankie's telling of it...

Steve, K4YZ

From: K4YZ on Aug 29, 4:02 pm

wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 28 Aug 2005 05:54:46 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in

Since the chain of command was already in the
field I couldn't request mast, so I refused the order. He then ordered
me to serve on mess duty while awaiting office hours, which I also
refused (since I was supposed to be on light-duty). The result was a
summary court-martial, a month in the brig and reduction back down to
private. And a big hit on my conduct marks.

It's all becoming very, very clear.

Was the shop chief an "A" NCOIC with a God complex?

It wouldn't matter.

Frankie took a spill over one of his own "trip ups".

Tsk, tsk. Dudly takes a spill just about every time he posts
here. :-)

A Marine has the RIGHT to Request Mast to HIGHER headquarters
irrespective of the consent or advice of the lower level command.

UCMJ doesn't apply to USMC anymore? :-)

Not so!

That his "chain of command" was "in the field" was irrelevent.

He had recource. He didn't pursue it.

Dudly yanks our chains with nearly every posting also... :-)

Dudly ought to pay attention to his words. "Recourse" or
"resource," which is it?

Obviously the OIC of the Court Martial wasn't impressed with
Frankie's story, either.

Those are called "President of the Court," Dudly. It's spelled
out in the UCMJ.

USMC Court Martials don't like having
judgements overturned on appeal anymore than civilian courts do, and
had Frankie had VALID reason for refusing an order, they would have,
at the very least, returned the issue back to his commander for Article
15 (Office Hours). Seemingly he HAD that reason. There's more to the
"big story" than Frankie's telling of it...

What's the "big story" with Dudly? So far he's said dink on
his "medical-turned-honorable discharge due to an accident."

Dudly no spell out specifics, just make vague generalities.

Dudly also FORGET that UCMJ applies to ALL branches, including
USMC. "It's the LAW."

Dudly do a BAD imitation of David James Elliott in here. This
is NOT the "JAG" show production office. :-)

Dudly need better writers. He no pay scale. He may have scales.

This forum be about AMATEUR RADIO POLICY, not blood-pinning of
USMC wannabes like Dud.

Temper fry, wannabe.