-Caveat Lector-

WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War!

SOLDIERS FOR THE TRUTH
"DEFENDING AMERICA NEWSLETTER"

25 October 2000 - " USS Cole, Security and Berets"

"When we assumed the Soldier, we did not lay aside the Citizen."
General George Washington, New York Legislature, 1775

"Our militia will be heroes, if we have heroes to lead them."
Thomas Jefferson

Soldiers For The Truth Foundation, PO Box 63840, Colorado Springs, CO
80962-3840
HTTP://WWW.SFTT.ORG
***********************************************************
TABLE OF CONTENTS:

SITREP from the President
HOT BUTTONS!

Hack's Column:
Know It Alls Never Learn

"Through the Primary Gun Sight"
Article 1 - Berets as Door Prizes?

The Big Picture:
Article 2 - Captains' Exodus Has Army Fearing for Future
Article 3 - Yemen Harbor Workers Not Screened

Voice of the Grunt:
Article 4 - The USS Cole Bombing - Reader Reactions
Article 5 -- Navy: Close-in Security used to be Common Practice
Article 6 - Army: Save Small Group Instructions
Article 7 -- Berets for Everyone!
Article 8 - Security Sucks at Most Naval Installations
Article 9 -- PSYOPS Money Wasters
Article 10 - Voices from the Frontlines: We Will Stand our Ground in Kosovo
Article 11 -- Quality of Life Update

G.I Humor:
Article 12 -- GI HUMOR - The Balloonist

Medal of Honor:
Article 13 -- *JONES, WILLIAM A., III

SITREP:

1. Main topics: 1) USS Cole and National Security 2) Berets and standards 3)
Money wasters 4) Teaching future leaders 5) Quality of Life/Healthcare

2. Hot Buttons:

A. I am interested in the following feedback:

* Will Berets help instill pride or will they be divisive?
* Do you think it is critical to maintain Small Group Instructions for the
Captains Career Course and other military schools?
(I have answers but like to hear from you?)
Feel free to send me hot topics directly if you can't get through the
admin/log net -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

B. The WEBPAGE. Webmaster, John Cloven is continually working on improving
the site. Thanks for your feedback.

C. DONATIONS. Thank you for your continuing support. Your donations are
helping us to get the word out. Thanks for supporting an organization that
stands for the Truth, even if it questions every rule of political
correctness.

D. Keep the mail coming!!! We won't reveal your true identity unless you give
us your approval. We know how vindictive the "system" is.

3. How You can help:

!!! Credit Card donation via our WEBSITE at www.sftt.org.

!!! If you think we HIT a target, forward the newsletter to TV, radio and
your local papers. YOU are the frontline recruiters and intel gatherers for
SFTT.

Check or Money order: Send to and make payable to: Soldiers For The Truth
Foundation, PO Box 63840, Colorado Springs, CO 80962-3840.

Important: Your donation is tax deductible! SFTT is a 501 (c) 3 non-profit
educational foundation, IRS # 31-1592564.

If you send us an E-MAIL address with your donation we can immediately mail
you a RECEIPT.
Multiple contributions: Please remind us when you submit your donation. We
will send you a cumulative statement.

Prepare for Action -- "Crew Ready! -- LOAD SABOT - DRIVER MOVE OUT!"

R.W. Zimmermann
President SFTT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

===========================================================
Hack's Column
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Know It Alls Never Learn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By David Hackworth

There's a striking and alarming parallel between the USS Cole catastrophe --
which took 17 sailors' lives and zeroed out a billion-dollar warship -- and
one that occurred seven years ago to our force in Somalia, where 18 American
soldiers died. No one at the top seems to have learned much from Somalia,
which happened at the beginning of President Clinton's term. Now, days before
the election, he and his gang of national security know-it-alls have made the
same mistakes again in Yemen.

In both instances, at the highest level -- the White House, State Department,
Pentagon, Intelligence Community and Central Command -- the civilian and
uniformed bureaucrats screwed up big time.

Simply stated, the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing, basic
security measures were ignored, and people died. No one played from the same
sheet of music, and the final tune -- "Taps" -- was not a happy sound to the
loved ones of the fallen or to many concerned citizens.

In Somalia, while State was into getting out of that war-ravaged land, the
Pentagon jumped in with all guns blazing. Sheriff Wyatt Clinton had
impulsively changed the mission from feeding to fighting by ordering the
Rangers to nail a two-bit gang leader.

When Army Gen. Thomas Montgomery asked for tanks to protect his forces in
Mogadishu, his request was denied -- since we supposedly were on our way out.
Gen. Montgomery went-along-to-get-along; then Ranger task-force leader Gen.
William Garrison set so clear a pattern for his opponent while conducting
seven identical raids that he might as well have had the Rangers flashing
"here we come" in neon. So once the rebel trap slammed shut, there was no
U.S. armor waiting in the wings.

Like our Rangers in Somalia, our sailors on the Cole were fed into the fire
like a gas-soaked log -- even though Intelligence had warned of an attack on
a U.S. warship and State had closed its embassies in the region because of a
danger alert just days before the Cole arrived.

Central Command not only ignored these reports -- never upgrading its threat
level (re: the Port of Aden) from green to red as it shot up the thermostat
-- it failed to conduct basic security checks of harbor workers in Aden.

Had the Cole's skipper known the risk, surely he'd have taken security
precautions to identify and destroy any terrorist craft before it closed
within a thousand yards of his ship!

Now Navy brass and their spinners are making more story revisions concerning
the Cole than the Oval Office defenders made during the Siege of Monica.

First they said the attack occurred at 12:20 p.m.; a week later this was
revised to 11:18 a.m. Next they said the Cole was mooring when attacked. Now
word is the ship was tied up at the refueling dock for more than two hours.
Right after the incident, the party line was that the suicide craft was part
of the harbor-boat operation and that the terrorists had used the mooring as
a ruse to mask their attack. Why the sudden switch in stories? Was the Cole's
security detail asleep at the switch?

Navy boss Adm. Vern Clark initially said the ship went to Aden to be
refueled. Now the Navy's admitting the Cole had 240,000 gallons of fuel
aboard when it arrived at Aden, enough to make it to low-risk Oman -- one of
the world's biggest gas stations -- with at least a quarter tank to spare.

Why would the Navy take such a high risk in such a dangerous port only to top
off and pick up some fresh vegetables, an exercise that included notifying
every vendor -- and all their terrorist cousins and brothers -- of the ship's
arrival?

Navy insiders say with bitterness that the Cole sailed into Aden to win the
hearts and minds of the Yemeni brass because the State Department sees it as
a strategic asset. But the folks at State were hunkered down, bunker-safe at
the very time our sailors were being blown to kingdom come.

If the sailors killed in Yemen had leaders who weren't into repeating the
same bloody mistakes over again, they'd still be alive. The new
administration must give learning from the past maximum priority.
***
Http://www.hackworth.com is the address of David Hackworth's home page. Sign
in for the free weekly Defending America column at his Web site. Send mail to
P.O. Box 5210, Greenwich, CT 06831.
(c) 2000 David H. Hackworth
Distributed by King Features Syndicate Inc.

===========================================================
ARTICLE 1 - "Through the Primary Gun Sight"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Berets as Door Prizes?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By R.W. (Zimm) Zimmermann
President SFTT
10/23/00

First it was Reimer's plastic value tags that troops were supposed to sport
on their dog tag chains to remind them of their heritage and duties. The day
they distributed the tags, I knew that we were going down the tubes for good.
I told all my troops that we would continue to carry the warrior ethic in our
hearts and minds and we ignored the stupid directive.

The latest Army announcement to provide black berets for all soldiers is
another such hipshot to make everyone feel special and professional, while
real standards and the warrior ethic are vanishing.

General Shinseki proves once again that our brass believe the old Hollywood
notion that if you look good, you have to be good. A great majority of
military leaders have deceived the public that if you starch your fatigues,
salute crisply and tighten your chinstrap, you're looking at a top-notch
soldier. Wrong!

Running the risk of offending the Airborne and Special Operations troops, who
I hold in the highest regard, especially since I have served with the
Airborne, here is another view on berets and elite standards for a
professional army.

A truly professional army must maintain high and tough standards for ALL its
troops. Here, I agree with the Chief.

Combat and special troops, the guys who fight the direct firefight, must be
held to even tougher standards. For meeting these standards and for taking a
higher risk, they deserve to be appropriately recognized.

All infantry troops, armor/cavalry troops and even engineers who breach mines
in front of these attack forces, should be recognized as elites if they meet
established high standards.

It could be a sad state of affairs, if we assert that only Rangers, Special
Forces and Airborne/Air Assault are our elite. That's about two and a half
divisions of our total combat power. And far as I know, even our airborne
forces have accommodated female troops into certain specialties, which
doesn't speak for highly elevated standards. All these females wear maroon
berets, don't they?

There are other branches that do real fighting. I always pushed my scouts and
tankers to be as tough as the Infantry and I think that the boys coming out
of the back of our Bradleys must be pretty darn good to mix it up in
dismounted combat.

Maybe I always believed my WWII father who insisted that Armor had to be a
deep strike elite. When he joined the Panzer forces, they and not the
infantry, were the elite of the ground forces. As an elite, they received the
same infantry training as regular grunts. That might have saved my father's
life, when as part of the 116Th Greyhound Division (Armor) he fought and
survived as regular infantry and recon man in the deadly Huertgen Forest.

Across NATO, most of our allies have given black berets to their armored
forces, green to the infantry, as well as red/maroon to the airborne. For
most of these troops, the beret is a convenient and practical cover.

The key to our beret and uniform debacle is to identify the warriors with new
branch insignia and special flashes on berets and field uniforms. A green
beret for Infantry forces would show a Bradley silhouette on the beret, while
the 10th Mountain's light infantry troops could show crossed rifles on their
berets.

In addition to the beret issue, we also ought to re-look the use of special
skills badges to raise standards and lower the amount of "thanks for a good
job" medals. These badges could be modeled after the Expert Infantryman's
badge or the Expert Field Medical badge. Tough criteria shouldn't allow more
than 20 % of a specialty's soldiers to earn the badge. The badge would thus
be a true badge of honor and achievement.

The bottom line of the beret fight is that the brass can't read our troops
properly. They are not into giveaway awards and gimmicks but they want to be
true professionals in a military that LIVES the values it preaches.

As any professional organization, they would like to be dressed the part with
decent looking and functional uniforms and not in 1960's type business suits.

Most of all, they want to be led by real warriors and not superficial "Care
Bears."

The berets won't hurt if we link them to higher standards and a redefined
warrior ethic.

My only concern is that Privates Benjamin and Joe Schmuck won't know how to
wear the thing and look like a bunch of French chefs.

(c) R.W. Zimmermann, LandserUSA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

============================================================
ARTICLE 2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Captains' Exodus Has Army Fearing for Future
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ed.: And 'feel good berets' won't buy them back either! Interesting that no
one mentioned distrust of senior leaders as a major reason to leave the Army.
It ranked pretty darn high on my list of reasons to retire this year. Maybe
they can find another 'anonymous' general officer to comment on that. From
the Washington Post, 16 October 2000.
**********************************************************

The Army is losing captains and other junior officers at such an alarming
rate that it could have trouble filling leadership positions within two or
three years, according to a new report circulating among senior commanders.

More money and earlier chances for promotion have not helped. During the
fiscal year that ended last month, the attrition rate among captains
accelerated despite pay increases and other incentives to keep them in
uniform, senior Army officials said.

More than 11 percent of the Army's captains decided to leave the service over
the past year, continuing a trend that began in fiscal 1997, when the
attrition rate was less than 8 percent, the officials said...

In recent surveys conducted by the Army and outside experts, young officers
have loudly complained about unpredictable reassignments and repeated
deployments away from home as an important factors driving them out of the
service...

As a matter of both pride and policy, attrition has hit the Army harder
because the exodus is not strictly correlated with outside opportunities but
reflects a widespread disillusionment with the service among junior officers.

The Army started the new fiscal year this month with about 1,300 fewer
officers than its personnel goals called for; the biggest shortage was among
the approximately 20,000 captains, according to still unpublished statistics.
If the trend continues to accelerate, the Army will not be able to sustain
staffing levels within two or three years...

The shortage of junior officers will soon hit the crisis stage if the Army
wins approval for plans to expand its ranks by as many as 40,000 soldiers.

"You can't create new units unless you have the officers to lead them, and
you can't make captains overnight. It takes years to grow them," said a
retired general officer familiar with internal deliberations on the attrition
crisis...

Since 1997, the Army has experienced growing attrition among the cohorts that
became officers during the first half of the 1990s. Roughly four to 10 years
after joining the officer corps, these captains, who are in their late
twenties or early thirties, usually command companies of some 175 soldiers or
are training in a specialty so they can take staff jobs after promotion to
the rank of major.

The losses in the cohorts that make up the more veteran captains; those who
earned their commissions in 1990 and 1993; are already severe enough to
generate concern that the Army will lack the desired number of candidates for
promotion as these cohorts become eligible for higher ranks if the current
trend continues, according to officials familiar with the latest projections.

"If we, as senior leaders, do not take action now to turn this around, we may
not be able to meet our future requirements," said Gen. John M. Keane, the
vice chief of staff...

The Army is trying to make up for the shortage of captains with steps such as
making some lieutenants eligible for promotion to captain earlier than
before, loosening some selection criteria for promotion and requiring
officers to give more advance notice before they can leave the service.

Other initiatives have aimed at the disillusionment that young officers have
expressed. Keane's letter, for example, notes complaints about the greater
workload put on young officers because the Army is deploying more often even
as it is still adjusting to the reduction in strength that followed the end
of the Cold War...

"Additionally, we increasingly hear from these captains that they are
frustrated by what they perceive as a 'zero defects' mentality and a
resulting culture of micro-management," Keane wrote. While captains;
especially those in command of companies; are anxious to take on
responsibilities, senior officers obsessed with ensuring that nothing goes
wrong on their watch constantly interfere, Keane said.

Job dissatisfaction ranked equally with a perceived incompatibility between
Army service and family life as reasons cited for leaving the service in a
survey of captains completed by the Army Research Institute earlier this
year. Nearly a third of those surveyed said they were undecided about staying
in the Army or already had plans to leave.

Those who leave are widely considered by their peers to be among the best
officers, the survey found. While abundant job opportunities in the civilian
economy enable captains to leave, the survey found that pay and concerns
about financial well-being were not a major cause of attrition.

===================================================================
ARTICLE 3
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yemen Harbor Workers Not Screened
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ed.: Interesting insights. Since we are fighting an undeclared war with
international terrorists, military and civilian leaders have to tighten up on
mission analysis. The State Department and the Pentagon ought to take a look
at how they do business around the world. Los Angeles Times, 17 October 2000.
***********************************************************

By Paul Richter, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON--As investigators began examining whether security lapses played a
role in the bombing of the U.S. warship Cole, government agencies disagreed
Monday about who was responsible for vetting the Yemeni contractors hired to
provide harbor services for the stricken guided missile destroyer.

They acknowledged, however, that no U.S. agency conducted conventional
security checks on the prime contractor or the subcontractors it hired.

The Cole, which lost 17 sailors in the attack Thursday, was scheduled to
spend only a few hours in the port of Aden, Yemen, to refuel. But a small
boat, unnoticed among the work boats around it, approached the ship and
detonated a massive explosive charge, officials said.

When the destroyer entered Aden, arrangements had been made for port service
companies to provide it with line-handling, fuel, water, food and garbage
disposal. These services are arranged through a prime contractor, called a
"husbanding agent," who hires and pays his own subcontractors.

Navy officials said security responsibilities for this kind of hire are split
between military and civilian officials of the U.S. government.

The State Department plays a role in ensuring the security of such operations
by initially choosing the husbanding agent, Navy officials said. This
decision--typically made with guidance from the host government--focuses
primarily on whether the agent is reliable and solvent, but also involves a
general judgment on trustworthiness, officials said.

But the decision doesn't involve traditional background checks that seek to
examine criminal records and analyze the character of employees, officials
said.

State Department officials, however, said they have no role in vetting the
contractors. The top military leader for the Mideast region, the commander in
chief of Central Command, "has the authority for all those decisions," said
Philip T. Reeker, a State Department spokesman.

Reeker declined to answer other questions, referring them to the Defense
Department. He added that the subject could not be fully discussed because of
the ongoing investigation of the bombing and related security issues.

Officials at the U.S. Embassy in Yemen could not immediately be reached for
comment. One Navy official, who asked to remain unidentified, said last week
that it would not be "possible or practical" to screen local contractors who
are foreign nationals.

In foreign ports, the Navy takes all the safety steps it can but also relies
on the host country to provide security, the official said. American military
and civilian officials take a variety of other precautions in port visits.

The Cole prepared a special security plan before reaching Aden. And Central
Command, the regional military organization, conducts regular assessments of
security in these ports, said a spokesman, Maj. Joe Lamarca.

The Navy on Monday had not yet released the name of the husbanding agent who
oversaw the operation in Aden. As a result, officials in Washington said they
could not discuss the specific procedures followed in the selection of this
agent.

In Aden, an official of a major port contracting company that was hired to
bring the Cole food and remove its garbage said Monday that the company did
not screen any of its 35 employees before they were hired.

According to Abdullah al Khalqi, marketing manager of the Al Mansoob
Commercial Group, the Navy sent a contracting team to visit the firm's
offices before it signed papers. But it apparently did not demand further
checks.

Khalqi said the company did not look further into the employees' pasts
because "we believe their word." The general manager of the company was
released Monday after two days of questioning by Yemeni police. The company
is known locally as "King of the Sea" because of its many contracts in the
harbor.

Navy officials, noting that the entire region is considered dangerous, have
argued that there was little they could do to prevent an attack like the one
on the Cole. But top officials have increasingly stressed their intention to
undertake a thorough review of security procedures.

"We will find out through this inquiry . . . whether there was any laxity,
any failure to measure up to the very highest standards that we insist upon
for force protection," Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen said Sunday on
CBS-TV's "Face the Nation."




*COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational
purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]

Want to be on our lists?  Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists!


******************************************************************************

*******************
A vote for Bush or Gore is a vote to continue Clinton policies!
A vote for Buchanan is a vote to continue America!
Therefore a vote for Gore or Bush is a wasted vote for America!
Don't waste your vote!  Vote for Patrick Buchanan!


Today, candor compels us to admit that our vaunted two-party system is a
snare and a delusion, a fraud upon the nation. Our two parties have become
nothing but two wings of the same bird of prey...
Patrick Buchanan

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to