The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 15, 2018, 01:57 PM   #76
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,700
Again, the Army I served in was ungun. No rifle or pistol teams, no marksmanship competitions, recreational shooting opportunities for a single EM living in the barracks were non-existent. The crack shot, the gun aficonado was derided as a nut, a kook. Small arms were seen as at best necessary evil, and an annoyance and a nuisance. A source of endless gigs at inspection time, a PITB to inventory, the loss of a small arm was a greater offense than losing classified information or a multi-million dollar aircraft.
SIGSHR is offline  
Old June 16, 2018, 12:02 PM   #77
cw308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 2, 2010
Location: Plainview , Long Island NY
Posts: 3,863
As a combat veteran you see what good human beings are capable of doing to each other . That has never left me. Giving up the right of protect yourself & loved ones will never happen to this guy. Like others have said we are a small group , I will never give up that right . Great word RIGHT.
P S As a city boy ( NY ) state side in the military was spent down south . Got into that
country -CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED- kicken music , always reminds me of my time in the service . Serving
with the backbone of this country

Sorry for the censored.

Last edited by cw308; June 16, 2018 at 01:15 PM.
cw308 is offline  
Old June 16, 2018, 08:08 PM   #78
johnm1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 652
Is there any way to research the authors service record?
__________________
John M.
Mesa, AZ
johnm1 is offline  
Old June 16, 2018, 08:37 PM   #79
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnm1
Is there any way to research the authors service record?
See post #18
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 16, 2018, 09:44 PM   #80
johnm1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 652
I did see post 18. It defines her rank and what she was trained as. But she was very specific claiming command of two special forces companies. I wasn’t in the military and don’t know what is possible or exactly what a special forces company is. Other than what others have said in this post about what she could have done in her position. it seems that there would have to be some shred of truth in what she claimed. Or the risk of being outed as a fraud would be too great.

Hope I didn’t offend any who responded. It sounds like I’m challenging. And I guess I am.
__________________
John M.
Mesa, AZ
johnm1 is offline  
Old June 16, 2018, 10:02 PM   #81
Liberate80
Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2017
Posts: 17
People forced to do that which they hate will hate what makes them do it.

He hates the object rather than the order.

Many people murder those they love due to hate. They blame the person rather than the instrument. But when ordered by a person, they blame the insteument.

The media is lies, propaganda.

We were told about wars and OPEC and all hell breaking loose. The people accepted higher gas prices. Buy gas now, 30 cents cheaper a gal.

In other words. Stop buying into the haze.
__________________
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword"
JESUS
MATT 10:34
Liberate80 is offline  
Old June 16, 2018, 11:43 PM   #82
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnm1
I did see post 18. It defines her rank and what she was trained as. But she was very specific claiming command of two special forces companies. I wasn’t in the military and don’t know what is possible or exactly what a special forces company is. Other than what others have said in this post about what she could have done in her position. it seems that there would have to be some shred of truth in what she claimed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Post #18
As it turns out she was a Signal Officer in charge of a signal company in the 112th Special Operations Signal Battalion.
There was a "shred" of truth to her claim. As a man I once worked for used to say, everything you read is true, unless you have first-hand knowledge of the facts.

To most people, I think, when you see the words "special operations" you immediately think of small, elite units who are the best of the best, the guys who take on the most difficult and dangerous missions the military has to offer. Think Green Berets, Rangers, etc. The Marines have their own designation: MEU SOC, which stands for Marine Expeditionary Unit - Special Operations Command.

We're talking "tip of the spear" here (with apologies to the Marines, for whom that's a motto). The way Ms. Margiotta wrote her article, she makes it sound like she was the company commander for not one but TWO of these hard-core best-of-the-best combat units. Agreed?

But she left the Army more than 15 years ago. Women were not allowed in combat fifteen years ago. Even today, the Army has been trying to get women through Ranger training, and even with reduced criteria they aren't making it. So the suggestion that this woman was the commanding officer of TWO such elite warrior companies fifteen+ years ago rang a lot of warning bells.

Then MTT TL did some checking and discovered that, in fact, Ms. Margiotta was a signal officer, and that the unit she commanded was a signal unit that supported a special operations battalion. That's not a combat assignment. Units such as that are what the real combat guys call REMFs -- "rear echelon MFs." I'm allowed to say that -- that's what I was for most of my time in Vietnam. I was trained as a Combat Engineer, but when I arrived in Vietnam for some inexplicable reason the Army sent me to 4th Infantry Division headquarters, where my primary weapon was an old, rearsenaled Royal typewriter. I did spend some time in the field, but for most of my tour I was a REMF (although we didn't use that term back then).

And that's what Ms. Margiotta was. She was not a combat officer, which is the impression she attempted to convey. She was a rear echelon, support unit commander. My primary weapon was a typewriter. The primary weapons of her signal troops were probably wire cutters, batteries, cables -- whatever fell under "signal" in the 1990s. My father was a captain in the Signal Corps during WW2, so I have some idea what that entailed around 1944-1945. The basic role was undoubtedly the same around 1994-1999, but the equipment used for communications was certainly more modern.

So -- did she command two "special operations" companies, or not? In a very technical, legalistic way, perhaps yes: she commanded a support company attached to a special operations battalion. Did any of the people in HER company -- or she herself -- engage in any "special operations" as we generally think of it? Absolutely not.

Last edited by Aguila Blanca; June 17, 2018 at 01:57 PM. Reason: can't type
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 12:22 PM   #83
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
Quote:
So -- did she commend two "special operations" companies, or not? In a very technical, legalistic way, perhaps yes:...
I feel pretty confident that she isn't lying about commanding 2 special operations companies. What she is doing is using the similarity of names and the general ignorance of the public to give a false impression.
Very much like the confusion between assault rifle, and assault weapon, two very, very different things that look similar and have nearly identical names.

Special Operations is NOT Special Forces!!! The difference is further muddied by the use of "Spec Ops" to describe any non "standard" mission, no matter who does it.

Special Forces includes all the "sharp end" guys we normally think of, Green Berets, Delta Force, Rangers, and Chuck Norris...

Special Operations "units" include everything that isn't an organic part of a line unit. And that covers a huge range of things OTHER THAN COMBAT!!

I had a friend, who spent his military career in "special operations". His job was in Special Services. He was one of the guys who managed the rec center, handing out sports equipment, and the occasional musical instrument.

Saying "I commanded a Special Operations" company while a truthful statement should NEVER carry the weight of expertise without qualifying specifics. Saying "I commanded Alpha Company 2/77th Rangers" (and dates) does.

I did get a kick from some of her other statements, both the outright factual errors, and the implied, or directly stated, opinions presented as facts.

Statements like this "the 5.56 mm ammunition used in assault rifles is intentionally designed to slow down upon impact", written that way for the express purpose of shaping the opinion of people who don't know the facts, and aren't going to bother to.

For instance, its not just bullets, cars are equally "designed" to slow down upon impact. Everything in the known universe slows down upon impact. The "design" in one of the laws of physics,

Another phrase, all too often heard is " weapons that don’t belong in civilian hands ".

We hear this all the time from the anti's, that's their opinion. My opinion (and that of the Founders) is that there are no weapons that "don't belong in civilian hands". Usually when this particular argument happens, the anti's jump all the way to nuclear weapons, as the greatest example of something that shouldn't be in civilian hands.

The irony of that is that, US nuclear weapons ARE in civilian hands! The President is a civilian.

It is a firm principle of our system of government that the military is under civilian control. All of our military's weapons are under civilian control in that sense.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 01:41 PM   #84
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,700
In Vietnam, Army Special Forces consisted of the A Team-the guys actually out in the bush, working with the locals, going on operations, and B Team-the guys back at the base, handling the paperwork, getting the rations and supplies to the forward bases-manning the signal equipment, etc. If you went through and completed Special Forces training and were award the "S" to your MOS, you were a fully qualified Special Forces soldier and authorized to wear a full flash . If you were assigned as a support type, were jump qualfied, but were not Special Forces qualified you were a "Candy Striper"-you wore a strip on your beret under the SF crest in the color of the group that indicated you true status.

Last edited by SIGSHR; June 17, 2018 at 02:14 PM.
SIGSHR is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 02:00 PM   #85
mehavey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,869
I will simply say that the Graduate Forum is having a very hard time pinning down exactly what Capt Kannis actually did/was.

That in itself is bothersome.
mehavey is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 02:01 PM   #86
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
But Ms. Margiotta didn't write "Special Forces," she wrote "special operations." As 44 AMP commented, she's counting on the mental association with what are called in the vernacular "spec ops" missions, which are typically carried out by Army Rangers, Marine MEU-SOC units, and/or Navy SEALS. So she wasn't outright lying, but she wasn't exactly telling the truth, either. She was deliberately and intentionally using words to convey a meaning far removed from the actual facts.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 02:22 PM   #87
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,700
Special Forces is a unit, "Special Operations" covers everything not performed by a line unit, usually by specially designated-and trained units. In WWII the official designation of the Devils' Brigade was the First Special Service Force. The officlal designation of Merrill's Marauders was the 5307th Composite Unit.
Her activities are still "classified" by "The Agency".
SIGSHR is offline  
Old June 17, 2018, 04:21 PM   #88
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSHR
Special Forces is a unit, "Special Operations" covers everything not performed by a line unit, usually by specially designated-and trained units.
I understand that, and you understand that. But Ms. Margiotta did not write "Special Forces," she wrote:

Quote:
Following graduation from West Point, I commanded two Special Operations companies – small forces structured to complete the most physically and politically challenging missions. Multiple times a year, year after year, we underwent recertification on the weapons that were most central to our mission. Going to the range was treated with the utmost of gravity and military discipline. There was no joking around on the range. Every single round of ammunition was accounted for every single time.
Regardless of the realities and proper nomenclature, she deliberately wrote that paragraph so that readers will think she was a badass warrioress who led elite "spec ops" combat personnel on dangerous missions. What we are discussing here is exactly that -- the "optic" she set out to create by describing her service in a way that makes it appear much more significant than reality suggests.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 06:35 AM   #89
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
Here is an article about her service. I haven't validated the article but it makes sense.

http://www.porcelainonsteel.com/2009...ocial-service/

I should point out that Don't Ask, Don't Tell was in effect at the time so she did not have to lie about being gay, despite what she says in the article. Also at the time the official policy on investigation of the possibility of someone being gay was held at the flag officer level. Meaning only a general officer could authorize such an investigation. Very few were authorized after 1996. I only point this out to put it in the broader context of integrity.

The article implies that she served on a bunch of deployments which she did not.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war.
MTT TL is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 08:49 AM   #90
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
Thanks for the article. One useful tidbit:

Quote:
In 1991, Becky graduated West Point and was commissioned a lieutenant in the Signal Corps. She served in various positions of increasing responsibility. As a Captain, Becky commanded a company in the 112th Special Operations (Airborne) Signal Battalion stationed at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina. This battalion provides communications support to various units within the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC), namely Army Rangers and Special Forces units.
Compare this with the way she described her service:

Quote:
Following graduation from West Point, I commanded two Special Operations companies – small forces structured to complete the most physically and politically challenging missions. Multiple times a year, year after year, we underwent recertification on the weapons that were most central to our mission. Going to the range was treated with the utmost of gravity and military discipline. There was no joking around on the range. Every single round of ammunition was accounted for every single time.
See the discrepancy?
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 01:46 PM   #91
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,235
So she is claiming to have the most experience in the topic that she has literally the least amount of practical experience in.

I’m sure her real duties were pretty important to the missions that her unit supported.

I see nothing that qualifies her to pass judgment on the bill of rights and our ability to retain those rights.

Now there’s one truth: there is the perception that every cartridge is accounted for. Just a perception to keep the troops from pilfering ammunition. It’s also accounted for so that there’s enough for everyone that needs to fire.
If a soldier has the will to steal a few boxes of ammunition, they can. Just like soldiers steal boxes of chem lights
rickyrick is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 02:56 PM   #92
johnm1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 652
Well, I’m 58 years old and I just learned a lot in reading the last few posts. I’ll admit that I fell for the close association of words. But it wasn’t blindly. AB quoted from the article what made me think she was claiming that she was actually in the mud and blood and beer.

I commanded two Special Operations companies – small forces structured to complete the most physically and politically challenging missions.

My failure in reading comprehension left me unsure about MTT TL’s research. The follow up didn’t.

To all those who clarified, thank you. To all those who clarified and knew from experience in the military, thank you for your service. You are still serving to help us not forget our history.
__________________
John M.
Mesa, AZ
johnm1 is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 03:23 PM   #93
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTT TL
I should point out that Don't Ask, Don't Tell was in effect at the time so she did not have to lie about being gay, despite what she says in the article.
Depending on which source you look at, DADT was either adopted in October of 1993, or enacted in October of 1993 and became effective February 28, 1994. Ms. Margiotta was commissioned in 1991, which means that (a) she was dishonorable enough to have accepted a commission as an officer knowing that she was prohibited from serving, and (b) she did have to lie about her sexual orientation for at least 2+ years.

It strikes me that Ms. Margiotta has a history and exhibits a pattern of "enhancing" the truth.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 03:26 PM   #94
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnm1
Well, I’m 58 years old and I just learned a lot in reading the last few posts. I’ll admit that I fell for the close association of words. But it wasn’t blindly. AB quoted from the article what made me think she was claiming that she was actually in the mud and blood and beer.

I commanded two Special Operations companies – small forces structured to complete the most physically and politically challenging missions.

My failure in reading comprehension left me unsure about MTT TL’s research. The follow up didn’t.
Don't feel bad. Yes, you fell for the trap, but that's exactly the point of this entire discussion. She wrote what she wrote to very carefully -- intentionally and deliberately -- cause readers to believe exactly what you believed. You did not fail in reading comprehension. You simply fell for the fairy tale.

A signal company is not an infantry or weapons company. Yes, they are issued weapons, but who knows what? As I wrote, my father was a captain in the Signal Corps in WW2. He's not alive so I can't ask him, but I'm going to guess that as company commander he probably wore an M1911A1 and never shot it after Officers' Basic Training, and his "troops" were probably issued M1 carbines rather than M1 Garand battle rifles. In the 1990s the support troops probably were issued the cast-off M16s when the front-line troops got the newer M4s.

To keep this on-track and on-topic ... this is typical and exemplary of the tactics employed by anti-gun types. It's not unheard of for them to outright lie, but it's perhaps far more common for them to stretch, twist, bend, fold, spindle and mutilate the truth in order to make their point promote their agenda. If we set aside the basic fact that Ms. Margiotta lied about her sexual orientation to stay in West Point and to accept a commission, we can probably assume that she served [otherwise] honorably for nine years. That should be enough -- "I served for nine years."

But that wouldn't make the point very effectively. So she embellished her account to make you (and countless other readers, I'm sure) think that, as you put it, she was "in the mud and the blood and the beer." You didn't misconstrue her words to reach that belief -- she wrote those words precisely so that you would believe that.

And that's why I wrote that, to me, her statements are tantamount to stolen valor. She's claiming to have been something more than what she was.

Last edited by Aguila Blanca; June 18, 2018 at 03:41 PM.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 05:32 PM   #95
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
Actually in my first hitch I was in the Signal Corps as well. Not too far from the time frame she served and also at Ft. Bragg for some of that time... at gasp... a Special Operations unit.

That said I would never for one second try to use that experience to validate any kind of opinion on firearms. Although, since I was the guy at the unit who loved going to the range I was qualified on the M60, M240, M249, M9, M16A2 and M2. Even rear echelon units have a few of these weapons. They loved sending me to the range because I would always qualify expert and it got their numbers up. For me it was a lot more fun than hanging out in the motorpool all day.

No clue how I was supposed to employ all these weapons were the unit to actually deploy. While in signal we never did any type of tactical combat training at all. I'd say most of the people in the unit were competent enough in their jobs but if it had ever had come down to real combat it would have gone... poorly. I was glad to be done with it and move on.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war.
MTT TL is offline  
Old June 18, 2018, 05:48 PM   #96
MoArk Willy
Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2018
Posts: 93
Gun control, climate change, world peace.
All are talking points. Whenever someone tries to tell me about more gun control I just say "like what?". The always say things that are already in place that they were simply ignorant about. But ignorance is the strength of the anti-anything.
MoArk Willy is offline  
Old June 19, 2018, 01:07 AM   #97
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
Quote:
his "troops" were probably issued M1 carbines rather than M1 Garand battle rifles.
A friend of mine was a telephone lineman (Signal Corps) during Korea. More than once I heard how he loved the M1 carbine, because it was light (and he freely admitted he never had to shoot anyone with it, and had he done so, he might have a different opinion). He also told how he hated the winter, because when winter came, they took away his carbine and made him carry an M1 Garand!

I'm less than impressed with ring knockers in general, my first serious interaction with a West Point Grad soured me so much, I declined appointment to the Point. Possibly because I did, and was first, 3 others in the group also did, and that REALLY upset the that Lt. We didn't get along after that....

Were it up to me, I would revoke that deceitful lady's "membership" in the WPPA, and hang her out to dry, she's not only dishonoring the military in general, she's a dishonor to West Point. She's welcome to hold any personal opinion she wants, but to deliberately mislead the public about her actual service, spout facts that simply aren't facts, and imply that her service gives her some kind of expertise that she clearly doesn't have isn't just deceitful its dishonest, and a slap in the fact to those who are or were honorable members of that special group of veterans.


I'm a Vet, and I hate ...people like her...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old June 19, 2018, 02:41 PM   #98
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,700
Yes, DADT only came into effect when the Clinton Administration came in on January 20, 1993. So like a lot of people, she put her career ahead of integrity. And anyone who takes until they're 19 or so to determines their sexuality....I wouldn't want them under men as an enlisted person.
Again, she is a poseur.
When a potential officer attends a service academy, in addition to a free education they join an alumni association and a network. 90% of them are not better than 90% of the rest.
SIGSHR is offline  
Old June 19, 2018, 05:15 PM   #99
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
anyone who takes until they're 19 or so to determines their sexuality....I wouldn't want them under men as an enlisted person
Not sure what you are trying to say. I've known guys that have "discovered" they are gay as late as their 50s, some after they retired from the military and were married for 20 years. It happens.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war.
MTT TL is offline  
Old June 20, 2018, 03:46 PM   #100
Tom68
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 20, 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 349
I was a student at the Infantry Officer's Basic Course on January 20, 1993, and vividly recall a figurative ominous black cloud that hung over Ft. Benning the entire day.

Back on topic, many comments are spot on regarding organizational support to US Army Special Operations, and more than a few have attempted to leverage their service in such organizations as a vague suggestion that they themselves served in a capacity that involved far greater danger and privations than they actually experienced. The "Tooth to Tail" ratio applies to special operations just as it does conventional forces, which means a whole lot of clerks, supply sergeants, and network signal technicians served in "Special Operations".

They, just like this person, are counting on the general public to be ignorant of the difference in order to misrepresent their credentials.

Oh, plus a whole lot of Signal Soldiers with whom I have served (and to be fair, a whole lot of other MOSs) viewed annual individual weapons qualification as a necessary evil and condition of employment.
Tom68 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.10470 seconds with 8 queries