SNIPERS AND PERSONNEL SERGEANTS - REBUTTAL
6 views
Skip to first unread message
dgvreiman
Mar 19, 2009, 6:36:13 PM3/19/09
to CYBERSTALKER WEB NAMES
SNIPERS AND PERSONNEL SERGEANTS - REBUTTAL
(Smear Merchant Disclaimer: Please note this article (the same as all
of my past articles and exchanges with posters) represents an
editorial on contemporary issues and events - my opinion. Nothing in
this article represents in any manner any asseveration of biographical
fact, nor is about, directed toward or against any particular person -
other than those specifically mentioned herein. This article is being
posted for entertainment purposes only. If any person finds this post
personally annoying, abusive, defaming or otherwise disturbing, please
notify me of your specific reasons for annoyance via email at
legal...@comcast.net.
If we find your detailed objections reasonable (considering the
“reasonable person” doctrine and case law) we will then remove this
post, or the offending passages contained therein, from the Google
archive, publicly apologize and retract. My intent is to entertain,
and to present articles to USENET readers prior to publication to
determine interest, and not to annoy, abuse, humiliate, or in any way
cause anyone emotional harm by posting on USENET or elsewhere. Please
note that defending myself from harassment and obloquy with rebuttal
posts has been deemed a “lawful and legitimate” publication by my
legal counsel. If I am not attacked, libeled, defamed or harassed, or
my copyrighted articles not interrupted nor infringed upon, I clearly
do not have a reason to respond with a rebuttal. Please also note that
I intend to notify any and all ISP’s and web hosts of any annoying or
calumnious post, web site or other similar entity about me after I
give the offender an opportunity to retract, apologize and remove said
post from the Google archive).
SMEAR MERCHANT DISCLAIMER TWO: Considering the typical ridiculous,
absurd and obviously false claims about my military service that
originates from the crackpot smear and con gang that operates on
alt.war.Vietnam, I also hereby certify and attest this article is NOT
a secret coded message that only gang members can decode with their
secret Federal Agent/Sp4 draftee/former Junior Reserve Officer/ midget
decoder and mind reading rings.
This means the Brownie crackpots’ inevitable accusations and howls
that this article is really me claiming in a special soothsaying code
(a code only crackpots et al smear gang can only read of course which
involves their typical claim the American Heritage Dictionary’s
definitions of simple terms, such as “we” “estimated” “involved”
“retired from” and “not representing any biographical claim” are all
incorrect, and only their “special interpretations of the English
language can apply to all English terms I use, and of course the
gang’s standard nonsensical mind reading and soothsaying claims that
(1) I was a CIA cross border assassin that sniper killed Ho Chi Minh,
HOORAH - (2) that I personally killed 1803 enemy soldiers in Vietnam
and then feasted on their bodies (burp) (3) that I was a secret member
of the Mi Lai massacre, (let god sort them out) that I hunted down and
murdered unarmed Priests (take that choir boy) (4) that I was trained
by the Martian Army on Mars, and I have green blood, and retractable
fangs (slurp), (5) that the movie "Rambo" was copied after my deeds in
Vietnam and I still live in caves in the northwest (6) and best of
all, I went to the Carlise War College to study WWII tactics even
before I was born!!!! BWHAHAHAHAHHA.
Needless to say, the smear gang misrepresentations of my past posts
are of course, not true.
I have posted dozens of times on USENET that I will not post
autobiographical facts about my life on USENET in any detail. Only a
quip now and then. And, if anyone wants to know the true facts, or a
clarification of any quip, or more information and details about an
issue which are clearly missing in my quips they must first contact
me via email, identify themselves, and then I will determine if I want
to exchange such personal information with them.
Although the above is my standing offer, I should mention that NOT ONE
member of the gang has ever contacted me directly over any one of my
posts. It is clear the gang does not want to know about obvious
typos, errors, and occasional ambiguities, nor clarifications, nor
corrections, nor do they even want verification whether I was the
actual author of the post in question.
As experts on Investigations and the US Military have noted, the gang
leaders and their members clearly want to avoid the truth whenever it
contradicts their contrived and conspired defaming parsing and
fraudulent misrepresentations and distortions of what I have written
in the past, or contradicts their lies and fraud in respect to what is
and is not truly contained in my military records, and of course,
their fraudulent use of USENET posts they know others have written to
use to smear me, defame me, hold me up to public ridicule, stalk me,
and otherwise further their years’ long demonizing and vilification
campaign they have been regularly waging against me.
In short, the gang does not want to know the truth, and they are
desperate to stop me from defending myself as they know my truthful
rebuttals, which they cannot defend as they know what I am posting is
true, reveals them for what they really are.
The gangs lies and fraud border on the pathological, and include the
gang’ preposterous and goofy fraud that (7) a Purple Heart VA card is
the same as a Purple Heart Medal (I have posted on USENET dozens of
times I did not receive a Purple Heart Medal) (8) Nor that removing
hundreds of typos, errors, misstatements made by typists and I found
so far in about thirty-five THOUSAND extemporaneous posts under
accounts I used, and then replacing the errors with the true intended
context and meaning by the author is somehow “sinister” and the
original discarded post was the correct intended post and the
corrected version is false! (Giggle).
Such glaring preposterous crackpot et al smear and fraud gang claims
about me are, as usual, blatantly false and equally ridiculous. (Ask
the gang leaders for proof of their claims the next time they make
such ludicrous claims and watch them scurry for their rocks or produce
their own forgeries, or perhaps typos, errors and such that have long
been detected and discarded in my waste basket they have dug out of
that trash). And no, regardless of forgeries and discarded posts found
in my waste basket that were thrown there because of an error or
typist misstatement by one of our typist’s, I have posted about two
dozen times in the past that my time in South America was spent (other
than an assignment and short visit to Southern Command after I left
Vietnam) exclusively as a Civilian working for Montana Western Oil and
Gas or PCA, which evidence was scanned and posted years ago.)
Also, in response to the smear gang’s et al repeated and convenient
outright lie and fraud that I never said that others were using the
same accounts to post on USENET as I did until the smear gang leaders
started their fraud, con and smear campaign against me and thereby
forced me to post on this newsgroup to defend myself, please see the
following proof that of course the gang leaders et al have been caught
lying again:
http://tinyurl.com/7kfaqz
Experts on Smear Gangs reveal what the Nigel Brooks con and smear gang
is all about.
http://tinyurl.com/6d4aay
TYPISTS’ GALORE POST proves there were about 71 previous posts prior
to the gang’s glaring lie that I never mentioned others posting under
the same accounts I used until after the gang leaders started to use a
few typos, errors and post fragments written by many different people,
years apart, never written on any military forum, deceptively spliced
together with forged words added into or subtracted from the
hodgepodge of different context post fragments so as to fraudulently
alter their meaning or context.
http://tinyurl.com/8hesja Just SOME of Nigel Brooks forgeries
revealed - proof.
End Disclaimer - Rebuttal Begins below:
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:72f6j7F...@mid.individual.net...
> My main weapon was a Car-15 and a M-79, and later various sniper
> weapons. http://tinyurl.com/dffoda
> --
> Nigel Brooks
Doug Says: Mr. Brooks, you pathetic ass, sniper weapons were common
on a bunker line in the 25th Infantry division. These weapons were
commonly used by regular troops and not necessarily by trained sniper
teams. (Brooks wants everyone to believe that although the enemy
regularly used sniper fire at us and against our bunker line - our
bunker line troops never returned any sniper fire - DUHHHHHHHHHHH -
see how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?)
I did use a Car-15 for a while (mostly because my M-16 jammed all the
time) but I soon got rid of it because of its excessive noise and the
blinding muzzle flashes - easy targets (in my opinion that weapon
needed work and that was probably why I could easily get one anytime I
wanted one - but after you used it no one wanted it!)
I went back to a modified M-16 (with a new gas operating system) which
jammed less frequently - but still was - in my opinion at that time -
a piece of shit.
However, most of the long range weapons we used on the Bunker Line
were either a Ma Duce, a Pig, or various 7.62 weapons, which every
bunker line had an ample supply of. (I qualified with a 7.62 so the
M-14 versions were especially accurate for me - I wasn’t exceptionally
good with the .50, yet I knew several NCO’s that were damn good with
that weapon as a sniper weapon, and they were NOT sniper trained
either.
We even used a special modified Ma Duce (.50 cal) as a sniper weapon
with a starlight scope mounted from time to time on the bunker line,
and reactionary force personnel that could hit what they aimed at used
those weapons and other sniper weapons on a regular basis. Brooks,
you already know my records reflect I was the second highest score
rifle expert in my entire battalion in Basic, and I only missed the
honor of being first by a single miss.
My super expert rifle scores certainly proves I was (am) a damn good
marksman, yet as I have already posted and told you several times
before, I am NOT sniper qualified as I never attended that school
nor took such specialized training, but you can bet I can usually hit
what I aim at, even with a starlight scope. (Brooks has a “selective
memory” when he tries to take snippets out of context to defame and
smear -he knows I have already told him several times I was NOT
sniper qualified, but when he sees a smear opportunity he becomes so
excited and shaky he must turn off what little pea brain he has for a
moment or two while his perverse “con man organisms” occur).
I and many other Regular Army NCO’s that were NOT “official
snipers” nor sniper trained sighted and used modified long distance
weapons to snipe at the enemy at every opportunity when were located
on the bunker line, and we even used some of those weapons during
ambush patrols (I didn’t see any draftees using them as most of them
could not hit their ass with a bell attached to it).
Sniping at the enemy when they attempted to infiltrate or recon our
defenses an an Infantry Division’s base camp was an integral part of
bunker line defense in Vietnam, as anyone other than Nigel Brooks will
confirm.
Also, Brooks, you seem to not be able to understand that a NCO’s MOS
(military occupational speciality) (personnel sergeant) whatever, had
little to do with the actual duties of a NCO during the 1968 Tet
Offensive and counteroffensive months.
Not not less than two military experts have already informed you of
the fact MOS meant little during the Vietnam war, and the actual
archives from the 25th Infantry Division in respect to the Special
Force Reactionary also provided you with information which proves your
miss-association of an NCO;s MOS and War time duties are completely
fraudulent, idiotic, stupid, and represent nothing more than con man
fraud in an attempt to defame and smear someone that obviously did
much more in Vietnam than you or your gang members ever did.
Note that Nigel Brooks is attempting to claim that because I (and just
about every other person that helped to man a bunker line at Cu Chi )
sharp shooted the enemy from time to time with special weapons I am
therefore, in Nigel's Secret Squirrel code, claiming I went to Sniper
School and was a qualified US Army sniper! BWHAHAHAHAHAHA! See how
easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/c23ld7
Here is where two former military experts both conclude Brooks is
lying about MOS's reflecting ALL duties an NCO will perform in a
combat zone. (Note the National Personnel Center's web site that also
proves Nigel Brooks is lying about this issue and about the contents
of my military records).
http://tinyurl.com/cdxqv8 Here is proof that Nigel Brooks has been
caught lying about my duties in Vietnam and my military records yet
again.
Here is the official US Army combat policy for all Soldiers assigned
to a hostile fire zone - note how the US Army’s official policy
disagrees with Nigel Brooks - see how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks
is a con man?
ARMY COMBAT POLICY
>From 1. Rod Powers,
Your Guide to U.S. Military.
"It is Army policy that assignment to combat or duty in a
hostile-fire or areas must be shared equitably by all similarly
qualified Soldiers."
1. http://tinyurl.com/p7psw
B. Nigel Brooks clearly is defaming me and painting my military
service in a false light
by stating that all NCO's that did not have infantryman's MOS's never
saw any real combat. Brooks is clearly lying as the official US Army
policy above clearly proves. Why did Brooks try to claim that my
"duty" MOS was always that of a Personnel Staff NCO in Vietnam when
we all know that a good one third of all Army Personnel regularly
perform permanent duties outside of their primary MOS, and ALL NCO's
are required to perform combat duties in a hostile-fire area of
assignment? Because Nigel Brooks is a smear merchant, a liar and he
is
clearly using lies, fraud and false statements to deliberately defame
and cyberstalk me. (The reasons for his actions have already been
stated and can be found at the following URL - along with evidence of
a fantastic amount of Nigel Brooks and his gang members lies, false
accusations and outright fraud.)
http://tinyurl.com/ekn97
Here are excerpts from the 25th Infantry Division’s Archives which
clearly provides the duties for all Reactionary Force personnel. Note
that this official archive states in no uncertain terms that ALL MOS’S
(Personnel Sergeant’s included) were used in those Special Force
Reactionary which were approved by the DOD AFTER Nigel Brooks left
active duty service! So how would ol Nigel have a clue about what
this force did or did not do? See how easy it is to prove Nigel
Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/dgc5aw Descriptions of the duties of special force
reactionary - which was formed by the DOD AFTER Nigel Brooks left the
US Army active duty as a two-year, Sp4 draftee, with a Village Rat
discharge. Brooks clearly does not have a clue that ALL MOS’s
including administrative participated extensively in reactionary
forces, as the archives from the 25th Infantry clearly prove. This
was especially true if a NCO was also infantry qualified, which of
course I was. (See how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con
man?)
http://www.vhpa.org/stories/sapper.pdf A typical account of an attack
on the Cu Chi base camp, this was light compared to the attacks in
1968 - note the various different MOS’s of the men defending the camp,
and the weapons they carried, also note the sniper fire from the
bunker line. See how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/c6wvgp An account of a brief attack on the Cu Chi
base camp - note how specific and special forces reactionary were
instantly deployed. There were no “orders cut” or “records noted” for
each deployment of a reactionary force. That deployment sometimes
happened in minutes, and even in respect to patrols we were lucky if
we would get a day in advance notice. Reactionary Special Forces were
sent to units within the Division as they were needed, and placed
under the command of that unit. Reactionary Special Forces therefore
participated, worked with and were assigned to *several* different
units within the Division without official orders assigning them -
there was no time to cut orders, assign men, then cut orders to send
them to another unit that was screaming for help - Brook’s suggestion
otherwise is nutty, goofy, idiotic, and downright Nigel Brooks. See
how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/5agdtr A history of the 1/5th (yes I was in the
5th) which provides ample references to sniper fire into and from our
bunker lines. Cu Chi was a very special place in Vietnam - people
like Nigel Brooks never experienced it - and know nothing about it -
which is typical of Nigel Brooks. See how easy it is to prove Nigel
Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/a4hova Here is an independent First Sergeant,
retired, with 30 years of service agreeing with me, and proving Nigel
Brooks is full of shit, as usual. Obviously, the unit I was assigned
to did not use in any manner the duties of a personnel sergeant - so
for Brooks to associate those duties with the actual duties this
1/27th Unit required - is absolute and total fraud - see how easy it
is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/dyfjbv Some of the Lessons that were provided in
RVN combat training - which of course Nigel Brooks never attended.
This includes sniping at the enemy from fixed positions. See how
easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man? And, of course, that
his gang members are morons?
I could go on and on and on proving Nigel Brooks is conning the
readers about this issue - but for us that really were in Vietnam,
and really were in combat, we already know Nigel Brooks is perhaps one
of the worst con men, smear merchant and fraud gang leader on USENET.
Doug Grant (Tm)
(Smear Merchant Disclaimer: Please note this article (the same as all
of my past articles and exchanges with posters) represents an
editorial on contemporary issues and events - my opinion. Nothing in
this article represents in any manner any asseveration of biographical
fact, nor is about, directed toward or against any particular person -
other than those specifically mentioned herein. This article is being
posted for entertainment purposes only. If any person finds this post
personally annoying, abusive, defaming or otherwise disturbing, please
notify me of your specific reasons for annoyance via email at
legal...@comcast.net.
If we find your detailed objections reasonable (considering the
“reasonable person” doctrine and case law) we will then remove this
post, or the offending passages contained therein, from the Google
archive, publicly apologize and retract. My intent is to entertain,
and to present articles to USENET readers prior to publication to
determine interest, and not to annoy, abuse, humiliate, or in any way
cause anyone emotional harm by posting on USENET or elsewhere. Please
note that defending myself from harassment and obloquy with rebuttal
posts has been deemed a “lawful and legitimate” publication by my
legal counsel. If I am not attacked, libeled, defamed or harassed, or
my copyrighted articles not interrupted nor infringed upon, I clearly
do not have a reason to respond with a rebuttal. Please also note that
I intend to notify any and all ISP’s and web hosts of any annoying or
calumnious post, web site or other similar entity about me after I
give the offender an opportunity to retract, apologize and remove said
post from the Google archive).
SMEAR MERCHANT DISCLAIMER TWO: Considering the typical ridiculous,
absurd and obviously false claims about my military service that
originates from the crackpot smear and con gang that operates on
alt.war.Vietnam, I also hereby certify and attest this article is NOT
a secret coded message that only gang members can decode with their
secret Federal Agent/Sp4 draftee/former Junior Reserve Officer/ midget
decoder and mind reading rings.
This means the Brownie crackpots’ inevitable accusations and howls
that this article is really me claiming in a special soothsaying code
(a code only crackpots et al smear gang can only read of course which
involves their typical claim the American Heritage Dictionary’s
definitions of simple terms, such as “we” “estimated” “involved”
“retired from” and “not representing any biographical claim” are all
incorrect, and only their “special interpretations of the English
language can apply to all English terms I use, and of course the
gang’s standard nonsensical mind reading and soothsaying claims that
(1) I was a CIA cross border assassin that sniper killed Ho Chi Minh,
HOORAH - (2) that I personally killed 1803 enemy soldiers in Vietnam
and then feasted on their bodies (burp) (3) that I was a secret member
of the Mi Lai massacre, (let god sort them out) that I hunted down and
murdered unarmed Priests (take that choir boy) (4) that I was trained
by the Martian Army on Mars, and I have green blood, and retractable
fangs (slurp), (5) that the movie "Rambo" was copied after my deeds in
Vietnam and I still live in caves in the northwest (6) and best of
all, I went to the Carlise War College to study WWII tactics even
before I was born!!!! BWHAHAHAHAHHA.
Needless to say, the smear gang misrepresentations of my past posts
are of course, not true.
I have posted dozens of times on USENET that I will not post
autobiographical facts about my life on USENET in any detail. Only a
quip now and then. And, if anyone wants to know the true facts, or a
clarification of any quip, or more information and details about an
issue which are clearly missing in my quips they must first contact
me via email, identify themselves, and then I will determine if I want
to exchange such personal information with them.
Although the above is my standing offer, I should mention that NOT ONE
member of the gang has ever contacted me directly over any one of my
posts. It is clear the gang does not want to know about obvious
typos, errors, and occasional ambiguities, nor clarifications, nor
corrections, nor do they even want verification whether I was the
actual author of the post in question.
As experts on Investigations and the US Military have noted, the gang
leaders and their members clearly want to avoid the truth whenever it
contradicts their contrived and conspired defaming parsing and
fraudulent misrepresentations and distortions of what I have written
in the past, or contradicts their lies and fraud in respect to what is
and is not truly contained in my military records, and of course,
their fraudulent use of USENET posts they know others have written to
use to smear me, defame me, hold me up to public ridicule, stalk me,
and otherwise further their years’ long demonizing and vilification
campaign they have been regularly waging against me.
In short, the gang does not want to know the truth, and they are
desperate to stop me from defending myself as they know my truthful
rebuttals, which they cannot defend as they know what I am posting is
true, reveals them for what they really are.
The gangs lies and fraud border on the pathological, and include the
gang’ preposterous and goofy fraud that (7) a Purple Heart VA card is
the same as a Purple Heart Medal (I have posted on USENET dozens of
times I did not receive a Purple Heart Medal) (8) Nor that removing
hundreds of typos, errors, misstatements made by typists and I found
so far in about thirty-five THOUSAND extemporaneous posts under
accounts I used, and then replacing the errors with the true intended
context and meaning by the author is somehow “sinister” and the
original discarded post was the correct intended post and the
corrected version is false! (Giggle).
Such glaring preposterous crackpot et al smear and fraud gang claims
about me are, as usual, blatantly false and equally ridiculous. (Ask
the gang leaders for proof of their claims the next time they make
such ludicrous claims and watch them scurry for their rocks or produce
their own forgeries, or perhaps typos, errors and such that have long
been detected and discarded in my waste basket they have dug out of
that trash). And no, regardless of forgeries and discarded posts found
in my waste basket that were thrown there because of an error or
typist misstatement by one of our typist’s, I have posted about two
dozen times in the past that my time in South America was spent (other
than an assignment and short visit to Southern Command after I left
Vietnam) exclusively as a Civilian working for Montana Western Oil and
Gas or PCA, which evidence was scanned and posted years ago.)
Also, in response to the smear gang’s et al repeated and convenient
outright lie and fraud that I never said that others were using the
same accounts to post on USENET as I did until the smear gang leaders
started their fraud, con and smear campaign against me and thereby
forced me to post on this newsgroup to defend myself, please see the
following proof that of course the gang leaders et al have been caught
lying again:
http://tinyurl.com/7kfaqz
Experts on Smear Gangs reveal what the Nigel Brooks con and smear gang
is all about.
http://tinyurl.com/6d4aay
TYPISTS’ GALORE POST proves there were about 71 previous posts prior
to the gang’s glaring lie that I never mentioned others posting under
the same accounts I used until after the gang leaders started to use a
few typos, errors and post fragments written by many different people,
years apart, never written on any military forum, deceptively spliced
together with forged words added into or subtracted from the
hodgepodge of different context post fragments so as to fraudulently
alter their meaning or context.
http://tinyurl.com/8hesja Just SOME of Nigel Brooks forgeries
revealed - proof.
End Disclaimer - Rebuttal Begins below:
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:72f6j7F...@mid.individual.net...
> My main weapon was a Car-15 and a M-79, and later various sniper
> weapons. http://tinyurl.com/dffoda
> --
> Nigel Brooks
Doug Says: Mr. Brooks, you pathetic ass, sniper weapons were common
on a bunker line in the 25th Infantry division. These weapons were
commonly used by regular troops and not necessarily by trained sniper
teams. (Brooks wants everyone to believe that although the enemy
regularly used sniper fire at us and against our bunker line - our
bunker line troops never returned any sniper fire - DUHHHHHHHHHHH -
see how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?)
I did use a Car-15 for a while (mostly because my M-16 jammed all the
time) but I soon got rid of it because of its excessive noise and the
blinding muzzle flashes - easy targets (in my opinion that weapon
needed work and that was probably why I could easily get one anytime I
wanted one - but after you used it no one wanted it!)
I went back to a modified M-16 (with a new gas operating system) which
jammed less frequently - but still was - in my opinion at that time -
a piece of shit.
However, most of the long range weapons we used on the Bunker Line
were either a Ma Duce, a Pig, or various 7.62 weapons, which every
bunker line had an ample supply of. (I qualified with a 7.62 so the
M-14 versions were especially accurate for me - I wasn’t exceptionally
good with the .50, yet I knew several NCO’s that were damn good with
that weapon as a sniper weapon, and they were NOT sniper trained
either.
We even used a special modified Ma Duce (.50 cal) as a sniper weapon
with a starlight scope mounted from time to time on the bunker line,
and reactionary force personnel that could hit what they aimed at used
those weapons and other sniper weapons on a regular basis. Brooks,
you already know my records reflect I was the second highest score
rifle expert in my entire battalion in Basic, and I only missed the
honor of being first by a single miss.
My super expert rifle scores certainly proves I was (am) a damn good
marksman, yet as I have already posted and told you several times
before, I am NOT sniper qualified as I never attended that school
nor took such specialized training, but you can bet I can usually hit
what I aim at, even with a starlight scope. (Brooks has a “selective
memory” when he tries to take snippets out of context to defame and
smear -he knows I have already told him several times I was NOT
sniper qualified, but when he sees a smear opportunity he becomes so
excited and shaky he must turn off what little pea brain he has for a
moment or two while his perverse “con man organisms” occur).
I and many other Regular Army NCO’s that were NOT “official
snipers” nor sniper trained sighted and used modified long distance
weapons to snipe at the enemy at every opportunity when were located
on the bunker line, and we even used some of those weapons during
ambush patrols (I didn’t see any draftees using them as most of them
could not hit their ass with a bell attached to it).
Sniping at the enemy when they attempted to infiltrate or recon our
defenses an an Infantry Division’s base camp was an integral part of
bunker line defense in Vietnam, as anyone other than Nigel Brooks will
confirm.
Also, Brooks, you seem to not be able to understand that a NCO’s MOS
(military occupational speciality) (personnel sergeant) whatever, had
little to do with the actual duties of a NCO during the 1968 Tet
Offensive and counteroffensive months.
Not not less than two military experts have already informed you of
the fact MOS meant little during the Vietnam war, and the actual
archives from the 25th Infantry Division in respect to the Special
Force Reactionary also provided you with information which proves your
miss-association of an NCO;s MOS and War time duties are completely
fraudulent, idiotic, stupid, and represent nothing more than con man
fraud in an attempt to defame and smear someone that obviously did
much more in Vietnam than you or your gang members ever did.
Note that Nigel Brooks is attempting to claim that because I (and just
about every other person that helped to man a bunker line at Cu Chi )
sharp shooted the enemy from time to time with special weapons I am
therefore, in Nigel's Secret Squirrel code, claiming I went to Sniper
School and was a qualified US Army sniper! BWHAHAHAHAHAHA! See how
easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/c23ld7
Here is where two former military experts both conclude Brooks is
lying about MOS's reflecting ALL duties an NCO will perform in a
combat zone. (Note the National Personnel Center's web site that also
proves Nigel Brooks is lying about this issue and about the contents
of my military records).
http://tinyurl.com/cdxqv8 Here is proof that Nigel Brooks has been
caught lying about my duties in Vietnam and my military records yet
again.
Here is the official US Army combat policy for all Soldiers assigned
to a hostile fire zone - note how the US Army’s official policy
disagrees with Nigel Brooks - see how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks
is a con man?
ARMY COMBAT POLICY
>From 1. Rod Powers,
Your Guide to U.S. Military.
"It is Army policy that assignment to combat or duty in a
hostile-fire or areas must be shared equitably by all similarly
qualified Soldiers."
1. http://tinyurl.com/p7psw
B. Nigel Brooks clearly is defaming me and painting my military
service in a false light
by stating that all NCO's that did not have infantryman's MOS's never
saw any real combat. Brooks is clearly lying as the official US Army
policy above clearly proves. Why did Brooks try to claim that my
"duty" MOS was always that of a Personnel Staff NCO in Vietnam when
we all know that a good one third of all Army Personnel regularly
perform permanent duties outside of their primary MOS, and ALL NCO's
are required to perform combat duties in a hostile-fire area of
assignment? Because Nigel Brooks is a smear merchant, a liar and he
is
clearly using lies, fraud and false statements to deliberately defame
and cyberstalk me. (The reasons for his actions have already been
stated and can be found at the following URL - along with evidence of
a fantastic amount of Nigel Brooks and his gang members lies, false
accusations and outright fraud.)
http://tinyurl.com/ekn97
Here are excerpts from the 25th Infantry Division’s Archives which
clearly provides the duties for all Reactionary Force personnel. Note
that this official archive states in no uncertain terms that ALL MOS’S
(Personnel Sergeant’s included) were used in those Special Force
Reactionary which were approved by the DOD AFTER Nigel Brooks left
active duty service! So how would ol Nigel have a clue about what
this force did or did not do? See how easy it is to prove Nigel
Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/dgc5aw Descriptions of the duties of special force
reactionary - which was formed by the DOD AFTER Nigel Brooks left the
US Army active duty as a two-year, Sp4 draftee, with a Village Rat
discharge. Brooks clearly does not have a clue that ALL MOS’s
including administrative participated extensively in reactionary
forces, as the archives from the 25th Infantry clearly prove. This
was especially true if a NCO was also infantry qualified, which of
course I was. (See how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con
man?)
http://www.vhpa.org/stories/sapper.pdf A typical account of an attack
on the Cu Chi base camp, this was light compared to the attacks in
1968 - note the various different MOS’s of the men defending the camp,
and the weapons they carried, also note the sniper fire from the
bunker line. See how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/c6wvgp An account of a brief attack on the Cu Chi
base camp - note how specific and special forces reactionary were
instantly deployed. There were no “orders cut” or “records noted” for
each deployment of a reactionary force. That deployment sometimes
happened in minutes, and even in respect to patrols we were lucky if
we would get a day in advance notice. Reactionary Special Forces were
sent to units within the Division as they were needed, and placed
under the command of that unit. Reactionary Special Forces therefore
participated, worked with and were assigned to *several* different
units within the Division without official orders assigning them -
there was no time to cut orders, assign men, then cut orders to send
them to another unit that was screaming for help - Brook’s suggestion
otherwise is nutty, goofy, idiotic, and downright Nigel Brooks. See
how easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/5agdtr A history of the 1/5th (yes I was in the
5th) which provides ample references to sniper fire into and from our
bunker lines. Cu Chi was a very special place in Vietnam - people
like Nigel Brooks never experienced it - and know nothing about it -
which is typical of Nigel Brooks. See how easy it is to prove Nigel
Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/a4hova Here is an independent First Sergeant,
retired, with 30 years of service agreeing with me, and proving Nigel
Brooks is full of shit, as usual. Obviously, the unit I was assigned
to did not use in any manner the duties of a personnel sergeant - so
for Brooks to associate those duties with the actual duties this
1/27th Unit required - is absolute and total fraud - see how easy it
is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man?
http://tinyurl.com/dyfjbv Some of the Lessons that were provided in
RVN combat training - which of course Nigel Brooks never attended.
This includes sniping at the enemy from fixed positions. See how
easy it is to prove Nigel Brooks is a con man? And, of course, that
his gang members are morons?
I could go on and on and on proving Nigel Brooks is conning the
readers about this issue - but for us that really were in Vietnam,
and really were in combat, we already know Nigel Brooks is perhaps one
of the worst con men, smear merchant and fraud gang leader on USENET.
Doug Grant (Tm)
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages