← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Stigmata
Thread ID: 18326 | Posts: 11 | Started: 2005-05-21
2005-05-21 12:49 | User Profile
[size=4][font=Arial]How Far Will The Army Go?
[/font][/size][font=Arial]Apr 28, 2005 9:59 pm US/Mountain [/font][size=3][font=Arial]How far will U.S. Army recruiters go to bring young men and women into their ranks? An Arvada West High School senior recently decided to find out. The following is CBS4 Investigator Rick Sallinger's report..
ARVADA, Colo. (CBS4) -- Last month the U.S. Army failed to meet its goal of 6,800 new troops.
Aware of this trend, David McSwane, a local high school student, decided he wanted to find out to what extent some recruiters would go to sign up soldiers who were not up to grade.
McSwane, 17, is actually just the kind of teenager the military would like. He's a high school journalist and honor student at Arvada West High School. But McSwane decided he wanted to see "how far the Army would go during a war to get one more solider."
McSwane contacted his local army recruiting office in Golden with a scenario he created. He told a recruiter that he was a dropout and didn't have a high school diploma.
"No problem," the recruiter explained. He suggested that McSwane create a fake diploma from a non-existent school.
McSwane recorded the recruiter saying that on the phone.
"It can be like Faith Hill Baptist School or something -- whatever you choose," the recruiter said.
As instructed, McSwane went on the computer to a Web site and for $200 arranged to have a phony diploma created that certified him as a graduate of Faith Hill Baptist High School, the very name the recruiter suggested. It came complete with a fake grade transcript.
"What was your reaction to them encouraging you to get a phony diploma?" CBS4's Rick Sallinger asked.
"I was shocked," McSwane said. "I'm sitting there looking at a poster that says 'Integrity, Honor, Respect' and he is telling me to lie."
McSwane also pretended he had a drug problem when he spoke with the recruiter.
The Army does not accept enlistees with drug problems.
"I have a problem with drugs," McSwane said, referring to the conversation he had with the recruiter. "I can't kick the habit ... just marijuana."
"[The recruiter] said 'Not a problem,' just take this detox ... he said he would pay half of it ... told me where to go."
Drug testers CBS4 contacted insist it doesn't work, but the recruiter claimed in another recorded phone conversation that taking "detoxification capsules and liquid" would help McSwane pass the required test.
"The two times I had the guys use it, it has worked both times," the recruiter said in the recorded conversation. "We didn't have to worry about anything."
Then the original recruiter was transferred and another recruiter, Sgt. Tim Pickel, picked up the ball.
A friend of McSwane shot videotape as Pickel drove McSwane to a store where he purchased the so-called detox kit.
CBS4 then went to the Army recruiting office and confronted Sgt. Pickel. CBS4 played him a conversation McSwane had with Pickel on the phone. The transcript of that conversation follows:
Pickel: When you said about the one problem that you had, what does it consist of? McSwane: "Marijuana." Pickel: Oh, OK so nothing major? McSwane: Yeah, he said he would take me down to get that stuff, I mean I have no idea what it is, so you would have to show me. Is that a problem? Pickel: No, not at all.
Pickel quickly referred CBS4 to his superiors.
CBS4 then played the tapes and showed the video to Lt. Col. Jeffrey Brodeur, who heads army recruiting for the region.
"Let me sum up all of this with one word: unacceptable, completely unacceptable," Brodeur said.
Hearing recruiters talking about phony diplomas and ways to beat drug tests left Brodeur more than a little disturbed.
"Let me tell you something sir, I'm a soldier and have been a soldier for 20 years," Brodeur said. "This violates trust, it violates integrity, it violates honor and it violates duty."
The army says it is conducting a full investigation. Brodeur said there is no pressure or punishment for recruiters if quotas are not met. They are, however, rewarded when their goals are surpassed.
[/font][/size][size=4][font=Arial]CBS4 Video:
[img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][/size][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Watch Rick Sallinger's Investigates Report, Part I[/color][/font][/url]
[font=Arial][img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Watch Rick Sallinger's Investigates Report, Part II[/color][/font][/url]
[font=Arial][img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Full Interview With Lt. Col. Jeffrey Brodeur (8 Minutes)[/color][/font][/url]
[size=4][font=Arial]Additional Resources:
[/font][/size][font=Arial][size=3]The U.S. Army Recruiting Battalion Denver office released the following press release on April 29 in relation to this case:
Yesterday the Denver Army Recruiting Battalion took action against two Army recruiters for alleged impropriety. One recruiter is suspended from recruiting until completion of the investigation. The other recruiter, who was in transition to a new duty location, is being called back to the area for the investigation and is also not recruiting.
Lt. Col. Jeffrey Brodeur, Denver Army Recruiting Battalion commander, said: "We began conducting an investigation immediately upon finding out about the allegations made toward these recruiters and are required to complete the investigation within 30 days.
"Recruiter misconduct is not acceptable and it violates honor, duty and trust.
"The Army takes a very serious approach to proper enlistment procedure and integrity. All allegations are investigated. We do not tolerate unprofessional behavior and our stringent guidelines for policing the recruiting force is evidence of that commitment."
[/size][/font][size=4][font=Arial]CBS4 Video:
[img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][/size][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Meeting Mission: Recruiter Says He Was Fired For Quota Failure[/color][/font][/url]
[font=Arial][img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Military Command Responds To Investigation[/color][/font][/url]
[font=Arial][img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Watch Rick Sallinger's Investigates Report, Part I[/color][/font][/url]
[font=Arial][img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Watch Rick Sallinger's Investigates Report, Part II[/color][/font][/url]
[font=Arial][img]http://images.viacomlocalnetworks.com/images_image_294131050[/img][/font][url="http://javascript:void(0)"][font=Arial][color=#000000]Full Interview With Lt. Col. Jeffrey Brodeur (8 Minutes)[/color][/font][/url]
[url="http://news4colorado.com/topstories/local_story_118125046.html"]http://news4colorado.com/topstories/local_story_118125046.html[/url]
2005-05-24 00:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Stigmata][font=Arial][size=1][color=indigo]How Far Will The Army Go?[/color][/size][/font] [font=Arial][/font][font=Arial][size=1][color=indigo]"The Army takes a very serious approach to proper enlistment procedure and integrity.[/color][/size][/font][/QUOTE] Yes, Bush says get 'em and they better get them recruits any way they can.
:tank:
2005-05-24 00:37 | User Profile
The US military is just like the US government: it sees no problem at all with telling lies. Lying is very easy for them.
This isn't just one isolated incident. Look at the other high-profile cases, especially those where the military tried to take lemons and make lemonade. The military making up that story about Jessica Lynch to stir up patriotism. The military hiding the facts about Pat Tillman's death for the same purpose.
"Honor" has no meaning to the leadership of the US military anymore. It's just another empty word to be cynically used in recruiting and propaganda.
2005-05-24 01:29 | User Profile
No problem, the US are now getting their troops from overseas but dont tell anyone about it.
The same thing that the Romans Empire did before it colapsed.
2005-05-24 01:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler] The military making up that story about Jessica Lynch to stir up patriotism. I got the sense that the media pursued that story like pirhana and made everthing they could out of it to fill the PC needs of the audience. However, I'd have to go back and look at the Public Affairs releases to unfog the memory.
The Tillman bit: I don't think anyone wants to advertise mistakes, but the smell of cover up was strong, wasn't it?
"Honor" has no meaning to the leadership of the US military anymore. [/QUOTE]False statement, generalization. Trouble is, evidence of "a lack thereof" seems to be growing, so you are at least partly right.
2005-05-24 14:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angeleyes]False statement, generalization. Trouble is, evidence of "a lack thereof" seems to be growing, so you are at least partly right.[/QUOTE]
I get the feeling the farther up the COC you get, the less honor is to be found. Is that less of a genralization? For every Hackworth, you get a dozen Boordas, maybe?
Hey, are those Mk. IX Spits in your av?
2005-05-24 15:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angeleyes][Quote=Angler] "Honor" has no meaning to the leadership of the US military anymore.
False statement, generalization. Trouble is, evidence of "a lack thereof" seems to be growing, so you are at least partly right.[/QUOTE]When I say "leadership," I'm talking primarily about the people who are sufficiently high up to make the decisions about what info (or disinfo) gets released to the public. Clearly those people in the highest positions have no sense of honor; otherwise, we wouldn't be hearing these lies. Those in lower positions who knowingly play along with the lie are also guilty of being dishonorable moral cowards. But I understand that not all officers are like that. There have been whistleblowers (sometimes anonymous, but that's okay) who have revealed the truth to the public. My negative remarks don't apply to them. For example, MST just mentioned Hackworth, a man I've always admired.
2005-05-24 23:59 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]When I say "leadership," I'm talking primarily about the people who are sufficiently high up to make the decisions about what info (or disinfo) gets released to the public. Clearly those people in the highest positions have no sense of honor; otherwise, we wouldn't be hearing these lies. Those in lower positions who knowingly play along with the lie are also guilty of being dishonorable moral cowards. But I understand that not all officers are like that. There have been whistleblowers (sometimes anonymous, but that's okay) who have revealed the truth to the public. My negative remarks don't apply to them. For example, MST just mentioned Hackworth, a man I've always admired.[/QUOTE] Angel: Got it, thanks.
Having concerns about how the leadership discharge the "special trust and confidence" is a valid position. Your Army is America's blood and treasure. You'd want to be able to trust Scout Masters if you kid was a scout . . .
MST: Your Hackworth analogy is actually backward, though I feel your sentiments ring true. By the time a Boorda or a Joulwan gets a fourth star, two hundred or so Hackworths stopped getting promoted past Lieutenant Colonel. :mad:
2005-05-25 00:44 | User Profile
Most Coups d'Etat are led by Colonels.
With the increasing Thirdworldization of America it's only a matter of time before such extra-Constitutional "Regime Change"... :tank:
2005-05-25 14:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angeleyes]Angel: Got it, thanks.
Having concerns about how the leadership discharge the "special trust and confidence" is a valid position. Your Army is America's blood and treasure. You'd want to be able to trust Scout Masters if you kid was a scout . . .
Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think trust is earned, not given. Mainly, I'm speaking about the blind loyalty shown to creatures like Bush, who send the kids of others out to die and be maimed to do something he's not willing to do himself (or send his prescious brats for either). Aren't the Bush twins the prime age to be directing cars in a Baghdad traffic circle? I realize this phenomenon has always been relatively common in the U.S. though never more so than in recent history. I don't think this necessarily means that the CINC should be required to have been in combat, but I think the country would be a helluva lot better off for it.
MST: Your Hackworth analogy is actually backward, though I feel your sentiments ring true. By the time a Boorda or a Joulwan gets a fourth star, two hundred or so Hackworths stopped getting promoted past Lieutenant Colonel. :mad:[/QUOTE]
That's what I was driving at. :thumbsup: Sorry if I gave the impression of thinking the military full of Boordas relative to Hackworths. I know it's quite the opposite. I get the feeling that truth-telling of the Hackworth variety is not a prized commodity in the etheral atmosphere of the Pentagon's halls. Feel free to woodshed me if I'm wrong in that impression. At all levels of government, it seems as if they're operating with a bad case of schizophrenia or something. What I mean is that if the guy on the street, whether that's a platoon sergeant or a beat cop, tells his superior what he wants to hear instead of what he needs to know (or if the superior has selective hearing) then that guy tells his superior the same and on up the chain of command, by the time you get to the decision-makers at the top, the info bears no resemblance to reality at all. Therefore, gov't response to events seems rather insane. I think the post-purge but pre-Barbarossa Soviet military was a great example of this. I sometimes think the only thing keeping the U.S. military's wheels greased at this point is the fact that individual initiative is still regarded as something good, though that could be changing for the worse.
2005-05-26 05:24 | User Profile
Hackworth had the credibility to raise the BS flag over and over again. Bless him for his passion and his love for the common soldier.
As for trust . . . aye.
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think trust is earned, not given. Mainly, I'm speaking about the blind loyalty shown to creatures like Bush, who send the kids of others out to die and be maimed to do something he's not willing to do himself (or send his prescious brats for either). Aren't the Bush twins the prime age to be directing cars in a Baghdad traffic circle? I realize this phenomenon has always been relatively common in the U.S. though never more so than in recent history. I don't think this necessarily means that the CINC should be required to have been in combat, but I think the country would be a helluva lot better off for it.
That's what I was driving at. :thumbsup: Sorry if I gave the impression of thinking the military full of Boordas relative to Hackworths. I know it's quite the opposite. I get the feeling that truth-telling of the Hackworth variety is not a prized commodity in the etheral atmosphere of the Pentagon's halls. Feel free to woodshed me if I'm wrong in that impression. At all levels of government, it seems as if they're operating with a bad case of schizophrenia or something. What I mean is that if the guy on the street, whether that's a platoon sergeant or a beat cop, tells his superior what he wants to hear instead of what he needs to know (or if the superior has selective hearing) then that guy tells his superior the same and on up the chain of command, by the time you get to the decision-makers at the top, the info bears no resemblance to reality at all. Therefore, gov't response to events seems rather insane. I think the post-purge but pre-Barbarossa Soviet military was a great example of this. I sometimes think the only thing keeping the U.S. military's wheels greased at this point is the fact that individual initiative is still regarded as something good, though that could be changing for the worse.[/QUOTE]