Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, you think I want to jump on people defending the military?
No, What I dislike are busybodies who try everything they can to get people in trouble. You seem to think I dislike the military. No I do not. I dislike the attitude of worshipping the military. Which Stolen Valor is a part of. It was easily covered under fraud. but for some reason it needed a special law because people feel that those who go into the military are special and deserve special things.

So because its a type of Fraud that has a special name you think its terrible? So should we also change the name to just rape then for Statutory rape? Just because they are underage they think they are special and deserve a special name for their types of rape....... who cares about what it is called its fraud.

As far as me being a "Busybody" I do find it offensive when someone impersonates a Veteran, I DO take it rather more seriously then you do because I have a bracelet I haven't taken off since 2011 with the name of my friend who stepped on an IED and didn't make it. I have a friend who was shot in the head by a Sniper (he lived believe it or not) and Another buddy who lost both his legs to an IED. And that was just from my one deployment. I have several other friends who are disabled for the rest of their lives because they served our country. So when someone tries to impersonate a veteran, especially to gain benefits of some sort it bugs me to no end and I will be a "Busy Body" to fix that problem.

I understand your point, you think its just a job and we signed up for it so why should we get more attention then you and your friends doing whatever you do. Regardless of what you think of the politics behind the wars we fight a lot of us signed up to SERVE our country, to shield our nation with our very lives if necessary. Yes we haven't been invaded since WWII but that doesn't change why we enlist. I have in the course of my enlistment and since then, run into a number of people who think that the only reason people join the military is because they are to stupid to get into college, wanted to steal from the government, wanted a place to live and all sorts of other demeaning and rude reasons. The fact is that this propagates a whole lot of problems that once led to how we treated our veterans of the Vietnam war. In the end you can think whatever the hell you would like of me. The law is on my side if he is fraudulent and if I ever suspect others I will report them as well.

Ohh and as a side note, go ahead and smoke pot in front of me or do something reckless behind the wheel because i'll report you for that as well. Going directly against popular belief, Rules were not meant to be broken. (I actually want Pot to be legalized so we can tax it, I dont smoke )


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I understand you want to jump on anyone defending the military or veterans but if you really think that is unreasonable I ask you to only go research the units and men/woman who fought in this last war to understand why it is unreasonable to assume someone can deploy that many times in a row without a break.

Depends on what sort of deployment we're talking about. Not sure about USAF (I'll ask tomorrow when i talk to the airforce guys I'm working with atm) but USN considers you forward deployed almost indefinitely if your duty station is someplace like Japan or Korea. I doubt he was in country the whole time, but his duty station might have still been in theater.

The only Air force base near Afghanistan that was considered in Theater was Manass, and it was (For some weird reason) considered a hardship post and was VERY short term. I understand what you mean though. But according to his resume and his comments on the T.V. show it isn't a case of a forward base but him actively saying he was in Afghanistan being a high speed operator for 9 years straight :p

So, you think that just because you decided on a career that is dangerous, you deserve more respect from people you never met? And answer me this, without an appeal to emotion, why is lying over military service worse then lying over something else? Such as lets say Tow Truck Drivers. They have it hard. My friend lost two of his co-workers this year because we decide driving doesnt come with an IQ minimum.

Ghaz, do you even read what I post? JSOC. The J stands for "joint", and unlike SEALs and Delta, CCTs deploy almost exclusively with units that *arent* part of the AF.

Beyond that, despite Manass being the only *base* in the vicinity of Afghanaland, the AF actually has quite a few remote outposts (the exact locations of which, as I understand it, are classified) that are used for SIGINT and air traffic control dotted throughout the region, usually only staffed by a handful of comm techs & radar operators and a small detachment of Security Force personnel. When I say remote, I really do mean * remote*, as in hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo. I dont know if they are still there, but I know at least 1 of them was still in operation as of 18 months ago.

 Ghazkuul wrote:


I understand your point, you think its just a job and we signed up for it so why should we get more attention then you and your friends doing whatever you do. Regardless of what you think of the politics behind the wars we fight a lot of us signed up to SERVE our country, to shield our nation with our very lives if necessary. Yes we haven't been invaded since WWII but that doesn't change why we enlist. I have in the course of my enlistment and since then, run into a number of people who think that the only reason people join the military is because they are to stupid to get into college, wanted to steal from the government, wanted a place to live and all sorts of other demeaning and rude reasons. The fact is that this propagates a whole lot of problems that once led to how we treated our veterans of the Vietnam war. In the end you can think whatever the hell you would like of me. The law is on my side if he is fraudulent and if I ever suspect others I will report them as well.

In certain countries, its a law you can stone people to death. The Law is on their side, why not let them do it?

chaos0xomega wrote:
Ghaz, do you even read what I post? JSOC. The J stands for "joint", and unlike SEALs and Delta, CCTs deploy almost exclusively with units that *arent* part of the AF.

Beyond that, despite Manass being the only *base* in the vicinity of Afghanaland, the AF actually has quite a few remote outposts (the exact locations of which, as I understand it, are classified) that are used for SIGINT and air traffic control dotted throughout the region, usually only staffed by a handful of comm techs & radar operators and a small detachment of Security Force personnel. When I say remote, I really do mean * remote*, as in hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo. I dont know if they are still there, but I know at least 1 of them was still in operation as of 18 months ago.

I read what you posted Chaos and mostly ignored it, not trying to be rude but I have a better understanding of whats going on then you do.

The AF has exactly Zero remote outposts in Afghanistan. They are limited to a few LARGE airbases and thats about it, they do have some guys that go out forward with the grunts for CAS but they never stay very long.

As a rule US OPs, FOBs and COPs are only classified when shown on a map with grids and such to keep the enemy from getting a pace count on the base. It is pretty easy for a bunch of Pastuns to figure out that those white guys living in the compound aren't from around here, so classifying an OP is only hurting our side. Hell I can show you Wiki pages for most of the FOBs, OPs and COPs I was on .

I was SIGINT, I had a TS clearance, I worked hand in hand with JSOC and Task force units in theater.

the kind of OPs you are talking about "Hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo" those do exist but they are only used for extremely short periods of time. You don't leave small garrisons around because they will get over run. I would also love to know how you have info on a remote outpost operating 18 months ago, PM me the details and I can tell you if your friend is full of it or not .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:


I understand your point, you think its just a job and we signed up for it so why should we get more attention then you and your friends doing whatever you do. Regardless of what you think of the politics behind the wars we fight a lot of us signed up to SERVE our country, to shield our nation with our very lives if necessary. Yes we haven't been invaded since WWII but that doesn't change why we enlist. I have in the course of my enlistment and since then, run into a number of people who think that the only reason people join the military is because they are to stupid to get into college, wanted to steal from the government, wanted a place to live and all sorts of other demeaning and rude reasons. The fact is that this propagates a whole lot of problems that once led to how we treated our veterans of the Vietnam war. In the end you can think whatever the hell you would like of me. The law is on my side if he is fraudulent and if I ever suspect others I will report them as well.

In certain countries, its a law you can stone people to death. The Law is on their side, why not let them do it?

So your argument is, since this guy may have committed fraud and I informed the local PD, that other countries should be allowed to stone people to death.....And that makes sense because reasons? did you help right the Eldar codex?

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I understand what you mean though. But according to his resume and his comments on the T.V. show it isn't a case of a forward base but him actively saying he was in Afghanistan being a high speed operator for 9 years straight :p

I'll ask around. There may be some weird assed rule in the USAF that makes it technically true, even if it isn't what you or I might consider deployment in country. (Mihail Kogalniceanu (Romania) [which replaced Manass] and PSAB (Saudi Arabia) were also in theater, IIRC)

 Ghazkuul wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Ghaz, do you even read what I post? JSOC. The J stands for "joint", and unlike SEALs and Delta, CCTs deploy almost exclusively with units that *arent* part of the AF.

Beyond that, despite Manass being the only *base* in the vicinity of Afghanaland, the AF actually has quite a few remote outposts (the exact locations of which, as I understand it, are classified) that are used for SIGINT and air traffic control dotted throughout the region, usually only staffed by a handful of comm techs & radar operators and a small detachment of Security Force personnel. When I say remote, I really do mean * remote*, as in hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo. I dont know if they are still there, but I know at least 1 of them was still in operation as of 18 months ago.

I read what you posted Chaos and mostly ignored it, not trying to be rude but I have a better understanding of whats going on then you do.

The AF has exactly Zero remote outposts in Afghanistan. They are limited to a few LARGE airbases and thats about it, they do have some guys that go out forward with the grunts for CAS but they never stay very long.

As a rule US OPs, FOBs and COPs are only classified when shown on a map with grids and such to keep the enemy from getting a pace count on the base. It is pretty easy for a bunch of Pastuns to figure out that those white guys living in the compound aren't from around here, so classifying an OP is only hurting our side. Hell I can show you Wiki pages for most of the FOBs, OPs and COPs I was on .

I was SIGINT, I had a TS clearance, I worked hand in hand with JSOC and Task force units in theater.

the kind of OPs you are talking about "Hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo" those do exist but they are only used for extremely short periods of time. You don't leave small garrisons around because they will get over run. I would also love to know how you have info on a remote outpost operating 18 months ago, PM me the details and I can tell you if your friend is full of it or not .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:


I understand your point, you think its just a job and we signed up for it so why should we get more attention then you and your friends doing whatever you do. Regardless of what you think of the politics behind the wars we fight a lot of us signed up to SERVE our country, to shield our nation with our very lives if necessary. Yes we haven't been invaded since WWII but that doesn't change why we enlist. I have in the course of my enlistment and since then, run into a number of people who think that the only reason people join the military is because they are to stupid to get into college, wanted to steal from the government, wanted a place to live and all sorts of other demeaning and rude reasons. The fact is that this propagates a whole lot of problems that once led to how we treated our veterans of the Vietnam war. In the end you can think whatever the hell you would like of me. The law is on my side if he is fraudulent and if I ever suspect others I will report them as well.

In certain countries, its a law you can stone people to death. The Law is on their side, why not let them do it?

So your argument is, since this guy may have committed fraud and I informed the local PD, that other countries should be allowed to stone people to death.....And that makes sense because reasons? did you help right the Eldar codex?

No, You say the law is one your side. The way things are =/= the things should be. Just because the law says it is right/wrong doesnt mean it actually is right/wrong. And you never answered my question

So the position of your argument hotsauce that I'm getting here is either

a) Ghaz has to support people getting stoned to death so that he can support wanting people to have to obey the law in this context

or b) Ghaz is a hypocrite for not supporting stoning while supporting people having to obey this law.

Unless there's something more to your argument, that's an incredible argument, you could divvy that up and keep England in stock for Guy Fawkes day for years to come.

 motyak wrote:
So the position of your argument hotsauce that I'm getting here is either

a) Ghaz has to support people getting stoned to death so that he can support wanting people to have to obey the law in this context

or b) Ghaz is a hypocrite for not supporting stoning while supporting people having to obey this law.

Unless there's something more to your argument, that's an incredible argument, you could divvy that up and keep England in stock for Guy Fawkes day for years to come.

Hotsauce, this is the point where you need to concede. Motyak hates me and he just defended me.

My point is that just because the law is on your side, doesnt mean the law is RIGHT.
Its that Stolen Valor is a law that was a stupid law that came up because of the veteran worship that seems to exist. it was a law created to placate people, while allowing others to be busy bodies and report other people for what MIGHT be a POSSIBLE tiny LIE.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
My point is that just because the law is on your side, doesnt mean the law is RIGHT.
Its that Stolen Valor is a law that was a stupid law that came up because of the veteran worship that seems to exist. it was a law created to placate people, while allowing others to be busy bodies and report other people for what MIGHT be a POSSIBLE tiny LIE.

Im guessing you didn't read what I posted at all. Stolen valor is just a name given to a specific type of Fraud. It was already against the law, they just made a fancy name for it because it pissed off a lot of veterans.

And yeah, Fraud is wrong. What is your deal about "Veteran worship" Im actually confused by you, you have an actual hatred for military personnel and veterans and I don't get it.

Again, I do not hate Military personel. I hate how they they they need to be treated better then others, nay DEMAND they be treated better because their job is dangerous. Case in point, they demanded that a law for an existing crime be made because it made them upset. I hate veteran worship because it is used to shut down arguments such as this because "It makes them feel bad" and appeals to emotion.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

No, You say the law is one your side. The way things are =/= the things should be. Just because the law says it is right/wrong doesnt mean it actually is right/wrong. And you never answered my question

Since you quoted a logical fallacy in part of your earlier arguments, here's another one: false equivalence. Your statement that Ghaz is wrong is based on the presumption that 1) the stolen valor law is "wrong" (and as an extra appeal to emotion you imply it's as wrong stoning people to death), and 2) that reporting a possible violation of the law to the authorities so that said authorities can assess the situation and deal with it as appropriate is equivalent to supporting any law regardless of right or wrong. Neither is a reasonable statement.

I disagree, it is, because saying "The Law is on my side" is like saying that whether it may be wrong, the law is always right.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Again, I do not hate Military personel. I hate how they they they need to be treated better then others, nay DEMAND they be treated better because their job is dangerous. Case in point, they demanded that a law for an existing crime be made because it made them upset. I hate veteran worship because it is used to shut down arguments such as this because "It makes them feel bad" and appeals to emotion.

Regardless of your personal hatred for "Veteran Hero Worship" the fact remains that this guy very probably broke the law, a fact that you have debated with several veterans who know what they are talking about. So if the Stolen Valor act hadn't been enacted it would still be fraud and I still would have reported him, so how does a useless law change any of this?

On the flip side then, why was the law needed? IF it was still fraud, then why pass it, if other then, as your own words, to appease the veterans.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
On the flip side then, why was the law needed? IF it was still fraud, then why pass it, if other then, as your own words, to appease the veterans.

So politicians could garner votes of course, do you live in the United States? nothing a politician ever does is for any other reason then to gain votes.

Probably to appease the businesses and small business owners who have been taken advantage of?


Plus, from what I remember of the time period the SVA was enacted, there was actually more pressure from Right Wing, Conservative group types than there was from actual veterans.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Plus, from what I remember of the time period the SVA was enacted, there was actually more pressure from Right Wing, Conservative group types than there was from actual veterans.

Which does make sense, at least to me. Real veteran soldiers don't usually make much noise about themself - my own grandfathers never talked about it (WW2). My old neighbor never talked about the war even if he was there together with my current employer's father (who also refused to talk about it). The wizened old veteran my dad used to take into town every day on his bus route spoke about his experiences exactly once. My friend's grandfather pretty much drank himself to sleep every day of his life after the war so he wouldn't see the faces of the people he killed with that Suomi SMG.

It's usually people who worship "heroes" that demand specific laws, not the veterans. I don't hate that, but I do think it's wrong for people who never saw war to wear necklaces, tattoos or whatever depicting the national symbol. Over here it's usually neonazis and the local version of rednecks that do it.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
So because its a type of Fraud that has a special name you think its terrible? So should we also change the name to just rape then for Statutory rape? Just because they are underage they think they are special and deserve a special name for their types of rape....... who cares about what it is called its fraud.

Statutory rape is a different crime, with a different list of things you need to prove to establish the case. With rape you need to prove that no consent was given. With statutory rape you need to prove the victim was under the legal age, and then prove some measure of standard that the alleged knew the victim was under the legal age.

Whereas stolen valour is no different to fraud in any way. You still have to prove the person made a fraudulent claim with the intent of receiving some kind of benefit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
On the flip side then, why was the law needed? IF it was still fraud, then why pass it, if other then, as your own words, to appease the veterans.

The reason stolen valour exists in it's current, pointless form is because the much more powerful version previously created was struck down by the supreme court. In 2005 a version was passed that made fraudulently representating yourself as a veteran a crime, whether you were trying to get anything out of it or not. That was shot down as an infringement of freedom of speech, because of course it was.

But by that point there was momentum set up, and congress wanted a law about stolen valour that would pass the SC. So they write a new version that now required you to be making some kind of gain from the fraud. That this version was basically no different in any way to the existing fraud laws didn't seem to bother anyone involved.

Some guy wearing the uniform, no problem.

Some guy wearing the uniform and trying to get tangible benefits from it, completely wrong, hit them with a stick.

Waiting on "Impersonating a LEO" angle to come up......oh wait

 Ghazkuul wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Ghaz, do you even read what I post? JSOC. The J stands for "joint", and unlike SEALs and Delta, CCTs deploy almost exclusively with units that *arent* part of the AF.

Beyond that, despite Manass being the only *base* in the vicinity of Afghanaland, the AF actually has quite a few remote outposts (the exact locations of which, as I understand it, are classified) that are used for SIGINT and air traffic control dotted throughout the region, usually only staffed by a handful of comm techs & radar operators and a small detachment of Security Force personnel. When I say remote, I really do mean * remote*, as in hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo. I dont know if they are still there, but I know at least 1 of them was still in operation as of 18 months ago.

I read what you posted Chaos and mostly ignored it, not trying to be rude but I have a better understanding of whats going on then you do.

The AF has exactly Zero remote outposts in Afghanistan. They are limited to a few LARGE airbases and thats about it, they do have some guys that go out forward with the grunts for CAS but they never stay very long.

As a rule US OPs, FOBs and COPs are only classified when shown on a map with grids and such to keep the enemy from getting a pace count on the base. It is pretty easy for a bunch of Pastuns to figure out that those white guys living in the compound aren't from around here, so classifying an OP is only hurting our side. Hell I can show you Wiki pages for most of the FOBs, OPs and COPs I was on .

I was SIGINT, I had a TS clearance, I worked hand in hand with JSOC and Task force units in theater.

the kind of OPs you are talking about "Hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo" those do exist but they are only used for extremely short periods of time. You don't leave small garrisons around because they will get over run. I would also love to know how you have info on a remote outpost operating 18 months ago, PM me the details and I can tell you if your friend is full of it or not .

I didnt say the existence of the base/outpost was classified, in fact there was a rather interesting article in the news (IIRC it wasn't in something like the New York Times, rather it was defense industry specific, I'm trying to relocate it but not having much luck) about it about 18 months ago (by my estimation, could be longer/shorter, caveat: I'm terrible at judging the length of time when it comes to past events), hence why I said "in operation as of 18 months ago", if I recall correctly they were in the process of shutting it down. I said its location was classified (even the reporter didn't know where it was, only that he/she had been taken there essentially blindfolded), one of those 'on a remote mountaintop in the Korangal valley' type affairs (not that it was on a mountaintop or in the korangal valley).

As for your credentials, all I will say is "if you say so". I dont know anyone with a clearance who would brag about it like you did (and you might say Im not a stranger to clearances), and I would think someone involved with SIGINT would know better than to broadcast it.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Ghaz, do you even read what I post? JSOC. The J stands for "joint", and unlike SEALs and Delta, CCTs deploy almost exclusively with units that *arent* part of the AF.

Beyond that, despite Manass being the only *base* in the vicinity of Afghanaland, the AF actually has quite a few remote outposts (the exact locations of which, as I understand it, are classified) that are used for SIGINT and air traffic control dotted throughout the region, usually only staffed by a handful of comm techs & radar operators and a small detachment of Security Force personnel. When I say remote, I really do mean * remote*, as in hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo. I dont know if they are still there, but I know at least 1 of them was still in operation as of 18 months ago.

I read what you posted Chaos and mostly ignored it, not trying to be rude but I have a better understanding of whats going on then you do.

The AF has exactly Zero remote outposts in Afghanistan. They are limited to a few LARGE airbases and thats about it, they do have some guys that go out forward with the grunts for CAS but they never stay very long.

As a rule US OPs, FOBs and COPs are only classified when shown on a map with grids and such to keep the enemy from getting a pace count on the base. It is pretty easy for a bunch of Pastuns to figure out that those white guys living in the compound aren't from around here, so classifying an OP is only hurting our side. Hell I can show you Wiki pages for most of the FOBs, OPs and COPs I was on .

I was SIGINT, I had a TS clearance, I worked hand in hand with JSOC and Task force units in theater.

the kind of OPs you are talking about "Hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo" those do exist but they are only used for extremely short periods of time. You don't leave small garrisons around because they will get over run. I would also love to know how you have info on a remote outpost operating 18 months ago, PM me the details and I can tell you if your friend is full of it or not .

I didnt say the existence of the base/outpost was classified, in fact there was a rather interesting article in the news (IIRC it wasn't in something like the New York Times, rather it was defense industry specific, I'm trying to relocate it but not having much luck) about it about 18 months ago (by my estimation, could be longer/shorter, caveat: I'm terrible at judging the length of time when it comes to past events), hence why I said "in operation as of 18 months ago", if I recall correctly they were in the process of shutting it down. I said its location was classified (even the reporter didn't know where it was, only that he/she had been taken there essentially blindfolded), one of those 'on a remote mountaintop in the Korangal valley' type affairs (not that it was on a mountaintop or in the korangal valley).

As for your credentials, all I will say is "if you say so". I dont know anyone with a clearance who would brag about it like you did (and you might say Im not a stranger to clearances), and I would think someone involved with SIGINT would know better than to broadcast it.

I was also an SSO for the last year and a half that I was in the USMC im aware of what can and can not be said a lot more then your average analyst/operator.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Ghaz, do you even read what I post? JSOC. The J stands for "joint", and unlike SEALs and Delta, CCTs deploy almost exclusively with units that *arent* part of the AF.

Beyond that, despite Manass being the only *base* in the vicinity of Afghanaland, the AF actually has quite a few remote outposts (the exact locations of which, as I understand it, are classified) that are used for SIGINT and air traffic control dotted throughout the region, usually only staffed by a handful of comm techs & radar operators and a small detachment of Security Force personnel. When I say remote, I really do mean * remote*, as in hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo. I dont know if they are still there, but I know at least 1 of them was still in operation as of 18 months ago.

I read what you posted Chaos and mostly ignored it, not trying to be rude but I have a better understanding of whats going on then you do.

The AF has exactly Zero remote outposts in Afghanistan. They are limited to a few LARGE airbases and thats about it, they do have some guys that go out forward with the grunts for CAS but they never stay very long.

As a rule US OPs, FOBs and COPs are only classified when shown on a map with grids and such to keep the enemy from getting a pace count on the base. It is pretty easy for a bunch of Pastuns to figure out that those white guys living in the compound aren't from around here, so classifying an OP is only hurting our side. Hell I can show you Wiki pages for most of the FOBs, OPs and COPs I was on .

I was SIGINT, I had a TS clearance, I worked hand in hand with JSOC and Task force units in theater.

the kind of OPs you are talking about "Hours from the nearest FOB or Outpost, even by helo" those do exist but they are only used for extremely short periods of time. You don't leave small garrisons around because they will get over run. I would also love to know how you have info on a remote outpost operating 18 months ago, PM me the details and I can tell you if your friend is full of it or not .

I didnt say the existence of the base/outpost was classified, in fact there was a rather interesting article in the news (IIRC it wasn't in something like the New York Times, rather it was defense industry specific, I'm trying to relocate it but not having much luck) about it about 18 months ago (by my estimation, could be longer/shorter, caveat: I'm terrible at judging the length of time when it comes to past events), hence why I said "in operation as of 18 months ago", if I recall correctly they were in the process of shutting it down. I said its location was classified (even the reporter didn't know where it was, only that he/she had been taken there essentially blindfolded), one of those 'on a remote mountaintop in the Korangal valley' type affairs (not that it was on a mountaintop or in the korangal valley).

As for your credentials, all I will say is "if you say so". I dont know anyone with a clearance who would brag about it like you did (and you might say Im not a stranger to clearances), and I would think someone involved with SIGINT would know better than to broadcast it.

RC North of Afghanistan. Believe near Kumdaz(sp). AF has a Communication setup on top a damn peak. Only accessible by Hawks. Its like the highest damn peak in RC North to cover that region linking every comm gear and satellite connection known to US Military up in there

^I believe that might have been it, still can't find the damned article about it though.

You won't being the article I believe your looking for contain pictures of the site and surrounding area. By photo's alone you can tell exactly where it is at. Also the equipment being used up there. Putin will shoot his favorite horse barechested just for 15 minutes up there unescorted.

Mind you the highest peak there they might not actually be on but a remote automated relay antenna setup to facilitate flow comms

Why is this such a big deal anyway?

If he lied to get benefits, then yes, that's illegal.

But otherwise, why does it matter?

If I found out that someone wearing a clown suit, walking around and telling people he's a clown isn't actually one, I wouldn't really be that bothered.

Not a lot of glory to steal.

I doubt it counts as fraud unless he deceived his employers at the programme, and that's where his wages come from. They'll spin any embellishment on the TV show as artistic license or somesuch.

 Ashiraya wrote:

If I found out that someone wearing a clown suit, walking around and telling people he's a clown isn't actually one, I wouldn't really be that bothered.

Maybe not the best example. If you are wearing a Clown Suit, you are a Clown.