Jim Wagner's military, police, counter-terror creds in question.

**SteveRBSD** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 4:17pm

Hi Joe,

No particular current association although I have been on one of his instructors one day courses which I feel I learnt something beneficial, but then I always do on most courses I attend. The system, as far as my experience goes, appears to be OK although I am no expert. I am sure other systems, like the SFC are good too so I have no gripe with the systems themselves.

Whilst you now might say that I am biased in my posting, that is not the issue here. I don't care what happens to Wagner but it irks me to see this kind of pre-emptive lynching based on hardly any evidence. Maybe there is some "self defense for forums" system that advocates this type of behaviour but I don't buy into it and don't agree with it when I see it. Although Wagner's advertsing has certainly raised a few eyebrows, I think certain people's behaviour in addressing this issue has raised mine.

I'm looing for an evidence based approach to what are serious accusations, not faceless accusations and bandwagon jumping based on conjecture and hearsay. I find it odd that no one has seen the stunt that SFC are pulling by making all these announcements. Conveniently that's been overlooked as everyone goes gunning for Wagner. I think the wool has been pulled over our eyes in more ways than one.

Steve

**Joe Karate** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 4:31pm

Originally Posted by SteveRBSD

Hi Joe,

No particular current association although I have been on one of his instructors one day courses which I feel I learnt something beneficial, but then I always do on most courses I attend. The system, as far as my experience goes, appears to be OK although I am no expert. I am sure other systems, like the SFC are good too so I have no gripe with the systems themselves.

Whilst you now might say that I am biased in my posting, that is not the issue here. I don't care what happens to Wagner but it irks me to see this kind of pre-emptive lynching based on hardly any evidence. Maybe there is some "self defense for forums" system that advocates this type of behaviour but I don't buy into it and don't agree with it when I see it. Although Wagner's advertsing has certainly raised a few eyebrows, I think certain people's behaviour in addressing this issue has raised mine.

I'm looing for an evidence based approach to what are serious accusations, not faceless accusations and bandwagon jumping based on conjecture and hearsay. I find it odd that no one has seen the stunt that SFC are pulling by making all these announcements. Conveniently that's been overlooked as everyone goes gunning for Wagner. I think the wool has been pulled over our eyes in more ways than one.

Steve

Steve,

Thanks, I appreciate your response and candor.

A big part of Bullshido (and I'm just a member, not staff) is alerting serious students and practioners of MA to outright frauds and those who misrepresent their credentials. The investigation you are seeing here is the result of that mission, regardless of where the initial information came from.

Mr. Wagner at any time has the option to answer the questions raised.

Joe

**SteveRBSD** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 4:53pm

Thanks Joe,

Yes, I'm with you on this yet an investigation such as this should come with responsibilty and an open minded, fact based approach. Unforunately, I can already see examples of Staff showing a bias which gets me worried.

Ultimately, I think you will find Wagner guilty of overstretching his credentials and advertising himself in an over the top manner. Whislt some may claim this is outrageous and he should be strung up the real world gives us evidence of this all around us, not least by his competitors. Although I don't agree with the path the following post on another forum takes, it gives a comic yet revealing take on what is actually going on. The VERY FIRST POST sums it all up for me, after that it gets a bit silly (er).

http://selfprotection.lightbb.com/th...less-t6432.htm

Steve

**Joe Karate** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 5:06pm

Originally Posted by SteveRBSD

Thanks Joe,

Yes, I'm with you on this yet an investigation such as this should come with responsibilty and an open minded, fact based approach. Unforunately, I can already see examples of Staff showing a bias which gets me worried.

Ultimately, I think you will find Wagner guilty of overstretching his credentials and advertising himself in an over the top manner. Whislt some may claim this is outrageous and he should be strung up the real world gives us evidence of this all around us, not least by his competitors. Although I don't agree with the path the following post on another forum takes, it gives a comic yet revealing take on what is actually going on. The VERY FIRST POST sums it all up for me, after that it gets a bit silly (er).

http://selfprotection.lightbb.com/th...less-t6432.htm

Steve

I for one don't want to train with / take a lesson from someone who has to misrepresent their experience, let alone the questionable techniques demonstrated in some of his videos. So from my perspective, mission accomplished.

There are also many active duty military / law enforcement officers on this site who get seriously bent out of shape (rightfully so) at people making false claims regarding service.

**Sam Browning** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 5:08pm

Originally Posted by Samuel Browning

AND I HAVE NEWS!

Today I spoke with Officer Phil Hartman of the Costa Mesa Police Department. Phil formally served on their SWAT team as a tactical officer for 10 years, and spent another 13 years as a crisis negotiator. He was on this team when James Wagner was involved with the team. Phil agreed to let me use his name but he did ask "are you going to burn me?" So the agreement we came to, was he was going to comment on the record just concerning facts and not opinions. Below are a list of questions I asked him, and his answers, I changed their order around a bit so they would be easier to follow. They are also not transcribed quotes but a summary of his answers.

Phil told me that Costa Mesa has a Department of approximately 160 officers. The SWAT team is part time. i.e. the SWAT officers normally perform other functions and then are called together when they need to be deployed. Phil also indicated that this team was not deployed often since Costa Mesa is more peaceful other California communities.

Q: Was Jim Wagner on the SWAT Team? Did he carry a sniper rifle or submachine gun?

A: Wagner was a logistical officer, he was not a regular SWAT officer, though he worked with the SWAT team. He was not a sniper, and he was not executing entries or acting in such a tactical capacity.

Q: How long was Wagner on the Costa Mesa Police Department?

A: I do not know.

Q: Did Wagner leave the department in good standing, or was he terminated.

A: To the best of Phil's knowledge, Wagner left the department in good standing.

Q: Did Wagner tactically train the SWAT Team or Conduct Tactical Training for the Department?

A: Wagner did not train the SWAT team in Tactics, and Phil does not remember Wagner conducting tactical training for the department, though I gathered he simply did not remember such an event happening with the department as a whole rather than simply ruling it out. He was pretty certain howver about Wagner not training the SWAT team tactically.

Phil did indicate that Wagner had helped out with the Costa Mesa police's Citizen Police Academy, but this involves educating citizens about what the department does, it did not involve tactically training civilians.

Finally in our conversation Phil remarked that Wagner had been fine to deal with as a fellow officer, and I observed from the tone of his voice, and how he recounted information that he did not appear to have an ax to grind about Jim. I had been the one to seek him out for information, he did not come to me initially to volunteer his comments and I did not get in contact with him through Hock.

My own comments on this are the following. The burden of proving that he was a Costa Mesa SWAT officer engaging in sniping duties or tactical duties (entries, assualt etc) has now shifted to Jim Wagner. I would like Mr. Wagner to produce at least two named witnesses who were former Costa Mesa Regular SWAT Officers who will be willing to swear under oath that Jim was on the SWAT team as a Sniper/Assaulter/or in such tactical capacity, and that he trained this team in tactical matters. These witnesses should be able to prove they were a part of this SWAT team.

Ball's in your Court Mr. Wagner.

OMG! Alleged staff bias! like this interview that Jim Wagner has not been able to challenge?

**SteveRBSD** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 5:27pm

Point taken and in the real world this goes on unfortunately, especially with regards to advertising. If you are to make an example of Wagner then you must scrutinise everyone else. As I've said, it is a grey and subjective area as to what is serious when trying to ascertain who is a fraud or misrepresenting themselves.

One example is the fact that Wagner wears his Army reserve uniform but teamed with his Sgt tag, those not in the know assume he is a Sgt in the army. However, when you look at some of the shots of Joe Hubbard of the SFC you might imply that he is ex military/special forces but he is in fact a reserve himself. Does that make him a "Weekend Walt"? This is the part I don't like, the pot calling the kettle black. Again, you scrutinise one you must scrutinise all.

We've also yet to work out the truth behind the alleged lies that Wagner is accused of telling. Not much has been proved yet, I would much rather work with facts than conjecture.

I am agreeing with you by the way, I just want a fair and unbiased investigation.

Steve

**SteveRBSD** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 5:37pm

Originally Posted by Samuel Browning

OMG! Alleged staff bias! like this interview that Jim Wagner has not been able to challenge?

Hi Sam, yes, you are right, you have invited him to answer which is great but I draw your attention to these posts:

Gezere: I ALWAYS thought something was odd about Wagner. Since I don't read BB I first noticed him in Germany in BUDO Magazine. I read one article about counter-terrorism on a plane and thought he didn't know what the **** he was talking about. I recall reading somewhere that he was supposed to be SF but I think that was just a retard spouting of something he heard and claimed to know first hand.

Samuel Browning: BTW a quick joke:
How does Jim Wagner break the tension on a tense counter-terrorism mission?
"Can I have a coke along with that bag of peanuts?"

Samuel Browning: I know JKD!

Samuel Browning: Black Belt Magazine Loves Me, and I was the first to promote tactical RBSD in the magazines.

Now to me (IMO) those comments, as funny as they might be, all have a slant towards them, and it's not coming across as impartial. Please excuse me if this is not the case, maybe I am being too critical here.

Steve

**Sam Browning** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 6:35pm

So I make a joke about him, big deal. I challenge you sir, to show me where my facts are incorrect.

**Sam Browning** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 6:36pm

Do you believe that each time an Air Marshal takes a ride on a plane in which nothing happens he is going on a "counter terrorism" mission?

**Lebell** · Posted On: 8/20/2008 7:05pm

Originally Posted by SteveRBSD

Point taken and in the real world this goes on unfortunately, especially with regards to advertising. If you are to make an example of Wagner then you must scrutinise everyone else. As I've said, it is a grey and subjective area as to what is serious when trying to ascertain who is a fraud or misrepresenting themselves.

Ok,i dont get this part, isnt that just like saying you can't sue one bad doctor because there are many more out there?
Who's to say how many more will follow?

Originally Posted by Steve

One example is the fact that Wagner wears his Army reserve uniform but teamed with his Sgt tag, those not in the know assume he is a Sgt in the army. However, when you look at some of the shots of Joe Hubbard of the SFC you might imply that he is ex military/special forces but he is in fact a reserve himself. Does that make him a "Weekend Walt"? This is the part I don't like, the pot calling the kettle black. Again, you scrutinise one you must scrutinise all.

Scrutinise all, yet so far you only mention Hubbard, something personal going on here?

Originally Posted by Steve

We've also yet to work out the truth behind the alleged lies that Wagner is accused of telling. Not much has been proved yet, I would much rather work with facts than conjecture.

I am agreeing with you by the way, I just want a fair and unbiased investigation.

Steve

'WE've also yet to work out...etc' : this means you will be contributing to this thread?
What is mentionned and confirmed so far is already pretty something imo.

I have translated your posts as this:
You basically you agree with something but its just that people here have slant, should come with evidence instead and focus on someone else then Wagner.

question: could you explain a little more on what your part in the rbsd field is?