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

[BackFistMonkey]

Nice logic. I guess you're a monkey then. Amazing.

Stevey ,

If my name was TheMonkeyWhoWroteShakespeare my style was listed as "Monkey" and I was on a Forum dedicated to Monkeys in a thread about Monkeys who could talk and type . Then yes that would be a good assumption .

As is tho we are on a Martial Arts Website discussing RBSD .

As to training I still train now and again in RBSD and not necessarily Wagner. Again, I'm breaking no forum rules and being honest. I am sorry you take umbrage at this.

I got interested because you mentioned me.

Steve

You see this interesting because you claim

* emphasis mine but they are your exact words

I have no part in the RBSD field, just an *outside observer poiting out a few things. The reason why I highlight the behaviour of Joe is that it is very pertinent to this thread.

Steve

Your two posts do not match . You can say I am splitting hairs if you wish but I see two conflicting points .

SSGT100, interesting first post. So to clarify, are you accusing Jim of being an out and out fraud?

I felt he was pretty clear with what he was saying . Let us all look it over again .

OK NOW THE WAGNER PART:

1. wagner is a real sergeant in a real MP unit

2. I am on the state combatives martial arts team. Is wagner? NO AND NEVER WILL BE

3. we teach combat techniques and civilian law enforcement technioues to national guard soldiers and are qualified to do so (one of the qulifications be task force warrior) is wagner? NO, I have never seen him at any of the qualifications. It is a small group he would have been recognized.

4. We have to pass Army military police training before being allowed to teach it. Is wagner? NO, wagner has still not met the qualifications.

5. 98 percent of the soldiers in my unit are recently seperated military police or actual army rangers. The other 2 percent are real civillian law enforcement officers that join up to teach civillian law enforcement to soldiers. (it sickens me to see people ride the coat tails of what honarable people do and claim it as their own)

6. LAST BUT NOT LEAST: how can Wagner teach anything when he is never at drill? How many times have you been deployed with our unit dude?

Stop taking pictures next to hummers and saying your training overseas. The **** is getting old, and you make us soldiers that actually care about these young kids going off to war look bad. We believe in quality training that may actually save a soldiers life not that bullshit you try to pass of as REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE.

Thank you Bullshido for your time.

Frankly steveRBSD , not once anywhere does SSGT100 say "Jim" is a fraud . Why would you ask a question like that

You give so much evidence that surely we're coming to the point soon where legal action can be taken.

or bring up legal action ?

and who is this "we" you speak of ?

[SteveRBSD]

Stevey ,

If my name was TheMonkeyWhoWroteShakespeare my style was listed as "Monkey" and I was on a Forum dedicated to Monkeys in a thread about Monkeys who could talk and type . Then yes that would be a good assumption .

As is tho we are on a Martial Arts Website discussing RBSD .



You see this interesting because you claim

* emphasis mine but they are your exact words




Your two posts do not match . You can say I am splitting hairs if you wish but I see two conflicting points .



I felt he was pretty clear with what he was saying . Let us all look it over again .



Frankly steveRBSD , not once anywhere does SSGT100 say "Jim" is a fraud . Why would you ask a question like that



or bring up legal action ?

and who is this "we" you speak of ?

Thanks for clarifying that MonkeyBackFist,

Personally, I think you are splitting hairs because I am an outside observer who has trained in RBSD and done a Wagner course. I have no involvement as far as Wagner goes, which is actually what you are trying to prove. I don't think it's an impossible situation to be in. If, again, I go by your logic, when I openly admitted early on that I went on a JW course and have been on courses then why not pick up on that conflict earlier on? In your eyes I am playing a part but that's not how I see it. I am not a part of some Jim Wagner movement which is how I interpreted playing a part.

It's all semantics and we can play the word games all day. Again, I've not said anything untruthful, but you can bend it as much as you want. My only crime is not being as articulate as I would like to get my point across so have raised a few questions. I apologise for that.

Why would I ask someone to clarify their position? To clarify their position! I see no need to look for a hidden meaning.

Steve

[Dsimon3387]

Thanks for clarifying that MonkeyBackFist,

Personally, I think you are splitting hairs because I am an outside observer who has trained in RBSD and done a Wagner course. I have no involvement as far as Wagner goes, which is actually what you are trying to prove. I don't think it's an impossible situation to be in. If, again, I go by your logic, when I openly admitted early on that I went on a JW course and have been on courses then why not pick up on that conflict earlier on? In your eyes I am playing a part but that's not how I see it. I am not a part of some Jim Wagner movement which is how I interpreted playing a part.

It's all semantics and we can play the word games all day. Again, I've not said anything untruthful, but you can bend it as much as you want. My only crime is not being as articulate as I would like to get my point across so have raised a few questions. I apologise for that.

Why would I ask someone to clarify their position? To clarify their position! I see no need to look for a hidden meaning.

Steve

ohh ohhh! I'll play the dumb hillbilly from eastern Kentucky for this question!!!!! You might ask somoene to clarify their position to entrap them into saying something that can be construed as slanderous towards SERGEANT Vogner!!!!! :icon_tong aha aha aha!!!!

[Jeff C.]

Why would Florida come up with their own rules concerning the UCMJ. And what would have to happen to be prosecuted by the UCMJ and not the FCMJ.

I thought I made that pretty clear in my last post. In order to be prosecuted under the UCMJ, one must be on FEDERAL ACTIVE DUTY not under state control. The UCMJ legally CANNOT BE APPLIED to any troops not on federal active duty; that is why states have a military code in their state statutes to apply to organized state militias and National Guard while under state control (drill weekends, Annual Training, and other types of inactive duty training, such as Code 91 and Code 71 Readiness Management Assemblies, Code 51 Junior Leadership Training, etc.).

Like I said, many people commonly refer to their state code as the "UCMJ," but legally it is not the UCMJ - although many state codes have adopted in large part the UCMJ under state statute.

I don't want to derail the thread any more than it has been. The only reason why I brought it up is because some people will try to use their state militia experience on their martial arts resume and advertisements, by leading people to believe they have federal armed forces military experience, saying such things as "even the UCMJ applies to us." Legally recognized state militias are not and can never be, under any circumstances, federal forces, thus the UCMJ - a federal legal instrument - can never apply to National Guard under state control or apply to state militias. US Code allows the formation of state militias - that is as far as federal law and regulation goes concerning those forces. This takes nothing away from the noble men and women who volunteer their time in organized State Militias; they are patriots for doing so. Please do some internet research on it, or send me a PM.

Jeff Cook

[Lob Sing]

I thought I made that pretty clear in my last post. In order to be prosecuted under the UCMJ, one must be on FEDERAL ACTIVE DUTY not under state control. The UCMJ legally CANNOT BE APPLIED to any troops not on federal active duty; that is why states have a military code in their state statutes to apply to organized state militias and National Guard while under state control (drill weekends, Annual Training, and other types of inactive duty training, such as Code 91 and Code 71 Readiness Management Assemblies, Code 51 Junior Leadership Training, etc.).

Like I said, many people commonly refer to their state code as the "UCMJ," but legally it is not the UCMJ - although many state codes have adopted in large part the UCMJ under state statute.

I don't want to derail the thread any more than it has been. The only reason why I brought it up is because some people will try to use their state militia experience on their martial arts resume and advertisements, by leading people to believe they have federal armed forces military experience, saying such things as "even the UCMJ applies to us." Legally recognized state militias are not and can never be, under any circumstances, federal forces, thus the UCMJ - a federal legal instrument - can never apply to National Guard under state control or apply to state militias. US Code allows the formation of state militias - that is as far as federal law and regulation goes concerning those forces. This takes nothing away from the noble men and women who volunteer their time in organized State Militias; they are patriots for doing so. Please do some internet research on it, or send me a PM.

Jeff Cook

excellant explanation thank you, a simple foia of his records would clear this up.

[BackFistMonkey]

Why would I ask someone to clarify their position? To clarify their position! I see no need to look for a hidden meaning.

Steve

So who is this "we" you were referring to when you brought up legal action in post # 217 SSGT100 ?

SSGT100, interesting first post. So to clarify, are you accusing Jim of being an out and out fraud? You give so much evidence that surely we're coming to the point soon where legal action can be taken.

What legal action ? You sound as if you are on SGGT100's side , but alas , he had said nothing about legal action and if he were to answer with the language you suggested and call Jim a "fraud" ( as you asked him to do ) instead of simply supplying information* it would possibly open himself (sggt100) to litigation .



Why do you behave in such blatantly malevolent fashion ?





* don't forget none of what sggt100 has been backed up or confirmed yet , even if it rings truthful like a church bell .

[SteveRBSD]

You say blatantly malevolent fashion yet you use phrases like:

...possibly open himself (sggt100) to litigation


...might ask somoene to clarify their position to entrap them into saying something that can be construed as slanderous towards SERGEANT Vogner

So am I blatantly or *possibly* doing these things in your eyes? Very easy to be judgemental on maybes and possibles.

When I say "we" I mean us. Like anyone else, I am keen to see justice prevail but only under a fair trial.

Steve

[BackFistMonkey]

You say blatantly malevolent fashion yet you use phrases like:

...possibly open himself (sggt100) to litigation


...might ask somoene to clarify their position to entrap them into saying something that can be construed as slanderous towards SERGEANT Vogner

Just because your set up may not work does NOT mean you aren't trying .

Only this quote

possibly open himself (sggt100) to litigation

is mine out of the two you used .

So am I blatantly or *possibly* doing these things in your eyes? Very easy to be judgemental on maybes and possibles.

When I say "we" I mean us. Like anyone else, I am keen to see justice prevail but only under a fair trial.

Steve

I said that I thought you were doing it and that if he fell for your bullshit it could open himself up to litigation . My views on that were pretty clear .

Thank you for your time , I am not being paid to do this so I have to check out for a few .

[It is Fake]

I thought I made that pretty clear in my last post. In order to be prosecuted under the UCMJ, one must be on FEDERAL ACTIVE DUTY not under state control. The UCMJ legally CANNOT BE APPLIED to any troops not on federal active duty; that is why states have a military code in their state statutes to apply to organized state militias and National Guard while under state control (drill weekends, Annual Training, and other types of inactive duty training, such as Code 91 and Code 71 Readiness Management Assemblies, Code 51 Junior Leadership Training, etc.).

Like I said, many people commonly refer to their state code as the "UCMJ," but legally it is not the UCMJ - although many state codes have adopted in large part the UCMJ under state statute.

I don't want to derail the thread any more than it has been. The only reason why I brought it up is because some people will try to use their state militia experience on their martial arts resume and advertisements, by leading people to believe they have federal armed forces military experience, saying such things as "even the UCMJ applies to us." Legally recognized state militias are not and can never be, under any circumstances, federal forces, thus the UCMJ - a federal legal instrument - can never apply to National Guard under state control or apply to state militias. US Code allows the formation of state militias - that is as far as federal law and regulation goes concerning those forces. This takes nothing away from the noble men and women who volunteer their time in organized State Militias; they are patriots for doing so. Please do some internet research on it, or send me a PM.

Jeff Cook

Not a derail at all. It helps explain the situation and how people can claim things not entirely true.

[SteveRBSD]

....Only this quote

is mine out of the .

Sorry, my mistake.

Steve