46Q refuses deployment to Iraq (UPDATED 2X)
Actually, I read this yesterday at the IVAW OneStop about Matthis Chiroux who refused to go to Iraq, but I’d had enough of IVAW for one day. But now it won’t seem to disappear. Zero Ponsdorf sent me this Breitbart link;
“I stand before you today with the strength and clarity and resolve to declare to the military, my government and the world that this soldier will not be deploying to Iraq,” Chiroux said in the sun-filled rotunda of a congressional building in Washington.
“My decision is based on my desire to no longer continue violating my core values to support an illegal and unconstitutional occupation… I refuse to participate in the Iraq occupation,” he said, as a dozen veterans of the five-year-old Iraq war looked on.
His military background is at Jammie Wearing Fool;
Some details AFP omits.
Matthis enlisted in the Army days after graduating from high school. During his five-year enlistment, Matthis served as a journalist in the Army, with tours in Germany, Japan, Afghanistan and the Philippines.
While serving in Afghanistan and Palawan, Philippines, Matthis experienced hostile environments fighting against Islamic insurgents.
Can you believe it? Actually entering hostile environments while playing a journalist?
Hmm, no agenda here, I’m sure.
Well, what no one else knows is that it was all staged. As soon as yesterday’s hearing ended, Maxine Waters arranged a press conference so young Matthis could announce he’d been converted by the testimony – as I described yesterday, the testimony couldn’t convince me of anything, it couldn’t convince anyone of anything. So they manufactured a miraculous conversion.
How do I know? His sister posted on an IVAW website yesterday that Matthis had been duped and used by the IVAW, and now her post is gone. If I hadn’t been so tired of IVAW BS last night, I would have screen capped it…but d’oh.
UPDATE: Thanks to Marooned in Marin who found another of her comments;
Here’s Chiroux’ video. That’s Kelly Doughtery on his right and Army Sergeant over his left shoulder, Sergio Kochergin behind him and Kristopher Goldsmith on his left.
Big surprise, he signed on for an eight year commitment, finished four years active duty and got called back in. being a 46Q journalist isn’t going to require him to do any of the heavylifting – no fighting, no patrolling. The reason I know the MOS for journalist is because it was my secondary. I spent some time as a private working as an Army journalist in Panama during the treaty negotiations in 1977.
There’s always a backstory to these conscientious objectors. Always.
Are these hearings affecting effecting the public’s perception of troops? LT Nixon thinks so;
Finally, Matthew Yglesias discusses an escalation of force incident that got resulted in Iraqi civilians killed, and an angry commenter quips:
And people wonder why I sincerely desire that Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Lieberman, both Clintons, and roughly 200,000 others, be tried as war criminals and, upon conviction, be hanged by the neck until DEAD DEAD DEAD? As far as I’m concerned, anyone who DOESN’T want that is a baby killing monster.
Ugh. I’ve heard of BushHalliburtonCheneyCo being tried for war crimes, but us military types going to the gallows is news to me. While I sympathize with the angst of the IVAW members, and in some cases their hearts may be in the right place, I strongly urge them to examine their tactics and how they are perceived by the civilian public.
All of this mud slinging being done on the Republican Administration is splashing on the troops. Can spitting on the troops in airports be too far away?
UPDATED AGAIN: From A Soldier’s Perspective;
The media is making it sound like Chiroux is about to deploy and that he is making this big stand as an active duty Soldier in refusing to deploy. The fact is that he is a civilian who received a recall letter back in February which he has ignored. The military has already said that they are not hunting down individuals who ignore those letters, though they’d have a legal right to prosecute if they wanted to. So, where’s the news again? Here’s the part of Chiroux’s speech no one seems to be reporting:
“As an army journalist whose job it was to college and filter service members’ stories, I heard many a stomach-churning testimony of the horrors and crimes taking place in Iraq. For fear of retaliation from the military, I failed to report these crimes. Never again will I allow fear to silence me. Never again will I fail to stand. In February, I received a letter from the Army, ordering my return to active duty, with the purpose of mobilization in Operation Iraqi Freedom.”
Thanks in great part to the truths of war being fearlessly spoken by my fellow IVAW members, I stand before you today with the strength and clarity and resolve to declare the military and my government and the world that this soldier will not be deploying to Iraq.
According to the UCMJ, Chiroux is guilty of every crime he failed to report. The testimonies of his fellow yellow-bellies is a direct result of his cowardice in reporting crimes. I find it ironic that he has the “strength and clarity and resolve” to refuse deployment and doesn’t fear “retaliation from the military” in this endeavor, but when it came to potentially saving lives, he chose to remain quiet. Basically, what Chiroux is saying is that he’s a selfish bastard whose own life is more important than anyone else’s!
Category: Antiwar crowd, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Phony soldiers
I think I have you figured out Jonn. You post about these IVAW whackos just to get my dander up 🙂
Jonn wrote: Well, I have to spread my own misery around.
Looks like she also posted the following on the Washington Independent website
http://washingtonindependent.com/view/ivaw-member-to
“As Matthis’ sister, friend, and eternal supporter I would like to comment on how noble I think it is that Matthis is brave enough to stand up for something he believes in. I am scared for you Matthis, and I am angered by this choice. I also publicly disagree with how the Iraq Veterans Against the War have, in my opinion, exploited my brother in this very trying and difficult time in his life.”
I’ll post later about Mathis Chiroux, I have a lot to respond to and post about. However, I will say briefly that as far as I understand, Matthis was not changed by the testimony yesterday, but did make up his mind after belatedly viewing Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan testimony. I don’t believe any dishonesty was meant.
Jonn wrote: That’s BS. The AFP story recited how Chiroux was slinging snot throughout the “testimony” and he joined IVAW on Thursday and made this announcement right after the Congressional testimony – the theater was crafted to imply that the testimony was so compelling that he decided not to go because of it. It was another attempt to suck the media in to cover this even though there’s no real story here. Just like Waters and Woolsey breaking into tears.
Also, while I, Kelly, and Kris were there, Jason Hurd wasn’t. I’m not sure who you’re referring to, but he wasn’t present. Come on, Jonn, you’re telling me you don’t have flash cards of this stuff? 🙂
Jonn wrote: OK, then who’s the hairy guy in the back? He looks like hairy-Hurd to me.
This Old Retired Petty Officer smells an Article 32 coming. Then a General Court-Martial? We can only hope. But he will become the posterboy for the left wing scum.
Leavenworth is calling you, boy.
Jonn wrote: I suspect the Army will want to get rid of this as soon and as cleanly as possible.
I have to take exception to this comment:
Big surprise, he signed on for an eight year commitment, finished four years active duty and got called back in. being a 46Q journalist isn’t going to require him to do any of the heavylifting – no fighting, no patrolling. The reason I know the MOS for journalist is because it was my secondary. I spent some time as a private working as an Army journalist in Panama during the treaty negotiations in 1977.
I am a 46Q with one tour in Iraq, and one coming up.
May I respectfully say that 1977 is about as relevant to the job now as little green men are relevant to the space program? I deployed to Iraq with a Mobile Public Affairs Detachment, and not only went on patrols, but I pulled security on IEDs, helped search females, and did things I never thought I’d need to do as a journalist. I’ve flown on assualts and I’ve been there to help pick up body bags.
We go where the Soldiers go, see what the Soldiers see and tell their stories. And most of us don’t do it by hanging out in the PX.
V/R,
Soldier Grrrl
Jonn wrote: Thanks for demeaning my time as an Army journalist. I was actually in an infantry brigade and I understand that it’s not sitting in an office or going to the PX. I went on night raids and airborne assaults with the troops, too. My initial reaction was much more toxic than this, but Zero Ponsdorf cushioned your arrival. I don’t what the thing is about you younger soldiers, but you’re not the only ones who ever had it tough in the Army. Please do your best to get over yourselves.
Spitting on the troops isn’t far behind. But, on the other hand, punching out the hippies isn’t far behind, especially if there are patriotic citizens who are willing to testify on the veterans’ behalf.
Is there an Article 32 hearing (the equivalent of a civilian grand jury proceeding, with extra protections for a service member) coming? You bet your ass. Will the Army fully pursue the charges? I entertain doubts. He’ll pull a “Kokesh” and the Army will probably give him a “General Discharge” under either Honorable, or Less Than Honorable, Conditions, so that he can obtain Veterans Benefits for his Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder from serving as a Journalist (just like Vice President Al Gore!) in a combat environment.
SoldierGrrrl, if you did those things, then you were clearly acting beyond the dictates of your MOS. More power to you. Are “you” suffering from PTSD? Have you been able to cope? If not, have you sought counseling, or at least the support of your fellow veterans? As I have stated on previous posts, it is NOT that the Veteran Community disavows the suffering of those (perhaps like yourself) who have suffered from their experiences in the war zone. What I (and, perhaps, we) object to is the creation of entirely *fresh* body of objectification of “deranged combat veterans” by Hollywood and the Political-Left (same thing, I know) who are “preying” upon the “civilized public population” of our nation because the “evil” Government failed to do anything about it.
Precisely WHO do think is advancing this propaganda? Why are they doing so?
I want every veteran to get the help that they need, but I oppose letting them to be used for post-Vietnam propaganda!
Can spitting on the troops in airports be too far away?
I’m sure that has occured already. However, in the age of MiniDV’s, cell phone video cams and so on – the IVAW/VFP/VVAW won’t be able to hide behind the claim that there is no evidence of such behavior.
Skye, welcome, always happy to “see” you. I doubt that you remember me, although we met. I’ve posted comments on your site, and we met recently.
I agree that in the current environment that no public act will be undocumented, but the Vietnam-era incidents were also documented (poorly), but they are denigrated now for their accuracy.
Kick ass, girl. You deserve it. (I’m married, have been for over 30 years, and don’t seek to change it, so I can’t make TSO-like pronouncements about your desired dating habits.)
Hmmm. Maybe in the post-Obama-“sweetie” thing I shouldn’t call Skye “girl”? Sorry. I don’t know your age Skye, but I think you’re only slightly older than my daughter. No insult intended in this hyper-PC world.
Still, Kick Ass (Woman)! You Rock!
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 05/17/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention updated throughout the day…so check back often.
So, for ignoring a Letter — This IVAW slime calls a news conference. Even Drudge has it on his page still.
Am I missing something important?
Jonn, How do you reconcile these two statements? Thanks for demeaning my time as an Army journalist. I was actually in an infantry brigade and I understand that it’s not sitting in an office or going to the PX. I went on night raids and airborne assaults with the troops, too. My initial reaction was much more toxic than this, but Zero Ponsdorf cushioned your arrival. I don’t what the thing is about you younger soldiers, but you’re not the only ones who ever had it tough in the Army. Please do your best to get over yourselves. and Big surprise, he signed on for an eight year commitment, finished four years active duty and got called back in. being a 46Q journalist isn’t going to require him to do any of the heavylifting – no fighting, no patrolling. The reason I know the MOS for journalist is because it was my secondary. I spent some time as a private working as an Army journalist in Panama during the treaty negotiations in 1977. Suddenly, it wasn’t just a secondary MOS, but rather, your job in an infantry unit and you did some heavy lifting as part of the MOS. Interesting. The wars fought in 1977 are not the wars we’re fighting now, and the work journalists did during treaty negotiations is, more than likely, wildly different. Jonn wrote: “During treaty negotiations” is not the same as covering treaty negotiations, is it? The reason I was a journalist during those days was because I was also an infantryman. At the time, I’d spent two years in 1/75th and a year in the airborne company in Panama. I was familiar with combat operations and fit in well with combat troops. Obviously, you’re not familiar with operations in Panama during that period. I don’t want to get into a whole thing, out of respect to Zero, but you have to admit that this Matthis fellow wasn’t going to be sent out on a mission to kill as many Iraqis as he could – given the body of his work (easily Googled), he was… Read more »
SoldierGrrrl, if you did those things, then you were clearly acting beyond the dictates of your MOS. That may be true, but I was acting as a soldier, and trying to help get the mission done.
More power to you. Are “you” suffering from PTSD? Have you been able to cope? If not, have you sought counseling, or at least the support of your fellow veterans? As I have stated on previous posts, it is NOT that the Veteran Community disavows the suffering of those (perhaps like yourself) who have suffered from their experiences in the war zone. What I (and, perhaps, we) object to is the creation of entirely *fresh* body of objectification of “deranged combat veterans” by Hollywood and the Political-Left (same thing, I know) who are “preying” upon the “civilized public population” of our nation because the “evil” Government failed to do anything about it.
I have received counseling, my husband is a combat vet, as are my parents. I am blessed in that I have a huge and active support network, and when I came home, I took advantage of that network.
I get rather irritated when a legion of (possibly non-existent) scarred soldiers are held up as an example of us all.
SoldierGrrrl,
I did not say anything to demean your mission or your actions. I Truly DO congratulate for accomplishing your mission, above and beyond the call of duty.
Alas, I did NOT serve in Vietnam, and do not personally suffer from combat-related PTSD (although I suffer from a related stress-disorder arising from purely intra-Governmental misbehavior that the USG has deigned to ignore).
I am very HAPPY that you received counseling, and the support of your husband and parents. I ENCOURAGE all returning veterans to take ADVANTAGE of the support network of other veterans who’ve been there – for they are the ones who understand the issue. At the end of it all, I want ALL of you to NOT be tainted by the Horse-Sh*t label that you are “Iraqi Combat Vets” who should be Feared. Instead, I want you to be Iraqi Combat Vets who should be praised and EMULATED!
As far as Government Policies, you may say things with which I disagree, but I will not *attack* your patriotism and courage, nor that of your husband or parents.
Finally, like you, I absolutely reject the purely Political posturing of second-hand-scarring Iraqi vets. If you (figuratively speaking for any veteran who Actually Needs support) need support, LET US KNOW. Don’t go and become a poster-boy (or girl (see my apologia to Skye)) for the people who despise us all!
Keep the faith, SoldierGrrrl, it is what holds us all together. And pass on my appreciation to your veteran husband, and parents.
So this is the face of the new generation of soldiers? Thank God he wasn’t around in 1940-44 or during any other period of American history when war was ugly and unfortunately it was expected to have civilian casualties, that’s war. I have to believe he’s the exception, not the rule. If he personifies the common soldier, God help us.
He should stop hiding behind this charade of “I’m against this illegal war” and just admit the fact he doesn’t want to return to Iraq. He wants to continue living the comfortable life that the real soldiers preserve everyday while fighting in Iraq and other parts of the world.
Throw him in Leavenworth, throw away the keys. This coward RE-enlisted during the Iraq war and I bet he cashed his paychecks and accepted his promotions. He is just dodging his responsibilities now. Period. You signed up – now get your ass back to work or go to jail!
I am not a rich man nor a beneficiary of any of this governements policies, but any man or woman that has served in Iraq that I see here in NYC I offer a free beer or cup of coffee to in thanx.
This pussy shows up here and I am going to kick his ass out of my City!
Jonn – great job covering this. Newsbusters has refuted the guy’s claim of being “filet mignon” for the recruiters…
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/05/17/pentagon-rebuts-afp-claim-military-recruiters-prey-poor-uneducated
He signed up when he was 16. At that age he could be forgiven for making a few mistakes. The mistake was to assume that the president only sends people to war for just causes.
The “official” causes for the Iraq war:
* find weapons of mass destruction – FAIL
* liberate and stop the torture of iraqi people – abu graib anyone?
* remove Saddam Hussein from Power – that’s done, so why stay?
Because the real reason for the war is to control the oil. Is anyone still so naive as to think otherwise?
Forgot to add: controlling the oil is the main goal, but on top of that the other reason for the war is to divert hundreds of millions of dollars PER DAY from the US Taxpayer into the hands of the business cronies of the bush administration. Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton, and now they get the contracts without competition. Is it any wonder his Halliburton Stock options rose by 3000 percent in one year?
Peter – He didn’t sign up at 16: 1) It is illegal; 2) He had graduated H.S. I expect the rest of your info is similarly made up garbage.
controlling the oil is the main goal
The Illuminati is behind it all, moohahaha!
Make sure you wear your tin foil hat, Peter, because Halliburton has developed a mind control device that changes lefties into full-blown patriotic conservatives!
[…] HOWEVER, it turns out this noble soldier is a journalist, who claims he covered up war crimes during…. If this is true, then by not reporting them he is as guilty as the people who actually committed them. If not, he should run for Senate in MA in a few years… […]
SoldierGrrrl,
I got a question,since you are a 46Q journalist, why would a 46Q journalist be “stop-lossed” let alone called back to duty?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-loss_policy
Soldiers subjected to stop-loss orders are often those whose enlistment period ends during a combat tour or who are due to leave within 90 days of the scheduled start of a combat tour. Without the stop-loss policy, the Army would have to replace those soldiers with new ones who had not trained with the unit.
He’s not a part of the combat team he hasn’t trained with a particular unit why would he be called back?
Peter
“Is it any wonder his Halliburton Stock options rose by 3000 percent in one year?”
“3000 percent”
I take it math’s not your forte in life there Peter?
I’d like to see ‘Robert NYC’ enlist, course he won’t….
“James Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:34 am
I’d like to see ‘Robert NYC’ enlist, course he won’t….”
You guys have a disconcerting interest in who enlists and who doesn’t. You guys are just beating the hell out of that Chickenhawk Memo, which is largely comepletely untrue. What possible interest do you have in James enlisting? Or me, or Jonn, or Rush Limbaugh or anyone else? Does military service somehow place you on an elevated pedestal? And if so, can I assume that means you’ll be voting McCain?
Honestly, I don’t get it.
The author who wrote “Spitting Image” is a Vietnam Veteran Against the War puke. So of course, it proves that Winter Soldier wasn’t a smear and had no impact on the rest of the vets, that he found no instances of troops being spit on.
Of course it’s like expecting Hitler NOT to deny the Holocaust.
Peter,
You lie. Most of Halliburton’s contracts were competitive, with a small percentage sole sourced legally under an exemption to competition. That one exemption protected Operational Security.
“Is it any wonder his Halliburton Stock options rose by 3000 percent in one year?”
Have a linky poo for that? And how does it compare to the stock price? As far as I know, his options were never viable, i.e., the stock price at which he could exercise his option was always MORE than what the stock was selling for anyway.
Jonn wrote: He did come back with a link last night, but I’ll be damned if I can figure out how he figures Cheney’s portfolio has anything to do with a coward refusing to serve in the capacity he contracted to serve. I deleted his two posts – I guess because I’m a jerk.
I don’t mind the subject going off course much…but Petey was just typing to make noise with the keyboard. I expect we’ll see a lot more of his type now that finals are over.
James,
“I’d like to see ‘Robert NYC’ enlist, course he won’t….”
I’d like to see all you hippies freaks with your “War Is Not The Answer” signs go to Iraq and stand 100 yards downrange from a checkpoint and implement your “Peace Plan”.
You claim it’ll work, so why not stand behind your claims?
Either way, you’ll satisfy my criteria, saving Soldiers. Terrorists who expend their IED on your dumbass can use it on our troops.
CORRECTION:
Either way, you’ll satisfy my criteria, saving Soldiers. Terrorists who expend their IED on your dumbass CAN’T use it on our troops.
I think the reason I and some others have an interest in people enlisting is that it takes away the relative safety of their position.
It’s easy to back a war that you will never have to fight. (Obviously not talking to some of those who’ve already been fighting). It’s easy to back something you have no personal involvement in.
Personal involvement forces you to take a more intimate stand.
Also, I wouldn’t wish IEDs on anyone, and I really don’t think that’s something to be throwing around.
It’s easy to back a war that you will never have to fight. Kind of ironic and broad, that.
Today’s military doesn’t get to pick their wars, they can join or not, but when and where they fight isn’t under their purview. Now anyone in the military can stand up and say “I will not fight”, but they don’t have the right be selective. That’s politics, not a moral position. The true Conscientious Objector doesn’t make his decision based on such externals.
On a personal note: It’s easy to back something you have no personal involvement in. If you mean the unlikelihood that I, personally, at 62 will go to Iraq, you may have a point. No kids here either, but I am, and have been, as personally involved with my brothers and sisters in arms as humanly possible so I take mild umbrage at your characterization. I back the war in Iraq only because my folks are there. How it got started is now irrelevant.
Which is why I’m not, nor will ever be, a conscientious objector. I will refuse illegal orders, but that’s it. My own personal stand is different than many, I realize.
That’s an interesting statement, Ponsdorf. “I back the war in Iraq only because my folks are there. How it got started is now irrelevant”. For me, it’s the exact opposite. I oppose the war in Iraq because my folks are there and I think how it got started, and whether they were supposed to be there, IS highly relevant.
Jonn: I guess I’m not as cynical as you are: also, yes, it is Sergio. There are a lot of IVAW members with beards.
Jonn wrote: It seems to be a part of the uniform these days like the black sweatshirts.
“That’s an interesting statement, Ponsdorf. “I back the war in Iraq only because my folks are there. How it got started is now irrelevant”. For me, it’s the exact opposite. I oppose the war in Iraq because my folks are there and I think how it got started, and whether they were supposed to be there, IS highly relevant.”
No remotely true once you are in uniform. You’ll need to explain how it becomes so.
Refusing an order you, as an individual, consider illegal is always your right. But that act is not done in a vacuum. It’s really simple, I think, take off the uniform, don’t claim to speak for anyone other than yourself, and face the consequences. Anything else is politics.
that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
One can not plead ignorance later at one’s convenience.
Perhaps you admit that some IVAW members are dumber than most and signed up under some misunderstanding?
[There are a lot of IVAW members with beards.]
It’s a Che thing, we wouldn’t understand.
Just a couple thoughts… when I was leaving active duty several months ago, what I was hearing was that everyone who got called back in was being reclassed into an 88M, a truck driver. I don’t know if this is the case with Matthis, but before anyone starts jumping to conclusions, you should at least consider that he might not be being called back in as a 46Q. Secondly, I know that when my unit of 92As (warehouse people) deployed, they didn’t deploy as to work in their MOS… they drove PLS trucks, and did base security, and did convoy security. I think the point I’m trying to make here is that given your limited knowledge of the person and the situation, none of you need to be passing judgement.
Many of you may not like what he’s doing, but if you’ve never been in his situation then you should consider yourself lucky… and if you have, find some compassion.
Jonn wrote: So we should guess like you’re guessing? Compassion for a selfish coward? Wrong blog, Kate.
“Spitting on soldiers”? Please. No one is blaming them for the disaster the bush administration has gotten us into. Get over yourselves. “Punching hippies”? Let us know when you can join us in this century……
John,
During Vietnam, it wasn’t good enough that the war was wrong, it wasn’t good enough that America was wrong. The VVAW via Winter SOldier made sure that the public believed that the Soldiers were wrong.
And the people behind Winter Soldier 2.1 are the old VVAW pukes who control the IVAW. IVAW hasn’t hasn’t had a single original idea. All their protests are replays of some VVAW event from the 60′ and 70’s.
Lok at any of the reports o WS2.1 that has photos and there they are, the old traitors from VVAW out to smear this generation of military.
Hell, Dougherty’s panel could have been named “Glory Days”.
If IVAW were a AM radio station, they’d be the Oldies Station.
Peter,
“Because the real reason for the war is to control the oil.”
$4/gallon and you say that with a straight face?
Since you clowns are not shy about calling Bush a liar, I’ll call you a liar. Only I’ll be correct.
Jon,
Aren’t we lucky to have Kate who knows everything…
Let’s see if Kate’s “understanding” extends to Bush who when he had to make decisions had to use imperfect information. Things at that level are always uncertain.
Of course the oposition has the advantage of working on the problem after it’s already happened. At that point anyone can tell you what should have happened.
Jon,
“OK, then who’s the hairy guy in the back? He looks like hairy-Hurd to me.”
Been reading “The Sixties Papers” and there’s a certain “look” that they are trying to recreate. Could be one of the other IVAW cult members.
[…] to Comrade Chiroux’s taste given his political associations. You can read more about his case at This Ain’t Hell It seems clear to me that Mr. Chiroux wants to duck out not for some high religious commitment, […]
Chiroux? Are you serious??? I know this kid from DL. The only reason he was in the Army was because he was a total fuckup in HS. He spent taxpayers money smoking pot and talking about himself, and now hes probably wasting IVAW funds to prolong it. IVAaw should be ashamed.
Jonn wrote: I’m working on a big expose` of Chiroux (I have his military records). You should email me and maybe we can fill in the blanks on some stuff.
How do I get in contact with you, Jonn?
Jonn wrote: You can use the contact form or the email address in the “Contact Us” page (the link is in the header). Or you can just leave another comment with your correct email address.
THIS DIRTBAG CLAIMS SERVICE IN AFGHANASTAN? I DO NOT BELIEVE 5 DAYS IS HONORABLE. THAT IS ALL HE SERVED IN A DANGER ZONE. HE IS A WEAK PIECE OF SCUM WHO BLEEDS COWARDICE IN THE FACE OF COMMITTMENT.