Dallas Wittgenfeld – A Recap
There’s been a lot of rambling and invective on the recent Wittgenfeld threads at TAH (here and here). As a result, it’s been easy to lose track of precisely what claims our “friend” Wittgenfeld actually has and has not made – and which of those claims are valid. Since he’s now entered in the Ballduster McSoulpatch Memorial Stolen Valor Tournament, it’s probably best to have that info immediately available. So I thought I’d take a shot at summarizing Wittgenfeld’s claims and their status.
If anyone finds what they feel to be an error in the information below, please let me know and I’ll correct it – provided I agree, of course. (And if you’re reading this, Wittgenfeld, the only way I’ll accept corrections from you is if they’re accompanied with paperwork you haven’t provided previously. Like a copy of your CIB orders, for example.)
The Legitimate Claims
1. Wittgenfeld claims to have served on active duty with the US Army. That claim is backed by his DD214 and his FOIA report. He served on active duty from Sep 1968 to July 1972.
2. He claims to be a Vietnam Veteran. This claim appears valid. Per the assignments section of his FOIA report, he served in-country from Aug 1969 to Aug 1970.
3. Wittgenfeld claims to have seen combat in Vietnam. This claim appears accurate. Per the assignments section of his FOIA report, Wittgenfeld saw combat in Vietnam with 2 different units. The first was D Co 151st Inf (Ranger) – which was reflagged D Co 75th Inf (Ranger) while Wittgenfeld was assigned to the unit (Aug 1969 to Apr 1970). The second was HQ 2nd Field Force Vietnam (HQ II FFORCEV) from Apr 1970 to Aug 1970.
4. Wittgenfeld claims to have an Air Medal for his service in Vietnam. This claim appears accurate. He was awarded one Air Medal, NOT for Valor, while assigned to HQ II FFORCEV. (The orders for this Air Medal have been removed from their former location on-line. However, I personally reviewed these orders prior to their removal from their former location on-line; they appeared legitimate. I will attempt to coordinate with the owner of the site where they were formerly posted to have them re-posted.)
5. Wittgenfeld claims he has two Purple Hearts. This claim appears accurate. He was awarded two Purple Hearts while assigned to HQ II FFORCEV.
6. Wittgenfeld claims to have been awarded the Army Commendation Medal with V Device (ARCOM w/V). That claim appears accurate. Per his DD214 and FOIA Report, he was awarded the ARCOM w/V, apparently while assigned to D Co 151st Inf (Ranger).
7. Wittgenfeld claims to be Airborne. That claim appears accurate. Per his DD214 and FOIA report, Wittgenfeld is Airborne qualified.
8. Wittgenfeld claims to have been a drill instructor. That claim appears accurate. After his return from Vietnam, per the assignments section of his FOIA report he served as a Drill Instructor (Oct 1970 – Jul 1972).
9. Per his DD214, Wittgenfeld received an honorable discharge.
10. Based on new information brought to my attention on 9 October 2012, it appears that Wittgenfeld’s CIB is legitimate as opposed to questionable. Apparently US Army Vietnam (USARV) – in an exception to Department of the Army regulation and policy of the day – authorized 05B RTOs serving with infantry units whose primary duties were to accompany infantry units on tactical operations to be awarded the CIB. While I have not yet personally located and verified the full text of the USARV exception, the exception is unambiguously referenced in a decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). The ABCMR doesn’t tend to get things wrong.
OK, so much for the “good”. Now for the “bad” and the “ugly”. And, finally, my attempt to make sense of it all.
The Questionable Claims
1. Wittgenfeld claims to have a CIB. This claim is questionable. In fact, Wittgenfeld’s FOIA report and DD214 both indicate he has a CIB. However, the assignments section of his FOIA report indicates he never served in combat as (1) an infantry unit commander, (2) a formally-assigned advisor to RVN forces, or (3) as an infantry soldier (all his assignments in Vietnam were Radio Operator assignments in his primary MOS of 05B). His receipt of the CIB is thus highly questionable, as it appears to be invalid under the regulations of the day (para 96.a., AR 672-5-1, May 1961, w/amendments). Yes, it’s in his records. Whether it’s legitimate or not is another question.
This claim is no longer regarded as questionable. As noted above, Wittgenfeld apparently does legitimately rate the CIB under a US Army -Vietnam exception to DA regulations.
2. Wittgenfeld claims to be, and and promotes himself as, a former “Airborne Ranger”. This claim is arguably true, but – like Roger Maris’ single-season home run record – also comes with a rather large asterisk. Per his FOIA report and the assignments section of same, Wittgenfeld was an Airborne-qualified soldier assigned as a Radio Operator to a Ranger Unit in Vietnam. However, per those same documents Wittgenfeld did not attend Ranger School, is not Ranger qualified, and therefore does not rate the Ranger Tab. Use your own judgement as to whether you accept this claim by Wittgenfeld as valid. I personally don’t buy it – Ranger School has existed in one form or another since 1950, and Wittgenfeld served from 1968-1972 – but I appear to be in the minority on this issue and could well be wrong.
3. Wittgenfeld also claims (by wearing the awards publicly) that he served with a unit during a period for which it was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC), Valorous Unit Award (VUA), and Meritorious Unit Award (MUA). This claim is questionable if not outright false. I’ve checked the official Army listing of unit awards; none of Wittgenfelds units in Vietnam seem to be listed there – so none of them appear to have ever been awarded a PUC, VUA, or MUA. That means Wittgenfeld almost certainly isn’t authorized these unit awards for permanent wear – and thus shouldn’t be wearing them now. (His Vietnamese Unit Awards are probably legit; many if not most US Army units deployed to Vietnam received one or both of those.)
4. Wittgenfeld has also made claims of “skydiving in Vietnam to entertain the orphans”. Yeah, right. Sorry, but I’m gonna need independent verification from a disinterested party before I’ll buy that one. I’m calling this claim at best questionable if not an outright whopper of a lie.
The Bogus Claims
1. Wittgenfeld was cited multiple times in the past in published articles as having received a “Bronze Star for Valor”. There’s really only one place those reporters would have gotten that info: from Wittgenfeld himself, either by interviewing him personally or from written material provided by him. Follow this link for one example of such a false claim. Per Wittgenfeld’s DD214 and FOIA report, these claims are bogus – and IMO, so is Wittgenfeld’s current claim that he had no influence over what those reporters wrote about him in the past. The fact that there are several other similar articles near the end of the web page linked here IMO effectively disproves Wittgenfeld’s claims of innocence in this area. Could one reporter “screw the pooch” and get his decorations wrong? Yes. Several, all making the same identical mistake? Uh, no, I don’t think so. I’m calling this claim, and Wittgenfeld’s oblique denial that he bears any responsibility for the misinformation those stories, bogus.
2. Wittgenfeld also apparently hoodwinked the Special Forces Association into admitting him by reputedly making false claims of serving as an advisor to the “Royal Thai Army” and of being temporarily attached to the 11th Special Forces Group. These claims also appear to be bogus. No such assignments are documented in the assignments section of Wittgenfeld’s FOIA report. Rather, Wittgenfeld’s Purple Heart orders show him assigned to “RTAVF-SLS”. I’m reasonably certain this designation stands for “Royal Thailand Army Vietnam Forces – Staff (or maybe Strategic) Liaison Section”. His duty position there was 05B – Radio Operator (SLS). Providing comm support while assigned to a liaison team ain’t the same thing as advisory duty.
3. Wittgenfeld’s also made claims of being “Airborne Ranger Special Forces”, too. Those claims are also bogus – there are no SF assignments in his record whatsoever. Wittgenfeld’s claims of “hanging out” with the 11th SF while on “compassionate leave” don’t cut it – that’s neither formal assignment nor attachment, and I’ve seen nothing documenting that it even happened at all. Ditto his claims of being a Ranger Advisor to the Royal Thai Army (serving on a liaison team ain’t the same thing). Bottom line: Wittgenfeld never served with SF, either in CONUS or in Combat. He was never Special Forces, nor is he authorized to wear the Green Beret – period. Even if he did con his way into the Special Forces Association.
4. Finally, Wittgenfeld claims to have been a “LRRP” or “LRP” in Vietnam. This claim is bogus. Wittgenfeld was never a “LRP” or “LRRP” in Vietnam. His first unit there – D Co 151st Infantry – was indeed originally designated as a Long Range Patrol (LRP) unit. But that designation changed about 6 months before Wittgenfeld ever arrived. D Co 151st Infantry’s status and designation was changed in Feb 1969 from LRP to Ranger. Wittgenfeld arrived in Vietnam in Aug 1969, so he never served with a LRP unit in Vietnam – and he absolutely did not serve with the 101st as a LRRP, as he’s previously implied. Wittgenfeld served as an RTO while assigned to a Ranger unit. He never served in a LRP or LRRP unit.
The Asshattery
Other than the above, Wittgenfeld’s dealings with others are textbook examples of how to make enemies and influence people the wrong way. Read the comments by “LoNg RaNgE PaTrOL 41” starting here. Yes, that really is Wittgenfeld playing with the shift key like a teenage girl (or a spastic) and using that asinine screen name. And after reading those comments, you can probably decide for yourself whether his tournament nickname of “Flying Assclown” is apropos.
His abuse of the Army uniform and his disrespectful attitude towards other veterans, veterans’ supporters, and others in general are reprehensible. His narcissism is obvious in his staged photos, his deeds, and his words. He is also one of very few people I’ve ever even heard of to get arrested for flying a plane while intoxicated (2nd part of article here). And when you read Wittgenfeld’s own words, it’s easy to conclude that he’s also a racist.
In short: he’s a real piece of work. He’s definitely a legend in his own mind, and obviously thinks he deserves to be famous.
The rest of the world? Either “deserves to be infamous” or “Dallas Who?” is probably more a accurate description of how the rest of the world feels about Wittgenfeld.
Reconstruction of Events, AKA Reality
Here’s my reconstruction of what likely actually happened. I could be wrong, and if I’m presented documentary evidence I am, I’ll revise this.
D Co 151st Infantry (Long Range Patrol) was an Indiana National Guard unit. It was one of the few Army Reserve Component (USAR and ARNG) units mobilized and sent to Vietnam, and was the only National Guard Infantry unit so mobilized and deployed. This unit was mobilized in April or early May 1968, departed Indiana in mid-May for extensive pre-deployment training at Fort Benning, and deployed to Vietnam in December 1968. The unit was assigned to II FFORCEV. It was redesignated D Co 151st Infantry (Ranger) in Feb 1969.
Per Wittgenfeld’s FOIA, Wittgenfeld was not originally a member of D Co 151st Infantry – he enlisted after D Co 151st Infantry had departed for pre-deployment training. The assignments section of his FOIA shows Wittgenfeld began active duty in September 1968; attended basic training at Fort Campbell; Leaders Prep and 05B AIT at Fort Knox; Airborne School at Fort Benning; and then was assigned to the 82nd Airborne at Fort Bragg, arriving in April 1969. He served as an 05B – Radio Operator with the 82nd Airborne for approx 3 months, then ended up on orders for Vietnam. He arrived in Vietnam in late August 1969 and was assigned to D Co 151st Infantry (Ranger) shortly thereafter.
Wittgenfeld was thus never assigned to D Co 151st Infantry while it was designated a “Long Range Patrol” unit, arriving approx 6 months after the unit had been redesignated “Ranger”. He was most likely either an individual replacement or Regular Army cadre assigned to that unit because of the pending reflagging of that unit as D Co 75th Infantry (Ranger), which occurred in November 1969 and was almost certainly due to the end of the period of mobilization of D Co 151st Infantry. Wittgenfeld thus served in D Co 151st Infantry (Ranger) for 2 1/2 to 3 months, and then continued to serve with D Co 75th Infantry (Ranger) after his unit was reflagged. While assigned to D Co 151st Infantry (Ranger), Wittgenfeld apparently received an ARCOM w/V. Per his official records, his assignment with both units was as an 05B – IS Radio Operator.
Wittgenfeld’s reflagged unit of assignment, now D Co 75th Infantry (Ranger) continued as a part of II FFORCEV until April 1970. At that time, D Co 75th Infantry (Ranger) stood down. As a Active Duty soldier on a 1-year tour, Wittgenfeld still had several months remaining in-country. He was then transferred to HQ FFORCEV for the remainder of his time in-country.
Wittgenfeld appears to have been assigned to a HQ II FFORCEV Staff/Strategic Liaison Team (RTAVF-SLS) with the mission of providing II FFORCEV liaision between HQ II FFORCEV and a subordinate Royal Thai Army unit HQ (the Royal Thai Army Vietnam Forces were subordinate to II FFORCEV). Wittgenfeld’s duty assignment was 05B – Radio Operator (SLS); his duties doubtless consisted providing long-range comm support for the liaison team, most likely often relating to fire support provided by US artillery to Royal Thai Forces. This is in no way, shape, form, or fashion “duty as a Ranger advisor to Royal Thai Army Rangers”. While assigned to this liaison team, Wittgenfeld was wounded twice and received an Air Medal. He served with II FFORCEV for less than 4 months – from April to Aug 1970. Approx 10 days before Wittgenfeld’s one-year in country anniversary, he departed Vietnam for CONUS.
After departing for CONUS, Wittgenfeld took about 45 days combined leave and travel time. He arrived at Fort Knox, KY, in early Oct 1970. He served as a Drill Instructor at Fort Knox until his ETS in July 1972.
Wittgenfeld served honorably in dangerous and demanding assignments in Vietnam. He received both combat decorations and wounds. But was never “Special Forces”, a “Ranger Advisor”, a “LRRP”, or a “LRP”. He does not have the Ranger Tab. He was an Airborne-qualified RTO assigned to a Ranger unit for about 8 months, then was assigned as a radio operator for a liaison team from HQ II FFORCEV to a subordinate Royal Thai Army unit HQ for a bit less than 4 months. That’s all.
Coda
Wittgenfeld’s a rather sad case, actually. His military service was honorable, and based on what I’ve seen his claim of PTSD could well be legitimate. IMO he definitely seems to have operator headspace and timing issues.
But having issues is no excuse to be a liar and a out-of-control asshat. And IMO Wittgenfeld is both of those many times over.
Author Note: The original article castigated Wittgenfeld for falsely claiming to be an “Airborne Ranger” even though he does not have a Ranger Tab. However, the consensus of initial comments appears to be that service with a Ranger unit vice qualifying for the Ranger Tab entitles one to call himself a “Ranger” permanently. I’ve thus removed those portions of the original article and/or reworded them appropriately.
Jonn added: Here’s another picture I have of Wittgenfeld’s uniform with some SF beret flash on his pocket with the SF DUI stuck to it;
ADDED: Kevin writes to tell us that the SF thingie on his pocket is the SF Association’s thing. The SF Association told us that Wittgenfeld wouldn’t be a member these days because he’s been grandfathered from a time before they required documentation and he has none on file.
Category: Phony soldiers, Shitbags
I’m certain that service in the 75th is enough to call yourself a ranger and wear the tan beret, at least while assigned to the 75th. Pretty sure both of those designations are tied to the unit, the beret stays with the unit, just like a maroon beret stays with the airborne unit (you can also wear a maroon beret without jump wings). The tab carries along with the soldier, but plenty of short tabbers never served in ranger units or wore the ranger beret, whatever the color at the time. I’m not sticking up for the guy, just trying to keep accuracy levels up.
Awesome summary. Wittgenfeld is my top pick to sweep the Stolen Valor tournament, mostly because of his subsequent comments and the invective directed at Mrs. Schantag.
jz638: Don’t think so. By that logic, someone who’s merely served in a Special Forces unit in a support role could call themselves “Special Forces” when they didn’t have the long tab. That’s a NO-GO.
I’m also relatively certain most folks currently serving in the 75th Ranger Regiment would disagree with you. I think they’d take a rather dim view of one of their soldiers awaiting a slot to Ranger school calling themselves a “Ranger” – whether or not they were authorized to wear the beret in formation. And I think they’d take a similarly dim view of anyone without the Ranger Tab wearing a Ranger Beret after discharge, whether or not they’d ever served in a Ranger unit. Guess I could be wrong, though.
Finally, you might want to check the current Army awards reg. The Ranger Tab requires one of two things – either (1) completion of a Ranger Course taught by either the US Army Infantry Center and School or the Ranger Training Command, or (2) during World War II only, receipt of the CIB for service with either Merril’s Marauders or a Ranger Battalion. Wittgenfeld doesn’t qualify. Period.
Can anyone confirm what jz638 is saying about the wearing of berets? That doesn’t sound right to me.
Hondo, guess we posted around the same time. I know that at the 173rd ABCT in Vicenza, Italy only those who are Airborne qualified wear the maroon beret. All others wear the black one. I kinda think if someone not Airborne qualified tried to wear the maroon beret there they wouldn’t last long. I also think the Rangers would take the same stance.
@1… Commo guys attached to ranger units wear maroon berets and never wear the tab. They are considered support personnel. I personally know someone who had a similar career path. Incidentally, he also was a commo guy who participated in combat. He wears a CAB, not CIB.
Hondo: I was with 1/75. Every man that passes RASP and is assigned to one of the Battalions is a Ranger. Once you don your tan beret, and pin your Ranger scroll at Ft. Benning after graduation from RASP, you are officially an Army Ranger. You tell that otherwise to all the Army Rangers who died in combat with a scroll and not a tab. A scroll makes you a Ranger, a tab make you qualified.
JAGC: It may have been different back then, but our commo guys go through RASP (used to be called RIP) and have the opportunity to earn their tab like all the grunts do. But that’s today, I don’t know about that era. A lot has changed…
One additional note is that support personnel in ranger units typically get first dibs at ranger school slots if they do a good job with the unit.
JAGC: They (support) get the same opportunity as everyone else. It’s usually about at the year mark in Regiment that you go to Ranger School (generally speaking for most Rangers). By then you’ve already done a deployment as a Ranger and earned your combat scroll.
Paachute Cutie: the Army has gone back and forth on beret policy over the years. Can’t address the policy changes for the tan beret, but I can give some historical background on the Green Beret wear policies.
In the late 1970s, if I recall correctly, SF restricted wear of the beret to only those who’d passed the Q course; those who hadn’t wore the baseball cap w/parachute disk to show they were airborne qualified. At some point, either JFKCMA or DA directed that everyone would wear the beret – and by 1981, that was the policy. This was before the SF tab existed, so a “Unit Identification Bar” (a 1/2″ by 2″ stripe in the SF Group colors) was worn on the beret by those who were not SF qualified; those who were SF qualified wore the complete beret “flash”. The Unit ID Bar was derisively called a “candy stripe”.
That was the policy in the early 1980s. Can’t say with certainty what the policy was much later than that, as I left Fort Bragg in late 1982.
As I recall, at the same time the 18th Airborne Corps policy for wear of the maroon beret was different. Only those on jump status wore the maroon beret. Others wore the baseball cap – with parachute ID disk if jump qualified and without if not, as I recall. But that was over 30 years ago now, and I could be mis-remembering policy for Corps units. I also don’t recall whether or not the 82nd varied from Corps policy or not.
Lee1/75: interesting. That wasn’t my impression, and it definitely isn’t the way SF treats the same issue.
Jonn: your thoughts as a former 75th guy?
Guys this stuff is basic information. I really enjoy this web site, but when you start going off on shit you know nothing about (tab vs scroll thing), it irritates me. A quick google search can verify a lot of this information about Ranger stuff. But don’t come on here and say a man with a scroll isn’t a Ranger until he’s gone to school.
Regiment is a very special place. Infantryman initially go through OSUT/Airborne/RASP
RASP is the Ranger Assessment and Selection Program. It is a 8 week selection process to determine if you’re good enough for Regiment. Read about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger_Assessment_and_Selection_Program
If you graduate RASP then you get assigned to a Ranger battalion as a Ranger, with a tan beret and Ranger scroll on your shoulder.
You will do a combat rotation as a line guy before you go to Ranger School (usually) and you will earn your CIB and Ranger combat scroll. Around the year mark in Regiment, you’ll be sent off to Ranger School and expected to graduate, if you ever want to pick up a team of your own.
We have a saying in Regiment. “The tab is just a school, the scroll is a way of life.”
You can have a Ranger tab and never have stepped foot in Regiment, never lived the life of a Ranger, or did our missions.
So in the end you have two kinds of Rangers: tabbed Rangers and scrolled Rangers. Scrolled Rangers are a much different breed.
Don’t know if Jonn is following this right now but since we both came from 1st Batt back in the day, I’ll wade into this shit storm. Hondo is correct that the beret for non-qualified individuals has never been nailed down for very long. When I first got to Battalion (there were only two at the time and no Regimental HQ) each Batt had its own RIP (current RASP). The day I graduated from RIP I was issued a black beret. As a side note, at the time we had what were called RATs (Ranger Augmentation Team). These were motorpool guys, some cooks and few other soft skill guys. They were not even assigned to the Battalion but still wore black berets.
Dallas may be a dick but if he served honorably in a Ranger unit in combat, he’s a Ranger in my mind.
Less that 2% of people who qualify for a Ranger Tab ever spend a day in a Ranger Unit and probably wouldn’t last long if they did.
And Lee1/75, get a beer and relax young man; it’s too damn hot to be getting excited. 🙂
According to Wittgenfeld twisted turns, while in RVN my unit 1/11 provided artillery support to SF. So I can claim to be SF?? I call bullshit. Too bad a man who has served honornably sinks to this level.
@3: Hondo, check out the book “Charlie Rangers”, about C Co. 75th in Vietnam. They were/are called Rangers, even though they didn’t have the Ranger tab.
Serve in a Ranger Unit… you are a Ranger… Tab is for a school, how can you call a tabbed guy who served in a regular infantry unit that he’s a Ranger and a guy who never made it to school, but ran missions overseas with a Ranger unit that he’s not a ranger because he never went to the school? Thats some dumb logic. Yes SF is different, their support wears the Maroon beret with the Groups flash and SF crest. Ranger, if your in the Batt, wether your support or not, you had to make it through some sort of assessment, and you wear the Tan Beret. Its not just the infantryman in a Ranger Unit that wears it. If the man was a radio operator in Vietnam with a Ranger Unit, he’s a Ranger… period. Did he qualify for the CIB? That I can’t say… but the issue of him as a Ranger is settled in my mind. On to the next issue. Special Forces… Ranger Batts are all under JSOC. Just like the Green Berets, Phsyops, Civil Affairs, etc… they are all considered Special Operations. Now if he’s claiming to be a Green Beret and he’s not, then its BS. If he’s claiming to have been Special Operations… he’s right, he was. People often mistakenly say Special Forces when they intend to mean Special Ops. SO at this point thats my question for him. He was clearly Special Ops, but was he Special Forces, was that a mistake he made, or did he intend to mislead people?
COB6: Roger… a little has changed since your day. I went through RIP back in ’04, served at B Co 1/75. The only reason this gets me fired up is because my war is still fresh on my mind and I’ve lost too many friends who represent that Ranger scroll.
I just find it a little disheartening that someone posting about an individual’s stolen valor on TAH doesn’t even understand basic knowledge (Ranger) pertaining to the topic. I think more research and discretion needs to be served before putting possible inaccurate information out in the future. I agree with everything else in the recap.
I don’t know much about this Dallas guy, he’s probably a big asshat like the rest of them. I don’t know his circumstance entirely with his service in the Rangers. But if he legitimately served in a Ranger unit in combat (I mean actually assigned as a Ranger, not some “I was attached BS”), he’s a Ranger. But I don’t know enough about his service in that aspect…
Just an FYI: Rangers were formed (Ranger Battalions) during WWII before there was ever even a “Ranger School”.
Anyway I’ll get off my soap box.
Well, if you look at Wittgenfeld’s picture, you’ll notice that he’s wearing the tan beret with an 82nd unit patch and the French cord (you spell it) that goes with being in the 82d. I can’t see the DUI clear enough to ID it and I can’t see what’s on his right shoulder.
I’m pretty sure that no one in the 82d wears a tan beret. Of course, he was also wearing a green beret with the 82d patch at the Wall.
@15: That’s the way I remember it, also, in regards to who got to wear the beret in 1/75. I remember one poor bastard that hadn’t been through RIP, yet, was caught wearing the beret as he came onto Hunter to report to 1/75 by a couple of Rangers. You can imagine what happened to that young private. RIP was a block down the road from my unit’s barracks and orderly room.
I agree with parachute cutie, when I was with the 173rd only airborne qualified wore the maroon. I never once saw a non airborne soldier in a maroon beret always black. Some of the MPs on post were airborne and some were not, they wore the corresponding head gear.
@Hondo – In the ’90’s at least….the Maroon beret was a unit headgear. Some units on Smokebomb Hill and definitely over at 1st COSCOM…if a unit was designated at ‘ABN’, all members wore the beret.
I know this first hand because my new bride at the time, asked me [I was in Division] to shape her friends beret as she was a leg, but had been assigned to one of the COSCOM units.
I hope they’ve since amended that unseemly policy.
All: Interesting. We seem to have consensus that I’m wrong, and that service with a Ranger unit (either in combat or peacetime assignment) allows one to legitimately call oneself a “Ranger”, so I’ll edit the article above.
I will say that it’s my impression the SF community views the same issue very differently. I served with an SF group many years ago in one of their organic support units; I never went to the Q-course. But you will never hear me make the claim that I’m “former SF” – because I don’t rate the long tab. And I’d expect to get ripped a new asshole by those in the SF community if I ever were unethical enough to make that claim – just like Ken Aden’s getting right now.
What you’ll hear me say is that I “served in an SF support unit” or “I served in SF in a support role”. You will never hear me say that I am “former SF”. That implies a qualification or service (ODA) I simply don’t have.
didn’t mean to stir up such a hornet’s nest there about the beret. (if I did, I’d probably bring up Lyddie England wearing a maroon beret to her courts martial to prove my point). It looks like regardless of his being or not being a Ranger at one time, Dallas’ uniform is unsat.
Hondo, I personally know a gentleman that served with our Indiana Rangers, matter of fact he did a sponsored trip to Iraq while I was there with the 1/163rd 2005-06(Also from Evansville)to do a documentary for the local TV station.
My point is he very active in the reunions of Co.D 151st Inf. and a tireless point man for the military families in the Evansville area military deployees.
He maybe able to supply you with more information.
Let me know I can hook the two of you up.
Also:
http://www.ranger151.com
Stu
What a great summary of a complex context.
Thanks, Hondo .
Yes, a very good summary.
However, I would prefer to never hear from or about the idiot ever again. He craves attention, and giving him what he wants simply isn’t in my plans.
Stu:
Would be happy to hear from the individual. Do I have your OK to contact you via e-mail to arrange contact with him?
Yes, again, SF and Ranger Units are very differently run. For instance you never get on a team until after you have completed Qcourse, however completing ranger school has nothing to do with wether or not you join your Platoon and deploy as a Ranger. Two different types of units. Again, support personnel actually in the SF Group wear the Maroon Beret with the Flash of that Group and the SF crest, they do not wear the Green Beret. Only ones who earn the Green Beret are 18 Series who have graduated the Qcourse, period. Ranger Batt is different, the Beret has nothing to do with wether or not you graduated Ranger school. If you pass your assessment, wether its Rip, Rope, Rasp… whatever it happens to be now, and you are assigned to a Batt as a medic, infantryman, artilleryman, etc.. you will wear your Tan Beret. I was a LRSD soldier, selected and went to the Q in 2008. I did not graduate due to having shoulder surgery. But that is the way things are, much different between SF groups and Batt…. not the same things.
Boys and Girls,
I think this meat gazer should get a low seed. He served, honorably it seems, but embellished his “rep” in old age.
Whatever, a dime a dozen. He is special, all right. Notice the “quasi” gang flash on his right hand. Or maybe he just wants his hole punched. Who knows? Turd Licker.
Now my boy “Ranger” Burrell, the “4th Most Dangerous Man In The World”. Yale Grad, author (My Weekend with Rick, I mean Rita”, his annual membership in the “Gentleman of the Backdoor Society”, confirmed “invisible ninja”, Medal of Honor Recipient (MOH), etc.
This man does not even blame the ex-wife, ex-lover, or the ex-girlfriends for his shitbaggery…he goes straight to the threats to you, your family, and others.
Got to give credit where it is due.
This is a potenial dark horse….
Posers in the night…stealing Valor by the firelight….
Pose on!
11V
The very real deal LRRP Airborne Ranger and still current parachuting qualified LoNg RaNgE PaTrOL 41’s summary of this Orwellian Truth Summary: Well, I see some real deal 75th Infantry Airborne Rangers stood up to clear the bullshit flying around here. The Scrool is a way of life… I remind every ass wipe here that I was the very first person to ever wear a black ranger beret….. a Green Beret Colonel awarded it to me and assigned me to a “special ops LRP team” of trail assassins, Sooo you Leggs can suck this. An RTO 05-2P is a special forces MOS… Common knowledge. In the real airborne rangers doing real Special Operations missions a C.I.B. and or an Infantry Air Medal is a minor detail for all combat Rangers.. no Infantry training needed. In our real ranger training we used real bullets and killed real gooks… no cardboard targets and no blanks allowed. We 5 LRPs inserted covertly, we watched & killed covertly, and we escaped & evaded the enemy on every mission. I like the part of this summary looking at my 5 unit citations from the 75th Rangers like they are nothing and I can’t wear them either. See how stupid these people are. Hey Ranger buds. They found 6 or so incorrect newspaper articles over several years… of some 100 other correct news articles they never mentioned. In the novel 1984, the Orwellians called this a “minitruth”. My shit is straight always has been. The part that is missing from your report is the begining. I was just sitting around Face Booking my bitches and suddenly they ask why I call myself a Ranger when I didn’t go to Ft. Benning. Then I realized I had been invaded by a dozen or so valor vultures inside my face book pages. That’s what I get for being “computer illiterate”. I am a 63 year old disabled man who is teaching my self the computer and I meet these assholes hereon. “Welcome to the new generation of military veterans, I say to myself.” Nowhere in this summary does… Read more »
Ya know guys, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if you guys had and kept ONE uniform, this kinda thing wouldn’t happen. Scrolls, tabs, patches, berets, discs, etc. I mean you guys can’t agree who is and who isn’t a Ranger or who gets to wear which beanie!? Dingleberry gets away with his crap because; 1) he’s a liar, and 2) this kind of confusion.
From the lowliest…whatever to the baddest Recon Marine, we all wear the same uniform with the same cover. No patches, no tabs, no nothing, just the Eagle, Globe and Anchor. Our title is United States Marine, your MOS is secondary.
@32..What the fuck are you talking about??? Are you sober?
Dallas is correct in one aspect…the “scrool” is his way of life.
Tanner: thanks for the update concerning today’s policy concerning wear of the Green Beret. However, that was not the policy in the early 1980s – which was also before the 18-series MOS/AOCs existed, by the way. (The 18-series SF career field didn’t exist before 1 Oct 1984.) The Army’s – and individual unit’s – policies concerning the wear of distinctive headgear have changed repeatedly over the years, as I observed in comment 11 above.
@32. Is this even really him posting or some random kid playing the part? I’m not convinced. Either way, he’s a dip shit and fails to live up to that 5th stanza:
“and under no circumstances will I ever embarrass my country.”
Go elevate your feet somewhere…
To the rest of you gents constantly seeking these posers, good work.
Wittgenfeld: you’re asking for an apology? For what? For my pointing out your lies, questionable claims, misrepresentations, and generally asshattish behavior? Get real.
Your records say you have no Ranger tab. Yes, you served with a Ranger unit. Go ahead and call yourself a “Ranger” if you like. Your official records say you’re not Ranger qualified, and that’s good enough for me.
Contrary to your past claims, your official records show no service with an SF unit in either peacetime or wartime. You were never a LRP or LRRP; your first unit in Vietnam was redesignated from LRP to Ranger about 6 months before you ever arrived in Vietnam; your second unit was never designated LRP; and your last unit (HQ II FFORCEV) was also never a LRP unit. Your official records show no assignment as a “Ranger Advisor” to the Royal Thai Army. Your official records show no assignment as an advisor to any RVN unit. Your official records show no BSM w/V device. None of your units in Vietnam seem to appear on the Army’s master list of unit awards as receiving any unit awards awarded in Vietnam – so that means any unit awards you were authorized to wear then were temporary, and are not authorized for permanent wear by you. Yet you’ve claimed all of those at one point or another since your ETS.
You want an apology? Then first show us some kind of documentary proof that your official records are wrong. THEN maybe you’ll get an apology. Until then – fuggeddaboudit.
You’re nothing more than a sad old man, Wittgenfeld. Your actual combat record is far more valorous and respectable than most. Yet that wasn’t enough, and you had to embellish it to make yourself the hero you felt you deserved to be. That’s truly sad.
I respect your Vietnam service, Wittgenfeld; that was honorable. But as an individual – no, I don’t respect you one whit. In my book, you forfeited all right to respect as an individual the day you started claiming deeds you didn’t do, and honors you don’t rate.
@ 13.. You have strength in your argument but you have to complete the course to wear the Tab.
It is not about the Tab, it is what you do with it. Am I mistaken?
Lee1/75: Yeah, that’s really him – the source IP address and return e-mail address checks out as the same one he’s consistently used when commenting here at TAH.
You might want to read his comments on the thread I linked in the article at the first link under “The Asshattery”. Some of them are even better than this one.
I’m just ever so impressed that he believes he’s the first person in the Army to wear the black beret….
A cursory glance at US military history shows otherwise…but Walter Mitty believes it…
@39. It was about tabs AND scrolls. Some didn’t know the difference.
Correct, you must complete the course to wear the Ranger Tab. Most with tabs don’t serve in the Rangers, but instead other conventional infantry units.
You must also successfully complete Ranger Assessment/Selection to be assigned to the 75th Ranger Regiment and wear the Ranger Scroll. This is for all (not just grunts).
Scroll is with service in the 75th Ranger Regiment(USASOC). Ranger School (TRADOC) is a leadership school. Both important aspects of Ranger history, but a lot of difference.
@40. I’ll take a peek again, browsed through a little of it awhile back.
@18 while the 75th Ranger Regiment in its current form falls under USSOCOM, as far as I know in Vietnam the 75th Ranger Infantry Regiment (Airborne) consisted 15 seperate companies that were attached to distinct Divisions, Corps, or seperate Brigades. They did not fall under a Special Operations Command.
His uniform is completely unsat. While its possible he was awarded a CIB, his records show he never held an Infantry MOS, so he doesn’t rate the blue cord or disks.
During the time that the independent Ranger units operated in Viet Nam even after they were designated as companies of the 75th Infantry Regiment they carried out as their main mission Lon Range Reconnaissance. To cut and paste Wikipedia which matches my understanding:
“Each independent company was attached to a Division or Separate Brigade. Rangers in Vietnam conducted long range reconnaissance behind enemy lines. They collected intelligence, planned and directed air strikes, acted as conventional operations force multipliers, assessed bombing damage of enemy territory, executed night and day ambushes, and sniper attacks.”
I’m not sure it’s a big stretch to claim to have been a LRRP or LRP if you performed these missions in a Viet Nam era Ranger Company.
I don’t know how he got that CIB and don’t care. He doesn’t rate to wear it unless he’s a grunt.
On a side note, I witnessed on my last deployment Navy personnel being awarded Combat Action Badges (CAB) in lieu of Combat Action Ribbons (CAR) because they were working with Army. I also saw Artillery MOS guys being awarded Combat Infantryman Badges because they went to some 2-week course the National Guard (Pennsylvania) was offering that somehow qualified them as 11B and entitled them to CIBs. Very stupid shit and I don’t know how much stuff like that went on in Vietnam or other wars.
Nonetheless, he should be ashamed of wearing it.
That’s right, Apologize to those Rangers dingleberry, because you’re dishonoring the Regiment with your behavior. You do not represent it well. AT ALL.
Hondo, you might check with the Quiet Professionals,Socnet and Rangerup sites about the Ranger Quals for the Viet Nam era.They guard their Honor like us Marines do. Just a throught. Joe
Just when I’m ready to chalk this up to dementia, the fool comes back in #32 and confirms his need to be voted top (dis)honors in the Stolen Valor Tourney. “Dallas, you are the Biggest Loser”
If you all want the long explanation then pick up a copy of Dick Couch’s Sua Sponte. He lays out in great detail the way into the Regt. OSUT (or Basic/ AIT ) Airborne school and then everybody goes through RASP, regardless of Rank or MOS. Those who have never served with the Regt. go through RASP 1 at Benning where the attrition is about 50%. Upon successfully completing RASP 1, the RGT CDR or the DCO (depending who is in theater) award the graduates their Scroll and Tan Beret. Then they go to wherever they may go in the Regt as Rangers. Lee 1/75 seems to be on target but my understanding is that you must complete Ranger School to put on SGT’s stripes.
All prospective platoon sgts and any prior Regimental Rangers who have been away from the the Regt. more than two years must complete RASP 2 prior to assignment back to the RGT.
Lee1/75: correct. Even if Wittgenfeld’s claims of “Thai Advisor” duty (not in his records) or 11B SMOS are correct, the plain fact remains that he also had to meet the other requirements for a CIB. That is, he had to perform duties as an Infantryman. Simply being involved in a firefight isn’t enough – you have to actually perform the duties of an Infantry soldier. Wittgenfeld’s records show zero assignments in an 11-series MOS.