The truth about Discovery’s Dual Survival’s Joe Teti
A few weeks ago, we wrote about David Canterbury, a member of the cast of a survival show on the Discovery Channel, “Dual Survival”. At the time, someone brought up Joe Teti, the other fellow on that show. So being the cynics that we are, we got Teti’s records, too. Here’s what Teti claims on his website;
Most of that is true. He was indeed in the USMC’s Force Recon. He spent less than 4 years in the Marines and here’s his records of assignments;
And his schooling;
He was also in Special Forces – National Guard Special Forces- for five years, ending on May 1st, 2000.
So that’s where his military records end, so he could hardly be a “combat veteran of OIF and OEF” as he claims in his bio in the way that most of us understand the term “veteran”. However, he did participate in those wars as a contractor.
I spent about an hour or so, total in about four phone calls with Joe yesterday. He stands by the “veteran” tag in regards to the war against terror, although your opinions may be different. He tells me that he didn’t reenlist after 9-11 because he was already in the pipeline for a contractor job, which seems reasonable to me, and I have no evidence to the contrary.
I don’t disparage his service because he certainly accomplished more in his nine years than I did in my two decades, well, school-wise, anyway. There are rumors about him flying around the internet and I won’t engage in hearsay. Joe has sent me volumes of his records that I have promised that I wouldn’t post. Of course, all of it reflects well on him as a warrior.
I also understand that he became a target as soon as he took the job at the Discovery Channel, for whatever reasons, that’s the downside of being a public figure. I found him to be an affable fellow, even though he called me ‘sir’ more times than I was comfortable with. And he called me a “smart guy” several times – if only he knew.
So, I may be accused of being star-struck, but, without some real evidence to the contrary, I’m inclined to come down on Joe’s side. We thought that we had a real story here when we first started out, because the first set of records we got were of another Joseph Nicholas Teti who was a helicopter mechanic in the Army back in 1983, the same time Joe said he was in the USMC, but I got a little suspicious of that first set of records, which took us back for another shot at it, and sometimes, they are who they say.
Category: Who knows
“Sir Jonn”, I like the sound of that 🙂
Dunno about that, Combat Historian. Sounds more to me like it should be a character from “Robin Hood: Men In Tights”. Don’t think that’s exactly Jonn’s style. (smile)
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Life is like a box of chocolates. Some of them are chocolate-covered caramels. Some are those weird jelly things. Ya never know what you’re gonna get ’til you bite into them.
Funny how that precise use of the language thing can be a double edged sword.
I dont know, veteran of OIF/OEF mean in uniform to me. Civilian Contractor working closely with SOF would be closer to the mark as far as I am concerned. I’m not knocking the guy’s service, but I guess it is something we are going to have to agree to disagree on.
“However, he did participate in those wars as a contractor.” Oh, brother. Speaking of brothers, one of mine has repeatedly been in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past nearly 20 years. I have a picture of him in one of Saddam Hussein’s palaces. He is not a Veteran. He will never be a Veteran. He was, and is, a well paid civilian contractor.
I don’t think anyone would quibble with his record if he noted his OIF/OEF service was as a contractor. Regardless, seems good to me.
Sad that every little detail these days has to be nitpicked from all the phonies that have ruined it for everyone else.
I see that it specifying he was National Guard SF, as if that was somehow ‘less’ than being active duty? He still earned the tab right?
Unless I missed something, this fellow served in the USMC and was not deployed to a combat theatre during his service. However, as a civilian contractor, he did ‘work’ in Iraq, Afghanistan or both. And that’s the basis of his claim that he is a “combat veteran.” Am I missing something?
Yeah, I’ve got a bit of a problem myself with a person who served only as a contractor in either Iraq or Afghanistan calling themselves a “veteran” of either conflict. I’d prefer them to phrase it “supported the war in . . . ” vice “veteran of the war in . . . “. That’s simply more accurate IMO.
Same goes in my book for most govt civilians who served in either country (or in other SW/Central Asian locations supporting either conflict). They were there ISO, but not in uniform – so they’re not “veterans” per se of either conflict.
I dunno…if this is one of those cases where if he was in fact a trigger guy in Iraq or the ‘Stan, I’d let it go.
There comes a point where you’re just picking fly shit out of the pepper. This might qualify as one of those cases.
NHSparky: it’s not a huge thing, true. And what the guy did as a contractor apparently was dangerous and honorable work that benefited the US.
But it’s still IMO not exactly correct in my book for him to bill himself as a “combat veteran” based on working a contractor security job. At any point, if things got to be too rough to suit him he could say “screw this” and go home in short order. Ditto for any govt civilian working there. Might cost the individual their job, but it was still an option.
Joes and Janes in uniform didn’t exactly have that as an option. They took that route, there was an intermediate stop before they got home. And it wasn’t a pleasant one.
That’s where I’d (I do) have an issue in that he doesn’t have the “bling” that one would associate with being an OIF/OEF veteran, but he certainly heard a lot more shots fired in anger than a lot of the fobbits who did in fact serve during that time.
Much as some people might want to get upset over this one, I’m having a hard time doing it. Yeah, he could have quit, but even the civilian contractors had some price to pay for doing so–not as bad as Joes and Janes in uniform (sometimes) but still not pleasant.
Trust me, there are so many much more far clear-cut cases of phony shitbaggery than Mr. Teti. If he were to make a simple correction/clarification, I’d consider the matter closed with no further actions necessary.
“At any point, if things got to be too rough he could say “screw this” and go home in short order.”
You betchum. I take no issue with this fellow’s choice of post-service employment. It is dangerous and deadly work as the numbers of contractors who died in Iraq and Afghanistan attest. And, of course, there are contractors and then there are contractors, distinguished by risk according to job site and job. But this “combat veteran” tag is just wrong. I’ll shut up about it now.
I agree with the others, I would take down the “OIF/OEF Veteran” thing and clarify that it was outside the scope of the military.
And I say that as a guy who absolutely LOVES the PMFs. But, those don’t make you a veteran, anymore than the AAFES manager on Bagram is a combat veteran by virtue of selling tampons.
…the AAFES manager on Bagram is a combat veteran by virtue of selling tampons.
Certainly more of one than was Mattis Chiroux. I could make a crude blood joke, but it’s Monday, and people read this during lunchtime, etc…
“But, those don’t make you a veteran, anymore than the AAFES manager on Bagram is a combat veteran by virtue of selling tampons.”
My point exactly, I’m not mad at the guy by any means but I do think that if you are going to bill yourself as a veteran you should be in uniform at the time. He chose to work in a combat zone and reap the benifits that came from the work in said area, so saying he is a veteran seems unfitting. He would be better served to just say he was a contractor, it would show a level respect to the troops that have been there and that are there now.
John, I appreciated the time you spoke with me yesterday. As I mentioned to you on the phone, I never served with a “military” unit in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, the government CT unit I served in consisted of nothing but former special operations guys, a majority of them coming from Tier 1 units. We were not doing “protection details” or “securing convoys” “logistics” or cutting the grass down range. I was actively involved in direct action missions in support of the GWOT. Those are the facts. So for those of you getting upset that I am calling myself a “veteran” of those 2 wars, I am sorry, but that is what I am. What am I supposed to call myself, a participant? Take a look at the pictures on my website….enough said. Like I mentioned to John, if I am guilty of anything, its down playing my background, certainly not up selling. The verbiage on my website was sent through the PBR (Publications Books and Records) of the organization I used to work for. This was done for several reasons, one of which was being sure I was in compliance with their legal requirements to insure I was not saying or commenting on anything sensitive or classified in nature. I am fully aware of OPSEC, and those of you who have held TS-SCI clearance like I have understand. On another note, in the future folks, we all know that many times schools and education that we have attended during our careers do not show up on our DD214s and SRBs. I for one have numerous schools that have not shown up on my records, to include ARS, HALO, and numerous civilian courses that I have attended. The crazy thing is that ARS (Amphibious Reconnaissance School) is an MOS producing school in the Marines…..0321……and its not on my DD214 from the Marines. So…………be careful in the future when you feel like you want to hammer someone because you didn’t find it in their records. If that were the case, all of us would be in trouble. I sent John some… Read more »
Um. I was more predisposed before that comment.
If someone is engaged in “criminally slanderous remarks” then why on earth haven’t you filed suit? Sending emails to companies you work with is tortious interference.
I wish you had:
a) Spelled Jonn’s name correctly;
b) Not insist that you are a combat Veteran when you were a contractor;
c) Not invoked the mention of an attorney; and
d) Not namedropped the Joint Chiefs.
By your definition of combat Veteran, there is no distinguishing among people in a combat theatre, is there? A taxi driver in London during the Blitz was a combat Veteran, no?
I worked with DynCorps guys on Karzai’s PSD. Under this theory, I suppose they are veterans of OEF? I would think that the Department of Veterans Affairs might be surprised by that reading.
Ok so shut up
So much for benefit of the doubt.
I am on Joe’s and John’s side here.
Don’t get caught up too tight in labels. I had a friend, now deceased and missed terribly, that served with all the front line units in Iraq during the worst times of that war.
He drove a fuel tanker truck and was in convoys where he lost many of his friends to IED’s, attacks and open warfare in an unarmored vehicle.
I called him a Veteran, and still do. He was brave, a Patriot and was one of my best friends in Milwaukee.
I miss him terribly as would those that served with Joe. They were an integral part of that war and we should honor them as we would the Merchant Marine in WWII, they were also civilian contractors and many died trying to get fuel to the combatants.
Thank you both for all your service to our country.
Thunder
They were an integral part of that war and we should honor them as we would the Merchant Marine in WWII, they were also civilian contractors and many died trying to get fuel to the combatants.
While true, Merchant Marines are still not defined under US laws as “veterans”.
I don’t know of anyone who is shitting on PMFs or saying they didn’t do something valuable etc, so that seems like a straw man to me. The question is whether service under a PMF in a warzone makes one a “veteran.” It is a semantic question, because legally speaking teh answer is clear: no.
So, if this fellow is seen sporting a USMC baseball cap with Iraq/Afghanistan Veteran on it, that would be okay? I can hear it now:
“Hey, Marine, what unit were you with in Iraq?”
“I supported a number of units, as a contractor–but I got a really good report from a support member of the Joint Chiefs.”
(WTF stare)
_____________________________________________________________
Let’s change this up a bit. Are the civilian airline pilots that ferry troops and equipment to and from Afghanistan combat Veterans by virtue of that employment? I guess so, especially if the pilots are military service Veterans.
Okay, I was done before—but was compelled to return by thus fellow’s post.
_____________________________________________________________
Thunderstixx, I respect your view and I am sorry for the loss of your friend. There are now two well defined camps here and that’s that. The Merchant Marine situation, as I understand it, was a source of scorn for sailors whose pay and choices were infinitely smaller than their MM counterparts. Consequently the effort to extend the merchant seamen benefits accorded to military service members after WW II was strongly opposed. That’s my understanding but I’m sure there are others here who know much, much more about that topic.
So much for quiet professionalism.
“What am I supposed to call myself, a participant?”
I would think private contractor supporting SOF and US operations in OIF/OEF would be just as apt.
I have nothing against you Joseph, I thank you for your service to our country, but like I said I think we are going to have to agree to disagree.
I’m just glad somebody bothers to comb through the records and parse this stuff, however they come down.
It strikes me that ordinary people are smart enough to recognize that some civilian contractors served in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the few extra keystrokes it takes to clarify a specific person’s experience are well-justified.
@26, to clarify my poorly worded statement above, in some instances they are considered veterans, but only for a certain class (the WWII guys) and only for some benefits.
(Thanks to Mary for pointing out how I was wrong.)
‘Contractor’ can mean a lot of things.
Mark Metherell was ‘technically’ working as a ‘contractor’ when he was KIA in Iraq. A couple decades from now if/when the details of his deeds come out, I have no doubt you would consider him a ‘veteran’ of Iraq.
Keep up the good work.
I’m an OIF veteran and spent time in Afghanistan as a contractor but I don’t consider myself an OEF veteran. That being said, I’m glad he turned out to be a legit BAM’FER and not a PX Ranger
Am I missing a page here? Under his schools, I do not see any courses corresponding to SF, or jump school; yet, in his awards and decorations, there is a parachute badge and SF tab authorized??? Does USMC Recon schooling equate to SF tab?
I know of one person who is 18 series, tabbed, who was never required to go thru Q school or anything (and has paperwork to back it). I’m just not familiar with a Marine who would cross over. And most Marines I know from Recon went thru Benning jump school; I was in a stick who had 3…
Reading his bio and then comparing his records says one thing and one thing only….he is embellishing his record to make himself look more “highspeed” than he really is. A four year stint in the Marines and a five year stint in SFNG (pre 9/11) does not equal the experince his bio shows. Also, by his own admission he is not a combat veteran of OIF and OEF. He was a contractor, nothing else nor was he a member (as a contractor) of any SMU. Finally, it is the servicemembers responsibility to ensure what is on his DD214 is correct and accurate as they are told before they sign it. There is also a process by which one can prove and add to a DD214 (DD215). What he IS doing is dissembling and quibbling in order to defend his SERIOUSLY over exaggerated bio.
First mark of a poser is threatening legal action.
One of the most convincing ways to embellish ones background is to tell a partial truth, knowing that the listener will “fill in the details” on his own and draw a conclusion that the teller intends, but which is factually incorrect. It’s not quite a lie but it’s not 100% truth, either. For example, I served in 3 different SF units: 3/1st (Fort Lewis), 3/3 (Fort Bragg) and 5/19 (CO ARNG.) I also deployed to Afghanistan with 5/19th. Now, if I was trying to embellish my resume, I could state those facts and allow others to draw the conclusion that I was a “special forces combat veteran.” In reality, I was in the support company of all three battalions (MI geek 😉 ) and never saw any “combat” while I was deployed. I make it a point when talking to people to let them know I was in the support company, and that I am not SF qualified, nor am I a “green beret” (which is confusing to civilians because until 1 January 1993, Support personnel in SF units wore the green beret along with the tabbed guys.) When discussing my military service with others, I go out of my way to try to avoid creating the impression that my service was something other than what it was. I never kicked in any doors or capped any terrorists but I’m proud of what I did. Of course, sometimes the confusion is on the listener, and the teller either doesn’t take the time to correct him. But sometimes, the teller lets the listener believe the incorrect story anyway, because the teller derives some benefit from the listener believing (and repeating) the incorrect story. The teller can always come back, shrug his shoulders and say “hey, everything I said was true. How is it my fault if someone else misconstrued what I told them?” and that’s a legitimate point – except in situations where the teller knows of the incorrect story and keeps silent. If Teti really wants to be honest, he’ll make it clear in his bio that his OIF and… Read more »
So many haters.
From the sound of it I’d have preferred more war fighter veterans like this guy instead of many of the military veterans I saw in country. It’s not his problem a lot of uninformed people automatically assume veteran means military service. Anyone that’s done anything in these wars knows better than to just assume without asking directly what individuals did. I’m sure I can related to this veteran with OIF military experience more so than I can other OIF military veterans.
Recon and Green Beret. What a fucking hard charger.
Interesting discussion here, and one which is entirely worth while, especially since there are so many liars out there.
A buddy of mine served in the Merchant Marine and made several trips to Viet Nam. He took and returned significant fire. I consider him a veteran even though he does not fit the technical definition required to receive benefits from the VA. I have introduced him to more than a couple Viet Nam veteran friends as “a veteran of combat with the Merchant Marine.” He is always afforded their respect, but he makes it clear that he has never claimed to be a “veteran” and still does not. But the truth is that he took more enemy fire than have most of us who served in the military.
What is a veteran? Guess it rather depends upon the audience and who is claiming what.
Having said all that, I do completely agree that the term “combat veteran” implies that such experience was with the military even if by strict definition it should not. There are better ways to phrase it that do not leave the impression of having served that duty as a military member.
SeaBee’s were invented because Civilian Contractors were not supposed to be in a Combat Zone per the Geneva convention. So pretty esay to know which way I come down on this issue, and the greater issue of Contractors Period.
Plain and simple – he’s not a combat vet.
Embellishment, hmmm, maybe, I just don’t know. I guess I could say that “Combat Veteran” doesn’t always have to mean military Veteran. In Mosul, seeing the AEGIS and State Dept guys go out and then come back with those up-armored trucks and SUVs all shot to shit, I would have to say they were Veterans of some kind of combat. I guess “combat related experience” would be more approp.
So, by this guys account, the KBR Truck Drivers who got IEDed and shot at are Combat Veterans huh?
Makes sense. Still won’t watch your boring show. I agree with the people who say you’re embellishing on a less than impressive record in hopes that people “fill in the blanks” to make you seem more high speed than you are.
Ahhh, semantics. Yes, Joe Teti is a veteran; I’m even comfortable calling him a combat veteran.
The word ‘veteran’, by itself, has many definitions and they aren’t all confined to the military.
We have ‘veteran police officers’, ‘veteran firemen’, even ‘veteran software engineers’.
Even when being used to describe someone in the military, the word ‘veteran’ is primarily used to describe someone with long service and experience, not necessarily combat experience.
Now we come to the definition of ‘combat veteran’. The term is defined by the VA, simply for the VA’s purposes. The VA’s recognition of the term for its own purposes does not officially indicate that the term has no other meaning or use outside the VA, or even outside of the recognized military establishment.
Joe Teti’s claim to be a ‘combat veteran’ is correct in a very literal sense. He has engaged in it, he has experienced it first hand, and is therefore a ‘veteran’ both of the experience and as an active participant. I didn’t find his bio to be significantly ambiguous. His training and experience appear to be legit enough to make him a reasonable candidate to fill the role he fills on Discovery’s program, and that after all is, or at least was, the original primary concern.
All that said, I found Joe’s post up above to be in poor taste, especially as the weight of opinion here seems to support his claims, even if a bit reluctantly. Some people should recognize that they are usually better served by being quiet rather than trying to preemptively throw their weight around.
@43 It’s good to see you posting again, Jacobite.
My guess is he’s more pissed about Jonn’s tongue bath, and thinks (with good reason) that it might be “bad touch.”
Still, the threat of legal action should always be the LAST arrow in teh quiver, not the opening salvo. Especially when we are talking about the definition of the word “veteran” which as was so eloquently argued in @43 is susceptible to numerous interpretations.
@45 I think Joseph’s comment about his lawyer refers to the man he claims has been pursuing him to the point of contacting his employers?
Semantics. Pugilists are combat veterans. Hell, that’s hand-to-hand combat. And let’s not forget Vic Morrow, truly a Combat veteran. Semantics. As I said before, my own brother, who has been to both Iraq and Afghanistan probably more times than most–if not all–here over the past 20 years is NOT a combat Veteran. He is a contractor. If he told me he was a combat Veteran, I’d punch him in the mouth.
Can Johnny “Mike” Spann KIA 11/2001 in Afghanistan working for Christians in Action be called a combat veteran or contractor? My feel is damm right he was, and for what it is worth so is Joe. Just saying.
TSO’s comment (#45) refers to the fact that Teti has already drawn the “Lawyer” arrow from his quiver in regards to this post and your comments. He, for some reason, thinks you guys are out to destroy his career. For someone who likes to call himself a “public figure” he sure has thin skin. I guess nice guys finish last, and this is probably the last time you’ll see me be a nice guy.
Guys, We have alot more game to hunt right now, so I see no reason if it sounds like the right thing to do, how about we just call it a DRAW For Now and hoster them shooting irons and take this matter up at a later time, that is, if everyone is in agreement?????????????????????????
Sam (Where the tall corn grows)