This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Phony soldiers

  • Turning up the heat

    Under the Hood’s den of pirates is cranking up the heat on the Army’s 3rd Armored Cavarly Regiment at Fort Hood by calling nationwide for participants in their protest against the 3rd ACR’s deployment on the 22nd;



    Of course, using the image of soldiers loading on aircraft with missing limbs and wrapped in straitjackets by calling for a halt to deploying “wounded soldiers” is just ridiculous. What use would there be to send crippled and incapable soldiers to a war? It makes no sense.

    I’d like Bobby or Cindy or some other member of the UtH’s Brady Bunch to give me the names and “wounds” of some soldiers who are being forced to deploy with the 3rd ACR.

  • Another phony SEAL

    Sparky and Tman both sent us a link from the Army Times about 2LT Douglas Sofranko. He left the Navy, where he flunked out of BUDS training, and joined the Pennsylvania National Guard and now works at an armory in Miami. Sometime in the last year, he thought he’d completed enough BUDS training to wear the SEAL trident on his Army uniform;

    “I do not,” he said when asked if he wears the SEAL Trident badge on his uniform.

    But his story changed once he was told of a photograph showing him wearing the Trident on his Army combat uniform.

    “OK, I have on occasion,” Sofranko said.

    When asked when he last wore it, he said, “it was a few days ago.” However, sources in the office tell Navy Times he was wearing the insignia the day of the telephone interview.

    Well, good for him, exercising his right to free speech and all. The article says he’s not subject to the UCMJ but that the state’s regulation will be enough to deal with his ass. But as we’ve seen a lot lately, this isn’t the first time Sofranko was a derelict POS;

    “He was basically AWOL from the time he joined,” said Sgt. Matt Jones, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania National Guard. “He never made an annual training period that we can see, and he was discharged as an E-3.”

    But Sofranko was given another chance.

    In April 2007, he got a waiver from the Florida National Guard despite his poor Pennsylvania service and was allowed to join in Florida as an E-4. Artley said waivers like this are common in the Guard and are based on a review of the member’s service record and personal interviews.

    A year later, Sofranko entered the Florida National Guard Officer Candidate Program, graduating one year ago.

    So, it’s not like anyone could have seen this embarrassing shit coming or anything. [Eye roll]

  • Following up with the ACLU.

    About a month ago I sent a email to the ACLU chapter in Colorado in concerning the ruling on the Stolen Valor Act with our favorite impostor. I got this reply about a week later that raised a few points that I wanted to address. I was going to post this sooner but I was hoping to get a second reply from them.

    Hello Mr. Andrews,

    Thank you for a thorough and well-written argument on the Stolen Valor Act case. I appreciate the time you took to contact us with your concern. To be clear, no one at the ACLU supports Strandlof’s despicable lies, nor wishes to minimize the insult they can cause for all members of our country’s armed forces, decorated or not. Ultimately, however, insulting another person–no matter how heroic the target of the insult may be–is not illegal.

    Our argument is strictly an analysis of the law itself, and the dangers we see in terms of it outlawing verbal falsehoods of all kinds, regardless of measurable injury. The government’s position was that the First Amendment doesn’t apply to any speech that isn’t true- something that would extend even to people saying things they believed to be true, but were not. If those lies are used to defraud others, than that in and of itself is already illegal, and should be prosecuted as fraud.

    Here is a link to a PDF file of the judge’s decision- if you have the time you can read the his reasoning for yourself:

    This being a nuanced legal argument, there are indeed respected legal minds who disagree: Eugene Volokh, a First Amendment expert and UCLA law professor, agrees with you, though for slightly different reasons- you can find his argument here:

    As to your parting image, let me just say, please continue to expose any all military posers you can. We absolutely support efforts to expose and shame those who pretend to claim honors they did not earn nor will ever understand what it means to serve. That is one of the best examples of “countering bad speech with more speech.”

    Thanks again for you time and concern,

    -Erik Maulbetsch

    It seems that the way that the Law is being viewed by the ACLU is that the Stolen Valor Act will go after anyone with the same level of punishment for wearing fake medals regardless of if it was a National Defense Medal or the Congressional Medal of Honor. But we know that we are not going to throw someone in Jail for wearing a Army Service Ribbon they did not earn. Yes the person is guilty and punishment is recommend. But the level of punishment varies. Also reinforced that this Act will some how lead to laws that will make lying about anything at all. I mean if that were true we would all be in jail.

    It also is confusing when he takes about going after fake Vets when a solid case of fraud has been done. But with the lack of a stricter punishment combined with a esoteric standard of what is considered fraud with each case makes this much harder.

    But one thing that I also wanted to talk about is what happened with with former Admiral Jeremy Michael Boorda This happened before the net came to full swing and I did not think about it until recently. I remember seeing this video when this first happened on the news.

    But this is my reply if anybody is wondering. I have yet to get a reply as of this writing.

    I am writing in reply to the court’s ruling that the Stolen Valor Act is unconstitutional. I strongly disagree that is is a matter of free speech. In the case of Strandlof in Colorado. The argument that nothing was gained or no one was hurt makes it freedom of speech is wrong. In every case of posers it does offer personal gain and injury to others.

    Personal gain:

    In the case of Strandlof he claimed the Silver Star and the Purple Heart while serving in Iraq as a Marine Officer. Because how these conflicts have affected so many, those who have faced the dangers of combat with heroics and valor are highly respected. So because of this many people lie about this to receive this attention. I have read a reply that this is just a law to protect the integrity of the Awards. It is, but there is more to that. Each award represents something that each person has gone through or gone without. To claim such awards like Iraq Campaign Medal without having spending time away from home is a insult. So consider that when he claims medals that can only be awarded by being in combat and never been in combat.

    Also when a person is highly decorated people are more willing to listen to them. Strandlof used his fake military service and awards to be started among different Veteran and Anti-War groups as key speakers. While doing these things they can and do receive additional awards and honors based on their lies. One thing that sees to keep coming up is that those that are proven to be fakes always claims elite units such as Special Forces, Ranger, SEALs, and Marine Recon. Hardly ever does it come out that a poser fakes being a cook, pad clerk or supply MOS (job). Because of the very demanding training and duties people who have done well. So people often want the glory of these people with out having to work for it. Also these awards are used to advance professional advancements in and out of the military, There are more then one story about people faking awards to get to the next rank.

    People who are hurt.
    First thing that comes to mind is his claim of a Purple Heart, the medal that is given for being wounded or killed by enemy actions. By claiming to have a Purple Heart without being wounded taking someone else pain and using it. When it is found out that you have fakes this it not only puts into question anything else you said, but anybody else who has a Purple Heart. Also people use the Purple Heart to get VA benefits and medical treatment. When at this time it is challenging to get VA medical care because of the numbers of claims. Fake and fraudulent claims steal from those who have honestly earned this and these fake awards only help this happen.

    But what I find it be damaging is when people like Strandlof are viewed as experts on what is happening in Iraq/Afghanistan despite the fact that he was never there. Often they make claims about atrocities that did not happen and sabotage the work and image of those that are serving honorably. Jesse Macbeth is a good example of this when he claimed to be a decorated Ranger that was Iraq vet that had been wounded in combat. His claims about killing women and children in a alleged terror campaign was sent around the web and even with the knowledge of the fact that he never got past basic the damage is still present if you go to youtube or similar sties. Now Strandlof was involved in the same group as Macbeth.

  • IVAW wants to prosecute Bush Administration

    Taking up the clarion call from Geezers for Sitting on Our Hands (VFP), the Iraq Veterans Against the War, announced that they voted last month to pursue the Bush Administration for their prosecution of the Iraq War. So let’s look at their statement for their justification (Here’s the link, but you’ll have to paste it into your browser because IVAW doesn’t allow traffic from TAH http://www.ivaw.org/node/6087).

    They claim that Bush violated the Constitution by not getting the authorization from Congress.

    Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution vests the power to authorize use of military force in the Legislative Branch, not the Executive.

    That’s funny because the October 16, 2002 Joint Resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq of the 107th Congress (it’s right there in the name) in section 3, paragraph (a) states;

    Authorization.–The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to– (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

    If you’ll remember, Democrats controlled the Senate in October 2002 and it still passed.

    By the way, have you guys ever heard of the War Powers Act of 1973? It says;

    In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced– […]

    The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad.

    So you see, there’s no requirement to get a declaration of war from Congress to engage troops in combat.

    IVAW also alleges that there was no “imminent threat” from Iraq. Do you mean aside from shooting at our aircraft patrolling the skies over the No-Fly Zone while our aircraft enforced the UN-mandate? Like the three times in ten years that the Iraq Army drove their armored divisions to the Kuwait border and rattled sabers – causing us to deploy troops back to Kuwait?

    Or this;

    And why limit the prosecution to just the Bush administration? The Clinton Administration called Hussein an imminent threat on December 18, 1998;

    Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. … Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. … Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

    The IVAW also writes;

    IVAW further alleges that the Bush administration’s alterations to Iraqi laws were made for the intended benefit of U.S. multinational corporations and are illegal under international law.

    What has the Obama Administration done to correct the supposed changing of Iraqi laws?

    IVAW is just clinging to the last shred of their relevance while trying to avoid pissing off the Democrats.

    It is time for America to hold the officials responsible for this war to account for their decisions.

    Why just the Republican officials?

  • Heavy drop serial phony spotted in AK

    Our friends at the Georgia Packing forum (that’s gun packing, not meat packing) sent us a link from their forum about an encounter with serial phony soldier William “Billy” Clark. I say “serial” because he’s done Federal “pound you in the ass” Prison time, five years worth, for impersonating a military officer in 2002, yet he continues.

    Here’s our hero yesterday at a gun show. You can see that he really looks the part of a Special Forces Captain who just returned from a 49-month tour of Afghanistan. It’s no wonder that General McChrsytal closed the Burger King on Bagram;

    The fellow who busted Clark yesterday says he’s going to call the FBI on this hero tomorrow morning and get his ass hauled off to prison – I’m guessing it’ll take more than one trip to haul that ginormous ass away.

    Of course, the reason he was arrested the first time was for trying to direct rescue operations in Oklahoma when a bridge collapsed in 2002. The second time, he tried to warn the Russian Embassy of a plot to assassinate Vlad Putin – and violating his parole from the first trip to prison.

    Some more info from POW.network that said that we were right about this guy.

    After speaking with investigators recently about the call to the Russian embassy, Clark claimed he suffered from mental illness and said he had never served in the military.

    They ought to drop his big ass off in Pakistan and let him eat his way out.

  • A name change – that’s the ticket!

    Suppose your organization was irrelevant and no one is paying attention to your message which is becoming less and less germane to your particular conversation, what’s the best way to make everyone pay attention again? Change the name? Well, that’s Victor Agosto’s idea. TJ Buonomo says the new name needs an adjustment;

    I told you that TJ was the smart one. Since a large number of IVAW haven’t served in either Iraq or Afghanistan, TJ’s idea has merit. Beth Roxby agrees;

    I SUPPORT limiting membership [of Iraq Veterans Against the War] to veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. I know that’s an unpopular idea right now, but I don’t really care. I think the liberal membership policy has possibly caused more problems, both for member retention and media credibility, than any other single factor. And granted, IVAW is currently facing a lot of dividing factors.

    We already have an anti-war organization that welcomes all veterans, and that’s Veterans for Peace. They’re big-umbrella

    Big umbrella – that means everyone who doesn’t have enough credibility to speak to combat veterans’ issues. Including TJ who barely finished MIOBC when he got out of the Army. If they narrowed membership to veterans who’ve actually been to the war, most of the Board would be gone as well as most of the membership.

    So what do you guys want…a credible organization, or larger membership? I think they’ve already made up their mind – after all, dollars are more important than credibility.

  • Phony Soldier planted with stolen valor

    Editor’s Note: COB6 got a copy of his DD214 from the cemetery that says he did go to Vietnam and earned 3 PHs and 4 BSMs. However, he doesn’t appear in POW Net’s database of Vietnam veterans. I’ve added the rest of his 2-1s to this post. It appears that the DD214 is a forgery, since it seems unlikely that the records center would inadvertly leave BSMs and PHs out of his records.

    A new reader sent us a tip about Donald L. Stump, a retired Army Reserve sergeant first class, who was buried in Illinois upon his demise recently;

    The problem is that he didn’t earn a Bronze Star or 3 Purple Hearts, yet there they are on his tax payer-funded headstone;

    Stump’s service ended in 1964, with his only overseas duty station listed as an APO NY address. Then his service started again in 1971;

    Notice that it’s all stateside. None of his 2-1s show that he went to Jump School, Ranger School or the SFQC, yet there it all is on his FOIA. It looks to me like he spent a lot of his Reserve time as an Oh-5-Bravo radio guy at a higher echelon support role, nothing that would lead someone to believe he was an A-Team ops sergeant like the last line of the 2-1 records. Anyone ever heard of the Duty MOS 11BSF1? If I’m not mistaken there was an 11B5S ops sgt position. But I doubt that an Oh-5-Bravo would just lateral over to an eleven-bee-four slot.

    His obituary tells quite a story about his career;

    In Vietnam from 1965 until 1971? His records show he wasn’t even in the military during those years. 140 jumps in Vietnam- 50 of them behind enemy lines?  Which enemy lines would those be? And how’d he find time to get those Bronze Star medals what with all of that pre-jump refresher for those 140 jumps? As far as I know, there was one combat jump in Vietnam by the 173rd – that’s quite a bit fewer than 140, isn’t it?

    Notice at the top of the 2-1 it says he had eight years of prior service. that’s the period from 1956 until 1964 when his records end. He wasn’t in Vietnam from 1965 – until 1971 like he says. Those were the years he sat out the Vietnam War. And it looks like he snowed some Reservist clerk to add his Ranger tab and jump wings, since none of his records show any time in those schools.

    But now here he is, planted next to heroes with his DD214 on his headstone and it doesn’t look like he belongs there. Who is going to tell his wife, kids and grandchildren he doesn’t belong there?

    Victimless crime indeed.

  • Chasing neocon ghosts at Vets Today

    We only bing the sage words of Gordon Duff here because of the entertainment value – no one takes him seriously, do they? And since we know that Gordon reads TAH, we can rest assured that we’re taking well-aimed shots at him. Take his latest at Veterans Today. It begins with these words and generally slides downhill from there;

    When former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld assigned General Boykin the task of “Christianizing” the US Army, even if every hard hitting, foul mouthed war fighter had to be “cashiered” the task was taken to heart. Boykin’s efforts to infiltrate every level of the officer corps with Christian Zionists, notwithstanding they may be the worst leaders any military service has ever seen in wartime, was a tremendous success.

    Yes, everyone with a single brain cell left knows that the Right is intent on firing everyone in the military who says cuss words. Right? It only makes complete sense. Yup, everyone must swear their complete allegiance to Jesus Christ and His Father – and the existence of Israel. It’s right there in the oath of enlistment for anyone to see. Right?

    if Gordon had more than 18 months of service in the USMC, he might be able to speak more intelligently to the subject of religion in the military. In fact, I wonder what he thinks about those officers with whom he served as a TOC rat. Does he think they could be influenced by such a useless plot to build an Army of God within the US Army? I know my leaders were always more interested in the outcome of a battle or an exercise than they were about salvation of my soul – but maybe that was just me.