Why, here is the leader you must surely want to follow into combat.........
VERBATIM (Too good to miss a second)
An article by Army Reserve Colonel Ellen Haring published in the Armed Forces Journal
advocates lowering the physical training standards for female combat
officer candidates. Colonel Haring, a 1984 West Point graduate and
current War College "concept officer", along with Sgt. Maj. Jane
Baldwin, filed a successful lawsuit against the Defense Department for
denying combat roles to women. Now she says physical ability and combat
training matter less than being creative and remaining calm. According
to the Colonel, by "celebrating strength" we're filtering out future
Audie Murphys. Miss Ellen's been misinformed. Murphy was a he. And
today he'd be filtered out in the first day of sensitivity training. If
anybody needs filtering out it's Colonel Haring.
What does she expect them to do, talk 'em to
death? Bedazzle 'em with creativity? Make 'em die laughing? If the armed
forces buy into this they forfeit respect from that moment on, the
kind of respect that matters, earned respect. To put it almost
plainly, a military riddled with transient opportunists and single
moms, diversitymongers—the two biggest users of pictogram interfaces
are McDonalds and the US
military—predatory gays and other misfits, led by underachieving but
oh-so-creative women is something we couldn't hide forever. Real armies
would find out soon enough and take 'em all to the woodshed for a long
overdue stropping.
The quote below is extracted from an article by Rowan Scarborough at the Washington Times. Hankies and pom poms at the ready, Miss Ellen. You go girl.
Perhaps it is time to take a hard look at what really makes a competent
combat soldier and not rely on traditional notions of masculine brawn
that celebrate strength over other qualities. If the going-in assumption
is that physical standards are the only thing that needs to be
examined, then we are also assuming that we have everything else just
right. This is belied by our less-than-optimal performances in many
instances during the past 12 years.
Fixating on physical standards is a
tactical-level approach that misses a strategic-level opportunity. We
can’t be sure, but odds are that Murphy would have washed out here, as
well. An obstacle course that relies on physical prowess tests none of
the important qualities that Murphy possessed. We diminish the
importance of what are probably more important traits in soldiers: the
ability to remain calm, focused, creative and quick-thinking in times of
extreme duress. These are the traits that we should be measuring as we
assess soldiers for combat specialties.
Physical strength is important, but it
shouldn’t be the most important trait that we assess, and it certainly
shouldn’t become a way to filter out the Audie Murphys of our
population.
The US military
is probably the most traditional and honor-bound part of the government
establishment, historically true to their calling and doggedly loyal to
the country. In recent times it's been degraded by social
experimenters, irrelevent futziness training, no-win political missions
and cammy-pattern feminism. Set against this are credible stories of
derailed promotions, rumors of blackmail at flag level and many lesser
examples of hostility toward members whose loyalty to the country is
unwavering. Instances of supplying intel and weapons to our putative
enemies, and warrettes which end not in victory but in nation building
videogames if not humiliating bugouts, make it difficult for
conscientious members of the military to understand why they fight.
What appears to be happening is this. The
collectivists captured the permanent government at least a couple of
generations ago. Having recently annexed the Republican party they now
see themselves as settling into perpetual power, and not without
cause, the days of orderly change are behind us. But no regime can
rule, as versus govern, without the explicit backing of the military.
Mere acquiescence is not enough, there must be positive loyalty
specific to the regime.
Historically it's been done this way. First, the
regular armed forces are permeated with a political cadre which monitors
and supervises it at all levels. These cadre are assigned ranks within
the military, or bring it with them. Military officers comprise one of
the two most anxiety-ridden professions there are—university professors
being the other. The political cadre plays the stalwart mentor before
and after they buckle. Second, a parallel quasi-military security force
is established which is superior in all instances to the regular forces,
meaning a senior military officer is outranked by a junior security
officer, in practice if not in appearance. Protocol is carefully
constructed to suggest otherwise. Incidentally, totalitarian states
typically create overlapping fiefdoms with muddled authority to
ensure unquestioning compliance with any order from the top.
What we're seeing is an armed forces
systematically conflating loyalty to the regime with loyalty to the
country. Knowledgeable observers put the number of country-loyal versus
regime-loyal at about sixty-forty, with the sixty per cent
country-loyal concentrated in officers below flag rank and the
senior enlisted. It's said the ratio was nearly the reverse as late as
the year 2000 just as an internal counterrevolution, goosed by committed
constitutionalists, began to take hold. The country-loyal appear to be
going from success to success. Given our daily dose of
up-to-the-nostrils disinformation and psyops, all this is little more
than speculation.
Colonel Haring's part in this is that of a useful
idiot, chic feminism apparently, who sees herself, and wants to be
seen, as championing equal opportunity, ennobling both herself and the
army in the doing. In fact, she's doing no such thing. What rankles Miss
Ellen is all
six female officers who have attempted the Marine Corps' infantry
officer qualification course have failed. Oops. So, on to Plan B: the
applicants didn't fail, the standards failed the applicants. Yeah. Dat's
da ticket. To suggest it could be any other way is to demean some
Really Deserving People, so let's do the Right Thing. And the Right
Thing is to demean everybody by tainting achievement with a whiff of
fraud.
There are those who work to strengthen the
military and those who work to weaken it. Which is Colonel Haring?
Lowering qualifications to accommodate a subset of applicants isn't
equal opportunity, it's the same demand for dishonest equal outcomes
we've seen elsewhere. We shall do our very best to look surprised when,
encumbered with playground rules, the armed forces become the lifeguard
who couldn't swim.
I am amazed at most survival book writers ignorance when it comes to
fooling a metal detector. They all seem to be repeating each other and
it seems it has not changed in years. It is very evident they are all
wrong, says Dude McLean in this short article, Metal Detector Myth, at Dirt Time.
Toddler murdered in CPS captivity -
Hill's two-year-old daughter Alexandria, was removed from her parent's
home last November for "neglectful supervision" following her parents'
admission that they smoked pot after she was put to bed...
Hill needed just four more months before he could get his daughter
back when she was beaten to death by foster parents, says
Matt Olson in this article, Father of foster child who died speaks, at KVUE.
