-Caveat Lector- <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"> </A> -Cui Bono?- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a prelude to war! Several key American congressmen are on board of the Aristide Foundation. Look at its website. <http://www.fonaristide.org> ."Click on" "What is the Aristide Foundation for Democracy" to see influential people who could be smeared by a successful criminal investigation. Haitians believe some received cash. Aristide, who renounced his priestly Vows of Poverty in October, 1990 is now worth one billion dollars. Customs and DEA officials say Haiti's cocaine business is controlled by Aristide yet no newspaper or elected representative comments upon this. U.S. Attorney in Miami has more evidence against Aristide than was required to extradite Noriega!! President Clinton's brother-in-law is involved with Aristide's wife in control of Haiti's cellular phone business. Immediately after the Clinton invasion, in 1994, Hugh Rodham made a fortune shipping cars to Haiti, duty free. Aristide's hand was in this. January 13, 2000 two French tourists, along with their Haitian guide, were killed in Jacmel They were chopped up with machetes. In Port-au-Prince four men were "necklaced" on Autoroute Delmas, one of the main streets....and the media reports nothing!!! Haiti could well erupt into a major presidential campaign subject within the next few weeks. ============================================================== ARTICLE 4 ~~~~~~~~~~~ Green Ammo II ~~~~~~~~~~~~ This piece appeared in the Washington Times on 14 January 2000. Killing with a heart for the environment! The Pentagon's latest in reducing our ability to kill enemy armor in the future. Combine this with the Army's move to go it light, and you are back to the days when our troops were fighting T34 tanks in Korea with 2.36 in bazookas. I though they promised NOT to forget TF Smith! ******************************************************************** By Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough (both are national security reporters for The Washington Times) Tree huggers at the Pentagon are at it again. We reported several weeks ago how the Army ordered a massive program to replace the lead in millions of 5.56 mm bullets -- those fired by standard issue M-16 rifles -- with tungsten filler. Now the Army is expanding its politically correct "Green Ammo'' program even further. Army Undersecretary Bernard Rostker directed the Army recently to consider filling all 120 mm tank rounds with tungsten instead of depleted uranium. Apparently, depleted uranium used in the tank-busting, armor-piercing shells is an environmental hazard, according to the Pentagon's environmental police. If the conversion is approved, however, there are serious drawbacks. The tungsten shells will have less range than those containing depleted uranium, thus nullifying a key advantage for U.S. ground forces. During the 1991 Persian Gulf war, depleted uranium tank shells gave U.S. forces a decisive advantage over Iraqi tanks. That advantage could be lost under the conversion plan for an environmentally safe battlefield. We're told by officials who oppose the idea that in addition to the decreased range, tungsten-filled tank rounds also pose another national security risk, one we highlighted earlier: The United States has no reserves of the material and currently has to buy what it uses from China. Expect members of the Senate Armed Services Committee to question Mr. Rostker about putting environmental concerns before war-fighting skills when he appears later this year before the panel. The Pentagon announced yesterday that Defense Secretary William S. Cohen is recommending Mr.Rostker for the post of undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, the top policy-maker in charge of making sure U.S. troops can do their job: fight and win the nation's wars, whether environmentally safe or not. =========================================================== ARTICLE 5 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zero Defects - A Defect Itself ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The older generation HAS to share lessons learned so the younger generation can learn more without having to make the same errors. That's how we grow. Unfortunately, Zero Defects is alive and well in today's military - stifling growth and pushing young leaders to pursue careers on the outside. ***************************************************************** By M. M. Dupré "Zero Defects" first became an Army-wide policy in the early 1960s as an outgrowth of the philosophy at IBM. As a goal, it was a wonderful idea to strive for perfection, make no dumb errors, to do no stupid things. The execution of that ideal became a nightmare. A number of budding careers were ruined by simple, honest mistakes made in training and peacetime administration. Unfortunately, the same thing is happening again. A part of the informal education process for any young troop is finding out what works and what doesn't. Junior leaders have to make mistakes to learn from them. Just as children make and learn from mistakes, leaders need the space and time to learn the tricks of their chosen trades. If the learning process is hobbled by an atmosphere of "make no mistakes or you're history," our young leaders will not learn anything. If people are afraid of doing anything for fear of doing something wrong, they will do as little as possible. I thank my many mentors and unofficial educators for allowing me to make my share of errors. I had a battalion commander who would ask during an after-action review, "Well, did you learn anything?" I as a company commander, training my infantrymen to prosecute combat in as nasty a fashion as possible, would reply red-faced (when the Aggressor forces soundly trounced me), "Yes." He would then wave his hand in forgiveness and say evenly, "Go ye forth and sin some more." Mark Twain said, "A man who carries a cat by the tail gets a lesson he can learn in no other fashion." I had to carry my "cat by the tail" to learn why you don't do things that way. And I tried to never make the same mistake again. Zero Defects is bad for all levels of leadership. Firstly, it discourages initiative. As pointed out earlier, people who are afraid of doing something for fear of doing something wrong will do as little as possible. Part of the past strength of our services has been in the American ability to improvise, to "think on our feet." Part of the weakness of the old Soviet forces was the inability to be flexible. Flexibility and initiative are part of our doctrine. Secondly, it does not promote growth for anyone. Change is inevitable in our society and, thus in our military. Pain is optional. It is much better to have a strong, well-tried chain of confident, almost cocky leaders down to the most junior level. A group of automatons who "check the block" is not the force that wins. Thirdly, it encourages micromanagement. The older leaders will run the junior leaders into the ground and out of the service, just when we need them the most. As our forces shrink ever more, the need is critical for innovative and confident leaders. The trust has to be there to give the junior the mission and let him succeed or fail, based on his own merits and skills. The Vietnam days of "squad leader in the sky" ruined several generations of NCOs and officers. Just when we got our pride back from Desert Storm, Zero Defects kicked in again. And lastly, it does not leave behind a generation of younger leaders when the older ones leave the service. Part of the duty of the older leaders is to ensure that the generation coming behind is fit to lead, better than the older ones. As the times change, the requirements for leading men and women will change. Our commanders and leaders need to be able to handle that change. Don't we have enough problems with force reduction, budget cuts, increased OPTEMPO, lack of resources, and plunging morale without adding more fuel to the fire? The force we have now is comparable to what was left after The Great War in 1919. Most of us are historically astute enough to realize that as long as man is on this planet, there will be conflict. It is our nature, unfortunately. We are a nation envied by the rest of the world. Many others would love dearly to see us fall and would contribute to that fall if they felt they could get away with it. The preventive is our military service. A large standing army is not in the best interests of the country. A superbly trained, well-equipped, ready cadre force is the key to being able to fend off attackers. This cadre will train the enlarged force when it is needed. If that cadre force is not there, who will train and lead our military shield when the next conflict comes? Widen the parameters of learning. Allow the juniors to make their share of fair mistakes. That's the way they learn and become senior leaders. ============================================================== ARTICLE 6 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Consideration for Others vs. Combat Training ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The man is right. What are our real priorities here? While in Washington the big issues are covered-up, in our units, priorities are shifted to please policy makers. Considerations for others, safety inspections and flashy briefings take precedence over deployment preparations and honing of combat skills. I believe the NCO - I served close to him! ******************************************************************* By a Concerned Non-Com Just read your piece in VOTG and I agree fully. I am currently stationed at Ft.…….. I have never seen so much paperwork that has to be completed just to go on leave. I think that in completing the DA 31s and the other required documents, my shop of 5 people killed at least 1 tree. We have micromanaged and force protected so much that it's absolutely ridiculous. In planning to complete any mission, I need to take into account that I will lose at least 1 hour of an 8 hour work day in order to fulfill all the force protection/micromanagement requirements imposed on us by senior leadership. I won't even begin to go into all the dog and pony show crap that ……has been going through while preparing for our deployment. I do have one more thing to pass on to you. The post has put up signs at all the gates with the 'Consideration of Others' word of the month on them. This month's word is family. A fellow NCO thought of posting a note on the sign saying hypocrites. Myself, I think that we should be spending our valuable money on something important such as training or improvements to soldiers living conditions instead. ================================================= ARTICLE 7 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Female Marine Response - We're not all Flakes ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Reader response to Hack's piece on "Private Flake." The female Marine NCO definitely points out that we must look at the women issues with an open mind. Many women perform a valuable mission and free up male troops to serve in the combat arms. The true women troopers clearly recognize the dangers of "gender-norming," reduced standards and limitations of women in combat. ******************************************************************** By a female Marine Noncommissioned Officer I am writing this letter as a personal response to an article, written by you, given to me by a male Marine. The article dealt with women in the military and specifically focused on single mothers. While I agree with you in the fact that there are currently numerous problems with women in the military I must differ with you on a few points. The description of the young female (purple nails and lips, inappropriate hair and constant whining) unfortunately is more the norm amongst junior enlisted females than I would like to openly admit. The fact that the majority of these females are allowed to use children, female issues, and just plain belly-aching to get out of work and deployments is not only disheartening to people such as yourself, but infuriates Career Level/Oriented females as well. I have spent the past 15 years in the United States Marine Corps. I am a single mother (via divorce) of two wonderful boys and am currently on a 7 month UDP in Okinawa. Upon the birth of my first child, while I was still married to another Active Duty Marine, I was required to not only have a child care plan, but was also required to sign documentation that my child would not prevent me from deploying. I did this freely. All women who are on active duty are given the option within the first 30-60 days of pregnancy to elect to remain on Active Duty or to process out with continued child care through the first "well-baby" check. You see Mr. Hackworth, although I fit the category you were talking about (single parent) I am not a 17 year old child. I am an adult female who has a career. I recently was a participant in a discussion group with fellow females of my same rank (Gunnery Sergeant) and some representatives from Washington DC (I leave it to you to decipher who I am referring to). The consensus amongst all of us, much to the surprise of the female in front of us, was the following: (a) We did not enter the Marine Corps to be men; (b) We enjoy our support role and would like to maintain it; (c) We are being forced into a hole that we did not choose by individuals who have NEVER worn a military uniform; (d) Women DO NOT belong in combat. Mr. Hackworth, women who have done a job in the military for more than 10 years enjoy their position. Most do not feel that we belong in a fox hole. I, for one, believe that women do not belong in any job unless it can be TRULY fair across the board. A few examples. Every ship should be configured for females before we put ANY on them. If we are going to allow women on Embassy Duty we need to allow them at ALL Embassies not just a few. Wanting to be equal is all fine but we really are not equal. We have simply pacified the women of Washington and increased a negative reputation with most males in the military. **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soap-boxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
