Off Topic - But Heinous

This has been kept pretty well under wraps but the word needs to be spread.

Excerpt:

"For three years The Nation has been reporting on military doctors' fraudulent use of personality disorder to discharge wounded soldiers [see Kors, "How Specialist Town Lost His Benefits," April 9, 2007]. PD is a severe mental illness that emerges during childhood and is listed in military regulations as a pre-existing condition, not a result of combat. Thus those who are discharged with PD are denied a lifetime of disability benefits, which the military is required to provide to soldiers wounded during service. Soldiers discharged with PD are also denied long-term medical care. And they have to give back a slice of their re-enlistment bonus. That amount is often larger than the soldier's final paycheck. As a result, on the day of their discharge, many injured vets learn that they owe the Army several thousand dollars.

According to figures from the Pentagon and a Harvard University study, the military is saving billions by discharging soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan with personality disorder.

In July 2007 the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs called a hearing to investigate PD discharges. Barack Obama, then a senator, put forward a bill to halt all PD discharges. And before leaving office, President Bush signed a law requiring the defense secretary to conduct his own investigation of the PD discharge system. But Obama's bill did not pass, and the Defense Department concluded that no soldiers had been wrongly discharged. The PD dismissals have continued. Since 2001 more than

22,600 soldiers have been discharged with personality disorder. That number includes soldiers who have served two and three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. "

And

"Luther's case is not an isolated incident. In the past three years, The Nation has uncovered more than two dozen cases like his from bases across the country. All the soldiers were examined, deemed physically and psychologically fit, then welcomed into the military. All performed honorably before being wounded during service. None had a documented history of psychological problems. Yet after seeking treatment for their wounds, each soldier was diagnosed with a pre-existing personality disorder, then discharged and denied benefits.

That group includes Sgt. Jose Rivera, whose hands and legs were punctured by grenade shrapnel during his second tour in Iraq. Army doctors said his wounds were caused by personality disorder. Sailor Samantha Stitz fractured her pelvis and two bones in her ankle. Navy doctors cited personality disorder as the cause. Spc. Bonnie Moore developed an inflamed uterus during her service. Army doctors said her profuse vaginal bleeding was caused by personality disorder. Civilian doctors disagreed: they performed emergency surgery to remove her uterus and appendix. After being discharged and denied benefits, Moore and her teenage daughter became homeless."

I wonder how many were under the age of 21? Not old enough to drink, yet old enough to take a bullet for Uncle Sam...

Jim Rojas

So? Blathering about it to groups where it's NOT ON TOPIC is spam. We jump hard on spam here, to make sure there isn't a second or Nth offense, because...

...so many many people think THEY know better than we do what we want to see on this here newsgroup. I snap my fingers at his online Marine-ness, so:

If he really was a Marine, which I'll admit is possible, he'd KNOW to scope out a situation before barging into the midst of it, and to figure out what the rules of engagement ARE, as opposed to what he wants them to be.

Sorry, dear (and Bob the Angry Flower will show up for you, please stay seated), that's not your call or his. Unless he's got magical technology that makes the post never download in the FIRST place to exactly the people who don't want to read it, he doesn't get to claim "I SAID this was going to be something you didn't want to listen to before I started yelling in your ear in parade-ground voice!". [Hint: Such tech is available. It's called NOT PUTTING r.a.sf.w IN THE NEWSGROUPS LINE]

Oh, I see it did get you at least once. Its work here is done. now SHOO, you're being boring.

Don't make me call Terry on your presumably-a-friend.

Dave

PS: I don't know which of the other two groups you read, but I know it's not this one. so aroint ye.

He made a mistake. I notice he hasn't come here to apologize. You, however, are making a much bigger mistake, by being vociferously wrong at length when you also haven't done the research.

Off-topic post.

The clue here: DIFFERENT NEWSGROUPS HAVE DIFFERENT STANDARDS. You're posting to one where you don't know the rules. This should mean you lurk a bit and see if you can figure out some of the rules by observation, right?

So post to alt.personals.meandmymarinebuddy - sure, it'll have dismal propagation, but you and he DON'T GET TO BUST INTO OTHER PEOPLE'S THREADS with stuff that's just plain out of left field.

Your buddy doesn't post here, and neither do you. He spammed an "I think everyone in these groups should see this! Listen up! This is IMPORTANT! I SAY SO!" which was exactly as relevant as telling us why our penises really DESERVE to be longer, or why our spare gold NEEDS to be sent to the following address. He made a mistake by doing so, but just one. We're making sure he doesn't do it again. It appears more corrective therapy shall be needed for you, however.

...okay, so you don't know the rules for TWO of the groups you're posting to.

So we give every person on Usenet one "pass" per newsgroup on Usenet? Do you know how many newsgroups there ARE? (No, you don't.) Of course there are fewer people on Usenet than there used to be, but there's still enough to make every single newsgroup unreadable if everyone decided they wanted to post to every other newsgroup about an issue that was important to them.

(ObSF: The recent thread about people having to cope with increasingly intrusive advertisements, holographic and otherwise, and the various mechanisms used to battle them. I don't _remember_ an SF story where "shoot the source of the advertisement so it explodes" was used, but real life HAS come up with the TV-zapper, which can turn off almost any TV that can be remote-controlled and fits in your pocket...)

This just shows that you haven't been paying attention. If he's not doing it, then he shouldn't be mimicking the form of the many many spammers that DO do it.

So is this. Think please.

Dave

Those are most likely groups he reads regularly, I know 2 are. He was remarking to his friends and colleagues to his favorite haunts how disgusting that policy is.

Since he preceded it with "off topic", and he's a Marine, I'd say he has every right to post his opinion where he sees fit.

If you don't want to read it that's why he put the "off topic" there, for bozo's like you.

Nice try with the "follow-up to:", very bad form.

Too funny. You're like kids, each with an icecream, not eating, arguing; and each demanding first lick. :-)

Bob

Don't sweat it G. - isn't it obvious that a recovering alcoholic involved in the alarm industry would NEVER read science fiction.

I'm still trying to figure out what a "Big 8" group is.

A guy on a web forum asked us to spread the word - so I did. I had no illusions that it would be well received by everyone.

It's not worth the pissin' contest - especially in a group I only lurk in.

Nope, I just dislike self-appointed Net-cops. I known Joe from his postings for years, and felt like he was treated unfairly by "David DeLaney". In my opinion he (David) should have said nothing at all instead of classifying Joe's post as SPAM (which it clearly is not). I don't see anyone else calling the OP "SPAM". It's a very personal issue for him (and me). Since the two .alt groups he posted to don't give a rat's ass about off-topic stuff (I don't read the other one), I think he should have been given a "pass", rather than being chastised by someone who doesn't like what he had to say. Accusing him of going in alphabetical order and adding a big-8 group to propagate his message is unfounded. A Google Group search would have revealed that Joe subscribes to those groups, and is an active participant.

I personally was glad he pointed out the article. I had no idea our government. was treating our veterans so badly. Now, thanks to Joe I can contact my representatives and voice my opinion. That's how things get changed, and injustices get righted.

"he (David) should have said nothing at all" "I just dislike self-appointed Net-cops."

Now you're like stomping on your own ice cream.

Followup: I see an "I lurked here" from further on down. So: let him come discuss with us milSF that includes unexpected biological contamination, or unreliable backup from the home country, or corruption in the legislatures. Or mil-fantasy that includes realistic disease, or that has the healers too tied up caring for the big shots to take care of problems among the enlisted men. Or any number of things along that line.

But don't cut-and-paste a current news story from a website somewhere and tell us THIS is what we should be talking about, not all that unimportant nonsense, and expect us to react like we're being done any sort of favor.

Dave

Why not? The article says the Nation has been reporting on it for three years. If this sort of thing is important to you, why haven't you paid more attention?

Actually, things get changed when lobbyists write large checks to your representatives. That's how your representatives got rid of those pesky regulations that so inconvenienced Wall Street, which almost led to a crash of the world economy.

This issue has been reported on for three years but your reps have done nothing. Why aren't they paying attention? Aren't they among the people who scarcely let a day go by without expressing a desire to "support the troops?"

Hmm, I must be feeling cranky today.

Matt Hughes

If it's true. The Nation does have a strong political viewpoint, so it's possible that it is making this up.

If it *is*, I certainly can't criticize the original poster for telling us about something as important as this, even if it's off- topic to the group.

If President Bush arranged for airplanes to fly into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon so that he could blame it on the Pentagon, that would be important enough too. But the people who post that sort of thing to off-topic newsgroups, though, are spammers simply because there's no chance of that being true.

John Savard

If you're so big on etiquette, why do you keep cross posting to groups that more than likely consider /your/ blather on a par with spam?

If you're so big on etiquette, why do you keep cross posting to groups that more than likely consider /your/ blather on a par with spam?

If you're so big on etiquette, why do you keep cross posting to groups that more than likely consider /your/ blather on a par with spam?

Yeah, these guys are a real "barrel of laughs".

For what it's worth, I appreciate you spreading the word.

PS: Big-8 groups are those that go through an entirely different process to create and delete. "Board members" are chosen (not elected) to decide what groups can be created or deleted. It's a good-ole' boy thing. Some regulars of such groups are somewhat "elitist's", somehow thinking that their hierarchy is somehow better than those that are not Big-8's. The hierarchies are:

comp.* humanities.* misc.* news.* rec.* sci.* soc.* talk.*

I'm done with these clowns. See you back in ASA.

Good riddance to bad rubbish. Don't come back.

Thanks. We appreciate it.

kdb

Nothing to apologize for. I've lurked in the SF ng for quite a while and there is not a zero-tolerance for off topic. I admit to a bit of a faux pas by cross posting - but I guess it isn't that big of a problem or you would trimmed the headers when you replied.

Seen lots of off topic conversations here.

Didn't bust into anyone's thread - started my own, which you have easily ignored and let it die.

But you didn't, so I guess I should thank you for keeping it alive.

LOL - I made one post to three ng's. A post that could have been easily ignored and allowed to wither away, never to be heard from again.

I posted to three ng's I subscribe to.

Sorry to have pissed in your Wheaties. I guess you should have the moderators ban me...