Tuesday, March 12, 2019

Gery Carson, Strong Future International (SFI) Founder, Corporate Headquarters Photo Deception Part II

It appears that Gery Carson relocated Strong Future International's headquarters. As with the previous location, SFI is portraying an entire building as its "headquarters".

The impression here is that they are "so successful", that they have taken up a larger building to accommodate the larger leadership and staffing required to run a growing business. This is what they have on their website as their headquarters:

The angle that the photograph was taken, given where the sun was located at, was an attempt to make it more difficult to read or make out the words on the building. However, by searching their address on the Internet, and zooming in on the resulting map, you can get more details on what the building says:

Details, not available on SFI's  website, become available here. You can make out the following: New Horizons, Grand Central Court, and Konica Minolta. Going around the side, and looking at the building from the street, you get the name of a different organization.

"Liba" as seen from the street, and then turning left from the street, you can see both "Liba" and the front of the building that SFI insinuates is their "headquarters":

You can see the "New Horizons" and its symbol on the corner. Going around the building, via "street view", does not provide a hint that SFI is there. However, that doesn't mean that SFI is "not" in that building. It's just an indication that SFI is not as big as it insinuates itself to be. Otherwise, as a big-name organization, with lots of money to spare, SFI would be able to get its name displayed on the side.

Chances are that as with the previous headquarters location, SFI is renting an office inside Grand Central Court. An Internet search for "Grand Central Court" leads to a rental listing for office space.

Office space, at Grand Central Court, rents for $6.00 through $12.00, negotiable. Granted, this could simply be advertising the two available spaces that they had as of the search for this facility. Thompson Realty Group had two offices available for renting, one was at a $12.00 rate, and the other was at $6.00 rate. Looking at the floor plans, they had different office sizes, which would command different rates.

For an organization that insinuates having lots of wealth to distribute to members, SFI appears to be cutting corners real steep with regards to costs. Or, this arrangement may be perfect for an organization like SFI, where the main thrust of operations is multilevel marketing. One would think that given how SFI portrays itself, they would have a headquarters building to themselves.

Monday, May 07, 2018

Dennis H Chevalier Arrested for Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon

Dennis Howard Chevalier a.k.a. Denny H Chevalier, was arrested on February 27, 2018, for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

"This man, as those of us on This Ain't Hell have suspected, is unhinged. The chances are strong that he's going to send his next date to the emergency room... Or to the morgue." - thebesig

        Be taken to justice for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon?
Or will it take a woman being beaten or shot?

As a recap, he's a phony veteran. He is also a phony Gulf War veteran, a phony retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel, a phony police SWAT veteran, and a phony PhD holder. He only did short stints with the police force. He did most of his "law enforcement" as private security such as guarding ATM operations.

If you are reading this, chances are you have questions about him and subsequently ran a search. Trust your gut feelings, here's why.

He has anger, control, and narcissistic issues

Dennis Chevalier is driven by anger issues, control issues, stress issues, narcissism, etc. Things have to absolutely, positively, go his way. His modus operandi starts "innocent", then builds up.

He will start by being "nice" and saying the right things to you. Denny Howard will make you feel like "you are finally the one". It won't be long before he talks you into getting married, even though you have been in a relationship for a short period of time.

The first signs, substantiating your gut feelings, may come from friends and family. Listen to them.

Should you marry him, the gloves come off. His true colors will rapidly come out. He will go from being your "Mr. Right" to being the epitome of the very guy perfect for, "Who the (Bleep) Did I Marry?"

As soon as that wedding ring comes on, he will have his profile back up on dating sites. He has to have women "on the side". It's about conquest and control.

He has a plan that involves him using you, while he indulges with other women. Dennis will guard that plan like a mother hen guards her eggs. He acts like he is entitled to this arrangement.

You will suspect things going on, and your confronting him will enrage him. He will even engage in "gas lighting" and make you think that you are the problem. Never mind, that with his previous relationships, he was the cause of the problem, and the problem itself:

"I watched him sit on the couch play with loaded guns pretending to shoot things around our living room. He becames violent when he gets exposed like this. He was throwing things screaming at me like I was the one that caused his problems. - fedupexwifeofdhc on This Aint Hell

When you question his actions and motives, he feels like he is losing control. It gives him a sense that his plan is about to fall apart. His sense of control kicks in. He will get confrontational when you decide to leave him. 

He pulled a gun on a woman, and on his son, when his ex-wife wanted to leave him:

"I kept questioning him on why his son, who is 16 years old, would need his mother to stay with him when he would visit. I did not know at the time, the divorce decree states Dennis (Denny) Chevalier's visitation has to be supervised due to the fact he held a gun on his ex-wife and his son." - fedupexwifeofdhc on This Aint Hell
"She said she tried to leave and he pulled a gun on them." - fedupexwifeofdhc on This Aint Hell

If he could do this to his own son, he won't have qualms about treating you the same. He even threatened to put a round into an ex-fiancé's head when she left him.

If you have that creepy feeling about him, listen 

Trust your instincts. His ex-wives, ex-fiancé's, and ex-girlfriends describe him as having charisma and a charming character. They compared him to a salesman that could sell blocks of ice, to an igloo neighborhood in the far north, in the middle of winter.

If you have that creepy feeling when interacting with him, or reading about him, or have your doubts... Run. Do not continue with meeting him. If you have met him, and get this feeling, disengage... Leave.

Your subconscious senses the danger, hence your doubts

If you are religious, just see that gut instinct as your guardian angel steering you away from him.

If you're not religious, but believe in spirits, then see that gut instinct as your soul guide and members of your soul group guiding you away from him.

If you believe in things like karma, your gut instinct about him has pass karmic implications... Meaning Dennis Howard Chevalier and you are not meant to fulfill your long-term companionship or marriage hopes.

If you do not believe in any of these, then simply trust your gut instinct, your intuition, your "sixth sense", your family, and your friends. If you don't, you will regret not doing so.

Trust the reason that you're reading this

Did you land here because you googled "Denny Chevalier" or "Dennis Chevalier", or something similar?

Know that we are telling the truth and that we are right. He will attempt to tell you that we are out to get him, that we are "terrorists", "bullies", or that we have some other issues. He will tell you that a disgruntled ex-wife, ex-fiancé, or ex-girlfriend is trying to destroy him. He'll explain that they are spreading misinformation against him. He will tell you that we are all "lying".

Don't believe him!

These women had the same doubts about him that you are experiencing now. They had their gut instinct say, "No." But, they disregarded that instinct. Against their gut feelings, they gave him the benefit of the doubt. They believed his claims that everybody else was lying about him.

Denny Howard ended up putting them through living hell. Some left fearing for their lives.

His descriptions of his ex-wives, ex-fiancé's, ex-girlfriends, and of those of us that hammered him on This Aint Hell, ended up being perfect descriptions of who he is.

He squeezes out of most police involvements

Dennis has a track record of being controlling toward his women. He has a track record of women complaining about him committing assault and battery against them. He also has a track record of police complaints made against him.

Unfortunately, nothing substantive was done. Just as he can convince you to disregard your gut feelings about him, he can convince law enforcement not to carry through with either arresting him or charging him. But, even they can't ignore his growing history of assault.

Consequently, we have Denny's February 27, 2018 arrest

Dennis Howard Chevalier's being arrested for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon comes as no surprise.

Listen to your gut instincts. Do your research. Google his name, as well as the other names that he uses. Contact his ex-wives, ex-fiancé's, and ex-girlfriends. Collectively, they've advanced very similar complaints about him.

Each new relationship that he gets into could be the one where he finally snaps. If this happens, the woman, possibly you, could either end up in the emergency room, or worse... In the morgue.

Do not become that statistic 

It's better to listen to your instincts, intuition, doubts, etc., with regards to Denny Chevalier. Those previous women were lucky. The next one that makes the same mistake that these previous women did, regarding disregarding their gut feelings, risks becoming a statistic.

Changing his outer appearance instead of changing his character.
He may grow out additional hair, wear a cap, use hair dye, etc.

Other names used:

Denny Howard
Howard Chevalier
Doc Chevy

Thursday, December 28, 2017

Memorandum, Retired Reserve and IRR Transfer

Soldiers requesting transfer from the Troop Program Unit (TPU) to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), Standby Reserve, Retired Reserve, etc., must include a memorandum with their transfer packet.

This post lists examples of Soldier memorandums requesting transfer to the IRR and to the Retired Reserve.

Select transfer scenarios are addressed; however, there is a common theme that's included among all transfer request memorandums. One of these is the need to reference the applicable sections in AR 140-10, Army Reserve Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers regulation.

Representative Memorandum Samples

You can adjust these examples for a packet requesting transfer to the Standby Reserve, transfer to another Troop Program Unit (TPU), or transfer to the Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA). These examples can also be utilized, and adjusted, for other justifications for transferring into the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). 

Bracketed Information for Changing Information

The bracketed statements below are variable information. Replace what's listed in brackets with the information that's required, and drop the brackets.

Since the Soldier is applying to transfer to another reserve component, the transfer packet must persuade the reviewers and signers to support the transfer request... And ultimately to get the packet approved.

You have to include documentations to support the justifications that you list in the memorandum. It's best to have affidavits from professionals relevant to the justification for the IRR or Standby Reserve transfer. For example, if you're applying to transfer to the IRR due to dependency hardship, you want to include affidavits from doctors, social workers, members of your chain of command, members of your NCO support channel privy to your hardship, and a statement from your dependent.

Generally speaking, federal statute, or Army regulations, specifically identify situations that allow for transfer. Examples include 6 x 2 initial enlistment contracts, and transfers to the Retired Reserve.

Refer to AR 25-50 for specific memorandum formatting and for including and annotating enclosures.

Sample IRR Transfer Memorandum, 6 x 2 Enlistment Contract

In this scenario, a Soldier completed his or her six-year drilling reserve obligation. The Soldier wishes to transfer to the IRR for the last two years of his or her eight-year obligation.

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, [Soldier's unit]

SUBJECT: Individual Ready Reserve Transfer Request for [rank and name for Soldier requesting transfer]

PURPOSE:  Request Transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve for Completion of Contractual Agreement.

1. Per AR 140-10, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-9d, completion of contractual agreement to serve in a TPU on initial enlistment in the USAR under a 6x2 option, request transfer from the Troop Program Unit (TPU) to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). I've completed my 6-year contractual obligation and wish to transfer to the IRR for the remainder of my Military Service Obligation (MSO).

2. Point of Contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at [phone number including area code] or [Soldier email address].

Note: see below on details for the signature block.

Sample IRR Transfer Memorandum, Pregnancy

In this scenario, a Soldier is pregnant, and desires transfer from the TPU to the IRR. This Soldier isn't within 3 months of her ETS, she's credited with IET completion, and she has an MOS.

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, [Soldier's unit]

SUBJECT: Individual Ready Reserve Transfer Request for [rank and name for Soldier requesting transfer]

PURPOSE:  Request Transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve Due to Pregnancy.

1. Per AR 140-10, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-9g, and Paragraph 4-14, voluntary reassignment for pregnancy, request transfer from the Troop Program Unit (TPU) to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). Per Paragraph 4-14, I've completed IET, have been awarded an MOS, and am not within 3 months of ETS.

2. [Doctor affidavit 1], [doctor affidavit 2], [Soldier, officer affidavit], and [Soldier, other relevant unit Soldier affidavit], are included as supporting documents in my IRR transfer request packet.

3. Point of Contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at [phone number including area code] or [soldier email address].

Note: affidavits must come from both doctors and Soldiers in the unit privy to the soldier's pregnancy. Unit soldiers, in this situation, substantiate the need for the pregnant soldier to transfer to the IRR. Ideally, these Soldiers should include the first commissioned officer in the Soldier's chain of command, as well as a senior NCO in the Soldier's NCO support channel.

Sample IRR Transfer Memorandum, Employment Conflict

In this scenario, a Soldier has a valid employment conflict that prevents him or her from participating in the TPU or IMA. This soldier has an MOS, has completed IET, and isn't within 3 months of ETS.

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, [unit]

SUBJECT: Individual Ready Reserve Transfer Request for [rank and name for Soldier requesting transfer]

PURPOSE:  Request Transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve Due to Employment Conflict.

1. Per AR 140-10, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-9a, unresolvable employment conflict, request reassignment from the Troop Program Unit (TPU) to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). I've completed IET, have been awarded an MOS, and am not within 3 months of ETS.

2. Employment conditions have changed since enlistment [or reenlistment], this employment condition is permanent. My job relocated me to [geographic location], and there are no Army Reserve TPU within reasonable commuting distance. [Or, the nature of my new job prohibits effectively participating in the nearest TPU] or [the nature of my new job prohibits effectively participating in the TPU].

3. My specific employment conflict involves [detailed, concise, explanation of hardship, without providing sensitive or privileged information. Include potential hardship to the Soldier if employment is lost].

4. I attempted to resolve my employment conflict using the guidelines for attempting to resolve dependency hardship per Paragraph 4-13b(1)(a)-(c). Per Paragraph 4-13b(1)(d), reassignment to the IRR is the only available means to alleviate the unresolvable employment conflict condition.

5. [Affidavit from (name and title of professional), (professional's specialty)]; [affidavit from (name and title of additional professional) (additional professional's specialty], [additional affidavits individually listed as first two examples], and [final affidavit, listed similar to previous examples], are included as enclosures to document the nature of the employment conflict [or employment hardship].

5. Point of Contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at [phone number including area code] or [soldier email address].

Note: guidelines for affidavits are similar to those listed for Soldier pregnancy above.

Details on the signature block are listed below.

Sample IRR Transfer Memorandum, Dependency Hardship

In this scenario, a Soldier is dealing with a dependency hardship issue, and is not able to resolve the hardship while remaining in a drill status. Consequently, the Soldier is requesting transfer from the TPU to the IRR, to alleviate the hardship. This Soldier isn't within 3 months of ETS, has completed IET, and has an MOS.

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, [Soldier's unit]

SUBJECT: Individual Ready Reserve Transfer Request for [rank and name for Soldier requesting transfer]

PURPOSE:  Request Transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve Due to Dependency Hardship.

1. Per AR 140-10, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-9f, Paragraph 4-11b(4), and Paragraph 4-13, voluntary reassignment for dependency or hardship, request reassignment from the Troop Program Unit (TPU) to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). Per Paragraph 4-13b(1)(e), I've completed IET, have been awarded an MOS, and am not within 3 months of ETS.

2. My specific hardship involves [detailed, concise, explanation of hardship, without providing sensitive or privileged information].

3. I have attempted to resolve my hardship per Paragraph 4-13b(1)(a)-(c). Per Paragraph 4-13b(1)(d), reassignment to the IRR is the only available means to alleviate the dependency [or hardship] condition.

4. [Affidavit from (name and title of professional), (professional's specialty)]; [affidavit from (name and title of additional professional) (additional professional's specialty], [additional affidavits individually listed as first two examples], and [final affidavit, listed similar to previous examples], are included as enclosures to document the nature of the dependency [or hardship] and the need for my assistance. Additionally, I have also included a statement from [name of dependent affected by Soldier's absence, or a representative for the dependent].

5. Point of Contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at [phone number including area code] or [soldier email address].

Note: guidelines for affidavits are the same as listed in the scenarios above, as well as in AR 140-10. This regulation provides detailed requirements for what needs to be included in the affidavits.

Sample Retired Reserve Transfer Request Memorandum

In this scenario, an enlisted Soldier is requesting transfer to the Retired Reserve. The Notice of Eligibility to Retire with Pay at 60 Letter (20 Year Letter), is one of the supporting documentation that's included with this packet.

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, [Soldier's unit]

SUBJECT: Retired Reserve Transfer Request for [rank and soldier name]

PURPOSE:  Request Transfer to the Retired Reserve.

1. Per AR 140-10, Chapter 6, Section I; and AR 600-8-7, Chapter 9, Paragraph 9-10, request transfer from the Troop Program Unit (TPU) to the Retired Reserve. I am in receipt of my Notice of Eligibility to Retire with Pay at 60 Letter (20 Year Letter).

3. My 20 Year Letter is included in this request. My latest DA Form 5016, Retirement Year End Date [date], reflects [number of years] good years of military service.

4. Point of Contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at [phone number including area code] or [soldier email].

Signature Block

Refer to AR 25-50, Preparing and Managing Correspondence, for composition and placement of signature block.


[First Name] [Last Name]
[Rank] [Enlisted branch official abbreviation]



AR 140-10 Army Reserve Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers
AR 25-50 Preparing and Managing Correspondence

Thursday, May 12, 2016

Dennis Howard Chevalier (Denny H Chevalier) Phony Military Claims April 2016

Dennis Howard Chevalier (Denny H Chevalier) Continues to claim to be a service member, as of April 2016.

Military blog "This Ain't Hell but You Can See It from Here" called Dennis Howard Chevalier, or Denny H Chevalier, out in four different threads. In 2014, he was featured in an article exposing his claims of being a retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. He attempted to backtrack from those claims, accusing somebody else of hacking his accounts and making these claims.

As he attempted to downplay these claims, someone came forward and contradicted his attempts to deny claiming military service. She observed him telling his students that he flew C-130s in Iraq during the Gulf War.

He adamantly denied claiming to be in the military. He insisted that he was in the Texas State Guard, was a retired Civil Air Patrol Lieut. Col., and was a reserve police officer. When someone presented Dennis Howard Chevalier (Denny H Chevalier) with evidence of his military claims on the Internet, Dennis went to the applicable profiles and changed the claims. This destroyed his "a hacker did it" claim.

On April 25, 2016, Dennis Howard Chevalier (Denny H Chevalier) posted on the Facebook page for All My Sons Moving & Storage (Fort Worth, TX). In addition to the negative review he provided, he identified himself as a disabled service member, a service member, a policeman, and a handicapped elder.

On the This Ain't Hell threads dedicated to him, he insisted that he had clarified his claims to differentiate himself from being an actual service member. Yet, here he was on this April 25, 2016 post, identifying himself as an actual service member, not a veteran.

He claimed to be in the military in a way that would allow him to backtrack and explain that he meant something else. He did this with his flight instructor claims with regards to his qualifications. For example, he initially left out the "ground" part of his title, using a term that would easily cause somebody else to think that he was in the air teaching people to fly.

By stating that he was a "service member", without clarifying information, it was clear that he wanted people to think of him a certain way. He wanted them to think that he was in the military. Had someone replied to his review by pointing out the stolen valor articles on him, he could've easily backpedaled and talked about how he meant he was Texas State Guard. However, he didn't identify himself as a veteran of the Texas State Guard. Anybody reading his statement would walk away thinking that he is currently in the US military.

In the same post, he identifies himself as a police officer. It was already established, based on documents that he provided, as well as statements by those who knew him, that he only did a few short stints as a police officer. These happened a long time ago. He was a reserve police officer. Most of this "security" experiences consisted of projects like guarding ATM personnel as they put money in ATM machines.

In the same post, he identifies himself as a "handicapped elder". When most people, in the Western world, think of "elder", they think of a senior citizen. Public records have Dennis Howard Chevalier (Denny H Chevalier) as being born in 1961 or 1962. This would make him either 54 or 55. Not an "elderly" by Western standards. It's possible that he may have a disability. But, if it's one that is not easily detectable, and the movers were not able to identify that, he can't use that against them. 

Tuesday, January 05, 2016

Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier Falsely Claims Valor Award

Post award ceremony photo shoot. Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier is patting the awardee in the back as a congratulations gesture. 

In November 20, 2015, Denny posted a "Forgotten Friday" event. In this post, he claimed that he was receiving his valor award at a 1989 event at Mansfield Business School, Fort Worth, TX.

When he argued with us on This Ain't Hell, he insisted that he received the police version of the Purple Heart. On his This Ain't Hell claim, he stated that he earned that award as a result of his actions during a school siege. He claimed that he got shot in the hands. In this recent claim, he claims that no shots were required.

A look at the picture that he posted contradicts both his claims on This Ain't Hell and on his Facebook wall. In the photograph, he is the only one in a security guard uniform. Everybody else is in formal civilian attire. Had this been a police award, awarding him a police valor medal, the people doing the presentation would have been in police uniform. He would be standing behind the written award citation, not the man in formal civilian attire.

In the photo, Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier is on the side, with his hands behind the man to his left. This man has an open award citation in front of him, being held by the man standing to his left. Immediately to that guy's left is a woman, standing on the leftmost side of the front row picture.

Dennis gives the appearance that he was walking up to accept the award. However, a look at the picture, relative to other award ceremonies, whether in the military or anywhere else, indicates that the posted photograph shows people in a post award photo pause.

The man, standing behind the open citation, appears to be the one that received the award. Dennis Howard Chevalier is patting that man behind the back. This indicates that Denny Chevalier was giving a congratulatory pat on the back to the man standing behind the award citation.

Look at the row behind him. The man that is most visible in the back is looking at the man standing behind the award citation. Again, this is an indication that Dennis Chevalier did not receive the award. If Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier has no qualms about lying to his friends and family on Facebook, he would not have any qualms about lying to anybody else.

Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier isn't a Mistaken Phony Veteran Case

Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier implies that his personal situation is similar to that of this veteran. On his own blog, Denny argued that he only did 20 days in the Texas National Guard.

In this Facebook entry, Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier laments that those that post on This Ain't Hell should be "shot". The man, in the photo, is an actual Vietnam War veteran. A couple of Marines confronted him and accused him of being a poser. When Dennis expressed outrage, he wasn't doing it on behalf of the man in the photo. He was doing it for himself.

Although the man in the photo was an actual Vietnam War veteran, he did not properly place his awards on his suit. For example, only one award needs to be displayed in cases where a veteran has received that same award multiple times. Also, you don't wear medals and ribbons at the same time.

Usually, during an award ceremony where the awardee is in uniform with ribbons, they would have the medal pinned underneath the ribbons. This is only acceptable during the award ceremony. On conclusion of the award ceremony, the medal must be removed and placed in a safe area.

The applicable ribbon would be added to the ribbon rack. If this is a subsequent award, the appropriate service device would be added to the ribbon that's already on the rack. The Marines were not in the wrong in suspecting that he was a poser given that simple mistake. However; they errored in the way they handled the situation.

Too many veterans don't realize this, but if they put the uniform on, or place awards on formal civilian attire, they are still subject to the applicable uniform regulations of their parent service.

At least this guy was an actual veteran who served in Vietnam. When Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier expressed outrage over this, he was attempting to put himself in the same category. He was implying that he too was an actual military veteran who served in war, who "mistakenly" was called out a poser. Using this inductive fallacy, he erroneously labeled those Marines as "This Ain't Hell" posters.

His goal was to insinuate that he was also falsely accused of being a phony veteran. Not only is that insinuation wrong, he is doing it in a way that is deceiving towards his friends and family on Facebook.

Even on his own blog, Denny Chevalier argues that he only did 20 days in the Texas National Guard. The document that he posted indicated that he was discharged for fraudulent enlistment. He didn't even make it to One Station Unit Training/Basic Combat Training. 

Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier Lies About His Discharge from the Texas State Guard

Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier edits a message to fit his argument. Note that the date on the letter is May 4, 2014.
Denny attempted to deflect rumors that he got kicked out of the Texas State Guard (TSG) with a blog post. In that blog post is a screen capture of an alleged email from his then Commanding Officer, COL Howard N. Palmer, TSG. The date of this message was on May 4, 2014.

In the body of the email, Mr. Palmer "assures" Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier that he had not made a decision on Denny's discharge. That, once he made a decision, he would notify Denny of his decision. If anybody says otherwise, they were "spitting in the wind".

However, in the discharge letter that he received from Mr. Palmer, Dennis Chevalier is informed of his general discharge. The date on that discharge paper is May 3, 2014. This letter is a formal letter informing Denny that he was officially discharged. It also informed him that he was permanently barred from rejoining the TSG.

Dennis (Denny) Howard Chevalier officially notified of his discharge from the Texas State Guard. Date on the letter, May 3, 2014.

How could Mr. Palmer not know of his decision yet, when he had already generated an official letter informing Denny that he was no longer in the Texas State Guard? The reality is that Mr. Palmer had made a decision, and would have already had that letter in the mail.

What actually happened is that Denny Chevalier forwarded a message that he got from Mr. Palmer to one of his commercial emails. Then, going into the sent folder, he edits the message to make it look like Mr. Palmer said something else. The original message may have informed him that his discharge was official. This message took place on May 4, the day after Dennis Chevalier's official discharge from the TSG.

Saturday, January 02, 2016

Fort Polk, Disregarding OPSEC while Harping OPSEC

Street names deliberately changed, based on a true story

Every morning, at a certain time of the day, an event happens on most Army posts. Soldiers stationed at the majority of the Army units located on an Army Post conduct physical fitness (PT).

At Fort Riley, most of the infantry units are located on Custer Hill. Before PT, Custer Hill's roads are blocked off. The roads rounding "The Hill" are now available for soldiers to conduct different kinds of physical fitness. Mostly, it's running.

The civilians that worked on Custer Hill arrive later in the morning, after PT is over.

On Fort Polk, it's a different story. Part of their morning PT is conducted on "N 59th Ave. W" and on "N 58th Ave. West" This area is not sealed off. Incoming traffic arrive largely through Grand Avenue. Grand Avenue intersects both "N 59th Ave. W" and "N 58th Ave. W".

The result?

Increasing their own vulnerability

Traffic transiting Grand Avenue is stopped before "N 59th Ave. W". Traffic ends up getting backed up towards the West. Traffic coming from further inside Fort Polk headed west on Grand Avenue is stopped at "N 58th Ave. W". Traffic ends up getting backed up towards the east.

Right when you enter Grand Avenue, you'll see signs directing you not to take photographs. This is based on an actual experience; however, this experience will be altered in a way that the concept remains the same. Let's imagine a fictional scenario were somebody enters the base with a personal dashboard camera video recorder.

This guy enters the base, with the MPs at the gate not catching his use of this dashboard camera video recorder. He drives further and then gets stopped at the line of cars waiting for PT to end. Another MP, within the area, notices the dash cam. He goes up to this driver, and tells the driver that he has to fork over the video.

For his explanation, the MP informs the driver that he is violating OPSEC. By videotaping the runners, he was putting the soldiers at risk of harm. He was possibly putting their lives at risk. The MP informs the driver that by having a dashboard camera, he was going to get people "killed."

Although the MP thinks that he sounds like he knows what he's talking about, he is actually missing the point about OPSEC.

OPSEC in a nutshell

OPSEC is "Operations Security". A basic concept of operations security goes like this.

Let's say that you, during the winter, plan a trip to go to Florida. You live in Minnesota, and are tired of the excessive snow showers and snow cover. You want a change of pace. Your flight leaves early in the morning. You decide to load your luggage into your car the day before.

In order to impress security at the airport, you have colorless/see-through luggage. Your see-through garment bag has short sleeve collared shirts, with tropical scenes. Your see-through luggage also contains short pants, slippers, and other items that you would normally take to a tropical or semi tropical area.

You go on to social media and brag about your upcoming trip to Florida.

Prior to your even hopping into your car to drive to the airport, you provided information to complete strangers. They know that you're going somewhere with summerlike weather. A look at the content of your bags, sitting in your car in the late afternoon and evening, tells people that you're going somewhere where it's nice and warm.

If you do not have your settings on Facebook to "friends only" or "me only", total strangers can look at your Facebook account and know that you plan on going to Florida.

Now, how could you, in this example, apply OPSEC?

Use regular luggage instead of "see-through" luggage. Position your luggage in the room in your house nearest to the door. You can also simply set your privacy settings on your Facebook to "friends only". Better yet, no need to update your friends about your upcoming trip until you are safe at your destination.

The same concept applies in a military operation. If the unit is about to go on a major combat operation, one simply doesn't go on Facebook to talk about it. One doesn't talk about it to anybody without a need to know. One doesn't go on Facebook and say the things that one normally says when one's about to do something major.

Also, one doesn't just do things, externally, that hints to others that the unit is about to move out until it's time to roll out and it's needed.

In this scenario, those involved with the combat operation would scrutinize what they plan to do so as not to provide hints to onlookers on what's going to happen.

Now, back to our Fort Polk example

In reality, locals who come in from Leesville, LA, and the surrounding areas, on a daily basis would know that PT takes place at a certain time in the morning. How could they not know? If they do not transit Grand Avenue before PT starts, they will be stuck. This is the fact that they inform other people in their friends and family circle who need to access the base.

What do these people do when a new person comes in town saying that they have business to conduct on Fort Polk? The locals will tell them to get to the base before a certain time, or get stuck waiting until after PT.

Why? Well, they have soldiers conducting PT on "N 59th Ave. W" and "N 58th Ave. W". A large segment of the people living in Leesville and the surrounding area would know that PT takes place at a certain time in the morning. They would also know that there is a traffic backup, on Grand Avenue, in both directions.

Based on this, claiming that videotaping the backed up traffic violates the well-being of the runners, and their safety, would be as pointless as trying to continue to hide when the person looking for you can see you.

Our military appearance clinches us as being military or veterans within the community

The MP, in our example, could turn around and explain that recognizable faces, in the video, will put the soldiers at risk. There are people out there who would like to do harm to these soldiers. Well now, why even have the soldiers abide by military standards if they are concerned about them being recognized as being in the military?

It doesn't take that much to look at a group of people and to get a good idea of who is in the military, or who are veterans. Those currently in the military have a certain appearance about them. So, even without the help of the video, or a photo on Facebook, as soon as the service members leave the post without their uniforms, people in the community would still look at them and recognize them as being service members.

The community already knows about organized on-post PT

Now, here's a really big weakness in the flaw of Fort Polk's security plan in this example. It doesn't matter that the MP in our example is getting wrapped around the axle over someone's dashboard video camera. The knowledge is already out in town that there is a traffic backup during certain parts of the day.

It's only logical for locals to advice newcomers to go to Fort Polk extra early or they will have to wait till later in the morning.

That's enough information to let someone, with bad intent, know that if they wanted to commit harm, they have a bunch of cars in line, drivers unarmed, who are simply sitting and waiting for PT to clear. These people, waiting in line, become juicy targets for acts of violence involving firearms which could result in mass casualty.

The soldiers on the base, who have combat deployed, would have to notice this weakness. The leadership on the base, with the ability to change these physical fitness routes, have to know about these security weaknesses. Yet, they choose the easy or convenient way to do things.

This threat extends to any where there is a traffic backup at the entry, or within the base. This problem/issue repeats itself across busy military installations across the United States. Backed up traffic at the entrance is the most visible to the public.

 Unit commanders must mitigate exposed vehicle waiting lines

Terrorists, downrange, have persistently attacked waiting lines.

OPSEC, as misunderstood by the MP in the above example, simply doesn't represent reality. In order to establish the applicability of OPSEC to this scenario, leadership on the base has to figure out a way to remove the cause of traffic backup on Grand Avenue during the same times of the day during the weekdays.

In fact, Fort Polk leadership must take a comprehensive, big picture/map look at all of their traffic in different parts of the day. All military bases, with traffic congestion's based on poor planning, need to do this.

One major solution is to redirect the PT route so that it does not cut off Grand Avenue, or any other, traffic. There are plenty options, on the base, that could afford the soldiers the same value of physical fitness without creating vehicle waiting lines.

What if traffic were to flow smoothly instead of being backed up? The risk, that the advice to be given, not to enter the base at certain times a day, would be removed.

Consequently, less people will be made aware that there are vehicle traffic wait lines on Grand Avenue, or elsewhere in the post. No vehicle or wait lines on a regular basis reduces the chance that someone could come in and commit a crime against the waiting line. It would be hard to plan against something that does not happen at the same time or location, but happens randomly.

Another option available, to reduce the risk against the soldiers, is to provide different PT areas for smaller groups of units. This would spread PT activity throughout the base instead of concentrating it in local areas. Smaller crowds, smaller signature, less casualties should a terrorist attack happen. Designated, cordoned off areas, out of the way of main traffic, could offer an area, for street PT, that's safe.

Saturday, September 05, 2015

Robert Keith English's Lack of Tactical Military Experience Painfully Shows

Robert Keith English, The 19th. He's pointing his weapon at the wall, after pointing it to the camera. That's not how you clear a hallway.

Robert Keith English, also known as Master English, and Kioshi English, is a martial arts trainer at Richmond, VA's Tactical Martial Arts. He has no records of serving in the Marines, Army, or Navy. There are no records of him serving in any tactical capacity in the military.

He likes to claim that he was a Marine, but he never served in the Marines.

Yet, he showcases himself as a martial arts expert drawing experience from his time in the military. The problem for him is that there is no evidence that he served even a day in uniform. But, that doesn't stop him from continuing to show people that he had that expense.

A viewing of the trailer, "The 19th", shows Robert Keith English's lack of tactical experience.

The preview begins with guys breaching a doorway. The number one man points his weapon at the camera, then hooks right. He stood at the doorway area too long. As long as he pointed the weapon towards the camera, he should've continued forward while remaining concealed from potential enemies in the next room.

Instead, he took "forever", waving (flagging the camera) his weapon back-and-forth horizontally, before finally turning to his right. All that was required was one sweep of the weapon eyeball pair. He stood there in from the open door, with a weapon pointing toward the camera for split-second sweeping to the right as he hooked right. He also pointed his weapon at the wall for too long.

Almost instantaneously, the number 2 man would've proceeded toward the camera while remaining concealed.

Now, the number two man enters pointing his weapon toward the camera, but doesn't keep his weapon pointed in that direction. He too turns toward the right. In this part of the film, both the number one and the number two men are pointing their weapons toward their right. No weapon is covering the front of the movement.

Now, the camera may have represented a "wall." If this were true, they would not have needed to continue to cover that area. Both men were pointing toward the opening, neither men needed to "split" in the hallway. If it was evident that the specific section that they were in was "clear", and now they had another opening to worry about, they would've immediately stacked before that opening.

The team walked in front of the opening in a gaggle

From there, someone would of "sliced the pie" (" sidestepped" sideways converting the "unknown" to the "known.") as the number two man did in the film. However, the guy that "sliced the pie" walked sideways in a way that anybody in the other side would have seen his elbows before they saw the rest of him.

The enemy would know about them before our "team" would've learned of the enemy. This would've given the enemy the upper hand.

In an actual scenario, had the enemy been in the other room, this would have initiated a firefight, with the enemy in the room firing the first shots. Or, they could've waited for everybody to start piling into the room. The next room's set up would've allowed the enemy to remain "concealed" from the team entering the room. The door would now live up to its "fatal funnel" label.

Let's take this from another angle.

The guy that "sliced the pie" continued to stand in front of the "opening" that everybody was pointing their weapons too. He was presenting himself as a target. If he would've quickly "sliced the pie" and taken another part of the doorway, concealed, he would've had a good idea of what lay on the other side of the wall that his battle buddy was at.

The team spends too much time in the "fatal funnel"

Yet, he didn't take the opposite position. He just stood in front of the opening. In real life, if someone was waiting for them, hiding behind something in the other room and ready to shoot, the man that just stood in front of the opening would've been shot before he could get any of the action.

As the scene progressed, the number one man shined his light "around parts of the door edges". Then he "carefully" walked to the other side of the door, in front of the number two man, still pointing his weapon at the opening. The number two and the number three men lowered their weapons respectively as the number one man passed in front of them.

That action alone wasted a lot of time, and put the number one man at risk if a target presented himself in from the team and fired at them. It also caused two of the men to lower the weapons, temporarily leaving their sectors uncovered.

At this point of time, all three team members pointed their weapon at the opening. A fourth man did his job and covered the direction they came from.

Meanwhile, the three men stood in front of the opening too long. The enemy would've had a perfect opportunity to take all three down. Again, the door area would've lived up to its "fatal funnel" nickname.

Robert Keith English's Combat Tactics May Get Everyone Killed

Robert Keith English, The 19th. Three men pointing their weapons in the same general direction, a fourth person points to the rear. Meanwhile, the remaining sectors of fire are not covered, and provide the enemy an opportunity to attack their flanks.

On to the next room.

The number one man takes his time walking in, continuously pointing his weapon in one direction. He should've either hooked left or right, not faced forward for a long time. One of the folks behind him would've taken care of that.

You can see that his two battle buddies were pointing their weapons in the same direction, then all three pointed their weapons right. Who is covering their left? Another question is, who is covering from the 6 o'clock position to the 3 o'clock position when all three turned the point there weapons towards the 3 o'clock position?

They bunched up and did not cover a 360° sector around them 

One common theme, that's present in all Soldier and Marine battle drills, involving room clearing, has soldiers covering all directions. At no time do you permit any firing sector to remain unwatched.

Once again, in this scenario, the bad guys could've came up on them from behind and shot all three of them.

Speaking of which, remaining bunched up like that while moving into, and through, the room, allows the enemy to maximize the use of stray rounds. For example, a round intended for the middleman, but misses, could hit one of the men on either side of the intended target.

The bad guy, armed with a machine gun, would not have spent as much time gunning them all down. Even rapid reflexive fire from a rifle or carbine on semi-automatic would take them all out.

As the preview progresses, the fourth man does his own thing. He switches from pointing his weapon in same direction as the other three to now pointing to the 12 o'clock position relative to their original movement into the room. Nobody is watching the fourth man's 6 o'clock through 11 o'clock positions. The fourth man's right side was vulnerable from his 1 o'clock through 2 o'clock positions.

The issues that I point out above, for the first three men, now apply for the fourth man.

The three men headed towards the left have nobody covering their 6 o'clock positions. Nobody's covering from their 10 o'clock through their 11 o'clock positions.

So far, from the beginning of the preview of "The 19th", until this point, the four men have left large gaps in their sectors of fire. We have three weapons pointing in the same direction, with two of the men not having a safe sector of fire because of the men in front of him.

Their movement, from most of this preview, is an example of what not to do 

With three of them moving in a straight line like that, one has to wonder if Robert Keith English learned his "tactics" from a videogame. One of the Black Hawk down video games shows this kind of movement. In the area they were in, there's a different way of moving.

Had Robert Keith English served, in an MOS that had to know room clearing, he would've known that. Back to the film.

If they would've been attacked at this point, these four men would've become casualties in less than a minute, depending on what weapons the enemy would've used.

Robert Keith English's advised tactics would easily be defeated

Their tactics at this point could've easily been defeated. For instance, one person could attack them from an uncovered sector of fire. The surviving "good guys" would've hopefully taken cover and fired back. But, given the trend observed so far, they would've taken a Hollywood "shoot back" approach.

While this is happening, another guy could come in and hit the surviving team members from the side.

This is just a movie preview. If Robert Keith English is providing tactical training to security companies, he's doing them a serious disservice. Again, his "tactics" are examples of what not to do.

If filmmakers are looking for someone with military knowledge, to provide guidance for actions in the movie, they should steer clear away from Robert Keith English.

On through the film.

The first three men walked towards the middle of the room, it takes too long for the fourth man to finally cover the rear, but then he turned around and covers a side. At this point, the 6 o'clock position of both groups of men are still vulnerable. The left flank of the three people in row, as well as the right flank of the fourth man, are vulnerable.

You can see that the three men turned away from the fourth man. This leaves his right flank vulnerable in addition to his back and left flank being vulnerable.

How can they be defeated in this section? Two people can enter from behind them, one of them shoots the fourth guy, while the other one simultaneously squeezes the trigger multiple times firing at the center of mass of the three progressing further into the room.

The examples that I bring up here, of defeating these guys, is just one of many examples that could be used to defeat the "tactics" that this preview demonstrated so far.

Robert Keith English, The 19th. The three guys bunched up reduces waste, on the bad guy's part, if he were to miss his intended target. The stray round has a good chance of hitting one of the other two. Meanwhile, both groups in the above photo have vulnerable 6 o'clock positions, and vulnerable flanks.

Now, when the fourth man pointed his weapon to their new 6 o'clock position, the second and third man should have had their weapons pointed at the 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock positions respectively. There were enough objects, in the area, that would've allowed hostile's, hiding behind them, to fire at the good guys.

Robert Keith English, keep that weapon pointed down range!

Robert Keith English, The 19th. He lowers his carbine then brings up a pistol. The transition is more than enough time for an attack from the front without the opposition fearing immediate return fire.

 Advance into the new room.

The lead man, looking like Robert Keith English, lowers his weapon temporarily as he enters the room. That's one of the many big "no goes" when doing these operations. The amount of time that weapon is lowered may have been seconds to the lead man. But to those who have done exercises like this repeatedly, that's an eternity.

For the amount of time that he lowered his weapon, the enemy could've fired into him and those behind him. Thus, ending their mission in the preview.

However, the reason he lowers his rifle/carbine is because he wanted to pull out his pistol. He had not fired any rounds from his rifle/carbine. Swapping out weapons like that wasted time and exposed their front to attack.

Also, when you still have rounds for your rifle/carbine, why put that away, in exchange for pistol, when doing a room clearing operation? In situations like this, the pistol is the, "Oh blank, I'm out of rounds, I now have to use my pistol!"

You can see that during this time, his battle buddies are walking in a straight line right behind him.

Their movement through the hallway is an example of what not to do

In a hallway like that, two would've taken a position against one wall, and the other two would've taken a position in the other side. The person on the left would've focused his weapon to anything that could jump out from the right. Person on the right would've done the same in the opposite diagonal direction towards the front left.

The two guys in the back would have been watching the rear using the same concept. Or, one guy would've covered the rear, while the third guy would've covered the middle sector in front of the movement.

Once again, they do not stack up against the door. The lead man standing in the opening makes himself a target. The second man is signaling. In that specific scene, there is no real tactical purpose behind the signaling. When one does signal in this group, a way is done to pass a signal back and forward.

What was he doing with his hand signals?

Robert Keith English, The 19th. The two guys behind are focused on the door, the signals are given well above their plane of view. System of signaling must allow for method for acknowledging receipt of signal.

The number two man, if he were in charge, would pass the signal to the number one man in a way that did not distract the number one man. He would have let the number one man know what the message was. Likewise, the number three man would've passed the signal back to the number four man.

While this message is being passed, all four men would focuse on their sectors. Again, their sectors would cover a 360 sector of fire coverage area.

After the signals are given, the number one man sidesteps into the opening, the man behind him does the same thing as he faces the other direction. The two men behind him are still in the hallway, too far behind them.

In reality, both lead men would've hooked left and right closer to the wall and move all the way almost instantaneously as the two men behind them would've entered the room. One would've covered one of the sectors in the other room, and the other one would've covered the rear.

As the scene progresses, the last two guys entered the room, the last man enters the room and still does not cover their six.

What would he do if he dropped the flashlight during a firefight?

Right after that scene, we see the number one man doing both, holding a flashlight up and using his pistol. Why do that when the carbine used earlier had a mounted light? His attention is now focused to flashing his light and pointing his pistol. What is he going to do if he were to drop the flashlight in the middle of a firefight?

Robert Keith English, The 19th. His carbine had a mounted tactical light. With the switch, he has to focus on two things, light and aim. What would he do if he were to drop that flashlight in a firefight?

Meanwhile, his buddies are in a straight line behind him and not focusing on covering their sectors.

You see a scene where they entered the hallway. The first man is pointing down the hallway. The second man, instead of coming in to cover the other direction, quickly looks back then quickly turns around and follows the first guy.

Once again, as they are going down the hallway, they follow each other in almost a straight line as opposed to taking parallel positions against the walls. As the scene progresses, the number two guy stops. He looks away from the direction that he's pointing his weapon. At no time did he stop the number one guy, who continues on.

Instead of the erroneous method that they used, he would signal the number one guy, so that the letter could provide him cover. He didn't. He allows the other two guys to continue walking on down the hall. This time, the team of four is split. In a large area like that, you do not want to split your team.

More than four people were needed to clear the rooms shown in the preview

In reality, if you're taking a large area like that, you'd use a lot more than just four people. Once your teams deploy into the building, they would work with each other. Team members would remain with their fellow members and do everything they can to remain in contact and together.

The guy, looking like Robert Keith English, does what apparently is a signal. He does it with his hand holding the pistol, waving the pistol down. With the way they have been moving, there is a good chance that he flagged (pointed the pistol at the other two) the others. Instead of stopping the guy ahead of him, he continues walking down the hall with him. They leave the other two behind.

They enter another room using the same lack of tactics that they've been using entering new rooms.

They continue in a straight line, or nearly straight line, instead of taking up positions on opposite sides of a hallway to walk parallel to each other. Either way, they did not effectively covered their sectors.

Robert Keith English, Tell Them to Maintain Team and Sector Integrity!

They get complacent right when they should've had their guards up

They come up to a woman sitting in the middle of a hallway.

Robert Keith English, The 19th. The lead man should have kept his distance, and tried verbal interaction. The other guy would've provided cover. The other two should've also been there to provide cover.

Almost immediately, they let their guard down. One guy gets too close to her and gets tackled. The other guy failed to keep his weapon aimed at her in the middle hallway.

Around this time, a man comes out of the shadows and attacks the partner. There was enough time, between the time the second bad guy comes out of the shadows, and the time that the partner could've fired some rounds into him.

In reality, neither would've approached the woman. With her stance not known, the two guys "tactically" moving down the hall would've kept their distance, and kept their weapons pointed at her. This is based on the scenario in the video.

Also, in reality, all four would stayed together. Two guys in the front would continue to cover their sectors diagonally. The third guy would've continued to cover their six. A fourth guy would've tried to interact, verbally, from a standoff position, with the woman sitting in the middle of the hallway.

They would've had more than enough to overpower the two bad guys had they stuck together.

As they approached the woman, they still would've kept their distance. At least one of them would've kept his weapon pointed on the woman sitting on the floor while the others covered their sectors of fire.

As the preview progressed, a fight ensues. They temporary regain control of the situation, then take the attention away from the opposition. They could've at least "cuffed" the opposition that was down, or used something to restrain his/her movement.

Robert Keith English, The 19th. Where are the other two? Now the other guy maintains security, instead of turning things around by helping his buddy. Had the other two been there, they could've provided security while two guys overcome the bad guy.

The opposition regains control of the situation. The other two team members are nowhere in sight as the current pair gets ambushed. During the second struggle, the man had plenty of time to get off a couple rounds on the attacker. He did nothing.

If this scene would've taken place in reality, one event would've been consistent. Those guys that attacked the two men would've gotten shot. The four people would've stayed together, covered their sectors, and would've rapidly shot anybody that tried to come at them from the shadows.

This is where reflexive fire comes in handy prior to being in a situation like this.

This is just a very simple, very basic, look at the military/police tactics that Robert Keith English contributed to this film. Those tactics that they used are a reflection on Robert Keith English. They painfully show that Robert Keith English has no relevant military experience as it relates to this film.

Yet, he is showcasing himself as having military experience in order to attempt to get people to hire him as a consultant on fighting films.

Robert Keith English, The 19th. More than enough time to put rounds in the bad guy.