Bullshit AGAIN Rosie.
Call your local VA Benefits Office tomorrow (here, I’ll look up the number for you and everything - 1-800-827-1000) and ask them if education benefits are available for veterans with anything less than an HONORABLE DISCHARGE. Not a GENERAL UHC such as yours, but HONORABLE.
Check back with us when you find out. Lie about it and I will find and post the government law that proves you wrong.
Liar.
Not that you’re worth the time to correct yet AGAIN… but if I was denied benefits, then why was it I was able to use my GI BILL for college courses, and everything from pencils to books was PAID FOR by Uncle Sam. And I still get letters every six months from the VA telling me of all the schools I can go to any time I want and they pay 100% of the tuition, and this is 5 years after my GI BILL expired. Guess this is a Government/VA error?..NOT.
Am seriously doubting that you work in any capacity for the Government. Send me your personal information and I’ll check your credentials with my sources.
hahahahahahaha
Rookie!
Diane will feed you your heart.
Go Diane! this is a pleasure to witness!
I used to have a Russ™ troll collection when I was a kid. One of my favorites had big, bulging green eyes, tall purple hair, and a frilly little dress.
I think it would make a perfect star for that movie.
Rosie:
I realize you are a bit busy hurling brickbats back and forth with Diane, but I was interested in a couple of points you made in your previous response to me.
I read with interest your vivid recounting of events in Okinawa during your time there. Yesterday you said you were there “when Clinton gave it back to the Japanese”. In your most recent response, you stated you were there “when Carter gave it back to the Japanese”. I assume this was sometime after 1975, as you have previously said your service time ran from '75-'85.
I’m rather hazy on the history of the period, so I did a quick search and found a web site for an upcoming book by
Nicholas Evan Sarantakes, entitled “Keystone: The American Occupation of Okinawa and U.S.-Japanese Relations.”
The site is located at:
http://faculty.tamu-commerce.edu/sarantakes/Okinawa.html
Rosie, the book lists the period of American occupation as 1945-1972.
In addition to a description of the books’ contents, the author has published a timeline of major events on Okinawa during this period. According to the timeline, formal talks on reversion began in 1969, the reversion treaty between the US and Japan was signed on June 17th, 1971 and reversion took place on May 15, 1972. All of this of course, took place during the Nixon administration.
The timeline also mentions the riots that I assume you were describing; these took place during the 1970-72 period as well.
I am trying to understand how you could have witnessed these events several years before you were actually there. Comments?
Given your misstatements of these facts, can you perhaps understand why we are skeptical of any of the assertions you have made in this thread?
Oh, one other thing.
According to my reading, the rape incident involving the US marine stationsed in Okinawa occurred in 1995. How does that relate to your time there?
Poor Myrr.
Unless she’s confusing it with Carter signing the rights to the Panama Canal back to Panama, which took effect this year, I believe.
Now, now, I think she’d know whether she was in Okinawa or Japan. The languages are different, for one thing.
whoops, I meant Okinawa or Panama…
Actually, IIRC, Diane offered to verify your service because other people were suspicious of your claims.
Ah yes, here it is…
This was supposed to help you. I am still not sure why you’ve turned on her, oustide of the fact that you are more than a few tacos short of a combination platter.
Back to your regularly scheduled psychotic episode…
It doesn’t make sense Rocket, because Rosie is a liar.
Rosie - Did you use educational benefits while you were on active duty or after you were released from the military?
VA educational benefits are NOT available for any veterans who received less than an HONORABLE discharge. If you claim that you used VA educational benefits, you are a liar.
C&P’d from the VA Homepage, Educational Benefits FAQ. You can see the entire thing at: http://www.gibill.va.gov/education/c30.htm
(Bolding mine)
*Who is Eligible ?
You may be an eligible veteran if you got an Honorable Discharge, AND you have a High School Diploma or GED or, in some cases 12 hours of college credit, AND you meet the requirements of one of the categories below: . . . *
Of course, this is when you back track and claim to have used educational benefits while you were on active duty instead of as a 70% disabled vet as you previously claimed.
Liar.
Hi Kelli 
Diane, I know you’re offended by R’s behavior (aren’t we all), but I’d like to suggest that it’s time to let go. I will too. This is turning into a bit of a public horsewhipping and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Rosie,obviously you’ve got a lot of issues. Hope you can find the help you need, and you certainly do need some help.
I’m outta here.
Hi, Diane
I just want to cover all the bases here. The MGIB (to which you linked) falls under Chapter 30 of Title 38 of the U.S. Code. The “old” GI Bill falls under a different chapter (I’m thinking Chapter 37?). They reworked and rejimmied the GI Bill many times across the years. I’m thinking, like Rosie, that eligibility requirements were looser back 15 years ago. If she went to school right after she got out in 85 and before the MGIB came into effect, she might have fallen under the old eligibility requirements.
I hate to give Rosie a free ride. I would rather have you prove me wrong too. But I think you may want to look at the earlier versions of the GI Bill as well. It’s a “generational thing.” 
Having skimmed this thread, I can honestly say that Rosie makes me ashamed to admit that I wore a uniform, and was an NCO.
But I was coming into the service just after she claimed she got out. Maybe they took a big-assed broom and cleaned house?
Fuck all this talk in Colonialism/Imperialism/Corporatism.
I don’t care what your beef is with the U.S.
If you shoot at us, wound or kill us, you die.
Sooner or later, we’ll get you.
And you will live the rest of your miserable life running from one stone to the next, crawling underneath it for a while, always looking over your shoulder to see who’s coming up behind you.
And if it ain’t this way, it damned sure ought to be.
ExTank
“Mostly Harmless :wally”
Um, that may be misleading. You know better than me, but I on second thought I believe she gets the GI Bill that was in effect when she entered the service. In January 75 that would have been the old GI Bill with the looser restrictions.
Whatever. I’m not clear on the details after all this time. And it’s tough enough getting to the bottom of things with all the incomplete and misleading answers Rosie provides. I don’t want to add to the confusion.
Alright, I’m back for more rounds with Guin and others.
I make no apologies for my language. This is the pit, isn’t it? I thought such language was de rigeur, just check out the titles, and I didn’t even use the word felch once.
I take no offence at being sworn at either. They’re just adjectives and I just read around them. Taking it personally clouds judgement.
OK Guin et. al. Did you check out your textbooks? What kind of activist rants do you have for me?
I guess I ought to explain in more detail.
Last night when I saw Diane’s link to the MGIB site, I started wondering. I served more or less contemporaneously with Rosie. I was in the Marines during 74-78, got out for a few years, and ended up back in the service again during 82-85. And I don’t remember being covered by the MGIB.
This morning I hunted down the old paperwork packages on VA bennies that I was given upon discharge (Honorable) in both 78 and 85. In both instances, the section on Educational Assistance (GI Bill) says something along the line of: “If you were discharged or released from service under conditions other than dishonorable, you may be eligible for education benefits under the GI bill if…” and so on about serving at least 180 days between such and such dates.
So this would tend to support Rosie’s version of events, rather than Diane’s. However, Diane may yet correct me, which would be fine with me. Those bennies packages are rather simplistic, and the info might be misleading.
By the way, if Rosie had e-mailed in her SSN as promised, Diane presumably would have drummed up all the pertinent info on Rosie from her files at work, and Rosie’s GI Bill status would have been at her fingertips. Diane made a friendly offer to help Rosie confirm her military status for the rest of us in a confidential setting, strictly as a favor. Rosie enthusiastically accepted, and then Rosie made a big show of being unable to get the information to Diane. Pulled into the middle of this debate, Diane eventually ended up checking Rosie’s GI Bill status without the proper background information on Rosie herself. All she had were Rosie’s service dates and an Internet search.
So if Diane got it wrong, her only fault is that she “fed the troll” and got sucked into a situation where she was looking up esoteric info without the aid of the usual background information and work resources and files.
Rosie trolls by offering vague, inflated stories about her military experience which practically scream for fact-checking. When challenged on them, she only gives out information in dribs and drabs, scaling back her story in the meantime. Eventually, by the time you have enough information to begin checking her background, the story is near enough to the truth that it more or less stands up.
Example: Rosie began by saying she was persecuted from the service by “The Man” because of PMS. When pushed for details, she told some story about getting in trouble with a Colonel over the purchase of $20,000 of safety equipment. When pushed further, she finally admitted she was tossed out because she couldn’t stay within the service weight limits.
To me, it sounds as though Rosie was indeed in the service, but the time she spent there was uneventful and utterly mundane. Now, 15 years later, she runs around acting like some kind of uber-Rambo, screaming for blood, calling everyone cowards, and trying to mystify people with her Vietnam-era veteran status. When pushed for details, she is eventually truthful about her less-than-honorable service record; however, it takes a lot of pushing to get even the simplest data from her. I assume she gets a big kick out of getting everyone in a fuss about her service record and playing dumb when asked to back up her record with the appropriate data.
Yes, it does indeed seem that Rosie was in the service. But she’s still a troll. She gets everyone worked up and then she misleads, stonewalls, exagerrates, baits. She’s still a troll, and I’m of the opinion that trolls shouldn’t be fed.
I mistyped Clinton… (read it 3 times and still overlooked it), it was Carter in office at the time… I was there 81-82. And even though your reference says we gave it back earlier, it wasnt until 82 that it became ‘official’. There are hundreds of mistakes in history books and encyclopedias.
**Rosie, the book lists the period of American occupation as 1945-1972. ** Okinawa was not officially returned until 1982…that’s what some said the riots were really about… that we had promised to return the island 10 years before and hadn’t yet…so Carter finally did.
I am trying to understand how you could have witnessed these events several years before you were actually there. Comments?
Because they might have taken place in the 70s, but they also took place during 1982, when I was there. I was in Okinawa from April 1981 to October 1982.
**Given your misstatements of these facts, can you perhaps understand why we are skeptical of any of the assertions you have made in this thread? **
I made a typo and got a President mixed up… one demon-crat looks like another to me… hahahhhaa. However, my statement about the events that occurred did happen and I was witness to them. There were dozens of directives issued during that time warning everyone to travel in groups when off-base, stay out of Naha unless absolutely necessary, etc. Those of us that lived off-base (I lived off-base out Gate 3) were offered on-base housing during the ‘duration’ of the ‘disturbances’. So, no offense, but keep researching.
**
[/QUOTE]
I think the thread UncleBeer linked to explains a lot. Well, not explains, exactly, as it is rather mystifying in its details, but it makes clear first the connection between Rosie and the other trolls, and also her mental state.