
I know y'all will find this hard to believe, but this guy is nigh on impossible to pin down on stuff. We know from his IVAW page that he served with "C Troop, 1st Squadron, 1st Regiment of Dragoons" in OIF 1. Presumably he is talking about C Troop, 1st Squadron, 1st Cavalry REG, 1st Armored Division, right?
Anyway, he arrived in late October of '03 and left in late July of '04. He says in one of his speeches:
three of my best friends died there. The first burned to death when his tank was hit by a rocket, the second was shot by a sniper, and the third was blown to pieces by an IED.
Now, he doesn't make it clear there that they are in that unit, but the implication seems to be that they were.
Later on he does a farewell to them or is it perhaps to others who died there? It is unclear, but he seems to have an affinity for the first guy killed but not the second or third. He uses first initials, and I am posting here so you can see it all:
The first of you was the hardest for me. A short and narrow youth, of pale skin and black hair. Twenty one years old when his tank was struck by armor piercing rockets, fired from some fool's shoulder. His three comrades escaped the flames, they bailed out of their hatches and made themselves scarce I imagine, but M_____ never emerged from the gunner's seat. A teenage girl in rural Michigan became a widow, having only seen her husband twice since their marriage.
Then came P_____. A man I feared and hated in many ways, a stern man, a loud man. Every morning down the hall he stormed; tall black boots strapped and buckled and shined to perfection, trousers hiked just above the regulation waist, chest like a whiskey barrel, and massive hands that could touch both sides of the hallway at once. Both of those arms were taken from him, along with one stout booted leg. You warned that some of us would not survive, and you were right, but we never thought They would get You. I imagine the explosion lifting him into the air, I imagine Their cheers, I imagine his last blank stare into the rain clouds, thinking his last thoughts, uttering his last [expletive]'
The third was in his middle thirties, a troublesome sergeant, a packrat. Two or three times he was promoted to staff-sergeant, each time quickly demoted. He'd been a good boxer in his youth, and still liked to fight, and he was also a believer in heavy drinking, both of which caused him much trouble in the service. I knew him for the length of time it took him to ascend from sergeant to staff-sergeant, and then back again, one full turn. He was tormented by many demons in life, the final demon, I hope, being that sniper's bullet which pierced his body and left him to bleed in the pale dust. I think not of old H_____ himself, but of the young soldiers under his care. They probably hated him, despised him even, but what on earth will they do without him?
He also mentions a guy killed long after he was there, and I have atleast verified that death, although the guy at this point was in an entirely different unit.
Anyway, I also found this letter from a commander in a different troop, same squadron who discusses casulaties:
As far as casualties are concerned we are doing alright but we have lost a few of our brothers. One Mortarman (C Troop) to a land mine that his vehicle hit, two Scouts (A Troop) during operations with SF units, and our former CSM.
Obviously, those casualties don't match Hicks' stories. I located the names of all the guys who died in that unit using this website.
The CSM was Eric F. Cooke, killed on Christmas Eve, 2003. By every account, a wonderful human being.
The mortarman, and first killed was Michael J. Deutsch. Like in the first listing of Hicks', note that he said "M____" which fits. And he was also 21. But Michael was from Iowa, not Michigan. Although that is not dispositive either way, the next factoid is vitally important. And he died on July 31, fully 2 months before asshat arrived in country.
The 2 scouts were Robert D. Roberts (CPL) and Damian S. Bushart (PFC). Were they his friends? They don't match the other postings above.
So help, am I not finding the right casulaties, do his stories not make sense? Can anyone make heads or tales of this cat?
ON EDIT: Here's another bit that strikes me as odd, or just that he plays fast and loose with language.
Every few minutes I fall asleep for a moment, a fraction of a second, awakened only when my chin touches the bulky kevlar neck guard that is fastened tightly over my throat; I’m the only one in my platoon who still wears it. The cloth is oily and slick and brown, coated with two months of sweat and filth, has it really only been two months?
So we know that he got there in October, and we know from another speech that he was issued his kevlar in country, which means by this point it is atleast December. So what is with this line:
It's four in the afternoon right now back home, my friends graduated from high school a few months ago when I was still in basic training...
Dude, isn't graduation usually like in the May-June time frame? Which would make it atleast 6 months prior. Does "few" really refer to up to six? If I drink six beers, is that only a few? Just curious.
EDIT x2: Go here and listen to his interview. Lots of material to go off here. Great stuff, like how his support for the mission went into the crapper the day he arrived at Basic Training at Ft Knox. Um....that was because why exactly? They gave you top secret info on day 1, or you suddenly realized the Army wasn't for you. Utterly ridiculous, this guy is about the most selfish human being I've ever encountered.
And compare that yarn with this one:
I joined to defend the people of the United States, and when I found our Army was not doing that, and that I was in fact being used to further the goals of evil men, I began to question my involvement in such an organization.
You figured that out on day 1 of basic? This dude is seriously intuitive. A regular Ms Cleo this guy is.
UPDATE: At 19 mins into the interview he claims not to have had any friends killed. Compare that with "three of my best friends died there."
OK....new we are into it. At about the 20 minute mark he talks about his best friend being killed. He knew the guy from basic. The guy died long after Hicks left country. He was from Michigan, no name is mentioned. Also, a Drill Sgt died and 2 other Sgts he knew were killed. "None of them were close friends" is what he says in the interview. So, they became best friends after they died apparently, but before he did his speech which is memorialized on the IVAW site.
There are a whole bunch of other inconsistencies. He says that his unit was in country for a year and then got extended for 4 more months. The extention occurred in April. So the unit went in country obviously the previous April. But he claims that his unit arrived in country at the same time that he started basic. Does that mean he did not graduate high school? That seems odd. Possible I suppose.
Then there is the reaction of the locals to the Americans. "Most the young people really liked us." Later on though, he claims that everyone hated them, young, old etc. If pretty sure if you asked him 4 times today what he had for breakfast, you would get 4 different answers.
And More:
There wasn't a whole lot of action for us, each platoon ran two 4 hour patrols a day, and 6, 8, or 12 hour gate and tower guard (yes we had to guard the same elitists who looked down on us from their Jim Crow pedestals).






25 comments:
OMG TSO - you absolutely nailed this idiot to the wall!! What a freakin' liar and how dare he stand up at these "protest" rallies and give speeches when he is nothing more than a 2bit trouble-maker looking for an easy way out.
I BEG all of our Vets to stand up to these people. I know most of their claims are ridiculous but it's what gets play in the media and saturates the far left blogs. In this age of new media we have got to counter these guys with the facts and expose them for the liars they are.
TSO - You did a great job and should be very proud. One liar down... many more to go!
Basic synopsis: I killed somebody and didn't like it, so now I'm against the war. I didn't like my chain of command and I had absolutely no sense of self-control, so I beat on the locals.
Not a big deal, guys have been saying that since the first time one of us bashed the other over the head with a rock.
There's a reason we have the saying "War is hell". Anybody who actually likes it is much psycho, the rest of us just do what we have to because we know nobody else will.
I've said it before, I'll say it again: surviving a tour is easy, dealing with the psychological effects is hard.
I stand on my statements.
I honestly do not understand why the things I've said are so unbelievable, what reason have I to lie? I volunteered when I was seventeen, I wanted to fight in Iraq, I would have enlisted on September 11th but I was too young of course. I went to Iraq ready to die because I believed so strongly in what I thought I was doing. Look at me now. Obviously something happened over there that dramatically changed my mind and completely altered me as a person. Now what do you think that was?
I challenge anyone in this world to produce a scout or a tanker who was in C Troop, 1-1 Cavalry in Baghdad in 2003 and 2004 who knows me and will look me in the eyes and say that I am lying.
That man does not exist,
Clifton Hicks
Which statements do you stand by Clifton? The ones where you lost your three best friends, or the ones where you didn't lose anyone that close to you?
Yes, something dramatic happened to you. It happened to every one of us. But you entered basic as an immature kid, and came out the other side as only slightly less immature. You have a complete inability to tell the truth. That is evidenced by the shifting stories.
I can't help but note the different settings for your different stories. At an anti-war rally, it is all sorrow and horror and everyone hated us. On the radio, the kids liked you even though members of your unit allegedly engaged in horrible acts. I think you want to be accepted by others so badly that your story changes based on who you are talking to. I have no problem with either of your stories, but atleast have the decency and honor to pick one and stick to it.
Mr. Hicks-
I challenge you to to produce a scout or a tanker who was in C Troop, 1-1 Cavalry in Baghdad in 2003 and 2004 who knows you and will look you in the eyes and say that you are telling the truth.
Does that man exist?
I served in Baghdad with Clifton from 03-04. He was a hero in every sense of the word. He killed lots of peeps, then realized he was wrong, and became a God to the people. They called him Clifton Maud'dib, and carried him through the streets yelling Hosannah. Everything I say is true.
Love,
Not Clifton Hicks.
Okay, can we get someone to confirm whose name is not "Not Clifton Hicks"? How about a name, rank, unit affiliation, MOS, something, anything ohter than "anonymous"?
I will confirm it, he was the best troop I ever had.
Donald Rumsfeld
Hey Sniper,
Forget about anyone credible from his former unit validating his horse shit. That person doesn't exist. The kid is a copycat Beauchamp, without the editorial backup of a screed like the New Republic. Instead he's left to flounder on the IVAW site, with the rest of the disgruntled "my-First Sergeant didn't like me" crowd.
As a sergeant in the active Army, I am appalled that you are insulting a former combat troop and questioning his integrity. How dare you, sir? Shame, sir, shame.
This PFC may have an opinion you disagree with. Disagree with his opinion all you want, but I cannot believe you would question his combat service in the way you are.
By doing so you show yourself as against the troops still serving in the sandbox right now and against all the troops who have returned.
I eagerly await your apology to this troop, to myself, and to the military service I belong to and which you have insulted.
-Sergeant Selena D. Coppa,
United States Army.
As a former active duty Staff Sergeant and combat veteran, I am appalled that you would blindly support the inconsistencies of PVT Hicks various versions of his service while simultaneously questioning the integrity of any who might bring his service into question. What you are attempting to do (very blatantly and very poorly, I might add) is to try to transfer the shameful behavior of one vet onto the characters of several others. If the status of “combat veteran” is one that bestows upon the bearer the inability to lie, then logic dictates that we also cannot lie. That being the case, what we have here would now be what is called a “paradox”. According to you, a combat vet’s integrity is watertight. We have questioned the various versions of PVT Hicks’ stories. Hicks is a combat veteran, so he cannot be wrong. We are combat veterans, therefore we cannot be wrong. Do you see the fallacy of your argument?
There are many “vets” that are now or have been in the IVAW camp whose records are questionable at best. Perhaps you would prefer it if we just blindly listened to the fabrications of shams such as Scott Beauchamp or Jesse MacBeth without questioning their integrity? Perhaps we should just ignore inconsistencies in their stories and those of their ilk and just swallow every drop of contradiction like so much cyanide laced Kool-Aid without ever questioning the veracity of their claims? No, we should not. It’s called due diligence and it is taught (or it at least it was when I went through) at the Primary Leadership Development Course. You are taught to question that which does not add up, such as saying that you lost three of your best friends there, and it turns out that two were former drill sergeants.
I also take issue with your attempt to make us look “against the troops still serving in the sandbox right now and against all the troops who have returned”, especially considering the work that is done on behalf of veterans and active duty soldiers alike by the writers here on a daily basis. Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion. In fact I relish the thought of lucid and well thought discussions with people from opposing viewpoints, but I would like those discussions to be based on a mutual understanding that the stories upon which they base their arguments cannot be malleable tools that change with the ebb and flow of the discussion. In short, pick a story and stick to it.
As for taking offence at what we have said here, that is your right. As for demanding an apology for those perceived offences, that is also your right. (You won’t get one, but it’s your right to ask.) Acting as a representative of all combat vets, however, is not… especially considering that the very people with whom you are conducting discourse are combat veterans. So in the realm of “how dare you”, how dare you try to speak for everyone in the military and rob them of their God given right to self determination and free will? How dare you tell us that we have no right to question that which is obviously flawed? How dare you tell us what opinions we can and cannot have? And how dare you make demands on behalf of the entire US Military when you have not been given a mandate from the people to do so?
And as for the apology to that troop, you, and the military: We will not apologize for pointing out inconsistencies in anyone’s story. We will not apologize for voicing our opinions. We will not apologize for serving soldiers and veterans every day. And we will most certainly not apologize to the US military for the service we have rendered and continue to render on a daily basis because of the baseless arguments and ridiculous demands of one misguided buck sergeant floundering in a sea of valorous Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines who are actually out there trying to make a difference.
Good day.
Actually, I wouldn't have even gone that far. SGT Coppa. take the time to read the missive from Pvt Hicks entitled Open Letter to Vets For Freedom. You will see that he not only attacks the combat servcie of VFF but also directly places his in question by ranking it highly superior.
I await your apology for jumping to conclusions.
Sniper:
If you want to point out valid and real inconsistencies in the PFC's story, that is fine. My problems are when you seem to be nitpicking his statements in order to make him an actual liar.
The kid says "a few months" and means six? Good god, alert the presses! I've never heard a junior enlisted (or even above sometimes) talk with fuzzy time! No, wait, actually I have. They say "a few days" to mean anytime in the last month, "a few months" can mean anything in the last year. If you are indeed a former staff sergeant, then you should know that.
As far as I'm reading from your excerpts, the PFC never said that the deaths were all in his unit, nor even that he witnessed all of them.
Calling him "the most selfish human being you've ever encountered" because his support for the Army slid in Basic Training...it just seems like you're reaching. If you have some valid points to make about his accuracy, please, by all means, make them. But don't resort to namecalling.
The kid has conflicted feelings about people that died-first feeling close, then not. That happens. We lost a SPC. He used to be squared away, but after he did IED work, he was a little messed up. So sometimes I'll talk about him as a great soldier-sometimes, as an example of a bad soldier. Why? Because the SPC was both. At one point he was a squared away kid. At one point he was not. He's not around anymore, so there's no 'what he is now' to compare off, only different flashpoints of what he used to be. I wouldn't be surprised if this is what PFC Hicks experienced.
The tag you used is also completely uncalled for. "Clifton Hicks is a first class no talent assclown"? If you are indeed a former staff sergeant, then at least you are not just some civilian bashing on something you've never been through, but it does make me question your professionalism.
My argument is not that combat vets are never wrong. My argument is that civilians (and even former vets) don't have the right to nitpick their service without some factual basis. I'd like to see a /real/ inaccuracy, rather than "oh, he said a few months, but it was really six" type stuff.
While I would never disparage your service, as I know nothing about it (and in fact, am even taking you at your word here, though I have no proof), I can question what service you are rendering 'today', by badmouthing some PFC who happened to come back and be against the war. Is that really such an offense that a former staff sergeant has to take aim at a PFC? Seriously, is that what we've come to? Is the new mission talking about junior enlisted on websites?
You claim not to be willing to apologize for 'pointing out inconsistencies'. Will you at least apologize for the tone you are using, the tone that, judging by the PFC response to you, he does not deserve? It's a shameful day indeed when a PFC shows more bearing than a former SSG.
thus spake ortner:
Honestly, I've never heard of the VFF. It might be a great vets organization, it might not. I won't speak to what it's like, as I have absolutely zero familiarity with it.
The letter from Clifton Hicks to Vets for Freedom is definitely a junior enlisted letter, and that's all I'm going to say about that. He was wrong to call the service of people into question based solely on their political position, yes. But that does not make it okay to compound a wrong with another wrong by doing the same thing over here. The way to defend against something like that is /not/ to sink to the level. It's to simply be professional, and if there's nothing of substance being said, ignore it.
If you are combat vets and sergeants as sniper said, I hold you to a higher standard than I hold a PFC. You at least should know better.
It's like what happens when you have a soldier who is a bit of a dirtbag. You still have to treat them with the fairness you committed to, even if you may personally wish they were out of the service.
You might argue that standards don't apply once you're out, but then how can you apply that standard to PFC Hicks? Who seems to honestly just be being a kid in that letter, especially with the 'retired' stuff(and yes, I can refer to a PFC as a kid without being insulting, because if he was under me, he'd be 'one of my kids')
Once again I’ll have to point up your lack of attention to detail. First and foremost, I didn’t write this post, so every time that you refer to statements that I supposedly made in the post (such as your flat out assertion that I posted the tag “Clifton Hicks is a first class no talent assclown”) you are, in fact, in egregious error. This lack of attention to detail is of some concern to me as it leads you to become overwhelmed looking at the trees instead of noticing the forest.
You will notice that, for the most part, we leave most IVAW guys alone. If you serve and are forthright and respectful, we will return the courtesy. When you make comments such as referring to combat veterans who have earned many medals for valor (including one nomination for the medal of Honor) as “lazy, incompetent, cowardly Officers with a handful of brain-dead NCO's to do their dirty work” then yes, we will call you out for the miscreant you are. Making excuses for anyone (even a “kid”) for those kind of crass, baseless, and blatantly false accusations paramount to supporting libel. And his use of another soldier’s death (one he admittedly hated… then loved depending on which version he is telling and to whom) to further the cause of his organization is reprehensible.
Trying to paint me as the “bullying former SSG” won’t work either. We’re both out now and if he’s man enough to write tripe like that, he should be man enough to take the lambasting that is sure to come as a result of it. The funny part is, I didn’t even write it in the first place! All I asked for was for him to pick one story and stick to it.
As for PVT Hicks’ [superior] bearing, allow me to quote him: “maybe you even payed (he misspelled “paid” by the way) a couple dollars that night to get your dick wet in your favorite interpreter girl” and “you had the pleasure of ordering teenage boys to their deaths”… yup, a real scion of honor, respect, and military bearing that one is. So no, I will not apologize for the tone used in any of the posts by myself or others on this blog. In fact, I would say that he’s getting a lot more respect than he deserves considering the tone he’s taken with my colleagues.
It’s a shameful day indeed when an active duty SGT (and I am doing you the same courtesy that you show me in that neither has verified the other’s military record) exerts her efforts to defend someone who, judging from the open letter he posted at the IVAW website, clearly has no respect for anyone who currently continues to bear arms for this country and has clearly crossed the line of good taste and reason.
As for Hicks’ letter being a “junior enlisted letter”, that may be so, but if you allow your junior enlisted troops to talk to you or about you like that, then should not be wearing stripes. In the military, allowing that type of slander to fester unchecked is paramount to dereliction of duty. It’s even more dangerous here in the big civilian world because if that’s the only version people get to see, regardless of who wrote it, that’s exactly what they will believe. And that is exactly what Hicks and IVAW want.
But you know that, don’t you?
I will add to the Sniper's superb missive by saying the following. Regardless of age and rank, Pvt. Hicks is not a "kid." He's a Soldier - or was, before he decided to malign and befoul and embellish his stories to impugn his fellow warriors. I don't care how old he is. He was old enough to volunteer to join the Army. He was old enough to train and be sent to a warzone. He was old enough to take advantage of the benefits afforded to our vets. He is, therefore, old enough to bear responsibility for the words he writes.
I am a Noncommissioned Officer in the United States Army. I just back from an 18-month tour of active duty with the Virginia National Guard. I have seen a lot of immature behavior from my junior enlisted Soldiers. But I would NEVER allow them to show the disrespect, disregard and utter disdain for those with whom they serve, those appointed over him and the uniform he wears. This is not typical junior enlisted behavior. This is the behavior of a typical self entitled brat who joined the military, found out it wasn't all fun and games and proceeded to take out his bitterness and lack of character on all with whom he served.
And finally, it certainly sounds to me like Hicks is embellishing his stories to give himself more credibility to compensate for lack of factual evidence for his political views. He's also using his Army service to bolster his political credibility. While he's entitled to whatever political views he may want to hold, he certainly is not entitled to hide behind the uniform in order to support his politics. That is part of the reason why statements, political speech and participation in political events while in uniform is strictly forbidden in the military. While Hicks is no longer in the military, the idea is the same. He's using his service and the uniform he wore to bolster the credibility of his political statements. He's using the uniform as a shield to hide from criticism as he maligns his fellow Soldiers. That is unacceptable, and he'll be called on it every time.
Why don't we stop harping on this "kid" being a former soldier and Enlisted man. What he is now is a spokesman for a supposedly "Major" veterans organization. I'm not attacking him for his military prowess, I am attacking him for statements he made as a spokesman for an organization. I'm not willing to give him a free ride just because he's a former junior enlistedman. When he is a spokesperson for an organuization he immediately insinuates himself into the big leagues, and thus is fair game.
Still standing on, by, next to, and around every single one of my prior statements, regardless of how many National Guard lifers and internet nerds are twisting my words and correcting my spelling.
FTA
- Klifftun Hikx
Which statements?!?!
You tried to paint us as "National Guard lifers". I had ten years in on active before you even walked into the recruiter's office. After I went Guard, I had another four years on active duty. In fact, I have taken craps that had more time in service than you. And I've been in more combat zones than you and most of your IVAW cohorts, so pretty much anything you say other than a clarification of which contradicting statements that you made are true is just prattle.
Fuck cock balls nerps nippers nipply nipples cunties.
Nasty Girl Lifers!
Unlike most of you uninformed individuals, I personally know Clifton Hicks. I happened to discover this blog-off while searching for civil war photos. I am appalled by the ways in which you criticize someone who has served and fought for our country. It seems as though these washed up war junkies (E.G. the sniper, cool name btw, bet it gets you plenty Internet pussy) have nothing better to do with their miserable lives than to babble about inconsistencies of war stories. I truly feel sorry for the individuals whom have witnessed the casualties of this "war", but you are NOT in any way shape or form freedom fighters. Although I greatly respect those willing to fight and die for our country, I do not however support our troops stationed in Iraq or any other conflict zone whom act as robots lacking common sense and compassion for fellow man. To be a freedom fighter you must fight for freedom. Yet this is not being accomplished in Iraq. You are neither fighting for the freedoms of us American’s nor those of the Iraqi people. So do not give yourselves so much credit. Anyone can join the army so don’t act you are God’s gift to the world just because you signed your soul to the government.
SNIPER - I could care less how many years you spent in the sand because if you had any greymatter sense you would have put you mind towards something more important than enlisting in a government agency that revolves around killing people. I support all armed forces dedicated to preserving the safety and security of the nation, but I MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT support anyone who does not have the decency to identify the difference between what is right and wrong and rise up above immorality. Any member of the armed forces who has the audacity to carry out an order that they know in their heart is inherently wrong deserves nothing better than the painful and humiliating death suffered by hundreds of innocent Iraqis in Abu Ghrab and other such military prisons. This war is not a means of national security rather a means of controlling our fellow man. Do you all think that it is some big coincidence that all of our allies have pulled out by now? I think not.
REGARDLESS of the inconsistencies in his stories can you not see that he has good intentions? Why support a war that encourages rape, torture, oppression, abuse, and other countless unconstitutional ideals? Aren't these the types of things that we as mankind are trying to eliminate in Iraq and around the world? Then why are our troops and officers displaying the same disgraceful acts that we do not condone? Tell me that. Why do our officials in Washington permit tactics such as water boarding when at the same time using it as grounds for persecution of other peoples? Seems a bit hypocritical.
We are all Gods’ children regardless of rank, race, religion, social-class, or any other way in which we choose to categorize individuals. All I ask is that anyone reading this post open your eyes to what is happening around you and do not let the haze of the media and politicians cloud your views. As for sniper and all you other bastards who want to badmouth my friend and I, do the world a favor and go inside your trailers and off yourselves. Try laying down your guns and macho-egos and picking up a book or a joint for that matter. Rock on inbreds
I would post my real name but I am afraid one of you neo-nazi war junkies would track me down and drink my blood like you did to hundreds of innocent Iraqis. Go right ahead and respond to this post with all the disdain and built up hatred in your heart as I know you surely will. But know this, that you will not evoke any feelings of shame from either myself or my good buddy Clif.
One love,
Rastamon
Keep fighting the good fight Clif.
So maybe this is an interesting tad bit of info maybe not. But I am PFC. Damian Bushart's widow. Also a friend of Jill's, Cpl. Robert's wife. I have no idea who this guy is. Granted yes we were from Michigan and I was left a widow at 19 but that was in every paper in the world. He is just as bad as everyone else. You should see how many people have claimed to be his best friend, "supposedly" had his children (one's he didn't know about) and the 4 + girls that were all supposedly engaged to him.
Yes, it is very interesting.
My sincere thoughts go out to you and Ms Roberts. I've seen the phenomena you refer to and it makes me sick everytime.
My first toast on Friday night in Vegas will be to your husband and Cpl Roberts.
Post a Comment