Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
appointment to a military academy?

In a previous article, "anon" > said:
>Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
>appointment to a military academy?

You sure he didn't mean "laughing academy"?


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"We all agree that your theory is crazy, but is it crazy enough?"
- Niels Bohr (1885-1962)

"anon" > wrote in news:ebSdnZITb6ev-
:

> Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
> appointment to a military academy?
>
>

Salvation Army?

anon wrote:
> Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
> appointment to a military academy?
>
>
And here starts another loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong
thread...

"anon" wrote ...
> Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
> appointment to a military academy?

I thought everyone knew about that. He was the first to be appointed to the
US Space Academy. His tenure as a Space Cadet ended with the rumors of a
love triangle between Jim, Juan and the school's commandant. Jim sued over
his dismissal and since this suit was to establish the laws involving
relationship in space, it became known as The Complete Space Case. Even
today if you talk to an aviation lawyer about The Complete Space Case, they
automatically think of Jim.

Rich

Richard Isakson wrote:
> "anon" wrote ...
>
>>Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
>>appointment to a military academy?
>
>
> I thought everyone knew about that. He was the first to be appointed to the
> US Space Academy. His tenure as a Space Cadet ended with the rumors of a
> love triangle between Jim, Juan and the school's commandant. Jim sued over
> his dismissal and since this suit was to establish the laws involving
> relationship in space, it became known as The Complete Space Case. Even
> today if you talk to an aviation lawyer about The Complete Space Case, they
> automatically think of Jim.
>
> Rich
>
>
I can even see him running around Florida in a Diaper also.:-)

In a previous article, "Richard Isakson" > said:
>"anon" wrote ...
>> Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
>> appointment to a military academy?
>
>I thought everyone knew about that. He was the first to be appointed to the
>US Space Academy. His tenure as a Space Cadet ended with the rumors of a

Even today, all his teachers will swear that he did nothing at school
except take up space.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"It is my prayer that other Americans will fully realize that to condone the
whittling away of the rights of any one minority group is to pave the way for
us all to lose the guarantees of the Constitution" - Harold L. Ickes

> And here starts another loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong
> thread...

In the Zoom saga, I thought this was a bit unique.

Unlike many stories that he dismisses as lies or part of an earlier life we
shouldn't consider, this claim was recent and documented.

I think it is a stepping stone to the FAA revisiting the status of his
medical.

"Richard Riley" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:06:35 -0500, "anon" > wrote:
> In which piece of testimony?

I need to look back to check. I did a quick cut and paste without noting
the date and venue. I like the part where he can't answer decisively if he
had ever been shot.
I'm not sure of recruiting policies at this time, but would Campbell have
actually been considered "inactive" prior to high school graduation? I was
under the impression that an individual would sign a recruitment contract
that would detail enlistment at a date after graduation. I think that it
would be very unlikely that a person could enlist as a private in the Army
and then request an inter-service transfer. It is much more likely that the
Army just tore up the contract, allowing him to pursue enlistment in the Air
Force.

He can't even keep his lies straight. His ego takes over and he claims he
received a nomination to a service academy - then he says his attempt was
unsuccessful. That doesn't make any sense. If you receive a nomination to
a service academy, no military branch would hamper your acceptance. In the
Vietnam era, combat soldiers were plucked out of combat assignments in the
middle of a tour to attend an academy, if nominated.

As those with nominating power do their homework, those nominated to attend
an academy are almost always qualified. Sometimes, a medical problem can
derail a attendance after nomination, but that's pretty much it. I guess
discovery of a criminal record or other such deal-breaker is possible, but I
don't think it happens. That said, I claim that Campbell NEVER recieved a
nomination to attend a service academy. This is the Campbell trap - he
can easily present some story explaining why he didn't attend an academy,
without actually proving that he received a nomination.


Q. And you were only in the service for approximately six or eight months?

A. There was a period of time before that - it was called "inactive." That
was from October of '74, early in my senior year of high school with the
United States Army National Guard, 3rd/104 Armed CAB, that was at the time
- they've since been reassigned. I made a switch from Army to Air Force
in June of that year. I didn't go until November. I was trying rather hard,
and in -fact even succeeded in getting a nomination to one of the service
academies, which was the reason for the period of time with the military.
That attempt was unsuccessful

Q. And Mr. Campbell, you were terminated from the armed services. What was
the reason for that?

A. It was an honorable discharge.

Q. What is your military service number?

A. It would be the same as my social security number - 146524672.

Q. Mr. Campbell, do you have a copy of the record which I gave you - the
Administrator's copy of your medical file?

A. I've got quite a bit of information here. If you'll call my attention to
where it is -

Q. Mr. Campbell, I want to refer you to page 103 of that medical file.
Specifically, I want to draw your attention to Section Number 11, and what
did you indicate was your service? Did you indicate on your application
that you had served with the Air Force or the Army at any time?

A. At the time, I wasn't, though.

Q. At any time did you indicate that you were part of the armed services -
at any time?

A. During the period of time when I was a member

Q. On the application itself, you checked the blank, "None," under -

A. "Extended active duty" - yes.

Q. And you also - you did not put down your military service number. Is
that correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. Now, the next application, on Page 105, you also did not put down any
military service number or indicate any prior military service, did you?

A. That's correct.

Q. And also on your application on Page 107, you again did not indicate any
armed service, did you?

A. Correct.

Q. Mr. Campbell, while you were in the service you were never at Viet Nam,
were you?

A. No, m'am.

Q. And you never received a shrapnel wound to your face, did you?

A. No, m'am. Tree branch, but not shrapnel.

Q. Mr. Campbell, have you ever been wounded in any way?

A. I have been hurt several times in various ways.

Q. Have you ever received a gunshot wound?

A. Not that I know of."

"anon" > wrote in
m:

SNIP
> I'm not sure of recruiting policies at this time, but would
> Campbell have actually been considered "inactive" prior to
> high school graduation? I was under the impression that an
> individual would sign a recruitment contract that would
> detail enlistment at a date after graduation. I think that
>
SNIP

Yes, when you sign up for a delayed enlistment, you were placed
in the Inactive Reserves for X months from the date you sign the
paper. I did that to complete my last two months at ISU in
1968, when I got my draft notice. I remenber receiving my
"Discharge" certificate from the Reserves while in Air Force
Basic Training at Lackland.

Ken

On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:49:32 -0500, "anon" > wrote:

>He can't even keep his lies straight. His ego takes over and he claims he
>received a nomination to a service academy - then he says his attempt was
>unsuccessful. That doesn't make any sense. If you receive a nomination to
>a service academy, no military branch would hamper your acceptance.

The difference is in "nomination" vs. "appointment." Being nominated means your
name was formally submitted to the admissions board, but only a bit more than
one in ten are actually offered admission ("appointment").

Each congresscritter is allowed to have five of his/her nominated cadets in each
of four Academies, and is allowed to nominate up to ten candidates for each
vacancy. In a given year, then, Zoom could claim to be one of 120 or more
nominees. He never does specify which Academy he was supposedly nominated to,
remember.

The big differences is that disproving a claim that someone was *appointed* to
an academy is relatively easy...but thirty years later, disproving someone was
*nominated* is a lot tougher. The New Jersey congressional delegation would have
turned over at least once since then, and minor records such as this are not
likely to have been retained. Even *proving* you were nominated would be tough,
if you hadn't hung on to the letter you received.

Finally, as the Air Force Academy web page says, "Each Senator and
Representative has considerable latitude in awarding nominations..." They can
be awarded in response to excellence, or they can be just a political or
personal favor. The congresscritter is protected from blame; they gain credit
for the nomination, but have complete deniability if their candidates fail to
gain appointment since that's an Academy decision.

Ron Wanttaja

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:49:32 -0500, "anon" > wrote:
>
>>He can't even keep his lies straight. His ego takes over and he claims he

Why bother even figuring it out? Isn't claiming to have found Zoomy telling
a lie about the same as claiming to have found a cow patty in a heavily
stocked pasture? The truth is you're extremely lucky if you walk past him
and don't step into a pile of bull****.

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:49:32 -0500, "anon" > wrote:
> The difference is in "nomination" vs. "appointment." Being nominated
> means your
> name was formally submitted to the admissions board, but only a bit more
> than
> one in ten are actually offered admission ("appointment").


You're right. I confused nominated with appointed. Every friend of my
that was nominated, ended up at an academy, so I didn't notice the
distinction.

I would have known this if I would have pursued an academy that required a
nomination. I was an alternate to attend the only service academy that uses
competitive admissions instead of the nomination/appointment process.

I guess it's possible that somebody owned Campbell's family a favor. You're
right, records would be hard to obtain.

On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 13:18:56 -0500, "anon" > wrote:

>
>"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
>> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:49:32 -0500, "anon" > wrote:
>> The difference is in "nomination" vs. "appointment." Being nominated
>> means your
>> name was formally submitted to the admissions board, but only a bit more
>> than
>> one in ten are actually offered admission ("appointment").
>
>
>You're right. I confused nominated with appointed. Every friend of my
>that was nominated, ended up at an academy, so I didn't notice the
>distinction.

No problem...I sometimes have trouble keeping this stuff straight, too.

I guess the most interesting aspect of this was Campbell's planning. He was
applying to go to one of the most prestigious schools in the US.

Many of us in this newsgroup attended college. Many set their sights high, when
they started to apply; if not deciding on the military route, they tried for
admissions to places like MIT, CALTECH, etc. as well as the less-prestigeous
(and less exclusive) schools. Some got their main target, more had to fall back
on one of their secondary choices.

Zoom was trying to get into one of the most grueling, selective academic
environments there is. What was *his* fallback plan?

He enlisted in the Air Force.

Nothing wrong with that, of course...it's to his credit, really. But it does
look like his academic aspirations were the academy, or nothing.

Odd, really. Any number of civilian schools offer ROTC, where he could have
earned a commission and gone on to flight school. He could even eventually be
offered a regular commission (I was). If he was so sierra hotel that he
"almost" got an academy appointment, he could probably have easily earned a
four-year ROTC scholarship.

But no. Perhaps he thought about going to OCS during his enlistment...it would
work, but he still would have needed a college degree, first. Instead, of
course, his enlistment was terminated after just six months of active duty.

There's another potential reason for the lack of a backup plan: Zoom didn't
think he'd need one.

Consider Dr. Powers' testimony in the SE-4661 testimony...he's talking about the
one of the personality disorders he diagnosed Zoom with: "These might be
feelings of entitlement or deserving, you know, special consideration..." Zoom
may have felt he was entitled to the appointment, that they HAD to give it to
him. If that were so...well, he wouldn't *need* a backup plan, would he?

Re-reading some of the testimony suggests an answer to one of the questions I've
posed here in the past: Why did he enlist in the ARMY national guard, only to
transfer to the Air Force once he graduated from high school?

Note that he never *says* what academy he supposed had been nominated to. We've
all assumed it was the Air Force Academy. What if it was West Point, instead?
It would certainly be closer to home, and would explain why he had joined the
Army Guard prior to starting the application process. Joining the Air Force
might reflect that he'd soured on the Army, if he'd been denied a West Point
appointment.

Anyway, one semi-related event to report: Campbell's attorney has filed the
paperwork stating he's ready to go to trial on the ANN lawsuits against
Controlvision and Liberty Aerospace. AFAIK, trial dates have not yet been set.
Nothing new has been added to SNF docket.

Ron Wanttaja

On Feb 10, 2:20 pm, Ron Wanttaja > wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 13:18:56 -0500, "anon" > wrote:
>
> >"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:49:32 -0500, "anon" > wrote:
> >> The difference is in "nomination" vs. "appointment." Being nominated
> >> means your
> >> name was formally submitted to the admissions board, but only a bit more
> >> than
> >> one in ten are actually offered admission ("appointment").
>
> >You're right. I confused nominated with appointed. Every friend of my
> >that was nominated, ended up at an academy, so I didn't notice the
> >distinction.
>
> No problem...I sometimes have trouble keeping this stuff straight, too.
>
> I guess the most interesting aspect of this was Campbell's planning. He was
> applying to go to one of the most prestigious schools in the US.
>
> Many of us in this newsgroup attended college. Many set their sights high, when
> they started to apply; if not deciding on the military route, they tried for
> admissions to places like MIT, CALTECH, etc. as well as the less-prestigeous
> (and less exclusive) schools. Some got their main target, more had to fall back
> on one of their secondary choices.
>
> Zoom was trying to get into one of the most grueling, selective academic
> environments there is. What was *his* fallback plan?
>
> He enlisted in the Air Force.
>
> Nothing wrong with that, of course...it's to his credit, really. But it does
> look like his academic aspirations were the academy, or nothing.
>
> Odd, really. Any number of civilian schools offer ROTC, where he could have
> earned a commission and gone on to flight school. He could even eventually be
> offered a regular commission (I was). If he was so sierra hotel that he
> "almost" got an academy appointment, he could probably have easily earned a
> four-year ROTC scholarship.
>
> But no. Perhaps he thought about going to OCS during his enlistment...it would
> work, but he still would have needed a college degree, first. Instead, of
> course, his enlistment was terminated after just six months of active duty.
>
> There's another potential reason for the lack of a backup plan: Zoom didn't
> think he'd need one.
>
> Consider Dr. Powers' testimony in the SE-4661 testimony...he's talking about the
> one of the personality disorders he diagnosed Zoom with: "These might be
> feelings of entitlement or deserving, you know, special consideration..." Zoom
> may have felt he was entitled to the appointment, that they HAD to give it to
> him. If that were so...well, he wouldn't *need* a backup plan, would he?
>
> Re-reading some of the testimony suggests an answer to one of the questions I've
> posed here in the past: Why did he enlist in the ARMY national guard, only to
> transfer to the Air Force once he graduated from high school?
>
> Note that he never *says* what academy he supposed had been nominated to. We've
> all assumed it was the Air Force Academy. What if it was West Point, instead?
> It would certainly be closer to home, and would explain why he had joined the
> Army Guard prior to starting the application process. Joining the Air Force
> might reflect that he'd soured on the Army, if he'd been denied a West Point
> appointment.
>
> Anyway, one semi-related event to report: Campbell's attorney has filed the
> paperwork stating he's ready to go to trial on the ANN lawsuits against
> Controlvision and Liberty Aerospace. AFAIK, trial dates have not yet been set.
> Nothing new has been added to SNF docket.
>
> Ron Wanttaja

Many things don't quite add up. For instance...

>Q. What is your military service number?
>
>A. It would be the same as my social security number - 146524672.

When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the service start using
the Social Security Number as the Military Service Number? It sure
wasn't used when I was in the Air Force.

>Q. Mr. Campbell, I want to refer you to page 103 of that medical file.
>Specifically, I want to draw your attention to Section Number 11, and what
>did you indicate was your service? Did you indicate on your application
>that you had served with the Air Force or the Army at any time?
>
>A. At the time, I wasn't, though.

Wasn't through...with what? Was he or wasn't he?

>Q. At any time did you indicate that you were part of the armed services -
>.at any time?
>
>A. During the period of time when I was a member

Member of what? Very strange.

>Q. Now, the next application, on Page 105, you also did not put down any
>military service number or indicate any prior military service, did you?
>
>A. That's correct.

No military service number because...he was never in servoce or what?

>Q. And also on your application on Page 107, you again did not indicate any
>armed service, did you?
>
>A. Correct.

So was he lying on the application? If so, why? Unless that
discharge was less than claimed.

>Q. And you never received a shrapnel wound to your face, did you?
>
>A. No, m'am. Tree branch, but not shrapnel.

One of his fabricated stories caught up with him and he got called on
it. How friggen funny....No, mam. Tree branch wahwahwah

>Q. Mr. Campbell, have you ever been wounded in any way?
>
>A. I have been hurt several times in various ways.

Yeah, stubbed his toe once and hit his thumb with a hammer but
WOUNDED..what total bull****. No, he has never been wounded or even
close to anything that might wound him.

>Q. Have you ever received a gunshot wound?
>
>A. Not that I know of."

Not that I know of? If you had ever received a gunshot wound you
would damn well know if you had. What the hell kind of answer it
that?


When so many things don't add up, there is usually a very good reason.

On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR" > wrote:

>Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
>
>>Q. What is your military service number?
>>
>>A. It would be the same as my social security number - 146524672.
>
>When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the service start using
>the Social Security Number as the Military Service Number? It sure
>wasn't used when I was in the Air Force.

And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had many arguments about it,
too. :-)

Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to the SSAN. I went in the
Air Force about the same time as Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.

Ron Wanttaja

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
> On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR" > wrote:
>
>> Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
>>
>>> Q. What is your military service number?
>>>
>>> A. It would be the same as my social security number - 146524672.
>> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the service start using
>> the Social Security Number as the Military Service Number? It sure
>> wasn't used when I was in the Air Force.
>
> And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had many arguments about it,
> too. :-)
>
> Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to the SSAN. I went in the
> Air Force about the same time as Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/1960.html

Skip down to July 1, 1969.

It seems like a McNamara-ism (whiz-kid style business decision), but it
actually happened after his tenure as SECDEF and during the first Nixon
administration.

Were you in the USAF or the Army Air Corps? ;)

Whwn I was in the USAF (1985-1988), we used our SSN.

Scott


BobR wrote:


>
>
> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the service start using
> the Social Security Number as the Military Service Number? It sure
> wasn't used when I was in the Air Force.
>

On Feb 10, 8:16 pm, Scott > wrote:
> Were you in the USAF or the Army Air Corps? ;)
>
> Whwn I was in the USAF (1985-1988), we used our SSN.
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> BobR wrote:
>
> > When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the service start using
> > the Social Security Number as the Military Service Number? It sure
> > wasn't used when I was in the Air Force.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Air Force but apparently things changed since I was in from 1965 till
1969. We did NOT use our Social Security Number at that time. I
guess a lot of things changed in those 20 years.

On Feb 10, 4:55 pm, Jim Carriere > wrote:
> Ron Wanttaja wrote:
> > On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR" > wrote:
>
> >> Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
>
> >>> Q. What is your military service number?
>
> >>> A. It would be the same as my social security number - 146524672.
> >> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the service start using
> >> the Social Security Number as the Military Service Number? It sure
> >> wasn't used when I was in the Air Force.
>
> > And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had many arguments about it,
> > too. :-)
>
> > Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to the SSAN. I went in the
> > Air Force about the same time as Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.
>
> http://www.ssa.gov/history/1960.html
>
> Skip down to July 1, 1969.
>
> It seems like a McNamara-ism (whiz-kid style business decision), but it
> actually happened after his tenure as SECDEF and during the first Nixon
> administration.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That was a surprise. I was in 1954-1975. I was thinking it was late
50s or early 60s. Still remember my old AF number.

Harry K

Harry K wrote:
> On Feb 10, 4:55 pm, Jim Carriere > wrote:
>> Ron Wanttaja wrote:
>>> On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR" > wrote:
>>>> Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
>>>>> Q. What is your military service number?
>>>>> A. It would be the same as my social security number - 146524672.
>>>> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the service start using
>>>> the Social Security Number as the Military Service Number? It sure
>>>> wasn't used when I was in the Air Force.
>>> And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had many arguments about it,
>>> too. :-)
>>> Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to the SSAN. I went in the
>>> Air Force about the same time as Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.
>> http://www.ssa.gov/history/1960.html
>>
>> Skip down to July 1, 1969.
>>
>> It seems like a McNamara-ism (whiz-kid style business decision), but it
>> actually happened after his tenure as SECDEF and during the first Nixon
>> administration.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> That was a surprise. I was in 1954-1975. I was thinking it was late
> 50s or early 60s. Still remember my old AF number.
>
> Harry K
>
I was drafted in 67, issued an Army Service Number, it was changed to
SSN in 68 before heading off to South Viet Nam. Remember it well,
drilled into my head.

George V.

George > wrote in
t:

> Harry K wrote:
>> On Feb 10, 4:55 pm, Jim Carriere
>> > wrote:
>>> Ron Wanttaja wrote:
>>>> On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
>>>>>> Q. What is your military service number?
>>>>>> A. It would be the same as my social security number -
>>>>>> 146524672.
>>>>> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the
>>>>> service start using the Social Security Number as the
>>>>> Military Service Number? It sure wasn't used when I
>>>>> was in the Air Force.
>>>> And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had
>>>> many arguments about it, too. :-)
>>>> Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to the
>>>> SSAN. I went in the Air Force about the same time as
>>>> Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.
>>> http://www.ssa.gov/history/1960.html
>>>
>>> Skip down to July 1, 1969.
>>>
>>> It seems like a McNamara-ism (whiz-kid style business
>>> decision), but it actually happened after his tenure as
>>> SECDEF and during the first Nixon administration.- Hide
>>> quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> That was a surprise. I was in 1954-1975. I was thinking
>> it was late 50s or early 60s. Still remember my old AF
>> number.
>>
>> Harry K
>>
> I was drafted in 67, issued an Army Service Number, it was
> changed to SSN in 68 before heading off to South Viet Nam.
> Remember it well, drilled into my head.
>
> George V.

The Air Force changed to the SSN shortly after I started
basic training in February 1968. We had a service number the
day we started, but by the time we got to stenciling our
number on our underware it was the first initial of the last
name and the last four of your SSN. Since the first week was
spent as a Rainbow Flight (remember that? :( ), it was in
February.

Ken

On Feb 11, 7:57 am, Ken Moffett > wrote:
> George > wrote . net:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Harry K wrote:
> >> On Feb 10, 4:55 pm, Jim Carriere
> >> > wrote:
> >>> Ron Wanttaja wrote:
> >>>> On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR"
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>>> Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
> >>>>>> Q. What is your military service number?
> >>>>>> A. It would be the same as my social security number -
> >>>>>> 146524672.
> >>>>> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the
> >>>>> service start using the Social Security Number as the
> >>>>> Military Service Number? It sure wasn't used when I
> >>>>> was in the Air Force.
> >>>> And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had
> >>>> many arguments about it, too. :-)
> >>>> Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to the
> >>>> SSAN. I went in the Air Force about the same time as
> >>>> Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.
> >>>http://www.ssa.gov/history/1960.html
>
> >>> Skip down to July 1, 1969.
>
> >>> It seems like a McNamara-ism (whiz-kid style business
> >>> decision), but it actually happened after his tenure as
> >>> SECDEF and during the first Nixon administration.- Hide
> >>> quoted text -
>
> >>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >> That was a surprise. I was in 1954-1975. I was thinking
> >> it was late 50s or early 60s. Still remember my old AF
> >> number.
>
> >> Harry K
>
> > I was drafted in 67, issued an Army Service Number, it was
> > changed to SSN in 68 before heading off to South Viet Nam.
> > Remember it well, drilled into my head.
>
> > George V.
>
> The Air Force changed to the SSN shortly after I started
> basic training in February 1968. We had a service number the
> day we started, but by the time we got to stenciling our
> number on our underware it was the first initial of the last
> name and the last four of your SSN. Since the first week was
> spent as a Rainbow Flight (remember that? :( ), it was in
> February.
>
> Ken- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That shows you how slow they learned. I went in to the AF in Sept.
68, was assigned RAF #, Stenciled in shorts, then switched to ssn
afterwards. I think some of shorts are still packed away with 3707 in
the band. May be a little ripe by now! Also doubt that they would
come close to fitting. as I recall the number was related year and to
sequencing of classes 68 053 707.

Dean B.

Ken Moffett > wrote in
:

> George > wrote in
> t:
>
>> Harry K wrote:
>>> On Feb 10, 4:55 pm, Jim Carriere
>>> > wrote:
>>>> Ron Wanttaja wrote:
>>>>> On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
>>>>>>> Q. What is your military service number?
>>>>>>> A. It would be the same as my social security number
-
>>>>>>> 146524672.
>>>>>> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the
>>>>>> service start using the Social Security Number as the
>>>>>> Military Service Number? It sure wasn't used when I
>>>>>> was in the Air Force.
>>>>> And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had
>>>>> many arguments about it, too. :-)
>>>>> Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to
the
>>>>> SSAN. I went in the Air Force about the same time as
>>>>> Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.
>>>> http://www.ssa.gov/history/1960.html
>>>>
>>>> Skip down to July 1, 1969.
>>>>
>>>> It seems like a McNamara-ism (whiz-kid style business
>>>> decision), but it actually happened after his tenure as
>>>> SECDEF and during the first Nixon administration.- Hide
>>>> quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>> That was a surprise. I was in 1954-1975. I was thinking
>>> it was late 50s or early 60s. Still remember my old AF
>>> number.
>>>
>>> Harry K
>>>
>> I was drafted in 67, issued an Army Service Number, it was
>> changed to SSN in 68 before heading off to South Viet Nam.
>> Remember it well, drilled into my head.
>>
>> George V.
>
> The Air Force changed to the SSN shortly after I started
> basic training in February 1968. We had a service number
the
> day we started, but by the time we got to stenciling our
> number on our underware it was the first initial of the
last
> name and the last four of your SSN. Since the first week
was
> spent as a Rainbow Flight (remember that? :( ), it was in
> February.
>
> Ken
>

Sorry, I made a mistake on the switch from Service Number to
SSN. I had said February of '68. That was wrong...that was
when
I got married. Anniversary the 25th! It was a year later, Feb
'69 February that I started Basic Training, and switch was
made
to SSN.

Ken

On Feb 11, 12:15 pm, Ken Moffett > wrote:
> Ken Moffett > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > George > wrote in
> t:
>
> >> Harry K wrote:
> >>> On Feb 10, 4:55 pm, Jim Carriere
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> Ron Wanttaja wrote:
> >>>>> On 10 Feb 2007 16:14:45 -0800, "BobR"
> >>>>> > wrote:
> >>>>>> Many things don't quite add up. For instance...
> >>>>>>> Q. What is your military service number?
> >>>>>>> A. It would be the same as my social security number
> -
> >>>>>>> 146524672.
> >>>>>> When did the Air Force, Army, or any branch of the
> >>>>>> service start using the Social Security Number as the
> >>>>>> Military Service Number? It sure wasn't used when I
> >>>>>> was in the Air Force.
> >>>>> And you, Billy Mitchell, and Ben Folois probably had
> >>>>> many arguments about it, too. :-)
> >>>>> Not sure when it was, but the services did switch to
> the
> >>>>> SSAN. I went in the Air Force about the same time as
> >>>>> Zoom, and my SSAN was my service number.
> >>>>http://www.ssa.gov/history/1960.html
>
> >>>> Skip down to July 1, 1969.
>
> >>>> It seems like a McNamara-ism (whiz-kid style business
> >>>> decision), but it actually happened after his tenure as
> >>>> SECDEF and during the first Nixon administration.- Hide
> >>>> quoted text -
>
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >>> That was a surprise. I was in 1954-1975. I was thinking
> >>> it was late 50s or early 60s. Still remember my old AF
> >>> number.
>
> >>> Harry K
>
> >> I was drafted in 67, issued an Army Service Number, it was
> >> changed to SSN in 68 before heading off to South Viet Nam.
> >> Remember it well, drilled into my head.
>
> >> George V.
>
> > The Air Force changed to the SSN shortly after I started
> > basic training in February 1968. We had a service number
> the
> > day we started, but by the time we got to stenciling our
> > number on our underware it was the first initial of the
> last
> > name and the last four of your SSN. Since the first week
> was
> > spent as a Rainbow Flight (remember that? :( ), it was in
> > February.
>
> > Ken
>
> Sorry, I made a mistake on the switch from Service Number to
> SSN. I had said February of '68. That was wrong...that was
> when
> I got married. Anniversary the 25th! It was a year later, Feb
> '69 February that I started Basic Training, and switch was
> made
> to SSN.
>
> Ken- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


That explains it then, that was a few months after I got out of the
Air Force. I didn't know they had switched to the SSN and considering
the considering the Governments distaste for using the SSN for
anything beyond the Social Security Program, I am surprised.

The good ol days....remember about 10 years ago when Badwater made that
webpage about zoomy.....Getting served papers....damn that was funny!


--
Turbo Tiger

"Richard Riley" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:04:34 GMT, "Not Me" >
> wrote:
>
>>The good ol days....remember about 10 years ago when Badwater made that
>>webpage about zoomy.....Getting served papers....damn that was funny!
>
> Badwater always seemed to think it was a joke. I took Zoom much more
> seriously than that. I still do. Every weekend I work behind the
> door that he put a clip full of 9mm through.

Really? I missed this story.

In article >, Richard Riley says...
>
>On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:11:03 -0500, "anon" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Richard Riley" > wrote in message
...
>>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:04:34 GMT, "Not Me" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The good ol days....remember about 10 years ago when Badwater made that
>>>>webpage about zoomy.....Getting served papers....damn that was funny!
>>>
>>> Badwater always seemed to think it was a joke. I took Zoom much more
>>> seriously than that. I still do. Every weekend I work behind the
>>> door that he put a clip full of 9mm through.
>>
>>Really? I missed this story.
>
>An old story.
>
>Something appeared on the internet that he didn't like. He wrote on
>the Internet that he was going to go to California to "take care if it
>- permanantly."
>
>The next week, in the middle of the night, someone fired 8 rounds of
>9mm through the door of my shop.
>
>He then wrote that he'd gone to California and the address was a
>Mexican bar. In fact, my shop is next door to a Mexican bar (which is
>why the rent is cheap, the music comes through the walls.)
>
>So I take him seriously.


WOW I never heard about that one must have been before my time on RAH. Did the
cops ever investigate?


Chuck S
>
>

I missed that story also....

--
Turbo Tiger


>
> WOW I never heard about that one must have been before my time on RAH. Did
> the
> cops ever investigate?
>
>
> Chuck S
>>
>>
>

Don't forget he was also ordained as a satanist priest and has been known to
take a whiz on mother theresa's grave. :)

"anon" > wrote in message
...
> Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
> appointment to a military academy?
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Feb 15, 2:11 pm, "Juan Jimenez" > wrote:
> Don't forget he was also ordained as a satanist priest and has been known to
> take a whiz on mother theresa's grave. :)
>
> "anon" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Did anyone noticed that Zoom claimed, under oath, to have received an
> > appointment to a military academy?
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

At least that would be believable.

Harry K

"Richard Riley" wrote ...
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:11:15 -0400, "Juan Jimenez" >
> wrote:
>
> >Don't forget he was also ordained as a satanist priest and has been known
to
> >take a whiz on mother theresa's grave. :)
>
> Naaa, that was me.
>
> And we prefer to be called "thaumaturge."

For those that don't know, I didn't: Thaumaturge is a Greek word meaning a
person who works miracles. I don't think Zoom has ever claimed that, though
it would explain his resume.

Rich

On Feb 16, 9:06 pm, Richard Riley > wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:45:49 -0800, "Richard Isakson"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >"Richard Riley" wrote ...
> >> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:11:15 -0400, "Juan Jimenez" >
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >Don't forget he was also ordained as a satanist priest and has been known
> >to
> >> >take a whiz on mother theresa's grave. :)
>
> >> Naaa, that was me.
>
> >> And we prefer to be called "thaumaturge."
>
> >For those that don't know, I didn't: Thaumaturge is a Greek word meaning a
> >person who works miracles. I don't think Zoom has ever claimed that, though
> >it would explain his resume.
>
> If we're being literal, it's from the Greek thaumatourgos - thaumat-,
> wonder + ergon, work; one who works wonders. A little rougher
> translation is magician, or sorcerer.
>
> Calling someone a "satinist priest" is like calling them a Mic or a
> Spic. Not just crudely insulting, but hopelessly out of date.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Well, yes, but when his bag of insults only contains ones from the
Grade School playground...

Harry K

>>An old story.
>>
>>Something appeared on the internet that he didn't like. He wrote on
>>the Internet that he was going to go to California to "take care if it
>>- permanantly."
>>
>>The next week, in the middle of the night, someone fired 8 rounds of
>>9mm through the door of my shop.
>>
>>He then wrote that he'd gone to California and the address was a
>>Mexican bar. In fact, my shop is next door to a Mexican bar (which is
>>why the rent is cheap, the music comes through the walls.)
>>
>>So I take him seriously.

"Did the cops ever investigate?" - Chuck S
>
>They took a report. There was no way to tell when it happened, not
>even which day - it was a wood door, and the holes were less than 1/2
>inch on the outside, so nobody noticed, and I didn't go to the shop
>every day. I found it on the weekend, but they might have been there
>for a few hours, or several days. It certainly happened after the bar
>closed, but before anyone was around in the morning. I don't know how
>far the police pursued it. They never came back for more questions.
>They found most of the shell casings, and most of the bullets, though
>one went throught the front door, through an interior wall, out
>through the back door and disappeared.
>
>It was a long time ago, back when Zoom was still on AOL. I miswrote
>earlier; he said he was coming to California in his weekly AOL chat
>session. He wrote about it being a mexican bar in the magazine. If
>you're really interested, Chuck, go back in Tony's archive and look
>about 1992.

======================================
>
>WOW I never heard about that one must have been before my time on RAH.
>
>
>Chuck S

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dear Nefoo Chuck,

After being being resurrected by nurse Tommy at P-Ville,
I was gifted with some very special powers that have since
been confirmed by world famous Catholic nuns.........
Sister Mary Holy Smoke and Sister Mary Hand Grenade.

It seems when events don't historically add up on rah,
my mind's eye sees beyond what some believe to be gospel.

An example that will be of interest to you.....

Zoom didn't start the AOL sessions until about 1994 or 1995 and Tony
never entered the picture until about 1996, at least on a frequent and
serious basis. Prior to mid-1996 Tony was actually on Zoom's side. It
wasn't until after that, that Tony changed his tune.

Further...
Zoom didn't have the money to travel for AOL sessions. Besides why
would you do this when you have access to everyone from your desk
chair. Now, there are actually one or two bullet holes in the shop,
but be assured that they did not come from Capt. Zoom.

I can see the shop in question..... adjacent to the Santa Monica
airport. If you google map address (3025 Airport Ave, Santa Monica
90405) and look at the satellite version you'll see it. For this
address, the green arrow actually is pointing at the south end of the
Barker Hangar. Zoom in (pardon the pun) a lot and if you go diagonally
to the right you can make out an EZ parked on the tarmac and one next
to the building. Berkut is the long building white building with the
EZ/Berkut right behind it. Next to it is another rectangular building
slightly smaller and it looks more gray on top. This building is a
flight school office and next to it is a car repair place, though
highly specialized. There is no Mexican restaurant for miles and there
never has been. Prior to moving to this location, the "shop" was in
the Barker Hangar.

Sincerely,
Unka' BOb -
Kousin to KARNAC* - no relation to Johnny Carson

*KARNAC is an acronym for Knowledge Aided Retrieval in Activity
Context; it is a system being developed in the United States for use
in profiling different categories of TERRORIST ATTACKS to determine
the components of possible future terrorist incidents.

In article >, Barnyard BOb says...
Thanks Unka Bob

I used to visit the chat rooms back then but I guess I started on AOL when I
posted my first "Zoomed" post and the rest is history. Reid from Capella was
around back then as well.



>Dear Nefoo Chuck,
>
>After being being resurrected by nurse Tommy at P-Ville,
>I was gifted with some very special powers that have since
>been confirmed by world famous Catholic nuns.........
>Sister Mary Holy Smoke and Sister Mary Hand Grenade.
>
>It seems when events don't historically add up on rah,
>my mind's eye sees beyond what some believe to be gospel.

Can't argue with that...a resurection that I witnessed and confirmation by
Sister Nary Holy Smoke and Sister Mary Hand Gernade. So you must posess the
power.


>
>An example that will be of interest to you.....
>
>Zoom didn't start the AOL sessions until about 1994 or 1995 and Tony
>never entered the picture until about 1996, at least on a frequent and
>serious basis. Prior to mid-1996 Tony was actually on Zoom's side. It
>wasn't until after that, that Tony changed his tune.

I remember when Tony was on zooms side and when I posted "Zoomed Part one" Tony
wrote me and asked for proof of what I was saying. I sent him a bunch of info to
support what I said .When he asked zoom he got the run around I guess.And
eventually Tony came over to the Light side.


>
>Further...
>Zoom didn't have the money to travel for AOL sessions. Besides why
>would you do this when you have access to everyone from your desk
>chair. Now, there are actually one or two bullet holes in the shop,
>but be assured that they did not come from Capt. Zoom.

Hmmm did you see the holes and is it the same place Richard is talking about?

>
>I can see the shop in question..... adjacent to the Santa Monica
>airport. If you google map address (3025 Airport Ave, Santa Monica
>90405) and look at the satellite version you'll see it. For this
>address, the green arrow actually is pointing at the south end of the
>Barker Hangar. Zoom in (pardon the pun) a lot and if you go diagonally
>to the right you can make out an EZ parked on the tarmac and one next
>to the building. Berkut is the long building white building with the
>EZ/Berkut right behind it. Next to it is another rectangular building
>slightly smaller and it looks more gray on top. This building is a
>flight school office and next to it is a car repair place, though
>highly specialized. There is no Mexican restaurant for miles and there
>never has been. Prior to moving to this location, the "shop" was in
>the Barker Hangar.

I'll see if I can find it .
>
>Sincerely,
>Unka' BOb -
>Kousin to KARNAC* - no relation to Johnny Carson
>
>*KARNAC is an acronym for Knowledge Aided Retrieval in Activity
>Context; it is a system being developed in the United States for use
>in profiling different categories of TERRORIST ATTACKS to determine
>the components of possible future terrorist incidents.

I checked my numerology expert and found that KARNAC can also mean Krap Always
Rises At Campbells .So it must be true you have powers :-)

See ya

Nefoo Chuck

In article >, Richard Riley says...

>he's talking about the round Dave put through the ceiling in the
>Berkut shop. And no, that's not the same place I'm talking about.
>
>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4151671949251197415&hl=en

ROFL!!! Great video!!!I loved it .I can't believe you produced ,directed.filmed
and acted in the production of "Richards Shop" complete with Mexican bar and
Juke box. I can't believe you machined the inst panel out of one thick slug of
Alum what a project!
Thanks for the enlightening tour and an entertaining video :-)

See ya

Chuck (No Mexicans only Amish) S

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:34:04 -0800, Richard Riley
> wrote:

>On 19 Feb 2007 06:06:06 -0800, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:
>
>>>Further...
>>>Zoom didn't have the money to travel for AOL sessions. Besides why
>>>would you do this when you have access to everyone from your desk
>>>chair. Now, there are actually one or two bullet holes in the shop,
>>>but be assured that they did not come from Capt. Zoom.
>
>He didn't travel for the AOL sessions. While in an AOL session, he
>announced he was coming to California to "permanantly" take care of
>the person who posted NTSB transcript to the AOL library.
>
>Chuck, go check the archives. It'll be around the same issue where he
>claimed I faxed him a bomb threat.
>
>>
>>Hmmm did you see the holes and is it the same place Richard is talking about?
>
>He's talking about the round Dave put through the ceiling in the
>Berkut shop. And no, that's not the same place I'm talking about.
>
>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4151671949251197415&hl=en

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Hi Richard.

ARRGH!
Please accept my humble apology for my
'mind's eye' being off approximately 60 miles.

Loved your personal and detailed video, but alas --
it shows EVERYTHING BUT the proverbial kitchen sink and the
BULLET RIDDEN door in question. Rather curious omission.

Anyway...
Given the description of your cheap Mexican 'hood rent,
even if you gave us some footage of a holey door,
it would be far easier to believe that some 'hood locals
did a number on you. To believe that Zoom had bucks
to blow on a coast to coast trip just to aerate a shop door in
the dark of night or whatever is one helluva stretch for me.

Until Zoom actually comes to California and "permanently" takes
care of the person who posted NTSB transcript to the AOL library,
I'm from Missouri. SHOW ME!

Your mileage may vary.

A nice day to you also, Mr. Riley.


- Barnyard BOb -

On Feb 20, 11:11 am, Barnyard BOb > wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:34:04 -0800, Richard Riley
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On 19 Feb 2007 06:06:06 -0800, ChuckSlusarczyk
> > wrote:
>
> >>>Further...
> >>>Zoom didn't have the money to travel for AOL sessions. Besides why
> >>>would you do this when you have access to everyone from your desk
> >>>chair. Now, there are actually one or two bullet holes in the shop,
> >>>but be assured that they did not come from Capt. Zoom.
>
> >He didn't travel for the AOL sessions. While in an AOL session, he
> >announced he was coming to California to "permanantly" take care of
> >the person who posted NTSB transcript to the AOL library.
>
> >Chuck, go check the archives. It'll be around the same issue where he
> >claimed I faxed him a bomb threat.
>
> >>Hmmm did you see the holes and is it the same place Richard is talking about?
>
> >He's talking about the round Dave put through the ceiling in the
> >Berkut shop. And no, that's not the same place I'm talking about.
>
> >http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4151671949251197415&hl=en
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> Hi Richard.
>
> ARRGH!
> Please accept my humble apology for my
> 'mind's eye' being off approximately 60 miles.
>
> Loved your personal and detailed video, but alas --
> it shows EVERYTHING BUT the proverbial kitchen sink and the
> BULLET RIDDEN door in question. Rather curious omission.
>
> Anyway...
> Given the description of your cheap Mexican 'hood rent,
> even if you gave us some footage of a holey door,
> it would be far easier to believe that some 'hood locals
> did a number on you. To believe that Zoom had bucks
> to blow on a coast to coast trip just to aerate a shop door in
> the dark of night or whatever is one helluva stretch for me.
>
> Until Zoom actually comes to California and "permanently" takes
> care of the person who posted NTSB transcript to the AOL library,
> I'm from Missouri. SHOW ME!
>
> Your mileage may vary.
>
> A nice day to you also, Mr. Riley.
>
> - Barnyard BOb -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

hi bob - would you mind emailing me at olympusE1 at cox dot net?

thanks,

al

("Richard Riley" wrote)
> He's talking about the round Dave put through the ceiling in the Berkut
> shop. And no, that's not the same place I'm talking about.

<http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4151671949251197415&hl=en>


http://www.borgus.com/think/hitch.htm
"What is written here will save your career..." <g>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope_(film)
"The film is Hitchcock's most experimental, abandoning many standard film
techniques to allow for the long unbroken scenes. Each shot ran continuously
for up to eight minutes without interruption. It was shot on a single set,
aside from the opening establishing shot street scene. Camera moves were
planned in advance and there was almost no editing. The walls of the set
were on rollers and could silently be moved out of the way to make way for
the camera, and then replaced when they were to come back into shot."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Player
"The opening tracking shot[1] lasts about 8 minutes without a single camera
break. It took them 15 takes in order to accomplish the task. This pays
homage to Orson Welles' Touch of Evil and Alfred Hitchcock's Rope, which are
both mentioned throughout the scene."


Montblack-lot

Richard Riley wrote:
>
> The long single shot is because I don't have any video editing
> software.

And I thought you were just a cinematographic genius! I loved the long
single take.

Perhaps THIS may explain some of Bob's confusion:
http://ousterhout.net/gallery/urban.jpg

- J.O.-