englishe standards in US army
-
Second Trial in Abu Ghraib Abuse Opens
Spc. Sabrina Harman faces five counts of prisoner maltreatment stemming from the photo of the inmate, known as "Gilligan," on a box with his hands outstretched.
In another photo, Harman poses with Graner behind a group of naked detainees stacked in a pyramid. In another, the 27-year-old reservist is shown with a prisoner on whose leg she is accused of writing "rapeist."
hmmm wonder how these ppl got enlisted if they obviously have "learning disorders" etc. -
Yup. They recruiment standards are crap and i think there was TV program which showed recruiment personnel actually hinting that one can cheat at drugs tests . There are also newspaper reports alleging that these recruiment personnel have been known to suggest using forged highschool diplomas to enter the army. In once case, the sgt even left a msg to a protential recruit that by federal law, he had to get down to the recruiment office!
Of course, you guys proably already know that Lyndie England, one of the Abu Grahib soldiers has learning disabilities!
Just shows how desperate the US army is. All hardware...but where's the software? -
alot of people are asking the same thing.
sadly, the us army is like a place to go if youve got seemingly nothing else going for you in life..
thats why the land warrior program is a bit worrying, with so many backups you have to keep in mind for those who..erm..cant quite handle it..
same in any country though - thats partially why theres so many attrocities in war - not everyone is 'made' the same way.. -
should be the other way round, right?Originally posted by lwflee:Yup. They recruiment standards are crap and i think there was TV program which showed recruiment personnel actually hinting that one can cheat at drugs tests . There are also newspaper reports alleging that these recruiment personnel also suggests using a forged highschool diploma to enter the army. In once case, the sgt even left a meg to a protential recruit that by federal law, he had to get down to the recruiment office!
Of course, you guys proably already know that Lyndie England, one of the Abu Grahib soldiers has learning disabilities!
Just shows how desperate the US army is. All hardware...but where's the software? -
I dun think so - I regard people as software. Am i mistaken?
I think singapore might have the same problems if we are ever at war... -
The US ASVAB (Armed Services and Vocational Aptitude Battery) does not return a pass/fail result - it doesn't even produce a result of how many correct answers out of the total number of questions attempted. Instead, it scores the candidate on a percentile score, based on the normal distribution of scores. Therefore, instead of getting a score of 55/100, the person would be on the 40th percentile, for example.
I'm not certain if the US armed services stipulates any cut-off percentile below which they would not accept a condidate. The ASVAB is designed more to determine which vocation a candidate should go to, rather than whether the person should be admitted in the first place. -
Still, I would say that the US Army has kept many people out of the streets and given them a better shot at life.For every Lyndie England, there is another soldier who might have worked his way up to a high school equivalency diploma or a ROTC degree.Originally posted by Gedanken:The US ASVAB (Armed Services and Vocational Aptitude Battery) does not return a pass/fail result - it doesn't even produce a result of how many correct answers out of the total number of questions attempted. Instead, it scores the candidate on a percentile score, based on the normal distribution of scores. Therefore, instead of getting a score of 55/100, the person would be on the 40th percentile, for example.
I'm not certain if the US armed services stipulates any cut-off percentile below which they would not accept a condidate. The ASVAB is designed more to determine which vocation a candidate should go to, rather than whether the person should be admitted in the first place. -
Without a doubt, LL. Let's face it, the same army that produced Lyndie England produced Colin Powell, didn't it?Originally posted by LazerLordz:Still, I would say that the US Army has kept many people out of the streets and given them a better shot at life.For every Lyndie England, there is another soldier who might have worked his way up to a high school equivalency diploma or a ROTC degree.
Technically, the ASVAB's a pretty clever system, but it's not foolproof. In any case, considering the quality of the average American school and the fact that Harman wasn't hired for her literary skills, it's not a really big issue. -
Well, I consider it as a bit of both. The brain is like a computer, have both hardware and software components.
If you have learning disabilities, then you have less than capable hardware (CPU not powerful enough), but you can always write more optimized programs. It takes a longer time and more effort to do so, but you can bring it up to a level they can do the job.Originally posted by lwflee:I dun think so - I regard people as software. Am i mistaken?
I think singapore might have the same problems if we are ever at war... -
Sadly with the sensitivity of the discrimination law, the U.S Army is unable to follow the standard of the Singapore Armed Forces where every soldier is able to count pass 20 & speak more then 1 language.
Understand this point, soldiers like Lyndie England volunteered for their service to the nation, the U.S Army & uncle SAM did not call upon them like it was during Vietnam. To reject Lyndie England, the U.S Army, would face the possibility of being sued by Lyndie England for discrimination for her gendar & her disability which if she had won the case, would result in the U.S Army having to pay her millions of dollar. So the Army thought they could take her in & teach her a skill that she may some day be able to use in the civilian world. But, unfortunately, instead of learning whats right, she got mixed up with the hill billies. The U.S Army is an organisation thats far larger then Singapore Army, Malaysian Army or Indonisian army. If you're able to confirm that any of this 3 country has a firm control over each & every individual soldiers' actions then by all means take over the responsibilities of the U.S Army.
I wonder why the French army nor other countries' military mistakes are never highlighted but when it comes to the U.S military.... -
1. Are you sure about that? The army surely is able to justify not hiring such people because because they are detrimental to op effectiveness? What about the tactics the recruitment sgts use? Telling ppl that they can cheat during the drugs test, telling ppl that high school diplomas can be forged? Threatening ppl with arrest if they do not go to the recruitment center? These practices have got nothing to do with discrimination laws.Originally posted by John Ching:Sadly with the sensitivity of the discrimination law, the U.S Army is unable to follow the standard of the Singapore Armed Forces where every soldier is able to count pass 20 & speak more then 1 language.
1. Understand this point, soldiers like Lyndie England volunteered for their service to the nation, the U.S Army & uncle SAM did not call upon them like it was during Vietnam. To reject Lyndie England, the U.S Army, would face the possibility of being sued by Lyndie England for discrimination for her gendar & her disability which if she had won the case, would result in the U.S Army having to pay her millions of dollar. So the Army thought they could take her in & teach her a skill that she may some day be able to use in the civilian world. But, unfortunately, instead of learning whats right, she got mixed up with the hill billies. The U.S Army is an organisation thats far larger then Singapore Army, Malaysian Army or Indonisian army. If you're able to confirm that any of this 3 country has a firm control over each & every individual soldiers' actions then by all means take over the responsibilities of the U.S Army.
2. I wonder why the French army nor other countries' military mistakes are never highlighted but when it comes to the U.S military....
2. This is really quite besides the point. Eg. A is lousy. --> But why don't you say that B is lousy too?. Doesn't change the fact that A is lousy. -
Before you, or anyone else, claimed that the U.S military recruitment standards are crap, (1)do note that the U.S embassy reserve the right to sue you for defamation on a public forum against its militay & the United States of America( that is if they read this forum other then me ). (2) Have you, or currently, served in any of the U.S military forces to give you the right to condamn it? (3) Were you rejected from any of the U.S military forces on any of the grounds of disabilities or gender dicrimination, to have such negative views about the U.S Army & its recruitment standards? Have you ever even serve in any military at all?Originally posted by lwflee:Yup. They recruiment standards are crap and i think there was TV program which showed recruiment personnel actually hinting that one can cheat at drugs tests . There are also newspaper reports alleging that these recruiment personnel have been known to suggest using forged highschool diplomas to enter the army. In once case, the sgt even left a msg to a protential recruit that by federal law, he had to get down to the recruiment office!
Of course, you guys proably already know that Lyndie England, one of the Abu Grahib soldiers has learning disabilities!
Just shows how desperate the US army is. All hardware...but where's the software? -
Ooh! Unlike you, I'm more then 100% sure of what I'm talking about. As for the answer to the rest of your question, where did you get your facts from?Originally posted by lwflee:1. Are you sure about that? The army surely is able to justify not hiring such people because because they are detrimental to op effectiveness? What about the tactics the recruitment sgts use? Telling ppl that they can cheat during the drugs test, telling ppl that high school diplomas can be forged? Threatening ppl with arrest if they do not go to the recruitment center? These practices have got nothing to do with discrimination laws.
2. This is really quite besides the point. Eg. A is lousy. --> But why don't you say that B is lousy too?. Doesn't change the fact that A is lousy.
Btw, I recently heard from a Singapore soldier that he was threaten by his recruitment officer that he should sign up with the Army Deceive Force or his career in the army would be blacked mark. Now is this fact or fiction?
What you asked in the aboved post has got nothing to do with discrimintaion but in your earlier post you mentioned Lyndie England & her disabilities, so that justifise as dicrimination.
Yes, its true A is lousy but you've focus soley on A & therefore it can only mean that you're discriminating A or you're totaly out to humiliate A. Either way, it makes you no different from the people that you're condamning. -
1. Bring it on.Originally posted by John Ching:Before you, or anyone else, claimed that the U.S military recruitment standards are crap, (1)do note that the U.S embassy reserve the right to sue you for defamation on a public forum against its militay & the United States of America( that is if they read this forum other then me ). (2) Have you, or currently, served in any of the U.S military forces to give you the right to condamn it? (3) Were you rejected from any of the U.S military forces on any of the grounds of disabilities or gender dicrimination, to have such negative views about the U.S Army & its recruitment standards? Have you ever even serve in any military at all?
2. No. But i still have a right to criticise it.
3. No, and yes. -
ation!Originally posted by John Ching:Ooh! Unlike you, I'm more then 100% sure of what I'm talking about. As for the answer to the rest of your question, where did you get your facts from?
Btw, I recently heard from a Singapore soldier that he was threaten by his recruitment officer that he should sign up with the Army Deceive Force or his career in the army would be blacked mark. Now is this fact or fiction?
What you asked in the aboved post has got nothing to do with discrimintaion but in your earlier post you mentioned Lyndie England & her disabilities, so that justifise as dicrimination.
Yes, its true A is lousy but you've focus soley on A & therefore it can only mean that you're discriminating A or you're totaly out to humiliate A. Either way, it makes you no different from the people that you're condamning.
From: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/army.recruiting/?section=cnn_topstories
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Army plans to stop recruiting activities for one day this month to review procedures that its 7,500 recruiters use, an Army official said.
.....
The move follows a CBS News report of least two allegations of recruiting abuse.
In one case, the network reported a recruiter suggesting how a potential volunteer might cheat to pass a drug test, and in another, a sergeant threatened a prospect with arrest if he didn't report to a recruiting station."
From: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/10/eveningnews/main694345.shtml
"
"Going Army" and making history appealed to 20-year-old Chris Monarch, so he called a Houston recruiting office.
"I recognized the name," he said. "His name was Kelt."
Sgt. Thomas Kelt was the recruiter.
But a new baby changed Monarch's plan to enlist and he cancelled his meeting with the recruiter.
"I said I'm a volunteer firefighter and eventually gonna try to go career with it and I'm just not interested anymore and I hung up the phone," Monarch said.
But the recruiter wouldn't take no for an answer -- with a phone message threatening Monarch with arrest if he didn't show.
"By federal law you got an appointment with me at two o'clock this afternoon at Greenspoint Mall." said Kelt. "OK, you fail to appear and we'll have a warrant, OK? So give me a call back."
In fear, Monarch called the recruiter back.
"He said, 'Oh Chris, don't worry about that. That's just a marketing technique I use,"' Monarch recounted.
..........
In Colorado, 19-year-old Michael Flaherty's recruiter gave him a laxative to lose weight to pass a physical.
"They even told me not to tell my parents about it," Flaherty said.
A form certified Flaherty physically fit -- complete with scores.
"I never completed any of those tests and my recruiter faked the documents," he said.
From fake diploma's from phony schools, detox kits to beat drug tests, Denver's CBS station KCNC uncovered a number of recruiter fraud cases.
"
Now please provide a source for your comment on the SAF's recruitment practices. Be aware, you may be liable for defamation!
Edit: OOops. I am sorry. You did not mention the SAF. My bad. -
1. I don't know whether say you're brave or just being plain dumb. But I guess you're not much different from a hill billy. As for your expectation on "bringing it on", you'll have to hope for the U.S embassy to read this forum. I only mentioned that you should "note" the possibility.Originally posted by lwflee:1. Bring it on.
2. No. But i still have a right to criticise it.
3. No, and yes.
2. Thats what so great about America that people like you hate & yet secretly love, America's constituation gives you the "right to express" or "freedom of expression".
3. Be a man & answer your question clearly & properly. -
1. I am neither brave, nor dumb (i hope). I am just confident in my ability to ward off a defamation suit.Originally posted by John Ching:1. I don't know whether say you're brave or just being plain dumb. But I guess you're not much different from a hill billy. As for your expectation on "bringing it on", you'll have to hope for the U.S embassy to read this forum. I only mentioned that you should "note" the possibility.
2. Thats what so great about America that people like you hate & yet secretly love, America's constituation gives you the "right to express" or "freedom of expression".
3. Be a man & answer your question clearly & properly.
2. Yea. Amercia - F uck Yea! wateva
3. I have never applied to join the US army. I have, however, served in the SAF.
Can you please stop being so belligerent and not resort to personal insults? Thanks. -
Let me highlight the word allegations because thats what the CBS news report. It has yet to be proven. Unless you prefer to accept allegations without facts then theres nothing further to talk about. That's why in the U.S law, you're innocent till you're proven guilty.Originally posted by lwflee:From: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/army.recruiting/?section=cnn_topstories
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Army plans to stop recruiting activities for one day this month to review procedures that its 7,500 recruiters use, an Army official said.
.....
The move follows a CBS News report of least two allegations of recruiting abuse.
In one case, the network reported a recruiter suggesting how a potential volunteer might cheat to pass a drug test, and in another, a sergeant threatened a prospect with arrest if he didn't report to a recruiting station."
From: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/10/eveningnews/main694345.shtml
"
"Going Army" and making history appealed to 20-year-old Chris Monarch, so he called a Houston recruiting office.
"I recognized the name," he said. "His name was Kelt."
Sgt. Thomas Kelt was the recruiter.
But a new baby changed Monarch's plan to enlist and he cancelled his meeting with the recruiter.
"I said I'm a volunteer firefighter and eventually gonna try to go career with it and I'm just not interested anymore and I hung up the phone," Monarch said.
But the recruiter wouldn't take no for an answer -- with a phone message threatening Monarch with arrest if he didn't show.
"By federal law you got an appointment with me at two o'clock this afternoon at Greenspoint Mall." said Kelt. "OK, you fail to appear and we'll have a warrant, OK? So give me a call back."
In fear, Monarch called the recruiter back.
"He said, 'Oh Chris, don't worry about that. That's just a marketing technique I use,"' Monarch recounted.
..........
In Colorado, 19-year-old Michael Flaherty's recruiter gave him a laxative to lose weight to pass a physical.
"They even told me not to tell my parents about it," Flaherty said.
A form certified Flaherty physically fit -- complete with scores.
"I never completed any of those tests and my recruiter faked the documents," he said.
From fake diploma's from phony schools, detox kits to beat drug tests, Denver's CBS station KCNC uncovered a number of recruiter fraud cases.
" -
Correct. That is why in my first post on this subject, i cited a TV program and a newspaper report. My second post should be read in the context of my first. That is an important part of defamation law.
-
Btw, can you please cite the relevant laws and cases where not recruiting ppl with learning disabilities was held to be illegal?
-
1. Well, Micheal Jackson is also confident he'll win his case, so why not you?Originally posted by lwflee:1. I am neither brave, nor dumb (i hope). I am just confident in my ability to ward off a defamation suit.
2. Yea. Amercia - F uck Yea! wateva
3. I have never applied to join the US army. I have, however, served in the SAF.
Can you please stop being so belligerent and not resort to personal insults? Thanks.
2. Only in America does one have the right to say FUCK YOU& not be worry about being censor, like the way you've typed.
3. Well, if you've served in the Army then you should know how the army works. Oh! I do believed that I read you had the intend to join the French Foregin Legion.
ME, BELLIGERENT? I do believed it was you who condamn the U.S Army. Did I in any way made you feel less then a human being in any of my post? If no, then how can I've insulted you when you've outrightly insulted the U.S Army. -
The other great thing about America is that the Law is define by who's got the best lawyer. Anyway, theres the internet, I'm sure you can find it yourself. Btw, Lyndie England was able to spell her name on the application form, she knew her right & left direction & she also knew how to count pass 20.Originally posted by lwflee:Btw, can you please cite the relevant laws and cases where not recruiting ppl with learning disabilities was held to be illegal? -
JC's got a point about discrimination in recruitment. Allow me to expand.
First, in countries like the US, the law clearly falls on the side of the job applicant, rather than the recruiter. Should the applicant fail to get the job, he or she can legally challenge the decision. Once that happens, the onus is clearly upon the recruiter to justify the decision based strictly upon the requirements of the job.
Over the years, Australia has been adopting the American model. Hell, I ought to know - as a recruiter for six years, I made some reasonably good money ensuring that my clients could brush off any legal challenges to their hiring decisions.
I'm not implying any ignorance on your part, lwflee, but the situation in countries like the US is vastly different from that in Singapore. For example, were a US recruiter to put, "Only successful applicants will be notified" in a job ad (as is common practice in Singapore), he'd be strung up by the balls before he could call his lawyer.
Second, the US Army has been using structured testing and interviewing for its recruitment purposes since 1917. With all of their test data, plus the fact that many of their war heroes like Audie Murphy are not highly educated, any half-competent lawyer could successfully argue in court that academic or intellectual performance has little, if any, to do with combat effectiveness. Lyndie England's language disabilities do not constitute the general intellectual disability which would be needed to justify a decision not to take her into the Army.
To summarise, with the way the law is weighted in the applicant's favour, plus the existing data that supports the case of combat effectiveness in the absence of academic performance, John's assessment of the situation vis-a-vis the discrimination law is correct. -
Let's call conjecture or by any other name, but I'm sure such tales abound in every military.So keep our heads cool yeah..Originally posted by John Ching:Ooh! Unlike you, I'm more then 100% sure of what I'm talking about. As for the answer to the rest of your question, where did you get your facts from?
Btw, I recently heard from a Singapore soldier that he was threaten by his recruitment officer that he should sign up with the Army Deceive Force or his career in the army would be blacked mark. Now is this fact or fiction?
What you asked in the aboved post has got nothing to do with discrimintaion but in your earlier post you mentioned Lyndie England & her disabilities, so that justifise as dicrimination.
Yes, its true A is lousy but you've focus soley on A & therefore it can only mean that you're discriminating A or you're totaly out to humiliate A. Either way, it makes you no different from the people that you're condamning.
JC, I understand where you are coming from.No one's out to smear the US army, they're just reporting tales and sometimes tales have a few grains of truth. -
gee, that phrase "bring it on" sounds awfully familiar.Originally posted by John Ching:1. I don't know whether say you're brave or just being plain dumb. But I guess you're not much different from a hill billy. As for your expectation on "bringing it on", you'll have to hope for the U.S embassy to read this forum. I only mentioned that you should "note" the possibility.
oh yes! 'ol dubya said it, too!
with respect to him, i'm thinking just "plain dumb". ;-p