Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at Ran

Documents Requested for Female Rangers : People.com

A congressman who is a combat veteran and Ranger graduate has asked the Pentagon's top Army leader to produce documents related to the performance of the females who began Ranger School at Fort Benning, Georgia earlier this year, PEOPLE has learned. In a letter obtained exclusively by PEOPLE, Rep. Steve Russell, R-Okla., gave outgoing Army Secretary John McHugh until September 25 to produce documents revealing the women's test scores, evaluations, injuries, pre-training and more. The letter was delivered to McHugh's Pentagon office on September 15. "The training of our combat warriors is paramount to our national defense," Russell wrote to McHugh. "In order to ensure that the Army retains its ability to defend the nation, we must ensure that our readiness is not sacrificed."

The congressman is concerned because "sources at Fort Benning are coming forward to say the Army lied about women in Ranger School, that the women got special treatment and played by different rules," according to a Capitol Hill source with knowledge of why the letter was crafted. "These folks say one thing, the Army says another. Congress needs to know the truth, and Russell reached out to find it." Ranger instructors – who said they were ordered to remain silent, and fear for their careers for speaking out – gave Russell's office specific examples of the special treatment the women received, the Capitol Hill source says.

The school consists of three phases: Benning, which lasts 21 days and includes water survival, land navigation, a 12-mile march, patrols, an obstacle course and others; Mountain, which lasts 20 days, and includes rigorous mountain training like assaults, ambushes, mountaineering and patrols; Florida/Swamp, which lasts 17 days and covers waterborne operations. The instructors say that among other things, the women did not carry the same amount of equipment as the men, did not take their turn carrying the heavy machine guns and were given intensive pre-training that was not offered to men, other sources with knowledge of what occurred at the school tell PEOPLE. In addition, men who repeatedly failed crucial phases of the school were sent home while the women were allowed to redo those phases over and over, sources say.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

Anomalism said:

Documents Requested for Female Rangers : People.com

A congressman who is a combat veteran and Ranger graduate has asked the Pentagon's top Army leader to produce documents related to the performance of the females who began Ranger School at Fort Benning, Georgia earlier this year, PEOPLE has learned. In a letter obtained exclusively by PEOPLE, Rep. Steve Russell, R-Okla., gave outgoing Army Secretary John McHugh until September 25 to produce documents revealing the women's test scores, evaluations, injuries, pre-training and more. The letter was delivered to McHugh's Pentagon office on September 15. "The training of our combat warriors is paramount to our national defense," Russell wrote to McHugh. "In order to ensure that the Army retains its ability to defend the nation, we must ensure that our readiness is not sacrificed."

The congressman is concerned because "sources at Fort Benning are coming forward to say the Army lied about women in Ranger School, that the women got special treatment and played by different rules," according to a Capitol Hill source with knowledge of why the letter was crafted. "These folks say one thing, the Army says another. Congress needs to know the truth, and Russell reached out to find it." Ranger instructors – who said they were ordered to remain silent, and fear for their careers for speaking out – gave Russell's office specific examples of the special treatment the women received, the Capitol Hill source says.

The school consists of three phases: Benning, which lasts 21 days and includes water survival, land navigation, a 12-mile march, patrols, an obstacle course and others; Mountain, which lasts 20 days, and includes rigorous mountain training like assaults, ambushes, mountaineering and patrols; Florida/Swamp, which lasts 17 days and covers waterborne operations. The instructors say that among other things, the women did not carry the same amount of equipment as the men, did not take their turn carrying the heavy machine guns and were given intensive pre-training that was not offered to men, other sources with knowledge of what occurred at the school tell PEOPLE. In addition, men who repeatedly failed crucial phases of the school were sent home while the women were allowed to redo those phases over and over, sources say.

Click to expand...

"Sources," huh? What "sources"? Looks like a fishing expedition to me. It doesn't make sense that the top brass of the army would lie about it or have any reason to. Like Judge Judy says, "If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true."

As further evidence of no reason to lie, there was recently another military commander in the news stating that they were considering opening the combat jobs to women, and in so doing, might lower the physical requirements or the like. So there's no fear about stating the truth, apparently.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

"Sources," huh? What "sources"? Looks like a fishing expedition to me. It doesn't make sense that the top brass of the army would lie about it or have any reason to. Like Judge Judy says, "If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true."

As further evidence of no reason to lie, there was recently another military commander in the news stating that they were considering opening the combat jobs to women, and in so doing, might lower the physical requirements or the like. So there's no fear about stating the truth, apparently.

Click to expand...

Isn't that what the good Congressman is trying to do? Confirm that the training is the same or it is not. Asking for the original documents does not seem out of line.

At this point no one is accusing the military of having two sets of standards.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

"Sources," huh? What "sources"? Looks like a fishing expedition to me. It doesn't make sense that the top brass of the army would lie about it or have any reason to. Like Judge Judy says, "If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true."

As further evidence of no reason to lie, there was recently another military commander in the news stating that they were considering opening the combat jobs to women, and in so doing, might lower the physical requirements or the like. So there's no fear about stating the truth, apparently.

Click to expand...

either way, we need to know for certain. these are our special forces, the spear of the American military, their excellence is directly related to the safety and security of our nation. i have no doubt that some women are physically and mentally able to complete special forces training, however it is imperative that we be certain that those elite women are the ones who are completing it, and not women who have been handpicked as showpieces of diversity, rather than handpicked for their excellence as special forces operators. this is no joke, men fail miserably, extremely fit men, with years of service under their belts, fail this test, all the time. they fail because they are allowed to fail, because they were not up to snuff and were not capable of meeting the rigorous standards required to be admitted to the ranks of America's warrior elite. i hope the women were held to the same standard, because these warriors regardless of gender are the front line of the front line of our national defense.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

QuadpolarNutjob said:

either way, we need to know for certain. these are our special forces, the spear of the American military, their excellence is directly related to the safety and security of our nation. i have no doubt that some women are physically and mentally able to complete special forces training, however it is imperative that we be certain that those elite women are the ones who are completing it, and not women who have been handpicked as showpieces of diversity, rather than handpicked for their excellence as special forces operators. this is no joke, men fail miserably, extremely fit men, with years of service under their belts, fail this test, all the time. they fail because they are allowed to fail, because they were not up to snuff and were not capable of meeting the rigorous standards required to be admitted to the ranks of America's warrior elite. i hope the women were held to the same standard, because these warriors regardless of gender are the front line of the front line of our national defense.

Click to expand...

We do know for sure.

Now, if he wants to see those records "to know for sure," then the records of males should be examined, as well, so we "know for sure" that some weren't given breaks and really passed.

Honestly, in the military, when a top commander certifies something, that is usually considered enough. To ask to personally examine the records is stating that you think he lied.

I also think they should separate the records of short males, and those records need to be examined separately to "know for sure" that they passed.

I also think they should separate the records of those with blue eyes, just to make sure they passed.

I also think they should examine the records of the white people, just to make sure they passed, as compared to the blacks. Just to make sure.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

jimbo said:

Isn't that what the good Congressman is trying to do? Confirm that the training is the same or it is not. Asking for the original documents does not seem out of line.

At this point no one is accusing the military of having two sets of standards.

Click to expand...

When a top commander reviews the records and states his opinion and passes the guys, that IS confirmation. For a non-military person to then request to personally examine the records of some of the rangers is stating that you think the commander lied. If this man thinks the commander lied, they should call an investigation into his ethics, so he can be discharged, if he lied when he said all members of the Rangers that year passed all the tests.

If they request the records to examine one group of rangers, they should also request the records of...

white rangers, since they are often said to be inferior physically to blacks....just to make sure they passed without being given breaks.

short rangers, since they have a smaller stride and smaller arm reach and hands....just to make sure they were up to snuff, like the commander says.

We DO know someone who doesn't tell all, though. The guy who is doing the requesting and accusing the military of lying. He won't say who, if anyone, is reporting that the commander lied.

This sounds like political gamesmanship, being done by yet another Republican. Or someone being duped by a couple of grunts who are ticked off that women got into their ranks. That is not uncommon.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

We do know for sure.

Now, if he wants to see those records "to know for sure," then the records of males should be examined, as well, so we "know for sure" that some weren't given breaks and really passed.

Honestly, in the military, when a top commander certifies something, that is usually considered enough. To ask to personally examine the records is stating that you think he lied.

Click to expand...

Given that Sec Nav is ignoring the latest report about the failure of having women in the marine units then yes.
there is a huge PC push to put women in combat roles. it wouldn't be the first time that the military has covered up things.
it is putting our military at risk and if there is any type of foul play involved then it should be investigated.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

When a top commander reviews the records and states his opinion and passes the guys, that IS confirmation. For a non-military person to then request to personally examine the records of some of the rangers is stating that you think the commander lied. If this man thinks the commander lied, they should call an investigation into his ethics, so he can be discharged, if he lied when he said all members of the Rangers that year passed all the tests.

If they request the records to examine one group of rangers, they should also request the records of...

white rangers, since they are often said to be inferior physically to blacks....just to make sure they passed without being given breaks.

short rangers, since they have a smaller stride and smaller arm reach and hands....just to make sure they were up to snuff, like the commander says.

We DO know someone who doesn't tell all, though. The guy who is doing the requesting and accusing the military of lying. He won't say who, if anyone, is reporting that the commander lied.

This sounds like political gamesmanship, being done by yet another Republican. Or someone being duped by a couple of grunts who are ticked off that women got into their ranks. That is not uncommon.

Click to expand...

yes it is political gamesmanship to push women into combat roles that so far have proven they are just not capable of doing and actually hurt unit functionality.
they don't need to request any other records as there have been no reports that those records were tampered with.

there is more and more news since those women passed that there was some fishy stuff going on and people were threatened into silence.
if that is the case it needs to be rooted out and the people involved need to be court martialed.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

We do know for sure.

Now, if he wants to see those records "to know for sure," then the records of males should be examined, as well, so we "know for sure" that some weren't given breaks and really passed.

Honestly, in the military, when a top commander certifies something, that is usually considered enough. To ask to personally examine the records is stating that you think he lied.

I also think they should separate the records of short males, and those records need to be examined separately to "know for sure" that they passed.

I also think they should separate the records of those with blue eyes, just to make sure they passed.

I also think they should examine the records of the white people, just to make sure they passed, as compared to the blacks. Just to make sure.

Click to expand...

You don't sound too confident that they did in fact pass with no help. In fact you sound like you are pretty sure they DIDN'T.

Unfortunately the Military is not a "clean and clear" as you pretend to believe it to be. In fact, there is probably as much political b/s there as in any civilian corporation. A limited number of slots available in the upper echelon and everybody wants to get that next promotion so it can be cut throat as hell. Especially when competing for certain key billets that will almost ensure a promotion. Don't be "that guy" who bucked the system and drew negative attention to yourself, especially from the civilian overlords. If the President told the SecDef that he wanted or "needed" to see women get through Ranger/Seal/Recon/SF schools, you can bet that SecDef told his service secretaries that they need to see to that. They in turn told the Service Chiefs and down the chain it went.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

When a top commander reviews the records and states his opinion and passes the guys, that IS confirmation. For a non-military person to then request to personally examine the records of some of the rangers is stating that you think the commander lied. If this man thinks the commander lied, they should call an investigation into his ethics, so he can be discharged, if he lied when he said all members of the Rangers that year passed all the tests.

If they request the records to examine one group of rangers, they should also request the records of...

white rangers, since they are often said to be inferior physically to blacks....just to make sure they passed without being given breaks.

short rangers, since they have a smaller stride and smaller arm reach and hands....just to make sure they were up to snuff, like the commander says.

We DO know someone who doesn't tell all, though. The guy who is doing the requesting and accusing the military of lying. He won't say who, if anyone, is reporting that the commander lied.

This sounds like political gamesmanship, being done by yet another Republican. Or someone being duped by a couple of grunts who are ticked off that women got into their ranks. That is not uncommon.

Click to expand...

I don't think there is anything wrong with Congressional oversight of our military, especially when reviewing new programs. I agree if they are going to review the females' records they should review the records of everyone in that particular class so they can be evaluated correctly. They shouldn't release the medical records but the other records? Why not?

As someone who served for 20 years I can tell you Commanders are not infallible. They make mistakes and, yes, sometimes lie. Especially if they have pressure on them from above to produce a certain result.

Maybe that isn't the case. Maybe everything went as it should. Go ahead and allow the review. It is government information. Congress, the People, should have access to it.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

BrewerBob said:

I don't think there is anything wrong with Congressional oversight of our military, especially when reviewing new programs. I agree if they are going to review the females' records they should review the records of everyone in that particular class so they can be evaluated correctly. They shouldn't release the medical records but the other records? Why not?

As someone who served for 20 years I can tell you Commanders are not infallible. They make mistakes and, yes, sometimes lie. Especially if they have pressure on them from above to produce a certain result.

Maybe that isn't the case. Maybe everything went as it should. Go ahead and allow the review. It is government information. Congress, the People, should have access to it.

Click to expand...

Then they need to examine ALL the records of ALL the members of that training session, instead of targeting a few individuals to look for a reason to denigrate their accomplishments. Capiche?

If they allege that one of the women got breaks, THAT COULD NOT BE KNOWN UNLESS THE FULL RECORDS OF THE MALES WERE EXAMINED AND INVESTIGATED, as well. You see?

I see what's going on. He wants to examine the records to put a black mark on the women's accomplishments. Any little thing. If that weren't the case, he would have a disinterested party examine ALL the records.

Why stop with the women's records? Let's just examine the BLACKS records, just to make sure they cut the mustard and weren't given any "breaks."

Why stop with that? Let's examine the records of SHORT MEN, since we all know they are physically inferior to tall men, so were possibly given "breaks."

You see what the deal is? It's only because he personally doesn't believe the women passed legitimately or he doesn't want women in the military, that he wants to go over their records to put black marks on their records.

There is no reason to doubt the records any more than there is a reason to doubt the male's records. Unless you don't want them there and want to look for a reason to exclude them. This sort of thing happened often enough when blacks were making inroads. There is no evidence whatsoever that the female rangers were given breaks. None.

The men had no complaints. 2nd Lieutenant Zachary Hagner recalled being bone-tired after carrying a 17-pound machine gun for three days. “I went to every single person, just in a line, no order, and they were `No, I’m really tired, too, I’m broken,’” he recalled the men in his squad saying.

His last hope was Griest. “She basically took it away from me,” he said. “Nine guys were like `Well, I’m too broken, I’m too tired.’ She—just as broken and tired—took it from me with almost excitement. I thought she was crazy for that, but maybe she was just motivated.”

Other males agreed. “When we were given resupply and you’re given 2,000 rounds of machine-gun ammo, the last thing you’re caring about is whether or not your Ranger buddy is a man or a woman,” 2nd Lieutenant Michael Janowski said. “Because you’re not carrying all 2,000 rounds by yourself.”

“You’re way too tired and way too hungry to really honestly care,” added Staff Sergeant Michael Calderon. “At the end of the day, everyone was a Ranger.”

Click to expand...

America: Meet Your First Female Rangers

Those are quotes from some of the men the women trained with. It doesn't sound like there was anyone holding a gun to their heads, forcing them to tell false tales. But I do see a reason that some of the men might resent the women.

If someone has a complaint, there is a legitimate method in the military for doing so. This isn't one of them, if you believe that anyone complained to the Congressman in the first place (anyone w/o a grudge, that is).

So...either examine and investigate ALL the records, or none. The fact that he didn't ask to see the male's records says it all: He's not looking for "breaks," since you'd have to see the men's records to know; he's looking for a way to stop the women's progress in the military, if not out and out get them booted. I'm not sure there's precedent for a sole Congressman to "examine" individuals' military training records, anyway. Maybe there should be congressional hearing by a committee. You know why there isn't one? Because there's no reason for one.

Let's not forget these are people's careers we're talking about. There should not be an avenue for a sole congressperson to carry out a vendetta against individual military service people.

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

Rentoc said:

You don't sound too confident that they did in fact pass with no help. In fact you sound like you are pretty sure they DIDN'T.

Unfortunately the Military is not a "clean and clear" as you pretend to believe it to be. In fact, there is probably as much political b/s there as in any civilian corporation. A limited number of slots available in the upper echelon and everybody wants to get that next promotion so it can be cut throat as hell. Especially when competing for certain key billets that will almost ensure a promotion. Don't be "that guy" who bucked the system and drew negative attention to yourself, especially from the civilian overlords. If the President told the SecDef that he wanted or "needed" to see women get through Ranger/Seal/Recon/SF schools, you can bet that SecDef told his service secretaries that they need to see to that. They in turn told the Service Chiefs and down the chain it went.

Click to expand...

Are you nuts? I am certain that the commander who certified the results knew what he was doing.

What I'm talking about is the VENDETTA this congressperson is pursuing against the female rangers. These are careers we're talking about. There should not be an avenue for a sole congressperson to carry out a vendetta against individual military personnel.

If there is anything untoward (if you believe that anyone without a grudge "reported" irregularities, which I don't believe), then there should be a congressional hearing on it. Period.

PROOF that the congressperson is merely looking for a way to put black marks on the women's records is the fact that he didn't request all the records of all the trainees, since the complaint he said were made was that the women got breaks that the men did not. In order to know that, you have to review the men's records, right? Right.

You can't know if the females got breaks the males didn't, unless you ALSO examine and investigate the records of the males. Duh.

This is akin to asking for the records of, say, only the BLACK trainees, claiming that someone complained the blacks got some breaks the whites didn't. This sort of thing happened when blacks began to make inroads into certain fields.

This is a military matter, or a congressional committee matter. It is not a matter for a sole congressperson to make political hay with. Just stating that there have been complaints (esp. with no proof of it) puts a black mark on the women's accomplishments.

I'm sure that congressperson would have a problem with a U.S. Senator requesting the military records of that congressman, because he wants to personally examine them, because a couple of military people of the rank & file have stated to the senator that the congressman got some breaks. That congressman would hoot & holler and wail about unfounded accusations, harm to his career and military record, illegitimacy of the request, and all the rest.

Here's what some said of the women:

The men had no complaints. 2nd Lieutenant Zachary Hagner recalled being bone-tired after carrying a 17-pound machine gun for three days. “I went to every single person, just in a line, no order, and they were `No, I’m really tired, too, I’m broken,’” he recalled the men in his squad saying.

His last hope was Griest. “She basically took it away from me,” he said. “Nine guys were like `Well, I’m too broken, I’m too tired.’ She—just as broken and tired—took it from me with almost excitement. I thought she was crazy for that, but maybe she was just motivated.”

Other males agreed. “When we were given resupply and you’re given 2,000 rounds of machine-gun ammo, the last thing you’re caring about is whether or not your Ranger buddy is a man or a woman,” 2nd Lieutenant Michael Janowski said. “Because you’re not carrying all 2,000 rounds by yourself.”

“You’re way too tired and way too hungry to really honestly care,” added Staff Sergeant Michael Calderon. “At the end of the day, everyone was a Ranger.”

Click to expand...

America: Meet Your First Female Rangers

I can see from the performance reported why some men would hold a grudge. I also didn't read that someone was forcing the male trainees to speak glowingly of the females' performance.

There is an avenue in the military to report unfairness, if some of the men wanted to do that. I'm sure some of the brass would've been thrilled to get the reports. The fact that there are none, that we know of, speaks volumes about this congressperson (that, and the fact that he didn't request to examine the male's records, which would be necessary, to know if the females got breaks the males didn't).

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

.....What I'm talking about is the VENDETTA this congressperson is pursuing against the female rangers. These are careers we're talking about. There should not be an avenue for a sole congressperson to carry out a vendetta against individual military personnel.

Click to expand...

So now it's a personal vendetta? lol

Women's "rights" above all, including National Security and the lives of Service Members (both male and female).

Re: Congressman Asks for Documents to Find Out Whether Women Got Special Treatment at

JumpinJack said:

Are you nuts? I am certain that the commander who certified the results knew what he was doing.

What I'm talking about is the VENDETTA this congressperson is pursuing against the female rangers. These are careers we're talking about. There should not be an avenue for a sole congressperson to carry out a vendetta against individual military personnel.

If there is anything untoward (if you believe that anyone without a grudge "reported" irregularities, which I don't believe), then there should be a congressional hearing on it. Period.

PROOF that the congressperson is merely looking for a way to put black marks on the women's records is the fact that he didn't request all the records of all the trainees, since the complaint he said were made was that the women got breaks that the men did not. In order to know that, you have to review the men's records, right? Right.

You can't know if the females got breaks the males didn't, unless you ALSO examine and investigate the records of the males. Duh.

This is akin to asking for the records of, say, only the BLACK trainees, claiming that someone complained the blacks got some breaks the whites didn't. This sort of thing happened when blacks began to make inroads into certain fields.

This is a military matter, or a congressional committee matter. It is not a matter for a sole congressperson to make political hay with. Just stating that there have been complaints (esp. with no proof of it) puts a black mark on the women's accomplishments.

I'm sure that congressperson would have a problem with a U.S. Senator requesting the military records of that congressman, because he wants to personally examine them, because a couple of military people of the rank & file have stated to the senator that the congressman got some breaks. That congressman would hoot & holler and wail about unfounded accusations, harm to his career and military record, illegitimacy of the request, and all the rest.

Here's what some said of the women:


America: Meet Your First Female Rangers

I can see from the performance reported why some men would hold a grudge. I also didn't read that someone was forcing the male trainees to speak glowingly of the females' performance.

There is an avenue in the military to report unfairness, if some of the men wanted to do that. I'm sure some of the brass would've been thrilled to get the reports. The fact that there are none, that we know of, speaks volumes about this congressperson (that, and the fact that he didn't request to examine the male's records, which would be necessary, to know if the females got breaks the males didn't).

Click to expand...

The fact that you can't see how there could be undue influence on a topic as politically charged as this says quite a bit. I think pretty much anybody who looked at this with an open mind could see how political pressure could effect the grading at a school either for good or bad.

And no you don't have to review everyone's records that is just silly. You simply look at the ones in question and compare it to the standards. If the standard is when you fail both a patrol and peers in the same face you get dropped and they were recycled then that's all you need. If you do a review and see that they were given extra land nab training before hand at the same location they do the course there's your answer. And all with looking at no one else's records.

You obviously already have your mind made up on this and it is causing you to make some rather funny comments.