March 18, 2026 • 61 mins
By almost any measure, the United States military is by far the most powerful on the planet. The immense size of the military, combined with advanced technology and near-unimaginable funding, guarantees a fighting force like no other. However,the size of the organization has also led to some disturbing cases of conspiracy, crime and corruption -- cases that are often buried by the powers that be. In tonight's episode, Ben, Matt and Noel dive deep into the grand conspiracy of military cover-up. Please note this episode may not be appropriate for all audiences.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer, Dylan the Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you
are you.
Speaker 4 (00:38):
You are here.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know. Folks,
as you may know, longtime listeners, new listeners, welcome. We're
all fellow conspiracy realists. We started this show and for
the most part continue this show in the United States.
The United States is home to a lot of things
other then stuff they don't want you to know. Some
(01:01):
of those things are great, right, and some of those
things are terrifying. I always remember that. I always remember
that stand up bit from years ago. I want to
say it was Dennis Leary maybe Carlin who pointed out
that the United States is the only country that would
look at cocaine and say, we need a little something extra.
Speaker 4 (01:24):
We can do better.
Speaker 3 (01:25):
Size it.
Speaker 4 (01:26):
Yeah, it can do better now, Yeah, sure, and we
can do better. But what it's true. Lest folks come
at us saying that we're like anti American or something,
we all love this country. We want to protect it,
we want to keep living here.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
You know it kind of rules well in the country
does a lot to protect itself theoretically, right with the
Department of Defense. It's all about defending the homeland, the country,
the culture, or the commerce, all the sea. We're we're
seeing a lot of military mind in the news right now, aren't.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
We, right Yeah, known as the land of big Stuff,
That's what I'll call it here, folks. The United States
supersizes everything, and Uncle Sam's armed forces are no exception.
We all know that. In the wake of World War Two,
when so many other countries had their bells rung, there
(02:24):
was no infrastructure that could match that of the US,
and so the US from those seeds grew the most
powerful military across the planet Earth. We're talking right now
as we record on Tuesday, March tenth, we're talking about
unmatched global reach, a blue water navy that no one
can mess with, unmatched funding, peerless training, and of course
(02:48):
technological superiority.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
We talked about it before, but it really did help
in World War Two. That we were so far away
from most of the fighting and we could build incredible
technological ships and send them, you know, that way across
the Pacific to help out. But we didn't really, we
didn't get decimated.
Speaker 4 (03:08):
No, that's a good point. I didn't really think about that. Guys.
Has it always been a thing that we call our
brave men and women of the military war fighters?
Speaker 3 (03:17):
It has not always been a thing that is like
a warfighters TM kind of situation, Like it's a little
bit of a rebrand, right, Yeah, it's a rhetorical device essentially,
it's marketing, it's pr The preferred term internally is going
to be service members. I would posit that warfighter came
(03:38):
into vogue when we saw the rise of private military contractors. Now,
then we have a new umbrella term that means people
who are not technically in the armed forces but have
a contract to help us mess some things up. So
now they're all war fighters, even if it's not a
war right right, Well, even if it's just an operation. Yeah,
(04:04):
war fighters.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
Sexy operation fighters. Now operators is scary character its own thing, right.
Operators are like the real the wet boys, right Yeah, And.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
Thanks for tuning in guys be safe out there.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Well, it is weird to I'm sorry, just thinking about
this more and more. The words we use to describe
the individual within the large infrastructure of a military right,
and you hear the words soldier, officer, and then trying
to figure out what's the difference between a soldier and
an officer, and then you can go, you know, pretty
deep down in the rabbit hole of some of the
nomenclature there. Sure, but it is you know, wow, I
(04:41):
haven't really thought about that concept of war fighter being
used for the purposes of kind of hacking your brain.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
When you think about that, it's a flex It's like
look at our look at our you know, superheroes kind
of right.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Yeah, it it polled well with certain demographics, that's the reality.
Same with phrases like homeland or same with we'll get
into a department of war. That's another idiom.
Speaker 4 (05:08):
Homeland is becoming a dog whistle kind of term. I mean,
does refer to like almost like the motherland, This idea
of racial purity, it feels like, is the way Homeland's
getting thrown around. We will have our home again, things
like that.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
It's tut tut. It's also ironic because the primary supporters
of language like homeland or Department of Homeland Security are
not themselves Native Americans. Story for another day. I'm just
saying it's weird to call it a homeland. How long
is the US going to be the world's most dangerous military?
(05:44):
How long will that be the case? It remains to
be seen. We live in exciting times like that old
curse and maybe ninety days, Ben, maybe maybe it's an
episode in the future, right, ninety days you think.
Speaker 2 (05:58):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, when in China's oil.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
Yeah, and then we see a cornered tiger.
Speaker 4 (06:05):
Yeah, I filled up, guys, good, good call on that.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
Yeah, man, glad you did.
Speaker 4 (06:11):
Look.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
Paranoia is something that only seems crazy before the S
hits the F, and the S did indeed hit the F.
In tonight's episode, we are exploring something that may not
be appropriate for all audiences, a disturbing series of alleged
and confirmed conspiracies about cover ups of sexual assault and
(06:37):
murder within the military. The threat came not from outside forces, but,
as we will all see tonight, came from with it. Again,
not appropriate for all listeners, but these are true conspiracies.
Speaker 4 (06:53):
Let's take a quick pause and get our wits about us,
and then we'll jump right in.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
Here are the facts, all right. We have a lot
of veterans, we have a lot of active service members
in the crowd tonight, and thank you for your service.
So for some of us this may be old beings,
but it's very important. We got to give you some
facts about the US Armed Forces because a lot of
(07:22):
civilians still don't understand just how big this thing is.
It is a leviathan, is behemoth. It is a monster
of old. I mean, it's so big that a lot
of people right now working in the military or in
adjacent industries, they're only going to see a very small
part of the larger picture in the day to day,
(07:45):
you know what I mean. It's like when we're talking
about building secret Cold War facilities or the Manhattan Project.
You could technically work in that endeavor, but if you're
the guy who just drives the truck, you have no
idea what they're building in there out out top weights.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
Always oh no.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
Well, and the three of us, I believe, have never
been members of any military service, and we imagine that
many of you have not as well. So a lot
of this is pretty new or at least things as
you're describing. There have been things that we don't think
about when our brains ping. Even you know the word military,
or you think about the navy or a military base,
(08:25):
even a complex, we don't think about the inner workings
of those systems.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, that's a great point, Matt. I mean, because how
could you full visibility on the entirety of something of
this stature seeing the forest for all those trees, It's
a herculean effort. We'll be honest, and again, I really
appreciate the point all made about how we do care
(08:53):
about this country and we're very fortunate to be here.
We also part of that great opportunity is the opportunity
to point out when things are going wrong. One of
the best, dumbest, most ridiculous examples, the size of the
US Armed Forces is such that even their budget is
(09:14):
beyond congressional understanding. It has so many loopholes, conundrums, redactions,
black bag projects we call them. We still as a
country can't figure out how to audit the thing. The
Pentagon is most famous in accounting circles for eternally failing
(09:36):
its audits. Shout out to tax season. By the way,
I'm super stoked.
Speaker 4 (09:45):
Yeah, I'm bullish taxes.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Shout out to Dick Cheney rip I guess when you
might guys remember he and he's the one who announced
during the Afghanistan Iraq conflict that, oh, yeah, we're missing
the twenties on the bill dollars.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
But it's don't matter national that doesn't matter. We got
stuff to do. So okay, if we're talking about the
armed forces, right, similar to warfighters, we are using an
umbrella term. So what what do we mean when we
say armed forces in the United States?
Speaker 4 (10:20):
That? Yeah, all of them, right, it's like all of
the different the various branches. That would be the Army, Navy,
Air Force, and don't we have a new one, the
Space Force.
Speaker 3 (10:30):
Yeah, the Marine Corps Marin Corps, of course, and then
uh and then of course the newest shiny boy.
Speaker 4 (10:41):
Yeah uh generation.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
We have the national guards, you know, the Army National Guard,
the Air National Guard. Those are considered reserve components. They operate.
The important logistic part here is they operate harshly under
the authority of an individual state in the Union and
all of this stuff, all of these people they are
(11:04):
under the supervision of the Department of Defense. Sometimes recently
called the Department of War.
Speaker 4 (11:14):
Question. Yeah, that is that was sort of a unilateral
move without any approval, So it's not technically legal, nor
is it official that it's referred to as that.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
It's official on their website, but it has not been
approved through the previously.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
Established didn't it change signage and all kinds of mentions,
And that cost a pretty penny to the taxpayers as well.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
And it was the Department of War in seventeen eighty nine.
Speaker 3 (11:42):
Right, so it's a renaming, like how Fort Hood got
renamed back to Fort Hood? Right, Yeah, So up until recently,
until about twenty eighteen, the Department of Defense, which call
it for this conversation, their mission statement, their thesis was, Hey,
(12:06):
we provide quote, the military forces needed to deter war
and to protect the security of our country. Until again,
twenty eighteen, this got changed to the mission of the
Department of Defense is to provide a lethal joint force
to defend the security of our country and to sustain
(12:29):
American influence abroad. So a little more agro, a little
more agro.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Oh, but yeah, but we remember even that initial one
protect the security of our country.
Speaker 4 (12:39):
We know what that means, you know, what that means.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
That's that's not that's not tsa stuff.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
Current administration is just quite fond of saying the quiet
part out loud, no uncertain terms, with words like lethal
and punching down, punching them the other they're down. I mean,
there's just a real, uh, you know, streak of the
kind of macho talk going on that is a little
I mean, look not to be political at all really here,
but it's just it makes me cringe a little bit.
(13:08):
It's hard to say, it's hard to hear. It feels
a little, i don't know, mma ish kind of like
taunting your enemy. And maybe some people are into that
and think that's the right move, but to me it
feels unprofessional.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
Maybe it's also not well ridden. To me, just on
a very specific point, the language and the mechanisms are
just not working. And part of that is because, as
critics allege, the current supervision of the most dangerous military
in the world is increasingly run and helmed by people
(13:43):
who do not have the qualifications that were historically requisite
for those positions. I'm talking, of course, about Pete Hexath,
who you may know best as being portrayed by Colin
jost In the newest season of Saturday Night Live perfect
Can you believe it?
Speaker 4 (14:00):
We're incredible casting. And also, I just wanted to add
two guys. I think there are some people, you know,
who are fans of this administration who might argue that
this is exactly the kick in the pants that the
government positions need is having all that experience that's old
hat and that is not that is not how we
make changes doing things the old way, that we need
to bring in new blood, and that that experience, that
(14:22):
lack of experience, is a feature, not a bug.
Speaker 3 (14:23):
We hear that, we hear that. We also we also
know that shake ups, to your point, are incredibly necessary
in a large organization. A weird fact about the size.
First off, if you are not from the United States,
thank you for tuning in. We've got to tell you,
despite being an individualistic capitalist democracy, the largest single employer
(14:52):
in all of the United States is the Department of Defense.
The military is this country's largest employer by far.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
That's right. And now they're doing maximum lethality, not tepid legality.
They're doing violent effects, not politically correct.
Speaker 4 (15:11):
All right, poetry slam.
Speaker 2 (15:13):
Sorry that's from him.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
I don't think he wrote it.
Speaker 4 (15:18):
But but he delivered it, that's for dang sure. And
he was he was on beat.
Speaker 3 (15:23):
I'll give him that. He was on beat with it.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
When this with his hands, you know, like doing the
Mariah Carey thing.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
It's a teaser for the album. Yeah, cut the track.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
Snare up in my headphones.
Speaker 3 (15:36):
I don't have him snare my headphones. We're talking about
more than one point three million active duty service members.
Then we're talking seven hundred and fifty thousand or so
civilian personnel, and then more than eight hundred eleven thousand
National Guard Reserve service members. Those are the official stats,
(15:58):
but they also don't out what six hundred thousand something
private sector employees who are you know, some of them
are war fighters, some of them are going to be
boffins over at places like Lockey Martin, the folks who
make the weapons systems for the defense industry.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
And this is one is Eric Prince.
Speaker 4 (16:21):
One is Eric Prince.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
Of course, returning character. I hope he finally figures out
a name for his little company he keeps going back.
Speaker 4 (16:29):
Which one is Eric Prince? Y'all, I don't think I'm familiar.
Sorry if I'm out of the loop.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
On the Mountain. He's an aristocrat, right wing in the US.
But it's fair, he said, Well, he controls Blackwater Academy. Fally,
they just keep going through. I mean it's their Wagner
Army essentially at this point. But like, this is what
I was thinking about, guys. Okay, So anyone who has
(16:56):
ever had a job knows that social dynamics can be
a challenge, even if you've got a relatively small workforce,
you know, like you have in your day to day career.
Let's say you have you're part of a team of
five people, or let's say you work at a top
notch American establishment like Dave and Busters. You have a
(17:19):
group of coworkers, you know them, but they're all still humans.
So there are going to be challenging social dynamics layabouts.
Speaker 4 (17:28):
Did We also mentioned how that David Busters is considered
a wing of the Armed Services as well.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
It's like training programs exactly, Yeah, brought well, they're contractors
brought to you by Illumination Globe Blood limited and the
signs are there once you check. But that's that's the thing,
Like the social dynamics don't really change based upon the
size of the humans interacting you're still going to find
some of the same almost sacricynct or invulnerable rules like
(17:58):
any other group, the military, like any other company. Really,
they have strict rules, codes, and policies to keep everybody
in line, to keep every little gear moving towards the
engine of the greater good. And if you violate these rules,
even the ones that seem arbitrary to you in theory,
that violation results in a range of punishments up to
(18:21):
and including getting incarcerated, getting thrown, and the brig getting
court martialed. They get in badly.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
It's interesting to think about the rules or the laws
or whatever you want to put it, right, the rules
of functioning within one of those groups, because each one
is going to have its own culture, right, are like
a separate culture, and that can change by like institution
or even building or you know, a base or a
(18:49):
ship like that slight culture change. But then you've also
got norms, so things that normally may happen, and then
how that organization or the top levels of that organization
handle those incidents well.
Speaker 4 (19:04):
And guys, I mean we just talked about Seer School
for example, about how inherent in some of these branches
there is as part of the training regime, things that
could be considered assault, things that could be considered the
most extreme forms of hazing. And I've seen full metal jacket,
I know what a blanket party is. I mean, like,
these are this kind of hazing. These rituals, they could
(19:29):
be argued, are just part of toughening people up, are
just part of the culture that yields good warfighters, good soldiers.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
Yeah, that's the rationale historically. And while we're talking pop culture,
this also reminds me of an excellent novel, The Stand,
written by a guy named Stephen King. In The Stand spoiler,
it's been adapted a couple of times, but read the novel.
In The Stand, the humanity encounters a lab create mutation
(20:01):
of influenza that wipes out the majority of the population,
and when the lab gets violated, right when things go wrong,
the virus begins to spread. This early in the book,
there's a military commander who is presented the option of
going public and warning people or covering up the entire
(20:25):
thing and trying to keep our problems in house. And
he has this moment that King writes really well where
he says, you know, he essentially says the military is
our mother. And if you find your mother violated or
desecrated right in her home, what's the first thing you do.
(20:46):
You don't go to the authorities. The first thing you
do is you cover up her body. And that is
something that I think is integral to a lot of
military reasoning in the United States. Yeah, we went dark,
but mommy.
Speaker 4 (21:06):
You're not wrong. Yeah, well it's the idea of Oh gosh,
I was actually I was watching The Simpsons last night
and there is an episode where Homer gets drafted into
the Navy and he's on a naval submarine with the
commander and it's almost like one of those things like
in the movie Being There, where this sort of dopey
(21:26):
person accidentally is saying really smart things or people are
interpreting it as such. And he's trying to get some peas,
and the naval commander says, yes, we all want peace,
and how do we get peace? And his Homer is
trying to pick up, scoop up the peas with a knife.
He says, with a knife. He goes, exactly, you need
you have to use a knife to get peace. There's
(21:46):
no namby pamby pussy footing around. We have the one. Sorry, wow,
I mean.
Speaker 3 (21:53):
That's another thing, right, Like we're we're thinking about the
size of an organization. Regardless of what you think about
the us AR enforces, there is no denying that it
is a gigantic, nostaltic organization. So that means the rules
don't always work the way they are supposed to. Things
(22:14):
fall through the cracks, Corruption occurs, crime as well. Individual
actors become concerned about their self right, their self interest,
So maybe they bend the rules, maybe they break the rules,
maybe they bury some bodies we have seen.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
Well, I think spend your idea of protecting the organization
itself and its reputation.
Speaker 4 (22:37):
It's legacy, it's you know.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
Your ability to get recruits that want to be a
part of this organization. You do not want the name
sullied of any of these organizations.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
If you're up there, right, don't let your flag hit
the dirt, you know, even when you're doing dirt to
save it. So Catholic Church, right, So another large organization. Yeah,
out our previous episodes, recent years, folks have exposed a
profoundly disturbing series of genuine conspiracies at the heart of
(23:11):
the world's most dangerous military. You see, folks, despite all
the rules and the regulations, a great many critics, including
veterans and active service members who may be watching the
show tonight, they're alleging that the military, for decades and
decades has been covering up the harassment, assault, and murder
(23:36):
of their own. The call is coming from inside the house.
And again, folks, the following may contain descriptions of graphic
violence and unclean things. As a result, this episode may
not be appropriate for all audience members. Will be right back.
(24:00):
Here's where it gets crazy. We've got to talk about
one of the most well known cases of conspiracy here.
I think it's a story we all remember, right from
about five years ago.
Speaker 2 (24:13):
It feels like we have at least mentioned this because
of when it happened, and then some of the other
military topics we've talked about. I think we've passed it
in or we mentioned it in passing as one of
the atrocious things that has occurred. And guys, I couldn't
find the episode to like point people to, I swear
we have.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
We're talking about the homicide of private first class now
posthumously promoted to specialist, Vanessa giet So. Vanessa again is
in Fort Hood, Texas. She's twenty years old, Private first class.
She it's a long term goal of hers to get
into the military, so she's set for a long life
(24:56):
and she may end up being one of those people
who does don't just do their bid and get honorably discharged.
She may be going for a full career.
Speaker 4 (25:07):
Right.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
This may be the most important decision of her life.
That all changed on April twenty second, twenty twenty, when
Vanessa disappeared. So as we know, this is already not
looking good and an investigation ensues. The family feels that
the army is stone walling them at every step. They're
(25:29):
keeping them in the dark. They're not telling them details
about their investigation into their daughter's disappearance. They call it
for now, and the FBI is getting involved right. Multiple
military authorities are getting involved in this search, and they're
looking all around the area surrounding Fort Hood. There are
(25:53):
also a number of protests. The public gets winned. Hundreds
of people are rallying for answers. The biggest mass protest
was at the very gates of Fort Hood on June thirteenth,
twenty twenty. This person is missing for more than two months,
before things take a turn and investigators discover pieces of
(26:20):
her body. She has not disappeared, she has died. The
remains they find are burned, dismembered. They were buried under
concrete and possibly dug up by a scavenging animal, and
this was discovered along the nearby Leon River on June thirtieth,
(26:41):
So around this time the authorities with this discovery, they
reinterview a local civilian named Cecily and Aguilar. Aguilar has
been married to a guy who's a soldier at Fort Hood,
but they're estrange. She is the girlfriend of a person
(27:03):
we have to mention at this point, Aaron David Robinson.
Aaron David Robinson, enlisted, also a soldier also at Fort Hood,
ranked specialist, one of the last known people to have
seen Gayenne on the day of her disappearance. He had
been previously interviewed by authorities as well, just because of
the timeline, but he had not been detained at that
(27:26):
point until Aguilar told the police that her boyfriend had
confessed to her that he murdered a female soldier unnamed.
So at the behest of the cops of the police,
she calls Robinson. She texts him stuff She specifically sends
(27:47):
a text that says, baby, they found pieces, referring to
Vanessa's body.
Speaker 4 (27:52):
WHOA.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
So she was working with police to get him to
officially confess, like in their presence or something, or over
in the presence of her phone. I suppose that's what
they're trying to get her to do.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
Yes, that seems to be the case. We also know
that he did not. Robinson did not ever say what
are you talking about or explicitly deny any of the stuff.
She was also texting news stories about the discovery and
the investigation.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Put heat on him. Do we know? Do we know
if the specialist ranked is that above whatever? Private? First class?
Speaker 4 (28:29):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (28:29):
She was okay, so she was throughout this whole process.
If this guy isn't actually involved, she's feeling the pressure
of that institutional thing. That's like I didn't really fully
understand that that it was like, is that like sergeant
rank or above? I don't know how any of that works.
Speaker 3 (28:46):
The sergeant was the one that had harassed her that
she refused to report. But definitely power structures are in play,
and we we haven't we haven't gotten to what actually happened.
So on the same evening, that these remains are discovered,
Robinson flees. He goes on the run. He probably knew
(29:09):
the walls were closing in. He was deceptively told by
investigators that he was being held and a new function
detained for violating COVID nineteen quarantine rules. However, he just
had one unarmed guard on him and he was able
to slip the news. He got out for a second
(29:30):
off base, and police located him, and as they were
coming to apprehend him, he took his old life via
firearm in the wee hours of July first, So he
did not escape for very long.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Geez. So the guy was still on the base when
he gets apprehended, so they just held him there and
then he just gets out for a second. Man, That's
that's insane.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
Well, these grizzly details are currently matters of public record,
and what you need to know here, folks, is the
ultimate result. Multiple investigations have concluded that Vanessa Gillen's life
was cut short on April twenty second, twenty twenty. She
(30:18):
did not consensually disappear. She was bludgeoned to death by
Aaron David Robinson. He was also another soldierhood obviously and
he was about twenty years old at the time. So
the truth did ultimately come out. To go out to
get to it, but you need to know the story
because it is a snapshot of a larger picture. The
(30:42):
Gillen family, they believe their darker depths to these events.
They call for justice, right sweeping improvements of the way
sexual harassment is handled by the US military, and Yen's
mother also says, look, I spoke to multiple witnesses who
were there when Robinson died, when the assailant died, and
(31:05):
those multiple witnesses tell me they heard two gunshots at
the time of the suicide. So she believes to this
day that Robinson did not take his own life. Instead,
he was executed by authorities as part of a larger
cover up, possibly involving senior members of the military over
(31:26):
at Fort Hood.
Speaker 2 (31:27):
WHOA Okay, so that goes back to the sergeant that
she was talking about she was assaulted by or did
she say assaulted by the sergeant?
Speaker 4 (31:38):
Harassed, harassm assed? Okay?
Speaker 2 (31:40):
All right, So theoretically, in this version, right, if we
take it to be true, potentially this person that killed
her wasn't someone who was assaulting her or harassing her.
This was someone who was sent to take her out.
Speaker 3 (31:55):
Well, it appears from what we understand, it appears that
this Robinson character, this soldier brutally murdered the other soldier
because they were fraternizing, or he found out or she
found out that he had a girlfriend, and that's the
(32:19):
official story. It became she saw like a picture of
his civilian girlfriend on his phone while it was screen locked,
and then he murdered her. But that doesn't seem like
the entirety of the story, even now in twenty twenty six.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
God no, right, yeah, very least. That's quite the extreme overreaction.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
Ray and the allegation of cover up there is more
directly that Robinson himself. I mean, it gets to like
a few good men's style, right, that maybe Robinson was
told to get rid of this person, and then maybe
he got disavowed, and then maybe he became inconvenient and
was self murdered. But again, we don't have the full
(33:04):
details on this, other than to say it definitely feels
like a conspiracy in a cover up.
Speaker 4 (33:10):
Well, I will say that the messiness of all of
this certainly doesn't seem to imply a systematic conspiracy that
involves taking people out. It feels like a lot of
crime of passion, messy randomness, and then perhaps to cover
up after the facts, right.
Speaker 3 (33:30):
Yeah, I agree with that because folks, as we've said previously,
oftentimes true conspiracies are not going to be vast you know,
doctor doom level finger steepled machinations into the future, or machinations,
if you want to drive language that way. Instead, it's
gonna be someone making mistake, right, and then fumbling and
(33:54):
trying to cover up that mistake. That's usually what happens.
Speaker 4 (33:58):
And then sometimes you have to cover up the cover.
Speaker 3 (33:59):
Up, right, and it's just cover ups all the way down.
Matroshka doll of conspiracy. This single case, though it did
make it to the public eye, made it to mainstream media,
made it out of the secretive internal mechanics of the
armed forces. And when the civilians learn about this, when
(34:20):
other siloed service members learn about this, this single case
triggers a massive tide, a tsunami of reports of similar
allegations of cover up, corruption, crime, and conspiracy. What if
we take a break for a word from our sponsors,
come back, talk about a couple more cases, and then
(34:42):
look at the larger picture here and we've returned. Do
you two remember the story of Private first Class Florence Schmorgener.
I do not, nor do I schmo to her friends.
(35:02):
All right, this is twenty to fifteen, so this is
before the case we discussed previously. This Private is nineteen
years old in the Marines, stationed to California's twenty nine Palms,
which is going to be legendary and bring up a
lot of bad memories to anybody who's ever had had
(35:23):
to be stationed there. All right, so they're an off time,
they're hanging out. Think of it like almost like a
dorm room these barracks, you're playing video games. Because of
the policy at the time, when male and female Marines
are in the same room like this, you have to
keep the door open, kind of like how parents have
(35:45):
that rule about you know, teenage paramoors coming over.
Speaker 4 (35:49):
Oh yeah, you guys.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
A good rule. That's a really good rule.
Speaker 3 (35:52):
It's a really good rule rule. As people who tried
to get around that rule so many times growing up,
it's a really smart rule.
Speaker 2 (36:01):
Yes, I'm not going to say anything more, but I
have learned as a as a young man that that
rule is important.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
It's very important. It's very important for a number of reasons.
And thanks to everybody who is chuckling and having their
own memories in the crowd. This gets dark because at
some point, we're about mid afternoon. At some point, Florence
falls asleep on her friend's bed, and when she wakes,
(36:32):
the door is closed. This is against policy. Her male
quote unquote friend is groping her, removes her clothing and
sexually assaults her. She has no idea what to do.
She doesn't know who to report to. She does know
(36:53):
what policies are available. It's twenty fifteen, so she knows
well the potential for retaliation. And we're pulling some of
this from The New York Times in an interview with her.
The next few weeks are terrified for this kid because
she sees her assaulter multiple times. Right, they work in
(37:16):
the same place, they use the same gym, she says.
Over the next few years she tries to trigger by
this trauma. She tries to take her own life on
at least six separate occasions. It's not until twenty seventeen
that she meets somebody else who can help her.
Speaker 4 (37:33):
And yeah, we know and have seen numerous accounts of
even in the civilian world, the idea of reporting a
sexual assault being incredibly emotionally complex, and potentially if it
was done by someone, you know, the idea of rationalizing
it after the fact, or it was a friend, or
he didn't mean it, or this, that and the other.
(37:53):
So even in the I'm not going to say the
best of circumstances, there's no best of circumstances here. But
when you do have recourse in a way to report
these attacks, these types of assaults in a system, perhaps
even through the emergency room and the idea of a
rape kit being done, it's incredibly complicated and difficult. In
this framework. In the military, there's already this overarching sense
(38:16):
of don't do it, it's bad for you. If you
do it, it's.
Speaker 2 (38:20):
Just bad for us.
Speaker 4 (38:21):
If bad for us, thank you, that's what I exactly right,
and are us a whole other layer of that emotional
complexity that would make it even more to the point
of what you just said, ben even more devastating. And
then to continue on in that environment.
Speaker 2 (38:37):
And the knowledge that the likelihood that something is actually
going to happen or a full investigation is going to occur,
or there's going to be any justice or anything like that.
Just knowing that that is few and far between already.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
Even worse that you do stand up and report it,
and then not only does nothing happen, but then it
makes you a new target.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
Absolutely right, And at each point you're re experiencing what occurred. Right.
This is also part of the This is one of
the reasons that survivors of assault may choose not to
testify in court, you know, and it's very valid, very
disturbing reason. Here's what changes. In twenty seventeen. Our protagonist
(39:22):
meets another survivor of assault, a fellow marine named Echo Arnold.
Echo is the one who encourages Schmorgunner to file an
actual report. So at first she files what's called a
restricted report. The details are confidential, there is no investigation.
(39:47):
All that happens is the complainant that closes what happened,
and they get healthcare and counseling. And I don't know
if I would always trust the counseling to be quite honest.
So a month later, this person filed an unrestricted report
to initiating an investigation into sexual assault that could result
(40:07):
in consequences for the offender. I don't know, it gets
shut down. They do the same thing like the Aguilar
case we mentioned earlier. This is run The investigation is
run by NCIS, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and they
get her on a phone with this abuser, and this
(40:30):
guy is now based in Hawaii. She's on the phone
with him, she talks about what happened. He confesses, and
he apologizes, and so now we're thinking we might see justice.
But NCIS shuts down the investigation and they say, yeah,
I guess he did confess, but we've got character witnesses
(40:54):
and they're saying nice things about him, and also we
don't have any physical evidence that this assault occurred. Feels
like a cover up.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
Well it's weird, wouldn't All you need is a confession
and you could at least do some kind of action, right.
Speaker 3 (41:12):
Right, that's the issue, you know, if you have if
you have the person literally saying I did this, I apologize,
that feels like case closed. Right then. It feels like
denying that confession is a cover up based on character witnesses.
Speaker 4 (41:36):
I don't know. That's not the typical procedure, right, Oh
it is. That's some legal gymnastics after the fact to
make the result that's most convenient. I mean, gosh, like,
and how come a rape kit wasn't done in the
first place. I guess that would require an immediate reporting,
(41:57):
which doesn't seem like would be the common the norm
in situations like this.
Speaker 3 (42:02):
Yeah, because this person was not provided the resources to
continue right to find those avenues for justice. The investigation
in this case closes in twenty eighteen. The assailant meets
no consequences despite the confession. He serves his time with
the Marines, he does his bid, he leaves with an
(42:26):
honorable discharge, so nothing on his record. And these two
cases we're outlining here, they just add to an unclean
litany of similar events, similar conspiracies. Maybe we talked briefly
about stuff like the Aberdeen scandal, the USAF Academy scandal,
or how about the nineteen ninety one Tailhook scandal.
Speaker 2 (42:49):
Oh yeah, let's talk about the Tailhook incident. Let's jump
to September nineteen ninety one to a Las Vegas convention
center and to a little thing the Navy is putting
on there. It's a huge convention called Tailhook. I had
never heard of this before. Guys, This has been reported
on a ton by PBS. I even saw, oh, someone
(43:09):
we've talked to on this show before, Celeste Hedley, hosting
a report on this from just a couple of years ago.
Speaker 4 (43:17):
We don't have a CELESTI that what you're saying for
Big Sugar, Wasn't that what it was? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (43:21):
Yeah, I'm also host of Freeway Phantom. But she's doing
a report on PBS about this from nineteen ninety one,
something I'd never heard about, and I don't know why
I've never heard about this. This is a convention in
Las Vegas where there are a ton of Naval officers,
specifically officers who are in the flight training programs. Because
we know Navy is on the sea, but things like
(43:42):
aircraft carriers, there's an entire Navy flight force basically that
is out there. Think of top Gun, that is naval
aerospace forces.
Speaker 3 (43:53):
Yeah, the two biggest air forces in the world are
in this order, the United States Air Force and the
US Navy.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Yes, you got things like the Navy Strike Fighter Tactics
Instructor Program and the Navy Fighter Weapons schools. These are
things that are actually top gun is in reference to
and what occurs in nineteen ninety one is at this
conference center. A lot of large groups of the officers
(44:21):
were accused of getting very very drunk and hanging out
having parties after the major events of the convention, and
then there were a lot of stories that came out
right after of these groups of men harassing, assaulting, and
raping women in that convention center hotel.
Speaker 3 (44:43):
Eighty three women and seven men.
Speaker 2 (44:45):
What the well, well, here's the thing. At first, nobody
knows about those numbers. There are rumors, there are some
people that are saying stuff went down, and it's a
known thing that stuff goes down at these conferences, specifically
with the Navy in this case.
Speaker 4 (45:00):
In that context, Matt tho, would they be more referring
to people get up to some fratonizing. You know, there's
set boys will be boys at it, right.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
That that is what the Navy.
Speaker 4 (45:10):
That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (45:13):
Yes, yes, yeah, But one person, Paula Coughlin, actually comes
out and she tries to get something done. After there's
an official internal investigation where there are fifteen hundred officers
questioned who were there at the convention. Only two officers
are named as suspects in some of the stuff that occurred,
(45:33):
and most of the officers refuse to cooperate. So Paula
goes on television and she says this, not every man
in the Navy behaves like that, but those who did
shouldn't remain in the Navy or the Marine Corps and
begins talking about that kind of toxic masculinity thing that
existed as a culture, not for one particular reason, but
(45:57):
for a lot of the things we talked about, especially
at the top of this episode. And this is a
time in the early nineteen nineties when men and women
are beginning to work closely together within the Navy and
the Army and other parts of the military, which is
not something that the establishment was used to, and rather
than you know, set up resources or anything like that
(46:18):
or figure out the problems, it was kind of covered up.
It was definitely covered up for quite a while, and
it wasn't until later that they there was an official
Pentagon investigation that found out that there was just a
what did you say where the numbers been.
Speaker 3 (46:33):
Yeah, the numbers for the nineteen ninety one Tailhook scandal
are eighty three women and seven men who are assaulted
during this convention. Again, that's September fifth through the seventh
nineteen ninety one coming out.
Speaker 4 (46:46):
That's a really good point, you guys, about how relatively
new this dynamic was, and it would make sense that
there wouldn't instantly be you know, resources for this kind
of stuff. This kind of stuff, I mean, it is
a very old organization with a lot of built in norms,
you know, and cultures within various branches of the armed forces.
(47:10):
And I'm looking around, and I mean there's certainly folks
who historically have criticized the inclusion of women in the
military because of quote unquote sexual tension that it could cause.
And that kind of language implies a victim blaming mentality
a little bit to me. I don't know, maybe I'm
(47:31):
overstated the case very much.
Speaker 2 (47:33):
So.
Speaker 3 (47:33):
I mean, consider the problem of co ed service members
on submarines, right, that was one of the last holdouts.
The Pentagon definitely historically pushed against inclusion in certain fighting forces.
The gosh, the Marines were very similar as well. And
we see more of these scandals, you know, like the
(47:55):
Aberdeen scandal, I think it's a full episode nineteen ninety six,
the USAF Academy scandal at two thousand and three, what
we're saying is the list goes on and on and on,
often with a very similar pattern of cover up and
eventual disclosure.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
Oh yeah, there's an official Pentagon investigation over a lot
from like twenty twelve all the way to twenty eighteen,
and the Pentagon estimated that there were around twenty thousand
sexual assaults that occurred in that year, and that is
because there were a little over six thousand sexual assaults
reported by service members. So the estimation there is that
(48:35):
there are many more that occur. Only about six thousand
were reported, And of those twenty thousand assaults, the Pentagon
believes that around seventy five hundred of the victims in
those assaults were male.
Speaker 4 (48:48):
So this is not a.
Speaker 2 (48:49):
Male male or female thing. This is a culture thing, yes,
where power comes into play, where there's so much at
play here that is just beyond what you may imagine.
Speaker 4 (49:02):
Well, it makes me think too of some of the
rhetoric around gay people serving openly in the military. How
the overarching sort of TACIT policy was don't ask, don't tell.
But of course there's things that are going on and
people that are being targeted, and perhaps people that are
closeted that are going to lash out in that way.
(49:24):
I think it's so important to mention the gender despair sure,
or the fact that it's not a gender specific thing.
Speaker 3 (49:30):
No, as we'll see in just a moment here, going
back to some of those reports, there are definitely male
identifying victims. This all leads to a larger picture. This
is the grand conspiracy of these cover ups and this corruption.
As a result of the Gien case and growing public outcry,
(49:51):
the Secretary of the Army at the time, a guy
named Ryan D. McCarthy, said, we're going to have an
independent investigation December. We're jumping around in time. He announces
the results of this first independent investigation and says there
is a quote permissive environment for sexual assault and sexual
(50:12):
harassment at Fort Hood. Then further says there were multiple
leadership failures. There were punishments for fourteen US commanders and
other leaders. And in the wake of this, Okay, these
investigations are important, it's crucial that they occur. But in
the wake of this, the public begins to learn that
(50:33):
these systemic issues, these secrets, have been open secrets internally
for quite some time. I'd love to recommend the journalist
Melenda Wenner Moyer, writing for New York Times in twenty
twenty one, She cites reports finding nearly one and four
US service women report being sexually assaulted during their time
(50:55):
in the military and the military leaders this is intergenerational, guys.
The military leaders have repeatedly promised reform and then just
never followed through. In twenty twenty one, women or female
identifying service members their distinct minority. We're talking about sixteen
(51:16):
point five percent of the Armed services, but of that
sixteen point five percent, nearly one and four is harassed
or sexually assaulted.
Speaker 4 (51:28):
It's insane, I mean.
Speaker 3 (51:31):
More than half. From a meta study that will actually
ruin your day if you want to check it out,
published in twenty eighteen in a journal called Trauma, Violence
and Abuse, finds that more than half of serving female
identifying people are also reporting sexual harassment. And to our
earlier point, men are also reporting similar events, but they're
(51:56):
doing so at significantly lower rates. And one thing we
have to know here is the issue of reporting, right,
So it's quite possible that the numbers, I would say,
it's virtually certain that the numbers are much higher, and
we're only looking at the people who actually did make
(52:18):
an official report. There was a twenty twelve survey from
the Pentagon itself that found in twenty twelve alone, twenty
six thousand men and women were sexually assaulted, and of
those assaults only like less than four thousand were officially reported.
(52:38):
This is a real conspiracy. This feels systemic. It doesn't
feel case.
Speaker 4 (52:42):
There's no question. It does feel that way. Yeah. No,
it's not one base, it's not one leader. Just yeah,
it's it's inherent in the system. Well did that.
Speaker 2 (52:52):
There's got to be there must be real fear. The
PBS report talks about and talks to a specific person, Lewis,
who was He's a former petty officer within the Navy,
and he talks about being raped at knife point by
a superior officer and how horrific that was. And then
when he attempted to tell people and get help and
(53:17):
get justice about this, he got discharged. He got diagnosed
with a personality disorder by the Navy, and they let
him go. They like said, get out of here. He
got discharged and nothing ever happened to the person that
assaulted him.
Speaker 4 (53:32):
You know, it reminds me a lot too of the
way police officers who report corruption within certain you know,
law enforcement agencies are treated the idea of being a
rat or something like that, and it does have a
very similar feel to it, and that does feel systemic.
Speaker 3 (53:52):
Which is why no one likes eternal affairs or the
idea of violating the thin blue line. I've got a question,
you know, if we are to ask ourselves what causes
this actual systemic conspiracy, then a big part of it
seems to go down to the way these crimes get
investigated and prosecuted. This is something that's going to be
(54:13):
familiar to a lot of us in the audience. The
Uniform Code of Military Justice. This means that should a
service member commit a crime, military commanders, not civilian law enforcement,
decide whether to investigate and or pursue legal action. Of course,
so I mean this case to point there in this
(54:35):
case is showing the public not just other cases of
assault and cover ups, but it also shows us something positive,
something I hope we find inspiring a long running attempt
by other forces, the quote unquote good guys to reform
this system. I'm thinking of folks like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
(54:59):
or Jilibrand, and this would this argument for years the
Senator was doing this. They were saying, Hey, take the
decision to prosecute major crimes, including sex crimes, away from
military command. Put it into the purview of independent prosecutors,
people who cannot be touched by the military power structure.
(55:23):
The Pentagon hated it, but.
Speaker 4 (55:25):
Of course they did. Yeah, I just want to double
back down to what we said at the top of
the show and extend it even a step further. We
are also incredibly grateful for folks who serve and folks
who you know, serve in the armed forces and are
out there, you know, being the good guys. But it
just it's hard to hear stories like this and not
(55:46):
just you know, see the rot that's kind of inherent
in the system that does not necessarily extend to every
man and woman that wants to go out there and
do good. I don't think that's what we're saying. It's
just important to kind of look at the whole thing
and take a holistic approach.
Speaker 2 (56:02):
If you're interested in looking at some of the reforms
that have actually occurred over this long span, at least
since nineteen ninety one, when Paula Coughlin spoke publicly let's
say about the tailhook incident. You can look to protect
our Defenders foundation. They've got an incredible timeline that you
(56:23):
can look to and see all of the tiny, little
small changes that have occurred, you know, when fits and starts,
and then some of the large sweeping changes that officially
are in place now. Even though it doesn't it doesn't
seem to have changed fully the culture, But are there
are positive things that you can look to and specific
human beings as you were mentioning Ben who have done
(56:46):
some good.
Speaker 4 (56:46):
Yeah, I mean, and I didn't mean to sound too
hard on sleeve with what I was saying. Minutego. I
think what I just mean is that, you know, folks
who go put themselves out there to do this kind
of service, they should not have to be terrified of
these types of outcomes, you know. And that's all I'm saying.
Speaker 3 (57:05):
Yeah, absolutely well said, and I think we're all saying that.
I think we can all agree on that. I want
to go back to the reasoning we almost missed here
about the Pentagon statements needs to be said. The Pentagon
was opposed to reform of any sort outside of a
few isolated investigations because they said this sort of move
(57:28):
away from the UCMJ would quote have a detrimental impact
on the ability of commanders to ensure good order and
discipline end quote. History proves, folks that this reasoning. Maybe
it's valid to some degree, but it's not enough to
justify the horrors these survivors have faced. To that earlier point,
(57:53):
there have been some reforms, and very positive ones, things
like the im Vanessa Gee Act, parts of that became
law in December twenty twenty one. The chief among these
was criminalizing sexual harassment and removing the decision to prosecute
(58:15):
sexual misconduct cases they call them, from the chain of command.
And right now we are happy to report that the
teams of independent prosecutors that were created from this act
have been pretty well received. They've been able to get
justice or survivors, because we don't like to use the
(58:37):
word victim, we like to use the word survivor. Yet again,
this is another thing we all agree on. Reform itself,
while positive, is not the same thing as fixing the
problem one hundred percent. So right now, as we're recording
tonight again March tenth, twenty twenty six, it is virtually
certain that many people in the armed forces, some of
(59:00):
whom are listening now have been the victims of assault
or sexual crime, have filed reports, have been stonewalled, or
never filed at all due to real possibilities of retaliation,
and the retaliation itself might never be acknowledged, it might
never be prosecuted. This is an ongoing conspiracy, and we
(59:21):
want to thank again all the service members and veterans
in the audience tonight. We also want to hear your thoughts,
especially if you have served in the military or military
adjacent fields. Have you encountered cover ups of this nature.
If so, what was or was not done? There's another
war looming on the horizon, you guys. Have you seen
(59:42):
the speculation about the return of the draft.
Speaker 4 (59:44):
I saw some offhanded comments made about it, but I
also saw that, you know, it's kind of the war's over,
it's going to be done. Then there was never a
war in the first place, but it's a couple more
days in terms, so of course, yeah, I mean, it's
hard not to get stressed out about things like that.
And do let us know if you've had any of
these types of experiences, and of course we will keep
you anonymous.
Speaker 3 (01:00:04):
And let us know. To the degree that you're comfortable
share your stories. We think we can agree. We can
conclusively say, right now when it comes to sexual assault,
there's something the military doesn't want you to know. Tell
us your thoughts please.
Speaker 4 (01:00:21):
You can find us at the handle Conspiracy Stuff and
Conspiracy Stuff Show, depending on your social media platform of choice,
and you can also find us a few other ways.
Speaker 2 (01:00:30):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three STDWYTK. When you call in, give yourself a cool
nickname and let us know if we can use your
name and message on one of our listener mail episodes
that appear in the audio feed of this show. Find
those wherever you listen to audio feeds called podcasts. If
you want to send us an email, we are the
(01:00:52):
entities the.
Speaker 3 (01:00:53):
Redeach piece of correspondence we receive, be well aware, yet unafraid.
Sometimes the void writes back. So hit us up with
your thoughts, hit us up for a random fact, or
give us one of your own. We'll see you out
here in the dark Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:01:29):
Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app.
Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer, Dylan the Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you
are you.
Speaker 4 (00:38):
You are here.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know. Folks,
as you may know, longtime listeners, new listeners, welcome. We're
all fellow conspiracy realists. We started this show and for
the most part continue this show in the United States.
The United States is home to a lot of things
other then stuff they don't want you to know. Some
(01:01):
of those things are great, right, and some of those
things are terrifying. I always remember that. I always remember
that stand up bit from years ago. I want to
say it was Dennis Leary maybe Carlin who pointed out
that the United States is the only country that would
look at cocaine and say, we need a little something extra.
Speaker 4 (01:24):
We can do better.
Speaker 3 (01:25):
Size it.
Speaker 4 (01:26):
Yeah, it can do better now, Yeah, sure, and we
can do better. But what it's true. Lest folks come
at us saying that we're like anti American or something,
we all love this country. We want to protect it,
we want to keep living here.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
You know it kind of rules well in the country
does a lot to protect itself theoretically, right with the
Department of Defense. It's all about defending the homeland, the country,
the culture, or the commerce, all the sea. We're we're
seeing a lot of military mind in the news right now, aren't.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
We, right Yeah, known as the land of big Stuff,
That's what I'll call it here, folks. The United States
supersizes everything, and Uncle Sam's armed forces are no exception.
We all know that. In the wake of World War Two,
when so many other countries had their bells rung, there
(02:24):
was no infrastructure that could match that of the US,
and so the US from those seeds grew the most
powerful military across the planet Earth. We're talking right now
as we record on Tuesday, March tenth, we're talking about
unmatched global reach, a blue water navy that no one
can mess with, unmatched funding, peerless training, and of course
(02:48):
technological superiority.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
We talked about it before, but it really did help
in World War Two. That we were so far away
from most of the fighting and we could build incredible
technological ships and send them, you know, that way across
the Pacific to help out. But we didn't really, we
didn't get decimated.
Speaker 4 (03:08):
No, that's a good point. I didn't really think about that. Guys.
Has it always been a thing that we call our
brave men and women of the military war fighters?
Speaker 3 (03:17):
It has not always been a thing that is like
a warfighters TM kind of situation, Like it's a little
bit of a rebrand, right, Yeah, it's a rhetorical device essentially,
it's marketing, it's pr The preferred term internally is going
to be service members. I would posit that warfighter came
(03:38):
into vogue when we saw the rise of private military contractors. Now,
then we have a new umbrella term that means people
who are not technically in the armed forces but have
a contract to help us mess some things up. So
now they're all war fighters, even if it's not a
war right right, Well, even if it's just an operation. Yeah,
(04:04):
war fighters.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
Sexy operation fighters. Now operators is scary character its own thing, right.
Operators are like the real the wet boys, right Yeah, And.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
Thanks for tuning in guys be safe out there.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Well, it is weird to I'm sorry, just thinking about
this more and more. The words we use to describe
the individual within the large infrastructure of a military right,
and you hear the words soldier, officer, and then trying
to figure out what's the difference between a soldier and
an officer, and then you can go, you know, pretty
deep down in the rabbit hole of some of the
nomenclature there. Sure, but it is you know, wow, I
(04:41):
haven't really thought about that concept of war fighter being
used for the purposes of kind of hacking your brain.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
When you think about that, it's a flex It's like
look at our look at our you know, superheroes kind
of right.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Yeah, it it polled well with certain demographics, that's the reality.
Same with phrases like homeland or same with we'll get
into a department of war. That's another idiom.
Speaker 4 (05:08):
Homeland is becoming a dog whistle kind of term. I mean,
does refer to like almost like the motherland, This idea
of racial purity, it feels like, is the way Homeland's
getting thrown around. We will have our home again, things
like that.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
It's tut tut. It's also ironic because the primary supporters
of language like homeland or Department of Homeland Security are
not themselves Native Americans. Story for another day. I'm just
saying it's weird to call it a homeland. How long
is the US going to be the world's most dangerous military?
(05:44):
How long will that be the case? It remains to
be seen. We live in exciting times like that old
curse and maybe ninety days, Ben, maybe maybe it's an
episode in the future, right, ninety days you think.
Speaker 2 (05:58):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, when in China's oil.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
Yeah, and then we see a cornered tiger.
Speaker 4 (06:05):
Yeah, I filled up, guys, good, good call on that.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
Yeah, man, glad you did.
Speaker 4 (06:11):
Look.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
Paranoia is something that only seems crazy before the S
hits the F, and the S did indeed hit the F.
In tonight's episode, we are exploring something that may not
be appropriate for all audiences, a disturbing series of alleged
and confirmed conspiracies about cover ups of sexual assault and
(06:37):
murder within the military. The threat came not from outside forces, but,
as we will all see tonight, came from with it. Again,
not appropriate for all listeners, but these are true conspiracies.
Speaker 4 (06:53):
Let's take a quick pause and get our wits about us,
and then we'll jump right in.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
Here are the facts, all right. We have a lot
of veterans, we have a lot of active service members
in the crowd tonight, and thank you for your service.
So for some of us this may be old beings,
but it's very important. We got to give you some
facts about the US Armed Forces because a lot of
(07:22):
civilians still don't understand just how big this thing is.
It is a leviathan, is behemoth. It is a monster
of old. I mean, it's so big that a lot
of people right now working in the military or in
adjacent industries, they're only going to see a very small
part of the larger picture in the day to day,
(07:45):
you know what I mean. It's like when we're talking
about building secret Cold War facilities or the Manhattan Project.
You could technically work in that endeavor, but if you're
the guy who just drives the truck, you have no
idea what they're building in there out out top weights.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
Always oh no.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
Well, and the three of us, I believe, have never
been members of any military service, and we imagine that
many of you have not as well. So a lot
of this is pretty new or at least things as
you're describing. There have been things that we don't think
about when our brains ping. Even you know the word military,
or you think about the navy or a military base,
(08:25):
even a complex, we don't think about the inner workings
of those systems.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, that's a great point, Matt. I mean, because how
could you full visibility on the entirety of something of
this stature seeing the forest for all those trees, It's
a herculean effort. We'll be honest, and again, I really
appreciate the point all made about how we do care
(08:53):
about this country and we're very fortunate to be here.
We also part of that great opportunity is the opportunity
to point out when things are going wrong. One of
the best, dumbest, most ridiculous examples, the size of the
US Armed Forces is such that even their budget is
(09:14):
beyond congressional understanding. It has so many loopholes, conundrums, redactions,
black bag projects we call them. We still as a
country can't figure out how to audit the thing. The
Pentagon is most famous in accounting circles for eternally failing
(09:36):
its audits. Shout out to tax season. By the way,
I'm super stoked.
Speaker 4 (09:45):
Yeah, I'm bullish taxes.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Shout out to Dick Cheney rip I guess when you
might guys remember he and he's the one who announced
during the Afghanistan Iraq conflict that, oh, yeah, we're missing
the twenties on the bill dollars.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
But it's don't matter national that doesn't matter. We got
stuff to do. So okay, if we're talking about the
armed forces, right, similar to warfighters, we are using an
umbrella term. So what what do we mean when we
say armed forces in the United States?
Speaker 4 (10:20):
That? Yeah, all of them, right, it's like all of
the different the various branches. That would be the Army, Navy,
Air Force, and don't we have a new one, the
Space Force.
Speaker 3 (10:30):
Yeah, the Marine Corps Marin Corps, of course, and then
uh and then of course the newest shiny boy.
Speaker 4 (10:41):
Yeah uh generation.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
We have the national guards, you know, the Army National Guard,
the Air National Guard. Those are considered reserve components. They operate.
The important logistic part here is they operate harshly under
the authority of an individual state in the Union and
all of this stuff, all of these people they are
(11:04):
under the supervision of the Department of Defense. Sometimes recently
called the Department of War.
Speaker 4 (11:14):
Question. Yeah, that is that was sort of a unilateral
move without any approval, So it's not technically legal, nor
is it official that it's referred to as that.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
It's official on their website, but it has not been
approved through the previously.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
Established didn't it change signage and all kinds of mentions,
And that cost a pretty penny to the taxpayers as well.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
And it was the Department of War in seventeen eighty nine.
Speaker 3 (11:42):
Right, so it's a renaming, like how Fort Hood got
renamed back to Fort Hood? Right, Yeah, So up until recently,
until about twenty eighteen, the Department of Defense, which call
it for this conversation, their mission statement, their thesis was, Hey,
(12:06):
we provide quote, the military forces needed to deter war
and to protect the security of our country. Until again,
twenty eighteen, this got changed to the mission of the
Department of Defense is to provide a lethal joint force
to defend the security of our country and to sustain
(12:29):
American influence abroad. So a little more agro, a little
more agro.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Oh, but yeah, but we remember even that initial one
protect the security of our country.
Speaker 4 (12:39):
We know what that means, you know, what that means.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
That's that's not that's not tsa stuff.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
Current administration is just quite fond of saying the quiet
part out loud, no uncertain terms, with words like lethal
and punching down, punching them the other they're down. I mean,
there's just a real, uh, you know, streak of the
kind of macho talk going on that is a little
I mean, look not to be political at all really here,
but it's just it makes me cringe a little bit.
(13:08):
It's hard to say, it's hard to hear. It feels
a little, i don't know, mma ish kind of like
taunting your enemy. And maybe some people are into that
and think that's the right move, but to me it
feels unprofessional.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
Maybe it's also not well ridden. To me, just on
a very specific point, the language and the mechanisms are
just not working. And part of that is because, as
critics allege, the current supervision of the most dangerous military
in the world is increasingly run and helmed by people
(13:43):
who do not have the qualifications that were historically requisite
for those positions. I'm talking, of course, about Pete Hexath,
who you may know best as being portrayed by Colin
jost In the newest season of Saturday Night Live perfect
Can you believe it?
Speaker 4 (14:00):
We're incredible casting. And also, I just wanted to add
two guys. I think there are some people, you know,
who are fans of this administration who might argue that
this is exactly the kick in the pants that the
government positions need is having all that experience that's old
hat and that is not that is not how we
make changes doing things the old way, that we need
to bring in new blood, and that that experience, that
(14:22):
lack of experience, is a feature, not a bug.
Speaker 3 (14:23):
We hear that, we hear that. We also we also
know that shake ups, to your point, are incredibly necessary
in a large organization. A weird fact about the size.
First off, if you are not from the United States,
thank you for tuning in. We've got to tell you,
despite being an individualistic capitalist democracy, the largest single employer
(14:52):
in all of the United States is the Department of Defense.
The military is this country's largest employer by far.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
That's right. And now they're doing maximum lethality, not tepid legality.
They're doing violent effects, not politically correct.
Speaker 4 (15:11):
All right, poetry slam.
Speaker 2 (15:13):
Sorry that's from him.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
I don't think he wrote it.
Speaker 4 (15:18):
But but he delivered it, that's for dang sure. And
he was he was on beat.
Speaker 3 (15:23):
I'll give him that. He was on beat with it.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
When this with his hands, you know, like doing the
Mariah Carey thing.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
It's a teaser for the album. Yeah, cut the track.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
Snare up in my headphones.
Speaker 3 (15:36):
I don't have him snare my headphones. We're talking about
more than one point three million active duty service members.
Then we're talking seven hundred and fifty thousand or so
civilian personnel, and then more than eight hundred eleven thousand
National Guard Reserve service members. Those are the official stats,
(15:58):
but they also don't out what six hundred thousand something
private sector employees who are you know, some of them
are war fighters, some of them are going to be
boffins over at places like Lockey Martin, the folks who
make the weapons systems for the defense industry.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
And this is one is Eric Prince.
Speaker 4 (16:21):
One is Eric Prince.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
Of course, returning character. I hope he finally figures out
a name for his little company he keeps going back.
Speaker 4 (16:29):
Which one is Eric Prince? Y'all, I don't think I'm familiar.
Sorry if I'm out of the loop.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
On the Mountain. He's an aristocrat, right wing in the US.
But it's fair, he said, Well, he controls Blackwater Academy. Fally,
they just keep going through. I mean it's their Wagner
Army essentially at this point. But like, this is what
I was thinking about, guys. Okay, So anyone who has
(16:56):
ever had a job knows that social dynamics can be
a challenge, even if you've got a relatively small workforce,
you know, like you have in your day to day career.
Let's say you have you're part of a team of
five people, or let's say you work at a top
notch American establishment like Dave and Busters. You have a
(17:19):
group of coworkers, you know them, but they're all still humans.
So there are going to be challenging social dynamics layabouts.
Speaker 4 (17:28):
Did We also mentioned how that David Busters is considered
a wing of the Armed Services as well.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
It's like training programs exactly, Yeah, brought well, they're contractors
brought to you by Illumination Globe Blood limited and the
signs are there once you check. But that's that's the thing,
Like the social dynamics don't really change based upon the
size of the humans interacting you're still going to find
some of the same almost sacricynct or invulnerable rules like
(17:58):
any other group, the military, like any other company. Really,
they have strict rules, codes, and policies to keep everybody
in line, to keep every little gear moving towards the
engine of the greater good. And if you violate these rules,
even the ones that seem arbitrary to you in theory,
that violation results in a range of punishments up to
(18:21):
and including getting incarcerated, getting thrown, and the brig getting
court martialed. They get in badly.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
It's interesting to think about the rules or the laws
or whatever you want to put it, right, the rules
of functioning within one of those groups, because each one
is going to have its own culture, right, are like
a separate culture, and that can change by like institution
or even building or you know, a base or a
(18:49):
ship like that slight culture change. But then you've also
got norms, so things that normally may happen, and then
how that organization or the top levels of that organization
handle those incidents well.
Speaker 4 (19:04):
And guys, I mean we just talked about Seer School
for example, about how inherent in some of these branches
there is as part of the training regime, things that
could be considered assault, things that could be considered the
most extreme forms of hazing. And I've seen full metal jacket,
I know what a blanket party is. I mean, like,
these are this kind of hazing. These rituals, they could
(19:29):
be argued, are just part of toughening people up, are
just part of the culture that yields good warfighters, good soldiers.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
Yeah, that's the rationale historically. And while we're talking pop culture,
this also reminds me of an excellent novel, The Stand,
written by a guy named Stephen King. In The Stand spoiler,
it's been adapted a couple of times, but read the novel.
In The Stand, the humanity encounters a lab create mutation
(20:01):
of influenza that wipes out the majority of the population,
and when the lab gets violated, right when things go wrong,
the virus begins to spread. This early in the book,
there's a military commander who is presented the option of
going public and warning people or covering up the entire
(20:25):
thing and trying to keep our problems in house. And
he has this moment that King writes really well where
he says, you know, he essentially says the military is
our mother. And if you find your mother violated or
desecrated right in her home, what's the first thing you do.
(20:46):
You don't go to the authorities. The first thing you
do is you cover up her body. And that is
something that I think is integral to a lot of
military reasoning in the United States. Yeah, we went dark,
but mommy.
Speaker 4 (21:06):
You're not wrong. Yeah, well it's the idea of Oh gosh,
I was actually I was watching The Simpsons last night
and there is an episode where Homer gets drafted into
the Navy and he's on a naval submarine with the
commander and it's almost like one of those things like
in the movie Being There, where this sort of dopey
(21:26):
person accidentally is saying really smart things or people are
interpreting it as such. And he's trying to get some peas,
and the naval commander says, yes, we all want peace,
and how do we get peace? And his Homer is
trying to pick up, scoop up the peas with a knife.
He says, with a knife. He goes, exactly, you need
you have to use a knife to get peace. There's
(21:46):
no namby pamby pussy footing around. We have the one. Sorry, wow,
I mean.
Speaker 3 (21:53):
That's another thing, right, Like we're we're thinking about the
size of an organization. Regardless of what you think about
the us AR enforces, there is no denying that it
is a gigantic, nostaltic organization. So that means the rules
don't always work the way they are supposed to. Things
(22:14):
fall through the cracks, Corruption occurs, crime as well. Individual
actors become concerned about their self right, their self interest,
So maybe they bend the rules, maybe they break the rules,
maybe they bury some bodies we have seen.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
Well, I think spend your idea of protecting the organization
itself and its reputation.
Speaker 4 (22:37):
It's legacy, it's you know.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
Your ability to get recruits that want to be a
part of this organization. You do not want the name
sullied of any of these organizations.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
If you're up there, right, don't let your flag hit
the dirt, you know, even when you're doing dirt to
save it. So Catholic Church, right, So another large organization. Yeah,
out our previous episodes, recent years, folks have exposed a
profoundly disturbing series of genuine conspiracies at the heart of
(23:11):
the world's most dangerous military. You see, folks, despite all
the rules and the regulations, a great many critics, including
veterans and active service members who may be watching the
show tonight, they're alleging that the military, for decades and
decades has been covering up the harassment, assault, and murder
(23:36):
of their own. The call is coming from inside the house.
And again, folks, the following may contain descriptions of graphic
violence and unclean things. As a result, this episode may
not be appropriate for all audience members. Will be right back.
(24:00):
Here's where it gets crazy. We've got to talk about
one of the most well known cases of conspiracy here.
I think it's a story we all remember, right from
about five years ago.
Speaker 2 (24:13):
It feels like we have at least mentioned this because
of when it happened, and then some of the other
military topics we've talked about. I think we've passed it
in or we mentioned it in passing as one of
the atrocious things that has occurred. And guys, I couldn't
find the episode to like point people to, I swear
we have.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
We're talking about the homicide of private first class now
posthumously promoted to specialist, Vanessa giet So. Vanessa again is
in Fort Hood, Texas. She's twenty years old, Private first class.
She it's a long term goal of hers to get
into the military, so she's set for a long life
(24:56):
and she may end up being one of those people
who does don't just do their bid and get honorably discharged.
She may be going for a full career.
Speaker 4 (25:07):
Right.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
This may be the most important decision of her life.
That all changed on April twenty second, twenty twenty, when
Vanessa disappeared. So as we know, this is already not
looking good and an investigation ensues. The family feels that
the army is stone walling them at every step. They're
(25:29):
keeping them in the dark. They're not telling them details
about their investigation into their daughter's disappearance. They call it
for now, and the FBI is getting involved right. Multiple
military authorities are getting involved in this search, and they're
looking all around the area surrounding Fort Hood. There are
(25:53):
also a number of protests. The public gets winned. Hundreds
of people are rallying for answers. The biggest mass protest
was at the very gates of Fort Hood on June thirteenth,
twenty twenty. This person is missing for more than two months,
before things take a turn and investigators discover pieces of
(26:20):
her body. She has not disappeared, she has died. The
remains they find are burned, dismembered. They were buried under
concrete and possibly dug up by a scavenging animal, and
this was discovered along the nearby Leon River on June thirtieth,
(26:41):
So around this time the authorities with this discovery, they
reinterview a local civilian named Cecily and Aguilar. Aguilar has
been married to a guy who's a soldier at Fort Hood,
but they're estrange. She is the girlfriend of a person
(27:03):
we have to mention at this point, Aaron David Robinson.
Aaron David Robinson, enlisted, also a soldier also at Fort Hood,
ranked specialist, one of the last known people to have
seen Gayenne on the day of her disappearance. He had
been previously interviewed by authorities as well, just because of
the timeline, but he had not been detained at that
(27:26):
point until Aguilar told the police that her boyfriend had
confessed to her that he murdered a female soldier unnamed.
So at the behest of the cops of the police,
she calls Robinson. She texts him stuff She specifically sends
(27:47):
a text that says, baby, they found pieces, referring to
Vanessa's body.
Speaker 4 (27:52):
WHOA.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
So she was working with police to get him to
officially confess, like in their presence or something, or over
in the presence of her phone. I suppose that's what
they're trying to get her to do.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
Yes, that seems to be the case. We also know
that he did not. Robinson did not ever say what
are you talking about or explicitly deny any of the stuff.
She was also texting news stories about the discovery and
the investigation.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Put heat on him. Do we know? Do we know
if the specialist ranked is that above whatever? Private? First class?
Speaker 4 (28:29):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (28:29):
She was okay, so she was throughout this whole process.
If this guy isn't actually involved, she's feeling the pressure
of that institutional thing. That's like I didn't really fully
understand that that it was like, is that like sergeant
rank or above? I don't know how any of that works.
Speaker 3 (28:46):
The sergeant was the one that had harassed her that
she refused to report. But definitely power structures are in play,
and we we haven't we haven't gotten to what actually happened.
So on the same evening, that these remains are discovered,
Robinson flees. He goes on the run. He probably knew
(29:09):
the walls were closing in. He was deceptively told by
investigators that he was being held and a new function
detained for violating COVID nineteen quarantine rules. However, he just
had one unarmed guard on him and he was able
to slip the news. He got out for a second
(29:30):
off base, and police located him, and as they were
coming to apprehend him, he took his old life via
firearm in the wee hours of July first, So he
did not escape for very long.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Geez. So the guy was still on the base when
he gets apprehended, so they just held him there and
then he just gets out for a second. Man, That's
that's insane.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
Well, these grizzly details are currently matters of public record,
and what you need to know here, folks, is the
ultimate result. Multiple investigations have concluded that Vanessa Gillen's life
was cut short on April twenty second, twenty twenty. She
(30:18):
did not consensually disappear. She was bludgeoned to death by
Aaron David Robinson. He was also another soldierhood obviously and
he was about twenty years old at the time. So
the truth did ultimately come out. To go out to
get to it, but you need to know the story
because it is a snapshot of a larger picture. The
(30:42):
Gillen family, they believe their darker depths to these events.
They call for justice, right sweeping improvements of the way
sexual harassment is handled by the US military, and Yen's
mother also says, look, I spoke to multiple witnesses who
were there when Robinson died, when the assailant died, and
(31:05):
those multiple witnesses tell me they heard two gunshots at
the time of the suicide. So she believes to this
day that Robinson did not take his own life. Instead,
he was executed by authorities as part of a larger
cover up, possibly involving senior members of the military over
(31:26):
at Fort Hood.
Speaker 2 (31:27):
WHOA Okay, so that goes back to the sergeant that
she was talking about she was assaulted by or did
she say assaulted by the sergeant?
Speaker 4 (31:38):
Harassed, harassm assed? Okay?
Speaker 2 (31:40):
All right, So theoretically, in this version, right, if we
take it to be true, potentially this person that killed
her wasn't someone who was assaulting her or harassing her.
This was someone who was sent to take her out.
Speaker 3 (31:55):
Well, it appears from what we understand, it appears that
this Robinson character, this soldier brutally murdered the other soldier
because they were fraternizing, or he found out or she
found out that he had a girlfriend, and that's the
(32:19):
official story. It became she saw like a picture of
his civilian girlfriend on his phone while it was screen locked,
and then he murdered her. But that doesn't seem like
the entirety of the story, even now in twenty twenty six.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
God no, right, yeah, very least. That's quite the extreme overreaction.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
Ray and the allegation of cover up there is more
directly that Robinson himself. I mean, it gets to like
a few good men's style, right, that maybe Robinson was
told to get rid of this person, and then maybe
he got disavowed, and then maybe he became inconvenient and
was self murdered. But again, we don't have the full
(33:04):
details on this, other than to say it definitely feels
like a conspiracy in a cover up.
Speaker 4 (33:10):
Well, I will say that the messiness of all of
this certainly doesn't seem to imply a systematic conspiracy that
involves taking people out. It feels like a lot of
crime of passion, messy randomness, and then perhaps to cover
up after the facts, right.
Speaker 3 (33:30):
Yeah, I agree with that because folks, as we've said previously,
oftentimes true conspiracies are not going to be vast you know,
doctor doom level finger steepled machinations into the future, or machinations,
if you want to drive language that way. Instead, it's
gonna be someone making mistake, right, and then fumbling and
(33:54):
trying to cover up that mistake. That's usually what happens.
Speaker 4 (33:58):
And then sometimes you have to cover up the cover.
Speaker 3 (33:59):
Up, right, and it's just cover ups all the way down.
Matroshka doll of conspiracy. This single case, though it did
make it to the public eye, made it to mainstream media,
made it out of the secretive internal mechanics of the
armed forces. And when the civilians learn about this, when
(34:20):
other siloed service members learn about this, this single case
triggers a massive tide, a tsunami of reports of similar
allegations of cover up, corruption, crime, and conspiracy. What if
we take a break for a word from our sponsors,
come back, talk about a couple more cases, and then
(34:42):
look at the larger picture here and we've returned. Do
you two remember the story of Private first Class Florence Schmorgener.
I do not, nor do I schmo to her friends.
(35:02):
All right, this is twenty to fifteen, so this is
before the case we discussed previously. This Private is nineteen
years old in the Marines, stationed to California's twenty nine Palms,
which is going to be legendary and bring up a
lot of bad memories to anybody who's ever had had
(35:23):
to be stationed there. All right, so they're an off time,
they're hanging out. Think of it like almost like a
dorm room these barracks, you're playing video games. Because of
the policy at the time, when male and female Marines
are in the same room like this, you have to
keep the door open, kind of like how parents have
(35:45):
that rule about you know, teenage paramoors coming over.
Speaker 4 (35:49):
Oh yeah, you guys.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
A good rule. That's a really good rule.
Speaker 3 (35:52):
It's a really good rule rule. As people who tried
to get around that rule so many times growing up,
it's a really smart rule.
Speaker 2 (36:01):
Yes, I'm not going to say anything more, but I
have learned as a as a young man that that
rule is important.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
It's very important. It's very important for a number of reasons.
And thanks to everybody who is chuckling and having their
own memories in the crowd. This gets dark because at
some point, we're about mid afternoon. At some point, Florence
falls asleep on her friend's bed, and when she wakes,
(36:32):
the door is closed. This is against policy. Her male
quote unquote friend is groping her, removes her clothing and
sexually assaults her. She has no idea what to do.
She doesn't know who to report to. She does know
(36:53):
what policies are available. It's twenty fifteen, so she knows
well the potential for retaliation. And we're pulling some of
this from The New York Times in an interview with her.
The next few weeks are terrified for this kid because
she sees her assaulter multiple times. Right, they work in
(37:16):
the same place, they use the same gym, she says.
Over the next few years she tries to trigger by
this trauma. She tries to take her own life on
at least six separate occasions. It's not until twenty seventeen
that she meets somebody else who can help her.
Speaker 4 (37:33):
And yeah, we know and have seen numerous accounts of
even in the civilian world, the idea of reporting a
sexual assault being incredibly emotionally complex, and potentially if it
was done by someone, you know, the idea of rationalizing
it after the fact, or it was a friend, or
he didn't mean it, or this, that and the other.
(37:53):
So even in the I'm not going to say the
best of circumstances, there's no best of circumstances here. But
when you do have recourse in a way to report
these attacks, these types of assaults in a system, perhaps
even through the emergency room and the idea of a
rape kit being done, it's incredibly complicated and difficult. In
this framework. In the military, there's already this overarching sense
(38:16):
of don't do it, it's bad for you. If you
do it, it's.
Speaker 2 (38:20):
Just bad for us.
Speaker 4 (38:21):
If bad for us, thank you, that's what I exactly right,
and are us a whole other layer of that emotional
complexity that would make it even more to the point
of what you just said, ben even more devastating. And
then to continue on in that environment.
Speaker 2 (38:37):
And the knowledge that the likelihood that something is actually
going to happen or a full investigation is going to occur,
or there's going to be any justice or anything like that.
Just knowing that that is few and far between already.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
Even worse that you do stand up and report it,
and then not only does nothing happen, but then it
makes you a new target.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
Absolutely right, And at each point you're re experiencing what occurred. Right.
This is also part of the This is one of
the reasons that survivors of assault may choose not to
testify in court, you know, and it's very valid, very
disturbing reason. Here's what changes. In twenty seventeen. Our protagonist
(39:22):
meets another survivor of assault, a fellow marine named Echo Arnold.
Echo is the one who encourages Schmorgunner to file an
actual report. So at first she files what's called a
restricted report. The details are confidential, there is no investigation.
(39:47):
All that happens is the complainant that closes what happened,
and they get healthcare and counseling. And I don't know
if I would always trust the counseling to be quite honest.
So a month later, this person filed an unrestricted report
to initiating an investigation into sexual assault that could result
(40:07):
in consequences for the offender. I don't know, it gets
shut down. They do the same thing like the Aguilar
case we mentioned earlier. This is run The investigation is
run by NCIS, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and they
get her on a phone with this abuser, and this
(40:30):
guy is now based in Hawaii. She's on the phone
with him, she talks about what happened. He confesses, and
he apologizes, and so now we're thinking we might see justice.
But NCIS shuts down the investigation and they say, yeah,
I guess he did confess, but we've got character witnesses
(40:54):
and they're saying nice things about him, and also we
don't have any physical evidence that this assault occurred. Feels
like a cover up.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
Well it's weird, wouldn't All you need is a confession
and you could at least do some kind of action, right.
Speaker 3 (41:12):
Right, that's the issue, you know, if you have if
you have the person literally saying I did this, I apologize,
that feels like case closed. Right then. It feels like
denying that confession is a cover up based on character witnesses.
Speaker 4 (41:36):
I don't know. That's not the typical procedure, right, Oh
it is. That's some legal gymnastics after the fact to
make the result that's most convenient. I mean, gosh, like,
and how come a rape kit wasn't done in the
first place. I guess that would require an immediate reporting,
(41:57):
which doesn't seem like would be the common the norm
in situations like this.
Speaker 3 (42:02):
Yeah, because this person was not provided the resources to
continue right to find those avenues for justice. The investigation
in this case closes in twenty eighteen. The assailant meets
no consequences despite the confession. He serves his time with
the Marines, he does his bid, he leaves with an
(42:26):
honorable discharge, so nothing on his record. And these two
cases we're outlining here, they just add to an unclean
litany of similar events, similar conspiracies. Maybe we talked briefly
about stuff like the Aberdeen scandal, the USAF Academy scandal,
or how about the nineteen ninety one Tailhook scandal.
Speaker 2 (42:49):
Oh yeah, let's talk about the Tailhook incident. Let's jump
to September nineteen ninety one to a Las Vegas convention
center and to a little thing the Navy is putting
on there. It's a huge convention called Tailhook. I had
never heard of this before. Guys, This has been reported
on a ton by PBS. I even saw, oh, someone
(43:09):
we've talked to on this show before, Celeste Hedley, hosting
a report on this from just a couple of years ago.
Speaker 4 (43:17):
We don't have a CELESTI that what you're saying for
Big Sugar, Wasn't that what it was? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (43:21):
Yeah, I'm also host of Freeway Phantom. But she's doing
a report on PBS about this from nineteen ninety one,
something I'd never heard about, and I don't know why
I've never heard about this. This is a convention in
Las Vegas where there are a ton of Naval officers,
specifically officers who are in the flight training programs. Because
we know Navy is on the sea, but things like
(43:42):
aircraft carriers, there's an entire Navy flight force basically that
is out there. Think of top Gun, that is naval
aerospace forces.
Speaker 3 (43:53):
Yeah, the two biggest air forces in the world are
in this order, the United States Air Force and the
US Navy.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Yes, you got things like the Navy Strike Fighter Tactics
Instructor Program and the Navy Fighter Weapons schools. These are
things that are actually top gun is in reference to
and what occurs in nineteen ninety one is at this
conference center. A lot of large groups of the officers
(44:21):
were accused of getting very very drunk and hanging out
having parties after the major events of the convention, and
then there were a lot of stories that came out
right after of these groups of men harassing, assaulting, and
raping women in that convention center hotel.
Speaker 3 (44:43):
Eighty three women and seven men.
Speaker 2 (44:45):
What the well, well, here's the thing. At first, nobody
knows about those numbers. There are rumors, there are some
people that are saying stuff went down, and it's a
known thing that stuff goes down at these conferences, specifically
with the Navy in this case.
Speaker 4 (45:00):
In that context, Matt tho, would they be more referring
to people get up to some fratonizing. You know, there's
set boys will be boys at it, right.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
That that is what the Navy.
Speaker 4 (45:10):
That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (45:13):
Yes, yes, yeah, But one person, Paula Coughlin, actually comes
out and she tries to get something done. After there's
an official internal investigation where there are fifteen hundred officers
questioned who were there at the convention. Only two officers
are named as suspects in some of the stuff that occurred,
(45:33):
and most of the officers refuse to cooperate. So Paula
goes on television and she says this, not every man
in the Navy behaves like that, but those who did
shouldn't remain in the Navy or the Marine Corps and
begins talking about that kind of toxic masculinity thing that
existed as a culture, not for one particular reason, but
(45:57):
for a lot of the things we talked about, especially
at the top of this episode. And this is a
time in the early nineteen nineties when men and women
are beginning to work closely together within the Navy and
the Army and other parts of the military, which is
not something that the establishment was used to, and rather
than you know, set up resources or anything like that
(46:18):
or figure out the problems, it was kind of covered up.
It was definitely covered up for quite a while, and
it wasn't until later that they there was an official
Pentagon investigation that found out that there was just a
what did you say where the numbers been.
Speaker 3 (46:33):
Yeah, the numbers for the nineteen ninety one Tailhook scandal
are eighty three women and seven men who are assaulted
during this convention. Again, that's September fifth through the seventh
nineteen ninety one coming out.
Speaker 4 (46:46):
That's a really good point, you guys, about how relatively
new this dynamic was, and it would make sense that
there wouldn't instantly be you know, resources for this kind
of stuff. This kind of stuff, I mean, it is
a very old organization with a lot of built in norms,
you know, and cultures within various branches of the armed forces.
(47:10):
And I'm looking around, and I mean there's certainly folks
who historically have criticized the inclusion of women in the
military because of quote unquote sexual tension that it could cause.
And that kind of language implies a victim blaming mentality
a little bit to me. I don't know, maybe I'm
(47:31):
overstated the case very much.
Speaker 2 (47:33):
So.
Speaker 3 (47:33):
I mean, consider the problem of co ed service members
on submarines, right, that was one of the last holdouts.
The Pentagon definitely historically pushed against inclusion in certain fighting forces.
The gosh, the Marines were very similar as well. And
we see more of these scandals, you know, like the
(47:55):
Aberdeen scandal, I think it's a full episode nineteen ninety six,
the USAF Academy scandal at two thousand and three, what
we're saying is the list goes on and on and on,
often with a very similar pattern of cover up and
eventual disclosure.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
Oh yeah, there's an official Pentagon investigation over a lot
from like twenty twelve all the way to twenty eighteen,
and the Pentagon estimated that there were around twenty thousand
sexual assaults that occurred in that year, and that is
because there were a little over six thousand sexual assaults
reported by service members. So the estimation there is that
(48:35):
there are many more that occur. Only about six thousand
were reported, And of those twenty thousand assaults, the Pentagon
believes that around seventy five hundred of the victims in
those assaults were male.
Speaker 4 (48:48):
So this is not a.
Speaker 2 (48:49):
Male male or female thing. This is a culture thing, yes,
where power comes into play, where there's so much at
play here that is just beyond what you may imagine.
Speaker 4 (49:02):
Well, it makes me think too of some of the
rhetoric around gay people serving openly in the military. How
the overarching sort of TACIT policy was don't ask, don't tell.
But of course there's things that are going on and
people that are being targeted, and perhaps people that are
closeted that are going to lash out in that way.
(49:24):
I think it's so important to mention the gender despair sure,
or the fact that it's not a gender specific thing.
Speaker 3 (49:30):
No, as we'll see in just a moment here, going
back to some of those reports, there are definitely male
identifying victims. This all leads to a larger picture. This
is the grand conspiracy of these cover ups and this corruption.
As a result of the Gien case and growing public outcry,
(49:51):
the Secretary of the Army at the time, a guy
named Ryan D. McCarthy, said, we're going to have an
independent investigation December. We're jumping around in time. He announces
the results of this first independent investigation and says there
is a quote permissive environment for sexual assault and sexual
(50:12):
harassment at Fort Hood. Then further says there were multiple
leadership failures. There were punishments for fourteen US commanders and
other leaders. And in the wake of this, Okay, these
investigations are important, it's crucial that they occur. But in
the wake of this, the public begins to learn that
(50:33):
these systemic issues, these secrets, have been open secrets internally
for quite some time. I'd love to recommend the journalist
Melenda Wenner Moyer, writing for New York Times in twenty
twenty one, She cites reports finding nearly one and four
US service women report being sexually assaulted during their time
(50:55):
in the military and the military leaders this is intergenerational, guys.
The military leaders have repeatedly promised reform and then just
never followed through. In twenty twenty one, women or female
identifying service members their distinct minority. We're talking about sixteen
(51:16):
point five percent of the Armed services, but of that
sixteen point five percent, nearly one and four is harassed
or sexually assaulted.
Speaker 4 (51:28):
It's insane, I mean.
Speaker 3 (51:31):
More than half. From a meta study that will actually
ruin your day if you want to check it out,
published in twenty eighteen in a journal called Trauma, Violence
and Abuse, finds that more than half of serving female
identifying people are also reporting sexual harassment. And to our
earlier point, men are also reporting similar events, but they're
(51:56):
doing so at significantly lower rates. And one thing we
have to know here is the issue of reporting, right,
So it's quite possible that the numbers, I would say,
it's virtually certain that the numbers are much higher, and
we're only looking at the people who actually did make
(52:18):
an official report. There was a twenty twelve survey from
the Pentagon itself that found in twenty twelve alone, twenty
six thousand men and women were sexually assaulted, and of
those assaults only like less than four thousand were officially reported.
(52:38):
This is a real conspiracy. This feels systemic. It doesn't
feel case.
Speaker 4 (52:42):
There's no question. It does feel that way. Yeah. No,
it's not one base, it's not one leader. Just yeah,
it's it's inherent in the system. Well did that.
Speaker 2 (52:52):
There's got to be there must be real fear. The
PBS report talks about and talks to a specific person, Lewis,
who was He's a former petty officer within the Navy,
and he talks about being raped at knife point by
a superior officer and how horrific that was. And then
when he attempted to tell people and get help and
(53:17):
get justice about this, he got discharged. He got diagnosed
with a personality disorder by the Navy, and they let
him go. They like said, get out of here. He
got discharged and nothing ever happened to the person that
assaulted him.
Speaker 4 (53:32):
You know, it reminds me a lot too of the
way police officers who report corruption within certain you know,
law enforcement agencies are treated the idea of being a
rat or something like that, and it does have a
very similar feel to it, and that does feel systemic.
Speaker 3 (53:52):
Which is why no one likes eternal affairs or the
idea of violating the thin blue line. I've got a question,
you know, if we are to ask ourselves what causes
this actual systemic conspiracy, then a big part of it
seems to go down to the way these crimes get
investigated and prosecuted. This is something that's going to be
(54:13):
familiar to a lot of us in the audience. The
Uniform Code of Military Justice. This means that should a
service member commit a crime, military commanders, not civilian law enforcement,
decide whether to investigate and or pursue legal action. Of course,
so I mean this case to point there in this
(54:35):
case is showing the public not just other cases of
assault and cover ups, but it also shows us something positive,
something I hope we find inspiring a long running attempt
by other forces, the quote unquote good guys to reform
this system. I'm thinking of folks like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
(54:59):
or Jilibrand, and this would this argument for years the
Senator was doing this. They were saying, Hey, take the
decision to prosecute major crimes, including sex crimes, away from
military command. Put it into the purview of independent prosecutors,
people who cannot be touched by the military power structure.
(55:23):
The Pentagon hated it, but.
Speaker 4 (55:25):
Of course they did. Yeah, I just want to double
back down to what we said at the top of
the show and extend it even a step further. We
are also incredibly grateful for folks who serve and folks
who you know, serve in the armed forces and are
out there, you know, being the good guys. But it
just it's hard to hear stories like this and not
(55:46):
just you know, see the rot that's kind of inherent
in the system that does not necessarily extend to every
man and woman that wants to go out there and
do good. I don't think that's what we're saying. It's
just important to kind of look at the whole thing
and take a holistic approach.
Speaker 2 (56:02):
If you're interested in looking at some of the reforms
that have actually occurred over this long span, at least
since nineteen ninety one, when Paula Coughlin spoke publicly let's
say about the tailhook incident. You can look to protect
our Defenders foundation. They've got an incredible timeline that you
(56:23):
can look to and see all of the tiny, little
small changes that have occurred, you know, when fits and starts,
and then some of the large sweeping changes that officially
are in place now. Even though it doesn't it doesn't
seem to have changed fully the culture, But are there
are positive things that you can look to and specific
human beings as you were mentioning Ben who have done
(56:46):
some good.
Speaker 4 (56:46):
Yeah, I mean, and I didn't mean to sound too
hard on sleeve with what I was saying. Minutego. I
think what I just mean is that, you know, folks
who go put themselves out there to do this kind
of service, they should not have to be terrified of
these types of outcomes, you know. And that's all I'm saying.
Speaker 3 (57:05):
Yeah, absolutely well said, and I think we're all saying that.
I think we can all agree on that. I want
to go back to the reasoning we almost missed here
about the Pentagon statements needs to be said. The Pentagon
was opposed to reform of any sort outside of a
few isolated investigations because they said this sort of move
(57:28):
away from the UCMJ would quote have a detrimental impact
on the ability of commanders to ensure good order and
discipline end quote. History proves, folks that this reasoning. Maybe
it's valid to some degree, but it's not enough to
justify the horrors these survivors have faced. To that earlier point,
(57:53):
there have been some reforms, and very positive ones, things
like the im Vanessa Gee Act, parts of that became
law in December twenty twenty one. The chief among these
was criminalizing sexual harassment and removing the decision to prosecute
(58:15):
sexual misconduct cases they call them, from the chain of command.
And right now we are happy to report that the
teams of independent prosecutors that were created from this act
have been pretty well received. They've been able to get
justice or survivors, because we don't like to use the
(58:37):
word victim, we like to use the word survivor. Yet again,
this is another thing we all agree on. Reform itself,
while positive, is not the same thing as fixing the
problem one hundred percent. So right now, as we're recording
tonight again March tenth, twenty twenty six, it is virtually
certain that many people in the armed forces, some of
(59:00):
whom are listening now have been the victims of assault
or sexual crime, have filed reports, have been stonewalled, or
never filed at all due to real possibilities of retaliation,
and the retaliation itself might never be acknowledged, it might
never be prosecuted. This is an ongoing conspiracy, and we
(59:21):
want to thank again all the service members and veterans
in the audience tonight. We also want to hear your thoughts,
especially if you have served in the military or military
adjacent fields. Have you encountered cover ups of this nature.
If so, what was or was not done? There's another
war looming on the horizon, you guys. Have you seen
(59:42):
the speculation about the return of the draft.
Speaker 4 (59:44):
I saw some offhanded comments made about it, but I
also saw that, you know, it's kind of the war's over,
it's going to be done. Then there was never a
war in the first place, but it's a couple more
days in terms, so of course, yeah, I mean, it's
hard not to get stressed out about things like that.
And do let us know if you've had any of
these types of experiences, and of course we will keep
you anonymous.
Speaker 3 (01:00:04):
And let us know. To the degree that you're comfortable
share your stories. We think we can agree. We can
conclusively say, right now when it comes to sexual assault,
there's something the military doesn't want you to know. Tell
us your thoughts please.
Speaker 4 (01:00:21):
You can find us at the handle Conspiracy Stuff and
Conspiracy Stuff Show, depending on your social media platform of choice,
and you can also find us a few other ways.
Speaker 2 (01:00:30):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three STDWYTK. When you call in, give yourself a cool
nickname and let us know if we can use your
name and message on one of our listener mail episodes
that appear in the audio feed of this show. Find
those wherever you listen to audio feeds called podcasts. If
you want to send us an email, we are the
(01:00:52):
entities the.
Speaker 3 (01:00:53):
Redeach piece of correspondence we receive, be well aware, yet unafraid.
Sometimes the void writes back. So hit us up with
your thoughts, hit us up for a random fact, or
give us one of your own. We'll see you out
here in the dark Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:01:29):
Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app.
Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!