Too many unanswered questions about Chiroux’ narrative [Jonn]

| January 23, 2009 | 47 Comments

I’m sure many of my regular readers remember Matthis Chiroux the guy who made a big deal about being recalled by the Army and his refusing to answer the call. This press conference was at the Congressional Offices on the same day as the IVAW’s Congressional testimony to a portion of the Progressive Caucus;

In October, Chiroux was arrested at the final Presidential debate. I wondered then why he wasn’t turned over to the Army by the Nassau County police and I called them to ask why. The person in the public affairs office said they couldn’t answer the question, but it got me to wondering.

So I got our good friends at POW Net to get me FOIA request on Chiroux’ record. Keep in mind, if he was in the IRR, I wouldn’t be able to get his records.


So, because I was even able to get his records proves he’s been discharged. The only thing I can figure is that he initially came in for two years, and then reenlisted for three more years which would negate his three years Individual Ready Reserve Commitment. His Form 2-1 seems to support this. He spent about 2 1/2 years in Japan and then went to Germany for 2 years. I called a recruiter in the area and she confirmed that’s the only way he could avoid the IRR commitment.

A month ago, he established his “Matthis Resists” website on which he begs for money for his defense fund promising to keep us updated. So far, nuthin’ in the way of “updates”. In fact, he visited the post I wrote about it and had the opportunity to answer my questions about his service, and he was more interested in how I found a picture of him licking Nick Morgan’s chest.

Clearly, there’s something wrong with his narrative. Has anyone seen this letter from the Army “ordering” Matthis back into the service? We’ve learned here at This Ain’t Hell that nothing these IVAW folks say can be taken at face value. He’s still wandering around loose, the police have no interest in turning him over to the Army. Although he’s trying to collect money for a defense fund, he doesn’t need money to defend himself against the Army in an administrative dispute. And there’s no word from him on when his hearing is scheduled. I think he’s trying to fleece money from his hairy-legged hippie chick groupies (and shaven legged hippie guy groupies).

In November, I wrote about Chiroux being waterboarded at the UN building by members of World Can’t Wait, the organization founded by Charles Clark Kissinger, the famous Maoist radical. In the lead up to the actual waterboarding of Chiroux, he shouts that he’s an Afghanistan veteran. Yeah, his records show two overseas ribbons one for a completed tour in Japan, the other for a completed tour in German. Nothing about Afghanistan. He claims he was stationed in the Philippines, too – no record of an assignment in the Philippines, either.

Chiroux paints an extensive deployment history in his IVAW profile;

Germany, Japan, Afghanistan, Philippines, Italy, Poland – again his records show only assignments to Germany and Japan. As we’ve pointed out countless times, the only reason Chiroux calls himself an Afghanistan veteran is because he flew into Baghram airbase for six days (give or take a few hours) to write an article for the Army. He never left the base and the Army doesn’t recognize his visit as an assignment to Afghanistan. I suspect the other countries where he claims service are along the same lines as his Afghanistan visit.

I’ve been on longer drunks than he spent in Afghanistan.

So after reading this particular lie, we have to ask ourselves if he really was recalled by the Army. Or is this just more of the BS we have to filter out in order to fall for the rest of their message.

I’ve got inquiries out on the letter that the Army sent to Chiroux and I’ll turn up an answer sooner or later, in the interim, Chiroux can cut this whole thing short by providing me a copy of the letter, or admitting it’s all a scam – before I dredge up the proof.

Category: Antiwar crowd, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Phony soldiers

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Comments (50)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. GI JANE says:

    Good work Jonn! Another IVAW fraud exposed. You could write a book on all the crap you’ve uncovered about these posers. (HINT)

  2. Sean says:

    IVAW=Fraud

    They’re the Walter Mitty’s of the Left.

  3. Raoul says:

    CID at Ft Hamilton had no interest in grabbing him at the hearing either. I think you’re on to something.

  4. YatYas says:

    Thanks Jonn, nothing goes better with the morning cup of coffee than seeing these shitebirds exposed, except maybe a shot of whiskey.

  5. usnretwife says:

    I love it when you stomp on these punks, Jonn! It brings a little sunshine into this cold overcast day.

  6. FeFe says:

    Every time I saw someone stomp or walk over an American flag discarded on the National Mall, I recalled your posts exposing deception and hate. Your efforts warmed me and give me a smile. Thank you for all you do.

  7. PDizzle says:

    Army Sergeant, are you out there?

  8. Richard Romano says:

    What’s ironic is that they claim to have a moral resistance to the war — I guess that doesn’t include lying?

    I’m glad this site exposes these frauds over and over.

  9. Askew Attitude says:

    Maybe we could also point out that by the time of his discharge, he would have been awarded the Afghan Campaign Medal? I see no such award…

  10. Yes, yes, good god, the things that people will post in order to lure me out of being crazily busy.

    Sorry, I just moved battalions, I’ll post about it at my blog later.

    Anyway…I haven’t seen Matthis’ letter physically, but I’m not sure why he would have faked a letter like that and then sat on it for months, fooling everyone he knew into thinking he was worried about an IRR callup…for nefarious purposes.

    The plain fact is that Matthis was called back by the IRR, and the Army takes no interest in prosecuting or having these people returned because they aren’t prosecuting people that don’t show up for IRR callup, they’re just mailing them changes to their discharge to the IRR.

    I’m pretty dubious about this POWNet stuff. First of all, it’s gotten questionable results before. I know military records can get jacked up, but all of it seems so.

    Also, the Army frequently sends people places it doesn’t count as an assignment. If I had every TDY I’d ever been sent on listed on my service record…it’d be a really long service record. You can be TDY to a country not long enough to earn either a hash mark or a patch, which is the situation that Matthis seems to have been in.

    Jonn wrote: Yes, dear, it’s all about you. This “POW Net stuff” is nothing more than the same FOIA request you could get from the records center about me. POW Net just helps me file the paperwork. If Chiroux was called back, he should have no problem showing me the letter.

    Sending someone to Afghanistan TDY for six days doesn’t give that person the right to compare himself to people who spent a hundred times more days in Afghanistan. You don’t honestly believe that, do you? I already know how Jim Goodnow feels about it, but then he’s never been in combat either. But, you have been in theater, separated from your family, suffering the deprivations of combat soldiers. He flew in from Germany and probably had more showers and hot chow than you did in the same six days. And he wants us to think he’s “an Afghanistan Veteran”.

    You’ve defended some bizarre shit before, but I know you’re not going to defend this.

  11. Askew Attitude says:

    Army Sergeant,

    I have known several people (service members, civilians, etc.) who have been to Iraq, Afghan, etc. TDY. But, they have never come back claiming to be a “vet”. And, the Army does prosecute those who oh so cowardly “skip out” on IRR recall. They do not activly pursue said cowards, but if they happen to fall into their collective laps, they can and will bring charges. Same applies to service members charged as AWOL, KWOL, and deserters. On a personal note, I would like to tell you that defending low-lifes such as this, and calling yourself a “sergeant” greatly shames the NCO Corps that I am a proud member of. Feel free to lose sleep over it.

  12. Let me be clear that I’ve never attempted to compare any of my experiences with the deprivations and sufferings of actual infantry or combat soldiers. I don’t know that Matthis Chiroux has either. But at the same time, everyone has different jobs, and they all make a military. Us intel pukes, for example, are necessary for reasons I won’t talk about in a public forum, but we’ve saved a lot of asses and also helped to take out a lot of individuals-whether there for three weeks, three months, or three year-long tours. Medical personnel back at Landstuhl participate in the war often without setting foot in dangerous soil. Right now, there are a lot of people arguing about “what makes a vet”. Is it combat time? Is it setting foot in country? Is it directly affecting combat soldiers? Is it treating wounded soldiers? Is it being in the military service during that time period?

    I think in twenty years we won’t be worrying about that stuff-much like everyone who was in during Vietnam is a Vietnam vet for us, or WWII, or Korea. We’ll simply call everyone a veteran of the wars until peace is declared and we pull out. We won’t ask “were you public affairs?”

    Askew Attitude: Yes, but a lot of times, the police simply don’t cross-reference things. I’ve seen this a lot-police take civilian identification and don’t even think that someone might be wanted by the Army. Also, I’m not defending the practice of going AWOL, I’m pointing out specifics that I think Jonn is wrong on.

    However, I have been pretty firm that in twenty

  13. Also, I’m going to go back to writing my honeymoon letter to my new command on my own blog now.

  14. More Info says:

    A/S,

    “I’m pointing out specifics that I think Jonn is wrong on.”

    eh…cough…cough…civilian ID wouldn’t have a rats ass to do with it. If he’s wanted, it would be an entry on NCIC.

  15. More Info says:

    Jonn,

    “You’ve defended some bizarre shit before, but I know you’re not going to defend this.”

    Give Her Time…Be Patient.

  16. Askew Attitude says:

    “I think in twenty years we won’t be worrying about that stuff-…We won’t ask “were you public affairs?” ”

    If any service member has a SHREAD of decency in their bodies, they will admit to the fact that they were not directly involved in combat operations. And, yes. The military could not properly do it’s job without support and service support personnel. Any “clear headed” person would be able to identify the difference between someone who patroled the streets of Karbala and someone who got fat on icecream at Victory. The problem is, you have way too many “I’m going to make myself sound really cool instead of telling people what I really did” head-cases out there. These are the same people who consider PTSD running out of Snickers Bars at the FOB PX.

    More Info: Thank you for pointing out the obvious! But, you might want to remind some readers that NCIC is NOT a CBS TV drama.

  17. UpNorth says:

    AS, when a LEO stops someone, obtains their ID and runs a file check on that person, the request goes to, among other places, the NCIC computer, that’s the National Crime Information Center. You don’t need to see their military ID. If there’s a warrant for extradition, or a hold for the military for AWOL or desertion, unless it’s San Fran or some other “haven” or sanctuary, that party is arrested. Then it’s up to the entering jurisdiction to make the decision whether or not to pick up.

  18. JuniorAG says:

    “We won’t ask “were you public affairs?” I am & served in that capacity on my 2nd Afghan tour. To get stories, went on patrols with the grunts, went out to ETT/PMTs at remote bases, went on convoys & got a CAB for some idjits making bang-bang at me.

  19. Ray says:

    AS,

    I served onboard a Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarine making Deterrent patrols. As a result of that service I am entitled to wear both the Submarine Enlisted Dolphins, signifying my qualification in Submarines, ( a long and grueling process) and the Deterrent Patrol Pin. You don’t get a Patrol Pin for doing a Dependant’s Cruise, and you can’t tell people you’re a Sub Vet just because you once got a tour on one. I’ve been to New York… it doesn’t make me a New Yorker. I’ve lived south of the Mason Dixon line for the past 16 years, but will forever remain a “Damn Yankee”. You have to “walk the walk” to “talk the talk”.

    I see a lot of talk coming from Chiroux, but don’t see him doing much walking.

  20. ArmySergeant says:

    UpNorth: I stand corrected. Having never actually been AWOL and then subsequently arrested by civilian authorities, I have no personal experience with the NCIC. In that case, my assumption would be one of two things: 1) the units aren’t entering in IRR that fail to report into that database, or 2) wherever the unit was, they didn’t care enough or have the manpower/finances/time to pick up Chiroux, and preferred to simply mail him his altered discharge.

    Askew: I understand that some people try to inflate their stories. In many ways I’m more fortunate-I really can’t talk about mine. The work was crucial, but the actual execution of it would be pretty boring to relate if I could. My life was rarely in danger, and generally indirectly. I don’t pretend to anything else. But I strongly know my work was indispensable to keeping other soldiers safe, and that makes me happy. My point was that all too often, once someone decides they’re against the war, it becomes okay to denigrate them as simply support and service personnel, and I think that’s a dangerous precedent. Every job in the Army is necessary. Armorer, for example, may not be a glamourous job, but can anyone imagine a unit functioning without one? Or Supply? Or no S-1 to fix people’s pay problems? No chaplain?

    I think we should agree that people shouldn’t need to inflate what they did, but that also at the same time what they did is enough. In twenty years when they start having parades and stuff, those guys will be equally entitled to call themselves Iraq and Afghanistan veterans.

    Ray: I am so Navy-illiterate that I can barely understand your story, but i think I understand what you’re saying. I would think though that if you’ve lived in the South for that long, you would be “from the South”, but I understand people are touchy about that.

  21. Skye says:

    Us intel pukes, for example, are necessary for reasons I won’t talk about in a public forum, but we’ve saved a lot of asses and also helped to take out a lot of individuals-whether there for three weeks, three months, or three year-long tours.

    Yet, there is a large question regarding whose asses you are saving working in Intel and as a member of good standing with the anti military group IVAW? al-queda or the coalition?

  22. ArmySergeant says:

    A large question only from idiots like yourself, who refuse to believe that it’s possible to serve your country loyally and not be a Republican.

  23. Ray says:

    AS,

    Being a Republican or a Democrat has nothing to do with it. I know a lot of Democrats that don’t make false and inflamitory accusations about our troops without any factual base.

    I’m throwing the BS flag on that one.

  24. Ray says:

    Ray: I am so Navy-illiterate that I can barely understand your story, but i think I understand what you’re saying. I would think though that if you’ve lived in the South for that long, you would be “from the South”, but I understand people are touchy about that.

    OK AS, I know you’re Army, so I’ll type slower.(kidding)

    A Dependent’s Cruise is a short (one day to a week) cruise that you can bring a family member onboard to show them what you actually do for a living. (I have been out of the Navy quite a while, so I don’t know if it is still a practice, but I was able to take my Mom and Dad on a one day cruise when I was in.) Being onboard a Submarine for a day or a week, even if you are an active duty military member, does not give you the right to call yourself a Submariner. Does that make it clearer? If not, are you sure you’re not a Marine?(still kidding)

    You are “from” where you are “from”. That is not the same as where you “are”. I live in Georgia, but I’m “from” Pittsburgh.

    PS. Calling yourself a Veteran of a battle or conflict that you did not actually attend is disingenuous. That’s like someone saying “I’m a veteran of Guadalcanal” when he only stopped there for an hour to refuel his aircraft in 1945. Yeah… he was there, but I’ll bet the people who fought and bled to secure that island would object to his bullshit claim.

    If Chiroux wants to call himself a Veteran of The War on Terror, fine. But to claim to be a Veteran of a particular conflict, you need to BE there long enough for it to count on your paperwork. The Army obviously doesn’t feel Chiroux deserves to be called a “Veteran of Afghanistan” as witnessed by his record and he’s being called on his bullshit claim.

  25. Lucky says:

    I believe that what Matthis is doing with the website of his might actually fall under the Federal RICO laws. He really does put the QUEEN in DRAMA QUEEN.

  26. Skye says:

    A large question only from idiots like yourself, who refuse to believe that it’s possible to serve your country loyally and not be a Republican.

    My cutting observations have nothing to do with Democrat or Republicans, and everything to do with traitors.

    Apparently, I hit a nerve, biatch. Maybe you do have a conscience, and will man up and chose a side following the footsteps of Benedict Arnold.

  27. Skye says:

    My guess is that AS is the next Ryan G. Anderson.

  28. Lucky says:

    They do have consciences? Well, what do you know! I hope it bites them in the ass!

  29. 1stCavRVN11B says:

    Matthis Chiroux is what we used to call a REMF. I guess they have a more PC term nowadays, Fobbit? No disrespect to any REMF or Fobbit, but he doesn’t even deserve either of those clasifications. After several years of research of the old VVAW and VFP members and their backgrounds while in service, Ive come to the conclusion that sme of them did deliberatly sabotage our own troops and equipment. Some even provided Intel to our enemies. I would still to this day like to see them tried in a court martial, convicted, and hung. It would be an honor to personally pull the trigger at a firing squad or for these SOB’s.

  30. ArmySergeant says:

    Thanks Ray, I appreciate that explanation. I think the way that these wars are structured makes it difficult-and no one wants to call themselves a GWOT veteran, simply because it’s such a stupid and long name. I’m honestly sure that name won’t last 20 years-much like Great War turned into WWII after some time. Also, I have to say that judging by how inaccurate everyone’s Army paperwork seems to be, it’s a miracle he’s not listed as a Korean War veteran. And no, I’m not kidding. My Army paperwork currently lists my graduation from high school as 1900.

    Skye: You know, they say that people who are one thing constantly see it in everyone else: a cheater assumes everyone cheats, a liar assumes everyone lies…just what /are/ you doing over with those CT folks, that you see traitors everywhere? Also, my guess is that you’re the next Eva Braun, if we’re just throwing out individuals by our assessment of character traits.

  31. Ray says:

    AS,

    Actually the “Great War” was WW I. Of course, it didn’t get called WW I until WW II happened and they had to start numbering them.

    Frankly, I’m shocked Chiroux doesn’t list himself as a Korea Veteran. He has just as much right to claim that title as the one he is currently using… zero.

  32. Raoul says:

    A/S,

    Sweetie cups, you’re the one closer to that honeymoon bunker than any of us. Physically and morally.

  33. Raoul says:

    1stCavRVN11B,

    Regarding your research, don’t forget VVAW, VFP, IVAW mentor and the guy who not only smeared our troops at Jane Fonda’s Winter Soldier “Investigation” but got to do it again in trashing this generation at Winter Soldier 2.1

    And guess who’s Barry Romo’s defender, Army Sergeant.

    Barry Romo, first “combat veteran” to visit Hanoi during the war.

    PS: The reason I call it Winter Soldier 2.1 is to remind the IVAW what dumbasses they are. The VVAW cockroaches hinding under the VFP rock are the IVAW puppetmasters who had the IVAW re-enact yet another VVAW “action”.

    Only problem is that the VVAW didn’t bother to info the Student Chapter of VVAW (That’s what IVAW really is) that they had already held a Winter Soldier 2. In Fanulei Hall in Boston the October after Winetr Soldier.

    In effect, their attempt to smear this generation should by rights be called Winter Soldier 3. But the IVAW isn’t smart enough to know the background, much less what’s happening.

    The proof of that last statement is how often we get some childish “I didn’t know” out of Army Sergeant.

  34. Sean says:

    Apparently 1976 Donzi will remove comments that arent slobbering over Matthis for the youtube link. Some 54 year old asking If I’ve ever fought a War? If he only knew I’d take him on a nice tour of Route Irish on foot back in 2004 and see how far fuckstick would get before filling his shorts in terror

  35. Anonymous in Jax says:

    Did Jonn ever turn up any orders that he was called up from IRR? When I was called off of IRR, my orders specifically said I was being relieved of my reserve status and ordered to report.

  36. Green Thumb says:

    Shitbag.

  37. Mitch says:

    His counting himself as a veteran of Afghanistan is like when I tell people (as a joke) that I was in prison just because I toured a historic jail and got locked in the sell for about 20 seconds to have my picture taken

  38. Napoleon Tunafarte says:

    Don’t denigrate people because they ‘only served a short time’ in the combat zone. Don’t denigrate them because they have different political beliefs than you do. They served. Bravely. Leave it at that. If ANYONE has earned the right to think and say whatever they want it’s servicemembers. How dare you insult these men?

    • Hondo says:

      Tunafart: I see you’ve chosen a screen name that’s apropos for yourself – a combination showing both evidence of megalomania and a recognition of the fact that you amount to essentially nothing in the great scheme of things.

      Now, about Chiroux: screw him. He’s a liar, plain and simple. He’s not an “Afghan vet” as he claims. Spending about a week TDY at Bagram AB ain’t the same thing as being deployed. Rather, that’s nothing but in-uniform tourism. I saw a fair amount of that from people at my higher HQ when I was deployed (short term TDY to the zone, followed by a quick departure) – but I don’t think any claimed to be Afghan or Iraq “vets” based on that. During the whole year, as far as I know only one individual stayed the requisite 30 consecutive days to qualify for a campaign medal. He had the standing to make that claim.

      For that reason alone, Chiroux deserves all the castigation and scorn he’s received here. The fact that he’s an anti-American POS who burns the US flag and verbally backstabs his former brothers- and sisters-in-arms simply adds fuel to the fire.

      Virtually no one he used to hang around with at IVAW has anything good to say about Chiroux. He’s also publicly stated he considers himself to be a rapist. All in all, IMO he’s a true POS.

      But hey, it’s a free country. Consider Chiroux one of your heroes if you like.

      Now, why don’t you crawl back under your rock in Durango. Maybe you should carry your AirSoft gun with you.

  39. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    There’s a logic problem with Bonaparte’s reasoning. If Veterans have “earned the right to think and say whatever they want…” then that would apply to 99% of the commenters here and he, she, or it should take no issue with our saying whatever we believe regarding Chiroux, the guy who likes to torch Old Glory.

  40. OWB says:

    @ #41: So you are saying that only those who agree with him politically AND have served in combat have earned the right to call him a liar and a jackass? That is a whole lotta restriction on free speech right there!

    Using that logic, Jane Fonda et al have no right to criticize we who have served. See how that equal protection thing works?

    (In case it needs to be said, again, we served to protect the rights and safety of all Americans without regard to their opinions of us.)

  41. Ex-PH2 says:

    Hey, tunaflabb, I’m a service member. By your definition, that gives me the right to say whatever I please.

    So try this on for size: You’re an asshole.

  42. OWB says:

    No, PH, actually, tunaflabb specifically precludes you from doing that. You are NOT a combat veteran. So, from tunaflab: all you female vets out there, take a seat at the back of the bus and shut up!

  43. Ex-PH2 says:

    OWB, I acknowledge your advisement and stand by my guns.

    And by the way, Happy Mother’s Day!

  44. OWB says:

    And to you, PH!

    As you, I will not shut up just because some troll suggests it. Kinda think that Code Pink et all will do the same, only more outrageously. Unlike them, I am not an attention whore. Such behavior would not please my Mom!

  45. Sparks says:

    Defending the right…yes that is what veterans, especially combat veterans do. Taking that to the point of defending a liars right to lie is absurd. The Army is, or was in my service in Vietnam, pretty strict on how they handed out CIB’s for instance for combat service. If you took the oath and were willing to serve whenever and wherever called and did so honorably then you are a “vet” and you have my respect for your service. If you served in combat, getting shot at or in danger of same, then you are a “combat vet” and have my further respect for your combat service. How a person defines that in their own mind is up to them it seems these days, reference Chiroux. But Chiroux is claiming combat service in a place he did not serve in combat. That is the point of his whole lie. If he was in the rear with the gear doing an op-ed for someone and never left the base, he can hardly say he was an “in harm’s way vet”. The battlefield has no regard for race, creed, religion or political persuasion. Just how well you exercise you training. A young troop walks into base camp right from the states and on first patrol gets shot and dies. He is a combat vet and casualty. Intel, supply and all of the support functions are needed and do a great job. If a guy counts socks in Afghanistan his whole tour great, we need that too. Just don’t come home with the, I choked three insurgents to death with a pair of socks in a night time hand to hand fight, story. There is honor and respect for all who serve in honorable and repectful manners even if they never leave stateside. We just don’t need the Matthis Chiroux types stepping on our nation, its flag or its veterans. I realize my comments here are simple and perhaps redundant. If a true vet wants to step on the issue of the war he has the First Amendment to do that. If, however he lies to inflate his believability to do the same, then no. In my opinion the First Amendment does not apply to lying. That’s the short of version of this long post.

  46. Smitty says:

    not sure why this one popped up again, but hell my 2 cents.

    Happy mothers day ex, and all others here.

    Tuna fart, you do realize that this is a military blog, so your claim that a military vet can say what ever they want would naturally extend to nearly everyone here. this little shit didnt serve bravely, he was a super POG. not all who enlist “serve bravely”. all serve, but if ya want to claim bravery, come out to the front lines, hop up in the turret on a hummer, and play target waiting on someone to shoot at ya. sitting in a FOB for 6 days writing an article or what ever he did, doesnt even come close to bravery. Army Sergent up above does not get to claim bravery. he/she is also a super POG. not saying it isnt an important job, im saying it is a safe one with no threat or worry. you can not claim bravery with out facing fear

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *