OK, that’s enough, Matthew Alexander

| January 21, 2010

I’ve gone on about a guy who pretends to be someone called Matthew Alexander, that guy who spent three months in Iraq interrogating some pretty dangerous guys and doing a good job of it. However he came back to the States, wrote a book and got himself a job with the ACLU and with the Soros Foundation. Ever since, he’s parlayed that three months into an incessant bleating about closing Guantanamo. This week, he’s going to be in DC like the drama queen he is, pleading for the closing of Guantanamo. For what? For his cheesy little ego.

I ran across this video at Vote Vets in which some other cheesy hippie tries to tell us that Alexander has been there and has all of this life threatening experience;

Yeah, well, I’m sick of it all. His name isn’t Matthew Alexander, it’s Anthony Matthew Camerino, he’s an Air Force OSI Major scheduled for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel in June. He has no friends other than his new ones at the Soros Foundation and the ACLU. At this point, I really don’t care about his useless life because he damn sure doesn’t care about mine or my family if he’s going to beat this incessant tattoo about Guantanamo…so fuck him.

Camerino has never been to Guantanamo – so what does he know?

I’d like to thank Keith Olbermann for leading me to his real name.

By the way, you Army OSIs should know that he’s scheduled to augment you guys this year. Duct tape your anuses shut.

Category: Antiwar crowd, Usual Suspects

Comments (30)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. TSO says:


    (Except me applauding in the background)

  2. LL says:

    BAM! And that’s how you put on a bitchslap.


  3. 96RinLA says:

    WTF is an AF OSI Major speaking out about this on camera?
    And under a pseudonym non the less??

    Someone needs to have a chat with his C.O.

    Bitchslap indeed.
    Well done!

  4. UpNorth says:

    Indeed, good job, Jonn.

  5. ponsdorf says:

    TSO noted: …crickets….

    Just sometimes a work of art needs to be admired and digested as such.

    This is one of those times.

    Personally I was admiring the paucity of unnecessary verbiage, the clarity of purpose, and the simplicity of both.

    This post is focused – just right.

    I’ll not applaud though. That would break the revere.

    Oh Yeah… Attaboy Jonn. Well done.

  6. OldTrooper says:

    Double BAM! Well done Jonn. Next time, try to get some emotion in your post, you’re much too reserved 🙂

  7. 1stCavRVN11B says:

    Agree. FUCK him! Good work Jonn.

  8. Susan says:

    Wait a freakin minute…this asshat is active duty saying this crap and CJ got in trouble for blogging? Something really stinks here!!!

  9. Yat Yas says:

    How in the hell is this “Major” getting promoted to Lt Col with all the outright politicized comments he has made. This has gotten out of control with those active duty on the left making outrageous statements which actually aid the enemy in their propaganda.

  10. NHSparky says:

    Yat Yas–different president, different rules. I guess that extends to the five-sided funny farm as well.

    And yeah, yeoman’s work, Jonn.

  11. USMC Steve says:

    This fuckstick is air force, I doubt there are any regs they would enforce to hammer the turd. Case in point, CJ versus this guy. The army goes nuts over nothing, but the air force won’t go nuts over anything, apparently. Another reason I am not at all impressed with them.

  12. CJ says:

    Maybe I should file an IG complaint against him.

  13. OldTrooper says:

    Sounds like a great idea, CJ. No defense, only offense. George C. Scott said it best in Patton “Don’t tell me we’re holding our position, we aren’t holding anything, we are advancing constantly”.

  14. DrinkWater says:

    Just one small nitpick detail. You mentioned that he will be augmenting “Army OSIs”. The Army version is CID. OSI is Air Force. I know, tiny detail.

  15. Yat Yas says:

    Unfortunately, the military had become to PC even before Obama. Look at the active duty idiots that were in IVAW protesting against George Bush and the Iraq campaign. This BS would not have been allowed during WWII.

  16. SteveC says:

    So, I ask, it was Gitmo that caused 9-11? The USS Cole bombing? Marine Barracks in Beirut? and on and on . . . and in these people’s world closing Gitmo will end the desire to kill Americans among people who hated the USA long before Gitmo?


  17. Stew says:

    I looked at the DD-214 – it said he separated in April of 2005. How did he get back in and subsequently achieve promotion to Lt Col?

  18. Tim O'Reilly says:

    So would a charge of contributing to the morale & welfare of the enemy the US being at war stick on this bum?
    His CO et al may not be aware of what he’s been doing … they should be brought up to speed, preferably so they can yank the promotion and can the bum

  19. Guys, this is the Air Force we’re talking about. A fine alternative to military service….

  20. Elm Creek Smith says:

    I knew some AF OSI officers in Germany. They seemed like reasonable folks. My friend Frank (lived downstairs in Germany) did ask me once where exactly the field was to which I kept going.

    Aiding and abetting…Aiding and abetting…Aiding and abetting…where have I heard that before? Aiding and abetting.

    I didn’t make major, so I guess I missed both the operations – the lobotomy and the installation of a window in the belly so the dumbfuck can see where he’s going.

    Captain, Armor
    US Army (Retired)

  21. twolaneflash says:

    Time to become Congress-botherers about what’s-his-name. A phone call here, an email there, and before you know it, you got Congress Critters stalking cameras to demand a pound of his flesh. The slanders and libels of this fraudulent poser demand a disproportionate response. Unleash hell, patriots.

  22. twolaneflash says:

    Is mine the only ghey-dar that goes off when viewing the video of Anthony Matthew “Alexander The Great” Camerino? I recalibrated and reset my instrument, looked at the video again, and ghey-dar says ding! ding! ding!. Just sayin’.

  23. twolaneflash says:

    The enemy combatant treatment issue is especially interesting to me in this age of technology. Son, SSGT FastLaneFlash and I were having a rare online chat a couple of years back, he in the computer room of a COP in Iraq and I home in America. He was pulling guard duty over part of a group of zip-tied and cleanly underweared hajis they had captured that day, so many they were running out of places to keep them. I remember being proud and awed with my son’s description of the care given to captured enemy in the heat of combat and after the last bullet is fired. The professionalism and decency of American warriors is nothing short of amazing, given the conditions of their workplace, and even knowing that the revolving door of Iraqi and American “justice” would be turning these men right back to jihad.

  24. Anonymous says:

    You guys are idiots

  25. NHSparky says:

    Says the anonymous poster. Thanks for your input, numbnuts. Don’t you have to go play in traffic or something?

  26. Curt Kastens says:

    I have not commented anywhere on this subject yet. It is actually a quite interesting subject. Ideological struggle is a never ending process. This struggle is not always violent but politically motivated violence is always a possibility.
    Today something happened in Germany that brings this in to focus. Someone from the CDU or CSU reccommended that the German version of the FBI conduct survelliance of the Left Party members of the German parliment claiming that they were enemies of the Constitution. Well what does it mean to be an enemy of the constitution? I happen to think that the German Constitution is vastly supirior to the US constitution which was supposedly devinley inspired. Yet I think the German Constitution has its own flaws. I also think that the Left Party is the best German party. So am I an enemy of the constitution?
    Take me for example. Unlike the charachter that I play on TV I am over 50 years old and have only engaged in politically motivated violence once in my entire life. It is possible that I will engage in politically motivated violence tommorrow but it is highly unlikely. So let us just say to set up a hypothetical situation that the chances are that I will engage in politcally motivated violence in the next 40 years are 25%. How should I be treated?
    Obviously that would depend on whether you were smart like me or a less smart person like so many on the other side of the political spectrum. But assuming that you were my adversary would your cause be best supported by locking me up and throwing away the key, keeping me under constant survellience until A I had broken any law that you could use to lock me up, or B I had broken only a very serious law that you could use to lock me up? Or would it be better to just do nothing until such time that there was a very devicive issue tearing the country apart and the danger of violence had become much greater? Then once you have someone in custody and have sentenced them with victors justice can such a person ever be let out again? After all if the person is for real, like the RAF member that refused to repeant for his previous behavior, letting the person out will just start the same conflcut over again. Unless one side or the other in the conflict comes to the conclusion htat the position that it held as a mistaken view.
    Well that is just something to think about.