James Yeager is a coward?

[Caleb]

Found what seems to be the complete video and not just the clip. Most of it is prior to the attack but it shows the road conditions and the area as they were driving.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NphgWi1nUt4

Maybe a NSFW warning for language and blood towards the end

 

[thebishopp]

how do you know that's what he did?

the ONLY semi safe spot at the rear of that car is directly behind the rear axle... and they both wouldn't fit there. Cohen went to the back where JY was, why didn't he go to the front?

Seems to me if you both can't fit... one should move.

Have you read the official AAR? It says right in it that he put himself in a position where he could not engage the enemy (coincidentally that is also the position where they could not engage him).

" James Yeager was in a location at the median where he could not engage enemy forces as he did no have a line of fire from his location."


Have you read Yeager's AAR?

Regarding why he retreated to the median:

"I felt Mark coming out of the rear door so I began the next phase of our
S.O.P. which is getting away from the car (getting off the “X”) because
people tend to shoot at cars and rifles easily penetrate them. I turned and
ran toward the median which was about 40 feet to the edge. I got face down
on the edge of the asphalt, took a firing position, and yelled “MOVE!” to
Mark."

Please point out to me where he says he did so to give "Mark" the better position?

Regarding what he was able to see of the enemy from the median:

"I pulled my rifle to my cheek, looked through my
EOTech again, scanned the roof tops and almost shot some clothes hanging
off a TV antenna to dry. Nobody was there. I scanned the windows of the
houses. I KNEW I heard a PKM and I KNEW the PKM was hitting us well and was
most likely in a static position. I scanned the Hescos again. Nothing.
“Where the **** is it?” I wondered as I searched. I began aiming between
the windows of the houses and shooting the solid brick walls. Although I
didn’t know who I needed to kill I knew they were that direction
“somewhere”. I felt useless but I thought I might be able to keep their
heads down."



Should we break down his personal AAR even more?


Reading it makes me "lol". It's part dramatic story (who taught this guy how to do a report?) and part marketing tool.


"After I went through my O.O.D.A. Loop (please search Google for OODA
Loop and Col. John Boyd for more info)"...

"As I shot from the rear of the car I wanted to kill the terrorists but
nobody had told me the direction (I figured that one out on my own),
description, or distance. I fired because I have been trained to fire when
someone is shooting at me. If I couldn’t make hits I was sure going to make
noise.' - Apparently he didn't figure it out on his own because in his report he says he has no idea where the fire was actually coming from.


"I now realize it was merely rounds from our team being shot without using the sights. At the time I didn’t know and because there were houses directly beyond that it was the safest place for me to shoot. I shot about 6-10 aimed rounds into the barriers utilizing my EOTech weapon sight." - Apparently houses make for excellent "safe" backstops I am certainly glad that he was utilizing his "EOTech weapons sight" to shoot into barriers rather than just firing blindly like his "teammates" lol.

"“****!” I thought to myself. I had forgotten to deploy a smoke grenade.
When Mark resumed firing I ripped it out of the pouch, peeled off the
100mph tape, put the spoon in the palm of my hand, straightened the ends of
the pin out, and pulled the ring. I kept thinking about my Instructor
course for and teaching the proper deployment of flashbangs, smoke, and CS.
My mind was racing. I forced myself to focus. " - O.M.G.

LOL. Cop for twelve years and a Chief of Police and this is how he writes a report? Who writes like this professionally? By no means were my reports perfect, but if I turned in something like this I would be rewriting it and it most likely would be used as a "how not to write a report" example. Folks would be laughing about it for years.

Honestly, to me, reading it, it sounds like a lot of embellishments and BS. You put it next to the company AAR and it looks even worse.

 

[HICKMAN]

yeah, I've read it.

We're rehashing conversations already had, or did you forget again?

I'm sure if you visit him, he'll answer any questions you might have.

I wasn't there.

 

[thebishopp]

yeah, I've read it.

We're rehashing conversations already had, or did you forget again?

I'm sure if you visit him, he'll answer any questions you might have.

I wasn't there.

You do realize that the whole point of an AAR is so that people who "weren't there" can analyse the incident? Not say "I wasn't there" and just discount it.

What is Yeager going to say (other than threaten to kill me and try to have me sign a dueling contract) other than what he has said already? Once he wrote that report and submitted it that was it. There is no "taksies backsies".

 

[HICKMAN]

beats me, again... I wasn't there.

 

[HICKMAN]

Please point out to me where he says he did so to give "Mark" the better position?

again, I only stated what I would have done.

Still not sure what you are trying to accomplish.

As I said, I'm sure JY would answer any questions you have personally.

 

[Fargo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=S53T8jBzXy4

"Why don't you step up to the ****ing plate like I ****ing asked you to, and come and say it to my ****ing face so I can ****ing kill you?!!" - James Yeager

Class act. Maybe he wouldn't be so uptight if he could find T-shirts in a size other than boy's small.

Contrast the above quote to the below (red underline added):

IC 35-45-2-1
Intimidation
Sec. 1. (a) A person who communicates a threat to another person, with the intent:
(1) that the other person engage in conduct against the other person's will;
(2) that the other person be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act; or
(3) of causing:
(A) a dwelling, a building, or another structure; or
(B) a vehicle;
to be evacuated;
commits intimidation, a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) However, the offense is a:
(1) Class D felony if:
(A) the threat is to commit a forcible felony;
(B) the person to whom the threat is communicated:
(i) is a law enforcement officer;
(ii) is a judge or bailiff of any court;
(iii) is a witness (or the spouse or child of a witness) in any pending criminal proceeding against the person making the threat;
(iv) is an employee of a school corporation;
(v) is a community policing volunteer;
(vi) is an employee of a court;
(vii) is an employee of a probation department; or
(viii) is an employee of a community corrections program.
(C) the person has a prior unrelated conviction for an offense under this section concerning the same victim; or
(D) the threat is communicated using property, including electronic equipment or systems, of a school corporation or other governmental entity; and
(2) Class C felony if, while committing it, the person draws or uses a deadly weapon.
(c) "Threat" means an expression, by words or action, of an intention to:
(1) unlawfully injure the person threatened or another person, or damage property;
(2) unlawfully subject a person to physical confinement or restraint;
(3) commit a crime;
(4) unlawfully withhold official action, or cause such withholding;
(5) unlawfully withhold testimony or information with respect to another person's legal claim or defense, except for a reasonable claim for witness fees or expenses;
(6) expose the person threatened to hatred, contempt, disgrace, or ridicule;
(7) falsely harm the credit or business reputation of the person threatened; or
(8) cause the evacuation of a dwelling, a building, another structure, or a vehicle.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.5. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.71; Acts 1981, P.L.300, SEC.3; P.L.183-1984, SEC.6; P.L.325-1985, SEC.1; P.L.242-1993, SEC.3; P.L.164-1993, SEC.12; P.L.1-1994, SEC.169; P.L.241-2001, SEC.3; P.L.175-2003, SEC.3; P.L.3-2006, SEC.2.

Then consider if when you are on the stand having shot someone, you want your training resume to include the guy who said the first quote.


Joe

 

[Rookie]

Contrast the above quote to the below (red underline added):
Then consider if when you are on the stand having shot someone, you want your training resume to include the guy who said the first quote.


Joe

But, but, but, I got offered a free class!

 

[Sylvain]

So a girl beat you up and a French guy is in the lead????

My illusions have been shattered.

lol

 

[thebishopp]

again, I only stated what I would have done.

Still not sure what you are trying to accomplish.

As I said, I'm sure JY would answer any questions you have personally.

I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish. You keep saying that Yeager would answer any questions I have personally and yet whenever someone tries to ask him a question he threatens to kill them. So knowing that why would I waste my time?

I ask you again what answer is he going to give that makes it even worth my time? He is the one who's "reputation" is in question. He is the one making death threats and asking people to sign dueling contracts because they are questioning his reputation. He is the one who made such a public spectacle of himself that his reputation is even in question to begin with.

So now why is it the responsibility of others to seek him out and even deal with the BS he throws at them?

Let's step out of reality for a minute and envision a world in which Yeager actually acted like he had some sense. Let's say he doesn't automatically start cussing and threatening to kill me.

What can he say?

He can't change what he wrote in his report, at least not do so and not look like he is lying. He can't really say anything at all that differs from the official ESRM report anymore (at least not and appear credible) because he even put out that public statement in 07 (Do I have to keep posting it?).

If your reply to all this is still some version of the "say it to his face" that Yeager and his supporters keep reciting then my reply will be (in the spirit of the Yeager maturity level):

I know you are but what am I x infinity (see infinity is infinite and I said it before you so I win).

 

[Fenway]

I know!!! Just got back from Miami where I visited the Bugatti dealership. Discussing some custom color/wrap options. Can't wait to get her home but unfortunately will have to store for the winter. Might be able to bring it to the next 1500.

Thanks all!

over 10K Fenway... as promised

 

[Fargo]

But, but, but, I got offered a free class!

Yeah, g'luck with that!

Truth is I neither know nor care whether he is a coward. That video etc is far from dispositive.

All I know is that every time I see him publicizing himself I just cringe at how he seems to have zero situational awareness and how he comes off representing gunowners and trainers.

He appears to have already gotten himself in a bad legal spot by running his mouth in violation of his contract with E'burg Risk Mgmt; hence his very public retraction. Now he can't deal with detractors without coming dangerously close to felonyland.

Maybe he should have a talk with Gabe Suarez about what a couple of months in a cage is like? From what I recall, Gabe was not a fan. It might give JY some perspective on when to keep his mouth shut.

Best,

Joe

 

[HICKMAN]

I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish. You keep saying that Yeager would answer any questions I have personally and yet whenever someone tries to ask him a question he threatens to kill them. So knowing that why would I waste my time?

That's a cop out

If you really want to know, then man up and ask him in person. I haven't seen him threaten anyone who wasn't trolling or talking smack.

You would rather "waste time" posting here over and over about what you found on the web than just go to the source.

Hell, he was just in Indiana, why didn't you go ask then?

 

[HICKMAN]

Oh look

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/3189931-post31.html

I got myself labeled a coward AND offered to drive you to Camden to ask him in person

 

[GBuck]

Oh look

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/3189931-post31.html

I got myself labeled a coward AND offered to drive you to Camden to ask him in person

Coward!

 

[thebishopp]

Oh look

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/3189931-post31.html

I got myself labeled a coward AND offered to drive you to Camden to ask him in person

I remember your statement:

I'm still wondering what you real heroes would have done. His teammate came to the rear of the vehicle where he already was. Pretty sure there isn't room to hide two people from 7.62 rounds at the back of the vehicle.

I'm sorry, this may be cruel, but these are civilian defense contractors, not my military brothers. I'm NOT DYING and stranding my four kids for being stuck in a stupid situation with no where to go.

If any of you judgemental internet bad-asses want to go down and personally challenge him and call him a coward to his face, I will drive you down to Camden and film the whole thing...

This S*** gets old and we hear the same crap every four months on here. Yeager's pissed me off to no end on more than once occasion, but that's no excuse for keyboard quarterbacking that video.

Whenever you want to man up, you let me know and I'll come pick you up

You got called a coward because you said you would abandon you team mates. Your reasoning was that you wouldn't consider your "team mates" lives as important as your own because they were not your "military brothers".

Edit- Man looking back on your comment that just really gets under my skin. You advocate accepting the pay for the risk/responsibility/duty of a job and then leaving your team mates to die to save yourself because they are not as important as you are. How could you even be trusted in the military? At what moment would you suddenly apply that same logic? How is it any different? Why is one promise to do one's duty any different than the other?

People with this type of thinking can't be trusted for they will always rationalize a "way out" if it suits them.

I'm willing to bet you were one of those kids in school that always tried to instigate a fight, wanting to see some "action" but not wanting to actually have to pay a price. You get to watch a fight then go home at the end of the day. I always disliked people like that.

How about this. I follow you down to Camden, you pay the gas down and a deposit for the gas back (I have no reason to trust you), as well as start a legal defense fund with a sufficient enough deposit to retain Guy Redford (or an equally as competent attorney licensed to practice in TN and referred by Mr. Redford) as well as sign a contract and promissory note (makes it easier for them to take your property if you try to renege and so I don't get stuck hanging having to pay the fees myself when they exceed the deposit) with said attorney saying you will be financially responsible for any and all legal fees necessary over and above the deposit you make to him.

So Mr. Yeager and you can't claim this was some kind of pre-meditated attack on him in order to justify some kind of legal or even lethal ambush at a later date it will be stated here, publicly that the journey is a non-threatening one. If he wishes to engage in criminal action on his part once we get there and if the conversation doesn't go as he would like then he is fully responsible for any consequences resulting from said criminal conduct.

No dueling contracts, no trickery, no bs. Our arrangement will be designed so you don't get a "freebie", it doesn't cost me anything to have myself as legall protected as is reasonably possible, and neither Yeager nor I are at any risk provided neither of us engage in criminal conduct.

I will be happy to video a Q&A session. I will start off by telling him what my opinion is from viewing the company AAR and supporting video. If he can maintain some level of decorum he can then rebut those opinions. He will need to keep in mind that a copy of the AAR and prepared questions will at hand and in addition the video will be made public. If he has any agreement with ESRM he will need to get cleared before making any statements contrary to the companies official AAR.

He starts yelling, screaming, threatening, and generally acting like a fool then I will leave. No chest bumping or testosterone sniffing. I don't engage in that behavior. If he attacks me I'll deal with it as best as I can and due to how close you will be, in all likelihood you will be caught in the crossfire. Note that any physical attack by him will be considered one of "deadly force" since he has made very public threats to that effect. In the event that Yeager "goes ballistic" I would suggest you have your will up to date.

In the end this is totally for his benefit since I would be investing my time (and you both your time and money) so I would consider this doing him a favor. Even my requirements of your financial investment in my expenses and potential legal fees does nothing but come short of "break even" for me. I should require some kind of "fee" for even doing this favor for him.

This may go perfectly with the new thread regarding the Irish Road incident.

 

[thebishopp]

That's a cop out

If you really want to know, then man up and ask him in person. I haven't seen him threaten anyone who wasn't trolling or talking smack.

You would rather "waste time" posting here over and over about what you found on the web than just go to the source.

Hell, he was just in Indiana, why didn't you go ask then?

A cop out? lol. Your logic is that EVERYONE who has ever disagreed with Yeager's actions was "talking smack" or "trolling"!

Unlike you I don't follow Yeager so I had no idea he was in Indiana.

 

[thebishopp]

How's about it Hickman, you going to put up or shut up? I gave you my offer, been waiting for a reply and all I have seen is a shot at me on another thread where my offer wasn't posted.

It is a great offer. It doesn't require the admission of intention to commit a criminal act (like Yeagers requirements for a "dueling contract"). It also provides for my legal defense should Yeager decide to commit a criminal act. All it requires you to do is "put up" the finances required for this, or "shut up" (that last should be self-explanatory).

Now you may ask "why should I pay for thebishopp's legal fees". Well for one thing there will be no "legal fees" should Mr. Yeager not attempt in any criminal action. Unless you are afraid that he will, or are in fact hoping so, then this should not even be an issue for you.

More importantly Why should I bear that burden?

I would already have to bear the burden of any fallout should Mr. Yeager engage in criminal conduct (something which he has already demonstrated and done with his threats to kill people). Why should I also bear the financial burden?

Especially since I have nothing to gain by taking a day or two out of my schedule to go an "help" Mr. Yeager answer questions which don't affect me in any way? You as a Yeager supporter and someone who I think just likes to watch "drama", and Yeager as someone who wants people to pay to take his training, are the only people that can benefit.

Like I said in my counter offer to your offer - What I am asking for actually falls short of me "breaking even". I said I "should" charge a fee but am willing to do this without. Normally I charge 75.00 an hour with mileage at 35 cents a mile. Providing you meet my requirements of legal protections and gas expenses, I am willing to waive my 75.00 an hour fee and 35 cents a mile fee.

 

[Fenway]

Being delivered next week. Early Christmas for me!

 

[Sylvain]

Being delivered next week. Early Christmas for me!

Nice!

I hope Esrice will be allowed to drive it.
We wouldn't have that many Yeager threads without him.