I see contradiction between these two statements. If you indeed don’t care about the pissing why would you care about the idiot to the point of causing mayhem to him? I take it as you nevertheless recognize the negative PR consequences of the act. Being leaked out the video is certainly a powerful ideological weapon that is going to be used against US. There is probably no law against publishing it, as this is definitely not a classified information. There are two ways of learning a lesson here. One is to further restrict freedom of speech by expanding the ill-conceived Patriot Act (and being born in the USSR I have seen plenty of examples how corrupt people eventually abuse secrecy to hide their crimes), but keep in mind that it could still be futile. Another is to accept that in the information age when virtually everyone carries a cell phone there is often little expectation of privacy. Methods of warfare change all the time, and it is important to adapt and learn from setbacks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_at_the_2004_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_50_metre_pistol

Olympic sports in Services? Here is my personal take. In every activity there is a law of diminishing returns. Does it make sense to make servicemen (and women) play hockey or basketball or any other sport? Yes, there are plenty of obvious benefits to that. Does it make sense to develop them into professional athletes able to challenge Joe Sakic or Michael Phelps on Olympic rosters? No. Master swimmer on a Navy SEAL mission is great. Phelps on the same mission? Too many extra hours of training for too little extra benefit. There is no doubt bullseye pistol shooting is a foundation of any applied pistolcraft. There is no doubt that making pistol military instructors be proficient at the 2550 level is good. Making them into professional athletes and able to perform at 2650? I believe not, there is too probably too little extra benefit there. It is well-known that being a good coach and a good athlete are too totally different things, and while some excel in both, I remain doubtful that cranking up scores of instructors above the level of solid competence is of much benefit to their cadets who are headed to battlefield.

Disclaimer: I am not an action shooter, I am a civilian bullseye. But I admit I am a bit jealous that I can never compete with servicemen given time and money I can spend practicing. If they were bringing back home gold medals and Olympic glory I would have swallowed my tongue, but it has been decades since US pistol shooters did well at Olympics, losing to Russians and Chinese, though Szarenski looks mightily impressive going into London this year.

Free pistol wil make you a better slow fire shooter, can hurt sustained fire if you don’t cross train, no combat application whatsoever. Air pistol will do the same and cheaper. Where Air Pistol will help you master trigger control which does in fact carry over to other shooting disciplines and stages of fire.

So I am curious. What about all the money the Services spend on making Olympic athletes? Any sport?