PDA

View Full Version : Army investigates: Are these West Point cadets making a political statement in unifor



sparks82
05-05-2016, 03:34 PM
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/05/04/army-investigating-if-these-west-point-cadets-making-political-statement-uniform/83950452/

Uh oh...

WILDJOKER5
05-05-2016, 04:20 PM
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/05/04/army-investigating-if-these-west-point-cadets-making-political-statement-uniform/83950452/

Uh oh...

Yeah, I don't see where they state a specific cause. Maybe they are just showing their "power" as women, or black women, being cadets at west point?

sparks82
05-05-2016, 04:27 PM
Yeah, I don't see where they state a specific cause. Maybe they are just showing their "power" as women, or black women, being cadets at west point?

It is perceived as they are supporting the BLM movement while in uniform. I'm pretty sure they're going to get reprimanded in some form. It's always about perception.

sandsjames
05-05-2016, 05:18 PM
These cadets have two things going for them. One, they are black. Two, they are female. There's no way anything other than a slap on the hand will happen.

If this were a group of white males, they'd be called Nazis and made an example of.

garhkal
05-05-2016, 05:31 PM
It is perceived as they are supporting the BLM movement while in uniform. I'm pretty sure they're going to get reprimanded in some form. It's always about perception.

Agreed. The perception of the raised fist these days is to support BLM or the black panthers (like Beyonce did in the half time show for the superbowl), so Can be seen as political speech..
BUT with how our current administration seems, they won't get punished in anyway imo.

sparks82
05-09-2016, 02:31 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/08/us/west-point-cadets-photo/index.html

Update to it and there's a different photo they also took.

"Mary Tobin is a graduate of the academy who said she is a mentor to some of the women in the photo and has spoken to them since the inquiry was launched. She said the pose had nothing to do with politics."They weren't doing it to be aligned with any particular movement or any particular party. It was, 'We did it and we did it together,'" Tobin said, referring to their completion of four years at West Point."

That is probably more to the reason why they did it. I don't feel they were trying to stir up some political affiliation with any group. As mentioned in the article, the raised fist has been used throughout history by many groups.

Honestly if they were white women I don't think there would have been anything in the news about them. Or white males.

Mjölnir
05-09-2016, 02:50 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/08/us/west-point-cadets-photo/index.html

Update to it and there's a different photo they also took.

"Mary Tobin is a graduate of the academy who said she is a mentor to some of the women in the photo and has spoken to them since the inquiry was launched. She said the pose had nothing to do with politics."They weren't doing it to be aligned with any particular movement or any particular party. It was, 'We did it and we did it together,'" Tobin said, referring to their completion of four years at West Point."

That is probably more to the reason why they did it. I don't feel they were trying to stir up some political affiliation with any group. As mentioned in the article, the raised fist has been used throughout history by many groups.

Honestly if they were white women I don't think there would have been anything in the news about them. Or white males.

Possibly, but the optic is definitely poor. I once saw a photo taken at an inopportune time when a boy was raising his had to catch something. It looked like the boy was making a Nazi salute (not a rigid extended hand, but close). Public reaction to the photo was pretty bad.

Now, maybe their after the fact story on why they posed the way they did in the photo is accurate, maybe it is made up after the fact. Either way, the photograph (absent of a banner or description) looks like they are making a political statement. Even if they weren't (which I don't fully think is true), the ability to have it taken this way shows a lack of judgement ... one I expect from someone in this age group.

sandsjames
05-09-2016, 02:58 PM
Honestly if they were white women I don't think there would have been anything in the news about them. Or white males.

White women, possibly not...but white males would have been referred to as Nazis almost immediately. Hell, there was a video of a Trump rally where he asked his audience to raise their hands and make a pledge and the media made references to Hitler.

Also, you mentioned prior that it's about perception. If it's being discussed then there is a perception. That, alone, makes it wrong when in uniform.

sparks82
05-09-2016, 04:18 PM
White women, possibly not...but white males would have been referred to as Nazis almost immediately. Hell, there was a video of a Trump rally where he asked his audience to raise their hands and make a pledge and the media made references to Hitler.

Also, you mentioned prior that it's about perception. If it's being discussed then there is a perception. That, alone, makes it wrong when in uniform.

I suppose they should have just not taken that picture and should have just gone with the one where they aren't raising a fist. I don't think a majority of people would say "Nazis" with a raised fist by white guys.

The Trump thing had a very Hitler-esque notion to it. I mean he had them raise their hand and swear a pledge to him. It was a pledge to vote for Trump. C'mon now. That wasn't the smartest thing to do. I can't upload a picture right now but if you Google it...that rally where he asked that the photos look very much like the Nazi salute. No other candidates said "Raise your hand and swear allegiance to me." That is why people said that it was like Hitler.

sandsjames
05-09-2016, 04:25 PM
I suppose they should have just not taken that picture and should have just gone with the one where they aren't raising a fist. I don't think a majority of people would say "Nazis" with a raised fist by white guys.

The Trump thing had a very Hitler-esque notion to it. I mean he had them raise their hand and swear a pledge to him. It was a pledge to vote for Trump. C'mon now. That wasn't the smartest thing to do. I can't upload a picture right now but if you Google it...that rally where he asked that the photos look very much like the Nazi salute. No other candidates said "Raise your hand and swear allegiance to me." That is why people said that it was like Hitler.

You can rationalize it all you want...

For instance...if this had been a group of black and white women with their fists raised in the air I wouldn't think anything of it because there is no history to anything questionable with white chicks doing this.

However, white men and black men/women have all made that (or a very similar) gesture for political reasons so to have it perceived as something larger is pretty easy to understand.

WILDJOKER5
05-09-2016, 04:33 PM
You can rationalize it all you want...

For instance...if this had been a group of black and white women with their fists raised in the air I wouldn't think anything of it because there is no history to anything questionable with white chicks doing this.

However, white men and black men/women have all made that (or a very similar) gesture for political reasons so to have it perceived as something larger is pretty easy to understand.

What about this?

http://ursulinemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/feminism.jpg

sparks82
05-09-2016, 04:33 PM
You can rationalize it all you want...

For instance...if this had been a group of black and white women with their fists raised in the air I wouldn't think anything of it because there is no history to anything questionable with white chicks doing this.

However, white men and black men/women have all made that (or a very similar) gesture for political reasons so to have it perceived as something larger is pretty easy to understand.

Women in Nazi Germany did the salute and pledged allegiance to Hitler just as much men did. There are female white supremacists and neo-Nazis today too. Women can be racist bigots just as much as men.

Also "A raised-fist icon appears prominently as a feminist symbol on the covers of two major books by Robin Morgan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Morgan), Sisterhood is Powerful (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisterhood_is_Powerful), published in 1970, and Sisterhood Is Forever, in 2003."

It was used as a symbol for Librarians Against the Digital Rights Movement apparently. Over 70 groups worldwide have used it - ranging from labor groups to feminists to terrorist groups.

WILDJOKER5
05-09-2016, 04:36 PM
Women in Nazi Germany did the salute and pledged allegiance to Hitler just as much men did. There are female white supremacists and neo-Nazis today too. Women can be racist bigots just as much as men. Like the founder of planned abortionhood.

waveshaper2
05-09-2016, 04:45 PM
This must be a trend at West Point. I must say that it looks pretty harmless when white cadets do it.
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*SZsgwyS-OSid2WUKgrzgJQ.png

Rainmaker
05-09-2016, 05:07 PM
These cadets have two things going for them. One, they are black. Two, they are female. There's no way anything other than a slap on the hand will happen.

'Black Lives Matter' is the on the list of approved racists of the government, like 'La Raza'.

WILDJOKER5
05-09-2016, 05:20 PM
'Black Lives Matter' is the on the list of approved racists of the government, like 'La Raza'.

Don't forget about code pink.

garhkal
05-09-2016, 05:39 PM
Possibly, but the optic is definitely poor. I once saw a photo taken at an inopportune time when a boy was raising his had to catch something. It looked like the boy was making a Nazi salute (not a rigid extended hand, but close). Public reaction to the photo was pretty bad.

Now, maybe their after the fact story on why they posed the way they did in the photo is accurate, maybe it is made up after the fact. Either way, the photograph (absent of a banner or description) looks like they are making a political statement. Even if they weren't (which I don't fully think is true), the ability to have it taken this way shows a lack of judgement ... one I expect from someone in this age group.

Too true these days. The optics on something often is MORE damning than the truth of it.


This must be a trend at West Point. I must say that it looks pretty harmless when white cadets do it.
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*SZsgwyS-OSid2WUKgrzgJQ.png

I know in ranks i have done similar, usually when cheering for Navy to beat army/airforce..

Rainmaker
05-09-2016, 09:38 PM
Don't forget about code pink.

How could they be racist? They're all pink inside!

WILDJOKER5
05-10-2016, 11:16 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JJesWvO3-4 Just like any good lefty, if the minority doesn't side with them, then the minority is a house *****

sparks82
05-10-2016, 04:25 PM
'Black Lives Matter' is the on the list of approved racists of the government, like 'La Raza'.

"Approved racists of the government?" I have never heard of a list of "approved racists of the government." Is this sanctioned by the government? Or is this by something like a conservative group? That doesn't even make sense. Approved racists of the government? Really?

sparks82
05-10-2016, 04:26 PM
Like the founder of planned abortionhood.

Planned Parenthood does a lot more than abortions. Only 3% of their services are abortions - and I see no issue with a woman choosing to get an abortion. It's just a choice - as is adoption or using the Safe Haven laws or keeping the pregnancy and having a child.

sparks82
05-10-2016, 04:30 PM
This is a case of pure perception. Some people see a political movement. Others see a show of empowerment. As I said it's all about perception. The media has portrayed that BLM uses the fist as a symbol of its movement when that's just a few people who claim to be part of it. As far as I can tell they don't officially have a symbol and not the fist.

There are dozens of pictures out there of people in uniform with a raise fist - of all ethnicities and skin colors. If you're going to say one demographic is political when they do it and the other isn't, you're treading into deep, murky water there.

Why don't they just have the women make a statement? Instead of all this innuendo or some pages saying they have "sources" that state that it is political just go to the source.

WILDJOKER5
05-10-2016, 04:35 PM
"Approved racists of the government?" I have never heard of a list of "approved racists of the government." Is this sanctioned by the government? Or is this by something like a conservative group? That doesn't even make sense. Approved racists of the government? Really?

Are you talking about democrat conservatives or GOP conservatives? They are different entities since "conservative" isn't a monolith political ideology. Democrat conservatives (liberals) prefer class systems of the rich and poor as they had during slavery. They keep the poor divided by claiming to white poor people that "at least you aren't a slave". Then, "at least you aren't black". Now its, "'those' evil rich guys are taking your money and the middle class wants to keep you down".

The GOP conservative is trying to conserve their founding principles of sticking strictly to the constitution and making sure we stay a constitutional republic. Hence the terms "Republican" and "Democrat".

sandsjames
05-10-2016, 04:52 PM
Planned Parenthood does a lot more than abortions. Only 3% of their services are abortions - and I see no issue with a woman choosing to get an abortion. It's just a choice - as is adoption or using the Safe Haven laws or keeping the pregnancy and having a child.

That's right. It's "just a choice". No biggy.

WILDJOKER5
05-10-2016, 04:53 PM
Planned Parenthood does a lot more than abortions. Only 3% of their services are abortions - and I see no issue with a woman choosing to get an abortion. It's just a choice - as is adoption or using the Safe Haven laws or keeping the pregnancy and having a child.

Yes, 3%, or "Planned Parenthood hopes to draw attention instead to its sexually transmitted disease and contraception services (the latter of which dropped four percent in one year). The organization states three percent of its services were abortions performed, but SBA-List notes that abortions made up 94 percent of the organization’s “pregnancy services,” while prenatal care accounted for only five percent (18,684), and adoption referrals only 0.5 percent (1,880).}"
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/01/01/planned-parenthood-annual-report-all-about-abortions-and-profits/

Counting handing out condoms along side an abortion for services rendered is pretty petty.

But then again, PP doesn't want these kids to live cause the racist that is Margret Sanger wanted to diminish the "less desirables" through eugenics. Ever wonder why 80% of PP buildings are in the neighborhoods of poor minorities? Also, their major income is from the abortions, not for passing out contraceptives or STD screenings.
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/10/16/79-of-planned-parenthood-abortion-clinics-target-blacks-hispanics/

sparks82
05-10-2016, 06:03 PM
Yes, 3%, or "Planned Parenthood hopes to draw attention instead to its sexually transmitted disease and contraception services (the latter of which dropped four percent in one year). The organization states three percent of its services were abortions performed, but SBA-List notes that abortions made up 94 percent of the organization’s “pregnancy services,” while prenatal care accounted for only five percent (18,684), and adoption referrals only 0.5 percent (1,880).}"
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/01/01/planned-parenthood-annual-report-all-about-abortions-and-profits/

Counting handing out condoms along side an abortion for services rendered is pretty petty.

But then again, PP doesn't want these kids to live cause the racist that is Margret Sanger wanted to diminish the "less desirables" through eugenics. Ever wonder why 80% of PP buildings are in the neighborhoods of poor minorities? Also, their major income is from the abortions, not for passing out contraceptives or STD screenings.
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/10/16/79-of-planned-parenthood-abortion-clinics-target-blacks-hispanics/

Not a biased source at all when it says "pro-life" SBA list. Or Breitbart.

I'm not getting into an abortion debate because that - along with religion- are the never ending debates. I have no urge to go into it because it's like running into a brick wall regardless of a person's stance.

sparks82
05-10-2016, 06:05 PM
That's right. It's "just a choice". No biggy.

It is just one choice - like adoption is one choice or Safe Haven is another choice or keeping it is another choice. It's "A" choice not "THE" choice. And it's a choice that I and other women should be afforded if we want to choose it. It is a choice I considered when a year ago I had a scare and thought I may have been pregnant and was still married. I would have gone and had it done if I so chose because not the best environment nor do I really want another kid and he doesn't need anymore kids. Immediately after I found out I wasn't, I got right back on Depo and have stayed on it since primarily because I like not having my period.

sparks82
05-10-2016, 06:06 PM
Are you talking about democrat conservatives or GOP conservatives? They are different entities since "conservative" isn't a monolith political ideology. Democrat conservatives (liberals) prefer class systems of the rich and poor as they had during slavery. They keep the poor divided by claiming to white poor people that "at least you aren't a slave". Then, "at least you aren't black". Now its, "'those' evil rich guys are taking your money and the middle class wants to keep you down".

The GOP conservative is trying to conserve their founding principles of sticking strictly to the constitution and making sure we stay a constitutional republic. Hence the terms "Republican" and "Democrat".

It doesn't matter I still don't know what the fuck an "approved racists of the government" list is. I Googled it and no such result or list came up. So what are you talking about?

WILDJOKER5
05-10-2016, 06:09 PM
It doesn't matter I still don't know what the fuck an "approved racists of the government" list is. I Googled it and no such result or list came up. So what are you talking about?

Im assuming its those racist groups that aren't on the terrorist watch lists like KKK or neo-nazis. BLM and NAACP and La Raza and Code Pink all deserve to be on that list, but since they are liberals, they get a pass on their racism and calls to violence against whites.

WILDJOKER5
05-10-2016, 06:10 PM
It is just one choice - like adoption is one choice or Safe Haven is another choice or keeping it is another choice. It's "A" choice not "THE" choice. And it's a choice that I and other women should be afforded if we want to choose it. It is a choice I considered when a year ago I had a scare and thought I may have been pregnant and was still married. I would have gone and had it done if I so chose because not the best environment nor do I really want another kid and he doesn't need anymore kids. Immediately after I found out I wasn't, I got right back on Depo and have stayed on it since primarily because I like not having my period.

Its "THEE" choice pushed by planned parenthood.

sparks82
05-10-2016, 06:13 PM
Its "THEE" choice pushed by planned parenthood.

Have you ever been to a PP? No it isn't.

WILDJOKER5
05-10-2016, 06:17 PM
Have you ever been to a PP? No it isn't.

You deny the live video shots of them by hidden camera. You deny their own stats. Guess the belief is stronger than reality.

"Planned Parenthood hopes to draw attention instead to its sexually transmitted disease and contraception services (the latter of which dropped four percent in one year). The organization states three percent of its services were abortions performed, but SBA-List notes that abortions made up 94 percent of the organization’s “pregnancy services,” while prenatal care accounted for only five percent (18,684), and adoption referrals only 0.5 percent (1,880).}"

Just cause you don't like the source, it doesn't mean its not real. Go get alternative data and show me its not true.

sparks82
05-10-2016, 06:20 PM
You deny the live video shots of them by hidden camera. You deny their own stats. Guess the belief is stronger than reality.

"Planned Parenthood hopes to draw attention instead to its sexually transmitted disease and contraception services (the latter of which dropped four percent in one year). The organization states three percent of its services were abortions performed, but SBA-List notes that abortions made up 94 percent of the organization’s “pregnancy services,” while prenatal care accounted for only five percent (18,684), and adoption referrals only 0.5 percent (1,880).}"

Just cause you don't like the source, it doesn't mean its not real. Go get alternative data and show me its not true.

Ah that video - that was horribly edited and some of those shots were not even FROM Planned Parenthood centers. Again I'm not getting into the abortion debate. It never ends. It has nothing to do with this topic.

sandsjames
05-10-2016, 06:22 PM
It is a choice I considered when a year ago I had a scare and thought I may have been pregnant and was still married. I would have gone and had it done if I so chose because not the best environment nor do I really want another kid and he doesn't need anymore kids. Damn, if only there was some way to avoid that in the first place.


Immediately after I found out I wasn't, I got right back on Depo and have stayed on it since primarily because I like not having my period.Awesome...it's good to go that women will use birth control as a way to make themselves more comfortable when it comes to their period but it's just an after thought to pregnancy.

sparks82
05-10-2016, 06:31 PM
Damn, if only there was some way to avoid that in the first place.

Awesome...it's good to go that women will use birth control as a way to make themselves more comfortable when it comes to their period but it's just an after thought to pregnancy.

I got it so I didn't risk getting pregnant again and so soon or the risk of having another medically fragile child.

And I was married at the time I had the scare - also I was a little busy with my daughter being in the hospital twice within her diagnosis at 6 weeks old and when I was supposed to go in for my shot I was in the hospital with her, three hours away from my base and she was there a month. Then I put in a compassionate reassignment and PCSed shortly after that hospital stay. Plus her infusions and doctor appointments, I really didn't have time to worry about it.

I said I am still on it even though I'm not having sex because of the period. But I have to remember who I'm talking to. You can be all pro-pregnancy all you want. That's your right and my right is to be pro-CHOICE. Whatever choice that woman may make.

sandsjames
05-10-2016, 06:45 PM
I got it so I didn't risk getting pregnant again and so soon or the risk of having another medically fragile child.

And I was married at the time I had the scare - also I was a little busy with my daughter being in the hospital twice within her diagnosis at 6 weeks old and when I was supposed to go in for my shot I was in the hospital with her, three hours away from my base and she was there a month. Then I put in a compassionate reassignment and PCSed shortly after that hospital stay. Plus her infusions and doctor appointments, I really didn't have time to worry about it.

I said I am still on it even though I'm not having sex because of the period. But I have to remember who I'm talking to. You can be all pro-pregnancy all you want. That's your right and my right is to be pro-CHOICE. Whatever choice that woman may make.

"Pro-pregnancy"? WTF is that? I don't suggest anyone get pregnant unless they really want to. There are so many ways to avoid pregnancy. Either way, you're right. It's your choice. If you think it's ok to use abortion as a form of birth control then you are perfectly within your rights to do so.

sparks82
05-10-2016, 06:55 PM
"Pro-pregnancy"? WTF is that? I don't suggest anyone get pregnant unless they really want to. There are so many ways to avoid pregnancy. Either way, you're right. It's your choice. If you think it's ok to use abortion as a form of birth control then you are perfectly within your rights to do so.

Pro-pregnancy are people who think they are pro life but they really are just pro-pregnancy - because after the child is born they don't give two shits about it and then want to attack the mothers for being on welfare or government assistance for trying to take care of the child they didn't even want. Or the fact that if you are for the death penalty you are not pro life either. That's what I mean by pro-pregnancy in regards to people who say they are pro life when they are in fact not pro life at all.

I never said abortion is a form of birth control. I'm not getting into this so stop commenting about it. You can be for an embryo or fetus and completely ignore the mother's rights and not give a shit after it is born all you want.

Rusty Jones
05-10-2016, 07:14 PM
I don't think that origins of "pro-life" are really religious in nature. Hell, if you look at Romania in the 1970's and 1980's, the government was actually providing incentives for women to have babies. And it was purely for economic reasons, nothing else.

sandsjames
05-10-2016, 07:28 PM
Pro-pregnancy are people who think they are pro life but they really are just pro-pregnancy - Ahhh...I see...yes...everyone should be pregnant


because after the child is born they don't give two shits about it and then want to attack the mothers for being on welfare or government assistance for trying to take care of the child they didn't even want. I know...it's far too much to ask for people who can't afford to care for a child to take precautions in order to not get pregnant.


Or the fact that if you are for the death penalty you are not pro life either. I'm not pro-life...I'm anti lack of responsibility.


I never said abortion is a form of birth control. I'm not getting into this so stop commenting about it. You can be for an embryo or fetus and completely ignore the mother's rights and not give a shit after it is born all you want.If you don't want to get into it then YOU should stop commenting on it.

Oh...and what about the father's rights? Or is he only allowed to have responsibility when it comes to child support?

WILDJOKER5
05-10-2016, 07:47 PM
I don't think that origins of "pro-life" are really religious in nature. Hell, if you look at Romania in the 1970's and 1980's, the government was actually providing incentives for women to have babies. And it was purely for economic reasons, nothing else.

S. Korea didn't ban abortions because of religion.

efmbman
05-11-2016, 11:56 AM
Survey says... no punishment.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/west-point-decides-punitive-action-female-cadets-raised/story?id=39023495

Carry on.

sparks82
05-11-2016, 04:22 PM
Ahhh...I see...yes...everyone should be pregnant

I know...it's far too much to ask for people who can't afford to care for a child to take precautions in order to not get pregnant.

I'm not pro-life...I'm anti lack of responsibility.

If you don't want to get into it then YOU should stop commenting on it.

Oh...and what about the father's rights? Or is he only allowed to have responsibility when it comes to child support?

What child support? I got about two months of it. He is behind probably close to 10,000 by now and none of his children's mothers or guardian will get any as he will probably be in jail for at least 3 years based on his probation violation and new charges with one having a year in jail. Oh and he's on trial for two felony charges (but that I don't think he did and got set up but that's what happens when you hang out with criminals and addicts). ALSO parenting time is at MY discretion because he failed to complete the parenting class, he failed to show up to any of the court proceedings for our divorce and for a month last summer I didn't hear from him at all as he spiraled into a meth binge. So in MY personal case, I don't give two fucks about his "rights" when he hasn't put forth the effort to be a father.

It depends on the situation in other people's cases. That's not up to me to decide for them.

sparks82
05-11-2016, 04:22 PM
Survey says... no punishment.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/west-point-decides-punitive-action-female-cadets-raised/story?id=39023495

Carry on.

I was about to post they said it was inappropriate but not political.

Rusty Jones
05-11-2016, 04:29 PM
What child support? I got about two months of it. He is behind probably close to 10,000 by now and none of his children's mothers or guardian will get any as he will probably be in jail for at least 3 years based on his probation violation and new charges with one having a year in jail. Oh and he's on trial for two felony charges (but that I don't think he did and got set up but that's what happens when you hang out with criminals and addicts). ALSO parenting time is at MY discretion because he failed to complete the parenting class, he failed to show up to any of the court proceedings for our divorce and for a month last summer I didn't hear from him at all as he spiraled into a meth binge. So in MY personal case, I don't give two fucks about his "rights" when he hasn't put forth the effort to be a father.

It depends on the situation in other people's cases. That's not up to me to decide for them.

Damn, you really know how to pick 'em.

sparks82
05-11-2016, 04:40 PM
Damn, you really know how to pick 'em.

I realize this ok? I never planned on having a kid with him. When I got back together with him at that time I had not planned on it being serious. It was going to be a hook up thing. I also thought I was never going to have kids as I was getting older into my 30s and gave up hope on that and then "BAM" pregnant. She was born with a genetic disorder that is kind of rare so no more for me. I'm not risking it with anyone.

I get it. I was stupid. He was the first guy I was with - we went our separate ways - I came back home he was divorced and we ended up back together. I'm too nice and give too many people too many chances - not just him. Family have screwed me over as well. Lessons learned hard.

Rusty Jones
05-11-2016, 04:55 PM
The problem isn't with you, personally. It's the overall problem in our society. I'm sure you're going to raise your standard to a guy who has shit together... but then that guy is left having to raise some deadbeat criminal's child. The best men in the country are always left with that, because the deadbeat gets the woman first.

Every time I see shit like this, I'm thankful for how lucky I am. I can't help but feel bad for the guys who are less fortunate, though. Even if they're convinced that they not unfortunate, because they got bullshit manipulative pats on the back for being a "real man" and "stepping up to the plate."

sparks82
05-12-2016, 04:36 PM
The problem isn't with you, personally. It's the overall problem in our society. I'm sure you're going to raise your standard to a guy who has shit together... but then that guy is left having to raise some deadbeat criminal's child. The best men in the country are always left with that, because the deadbeat gets the woman first.

Every time I see shit like this, I'm thankful for how lucky I am. I can't help but feel bad for the guys who are less fortunate, though. Even if they're convinced that they not unfortunate, because they got bullshit manipulative pats on the back for being a "real man" and "stepping up to the plate."

I have no desire to date anyone else or get married again. I don't need someone to "help" me raise my child. I do just fine on my own and have done so. Before this starts of sandjames on his tirade about relationships - ME personally I don't need someone at this time or in the near future nor do I have time for anyone else in my life when I have so much going on with my daughter's condition, work and so on.

Again trying to figure out how this thread got turned onto this topic. Somehow it got on abortion and then this shit again...smh.

Eric.chan
06-15-2016, 11:24 PM
The Army seems to pick and choose who they want to investigate. I'm a reporter with distinct information that was brought to our attention with regards to [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]. It appears he was at European Command one day and the next day gone. We were told by our informant that he is under an investigation for having an affair for over a decade and minus the legality, was "married" to a [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]. The Army leaders know, and public affairs is aware (as one stated the name of a person who was "working that particular case"). Why is the Army selective in who they punish? We found by various sources a [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx],who served the same command in Europe whom was released and sent back to the states and then discharged. What about [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]? When will the Army make an official statement? Is an officer given special treatment? It appears enlisted members get harsher sentences.

efmbman
06-16-2016, 11:20 AM
Why is the Army selective in who they punish?

Why is it like that in any organization? To rise through the officer ranks to general officer, it is reasonable to think that the general would have dirt or knowledge on others. Perhaps the same people that would decide punishment? It may boil down to the "CNN Rule". When something happens, or a policy is in question, the group must decide if they would feel OK testifying before Congress on CNN about the issue. If it would cause embarrassment to the service or senior people, hide it, cover it up, don't do it.


It appears enlisted members get harsher sentences.

Are you a relatively new reporter? Because this is not "news". Different spanks for different ranks... ranks has its privileges... all those sayings are grounded in truth.

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 11:34 AM
Let's not use the forum to spread an otherwise unpublished rumor and use the individuals and others who may be related names. If you are a reporter and publish or announce your story, feel free to link it ... until then this is a bit on the rumor / slander side ...

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 11:57 AM
Why is it like that in any organization? To rise through the officer ranks to general officer, it is reasonable to think that the general would have dirt or knowledge on others. Perhaps the same people that would decide punishment? It may boil down to the "CNN Rule". When something happens, or a policy is in question, the group must decide if they would feel OK testifying before Congress on CNN about the issue. If it would cause embarrassment to the service or senior people, hide it, cover it up, don't do it.

Concur that that has been / was the case for a long time. I think you are seeing more of a shift away from that now in the age social media where burying a story in EUCOM, PACOM etc. is much easier than it is today when the global connectivity and information spreading capability is different.



Are you a relatively new reporter? Because this is not "news". Different spanks for different ranks... ranks has its privileges... all those sayings are grounded in truth.

True ... but again, focus on why it is that way as well. Neither a Commander nor a court martial can reduce an officer, period. There is "loss of numbers" which a Commander could award at NJP or a court martial could use in sentencing, but officer ranks (O1-O8) are permanent; only O9 & O10 are temporary based on where the officer is assigned. A rank grade determination board (RGDB) can recommend to the service Secretary that an officer retire in the last grade in which the officer 'satisfactorily served' (ref LTG Kip Ward (formerly a GEN), RADM Michael Miller (formerly a VADM), RDML Terry Kraft (formerly a RADM) etc.) who did not retire at the highest rank they attained based on recommendations of a RGDB; but the authorities for a Commander to reduce an officer for misconduct simply do not exist (tied to the legal issue of officers being confirmed in their rank by the Senate).

Also, (and this came up on my recent command screening board) the issue of an NJP for an officer is unfortunately different for an officer than it is for an enlisted member. An NJP for an enlisted member is 'recoverable' -- at least in theory it is supposed to be (I was NJP'd twice when enlisted and seem to have recovered); NJP an officer once and they are done.

Is it fair? No. With the higher responsibility that officers have, that is part of the deal (goes along too with the better pay etc.) ... but it is what it is.

Is it legal to allows "effects on a career part" of the consideration process? Yes. The Manual for Courts Martial is very specific that all mitigating circumstances leading to an offense and following adjudication of an offense shall be considered by the adjudicating authority. This is why it is legitimate (usually not a valid point for appeal) within the UCMJ for two members, same rank, same offense etc. can be awarded different punishments for the same incident / offense.

sparks82
06-16-2016, 02:45 PM
The Army seems to pick and choose who they want to investigate. I'm a reporter with distinct information that was brought to our attention with regards to [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]. It appears he was at European Command one day and the next day gone. We were told by our informant that he is under an investigation for having an affair for over a decade and minus the legality, was "married" to a [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]. The Army leaders know, and public affairs is aware (as one stated the name of a person who was "working that particular case"). Why is the Army selective in who they punish? We found by various sources a [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx],who served the same command in Europe whom was released and sent back to the states and then discharged. What about [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]? When will the Army make an official statement? Is an officer given special treatment? It appears enlisted members get harsher sentences.

Are you new to the Army or the military? It's always like that. The higher up in the food chain, the more things get swept under the rug. I heard about the post CSM at Hood a few years ago had gotten busted by the MPs for a DUI. Then magically - it never happened.

After my second deployment from Iraq the BN CSM was accused of rape. He allegedly had a mistress in another state and he went to go see her and she didn't want to see him anymore. I'm not sure the entire story but I, as the BN S2 NCOIC, never saw that derog report. The BDE S2 "took care of it" is what the BDE S2 NCOIC told me. They were handling it there. I got every derog for our BN before and after that so it was odd. But he never got charged and I never heard anything more about it before I PCSed.

Also - we had a group of 1SGs and officers, including the BN CSM, go on recon to NTC before we went. I did see that derog report. They were apparently at the club at Irwin and got drunk. MPs told them to go home. They left. They cut across a barracks parking lot. My 1SG at the time decided to pull down his pants and chase the sprinkler. The staff duty NCO came out and yelled at them what were they doing? Another 1SG said "Who the fuck are you?" She said staff duty NCO. 1SG said "Yeah well fuck you." MPs showed up there and things would have been fine had one of the 1SGs not got up in the MPs face. So he got arrested. I think they all ended up getting arrested for disorderly conduct and then the 1SG who got in the MPs face got something. I can't remember what but when they came back...no one lost rank. I'm not sure if they got any administrative action. The only other time I heard about it is our 1SG got mad about something and goes "They wonder why we go to Ft Irwin and get drunk!"

But I guarantee if that had been some junior enlisted or junior to mid level NCOs they would have had rank stripped, UCMJ, etc. So yeah rank matters. That's been the case as long as our military has existed.

Rusty Jones
06-16-2016, 03:16 PM
Are you new to the Army or the military? It's always like that. The higher up in the food chain, the more things get swept under the rug. I heard about the post CSM at Hood a few years ago had gotten busted by the MPs for a DUI. Then magically - it never happened.

After my second deployment from Iraq the BN CSM was accused of rape. He allegedly had a mistress in another state and he went to go see her and she didn't want to see him anymore. I'm not sure the entire story but I, as the BN S2 NCOIC, never saw that derog report. The BDE S2 "took care of it" is what the BDE S2 NCOIC told me. They were handling it there. I got every derog for our BN before and after that so it was odd. But he never got charged and I never heard anything more about it before I PCSed.

It was only a rape accusation and it's possible that the charges may have been dropped. NO enlisted person will EVER get away with rape. It if happened, he'd have gotten busted to E1 and a dishonorable discharge. An FGO, on the other hand... their punishment will simply be not making the next paygrade (they MIGHT get busted one), and being forced to retire. Full benefits and everything.


Also - we had a group of 1SGs and officers, including the BN CSM, go on recon to NTC before we went. I did see that derog report. They were apparently at the club at Irwin and got drunk. MPs told them to go home. They left. They cut across a barracks parking lot. My 1SG at the time decided to pull down his pants and chase the sprinkler. The staff duty NCO came out and yelled at them what were they doing? Another 1SG said "Who the fuck are you?" She said staff duty NCO. 1SG said "Yeah well fuck you." MPs showed up there and things would have been fine had one of the 1SGs not got up in the MPs face. So he got arrested. I think they all ended up getting arrested for disorderly conduct and then the 1SG who got in the MPs face got something. I can't remember what but when they came back...no one lost rank. I'm not sure if they got any administrative action. The only other time I heard about it is our 1SG got mad about something and goes "They wonder why we go to Ft Irwin and get drunk!"

But I guarantee if that had been some junior enlisted or junior to mid level NCOs they would have had rank stripped, UCMJ, etc. So yeah rank matters. That's been the case as long as our military has existed.

Once you're serving in a paygrade that requires a selection board in order to be promoted to it, you can only lose rank via court martial. Cussing out an MP will only get you an Article 15.

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 04:59 PM
It was only a rape accusation and it's possible that the charges may have been dropped. NO enlisted person will EVER get away with rape. It if happened, he'd have gotten busted to E1 and a dishonorable discharge. An FGO, on the other hand... their punishment will simply be not making the next paygrade (they MIGHT get busted one), and being forced to retire. Full benefits and everything.

Not quite. Circa 2009, a Navy LCDR (O4) was involved in an incident with a local national overseas. In sum: LCDR was out in town with one of his female junior officers, his local national girlfriend saw them and confronted him, he smacked her and he was arrested my the local police. As a mitigating factor, he was a married geo-bachelor ... so add adultery to fraternization/disobeying a lawful order, assault consummated by battery, conduct unbecoming an officer. He opted for Admiral's Mast (NJP) and was found guilty, but even Commander Naval Forces Japan (a 2-star) did not have the authority to reduce.

The rest of the story: the O4 had already selected for O5, he had not promoted yet and his name was ordered removed from the promotion list (the list was confirmed by the Senate, but the promotion not yet effected), so this went from being selected to being considered a fail to select for promotion (first time). The following year the O4 failed to select again and after the continuation board (required for O4 who fail to select for promotion twice) he was separated from the Navy with 19 years and 5-8 months of service (was prior enlisted) -- did not retire.

As far as officers being allowed to retire vice being 'punished'. If the officer (or an enlisted member) has already qualified for retirement, they must be dismissed by a court martial (the officer equivalent of a dishonorable discharge); for an enlisted member who is retirement eligible (over 20 years of service), they must be awarded a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge to remove their retirement eligibility.

For members (officer & enlisted) who are over 18 years of service, they are basically in a 'safety zone' and cannot be involuntarily separated short of actions involving misconduct (side note: In the Navy, separation for failing to conform to height and weight standards is not considered involuntary unless mitigated by a medical issue).

Yes ... some people get in trouble and still retire ... it is the law. Yes, they will still get their benefits since they were already eligible at the time of the adjudication of the misconduct.

sandsjames
06-16-2016, 05:00 PM
For the sake of all that is good, let's not get into the ridiculousness of how much officers get away with simply because they're officers. I can only handle hearing so much justification of such injustices from our resident officers without going crazy.

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 05:02 PM
Are you new to the Army or the military? It's always like that. The higher up in the food chain, the more things get swept under the rug. I heard about the post CSM at Hood a few years ago had gotten busted by the MPs for a DUI. Then magically - it never happened.

After my second deployment from Iraq the BN CSM was accused of rape. He allegedly had a mistress in another state and he went to go see her and she didn't want to see him anymore. I'm not sure the entire story but I, as the BN S2 NCOIC, never saw that derog report. The BDE S2 "took care of it" is what the BDE S2 NCOIC told me. They were handling it there. I got every derog for our BN before and after that so it was odd. But he never got charged and I never heard anything more about it before I PCSed.

Also - we had a group of 1SGs and officers, including the BN CSM, go on recon to NTC before we went. I did see that derog report. They were apparently at the club at Irwin and got drunk. MPs told them to go home. They left. They cut across a barracks parking lot. My 1SG at the time decided to pull down his pants and chase the sprinkler. The staff duty NCO came out and yelled at them what were they doing? Another 1SG said "Who the fuck are you?" She said staff duty NCO. 1SG said "Yeah well fuck you." MPs showed up there and things would have been fine had one of the 1SGs not got up in the MPs face. So he got arrested. I think they all ended up getting arrested for disorderly conduct and then the 1SG who got in the MPs face got something. I can't remember what but when they came back...no one lost rank. I'm not sure if they got any administrative action. The only other time I heard about it is our 1SG got mad about something and goes "They wonder why we go to Ft Irwin and get drunk!"

But I guarantee if that had been some junior enlisted or junior to mid level NCOs they would have had rank stripped, UCMJ, etc. So yeah rank matters. That's been the case as long as our military has existed.

Is a "derog' report like a SAER (Subject Access Eligibility Report) for personnel indoctrinated into SCI? I am unfamiliar with that term.

If you were aware of your command or higher headquarters circumventing security procedures for senior personnel, did you contact your IG?

sandsjames
06-16-2016, 05:03 PM
Not quite. Circa 2009, a Navy LCDR (O4) was involved in an incident with a local national overseas. In sum: LCDR was out in town with one of his female junior officers, his local national girlfriend saw them and confronted him, he smacked her and he was arrested my the local police. As a mitigating factor, he was a married geo-bachelor ... so add adultery to fraternization/disobeying a lawful order, assault consummated by battery, conduct unbecoming an officer. He opted for Admiral's Mast (NJP) and was found guilty, but even Commander Naval Forces Japan (a 2-star) did not have the authority to reduce.

The rest of the story: the O4 had already selected for O5, he had not promoted yet and his name was ordered removed from the promotion list (the list was confirmed by the Senate, but the promotion not yet effected), so this went from being selected to being considered a fail to select for promotion (first time). The following year the O4 failed to select again and after the continuation board (required for O4 who fail to select for promotion twice) he was separated from the Navy with 19 years and 5-8 months of service (was prior enlisted) -- did not retire.

As far as officers being allowed to retire vice being 'punished'. If the officer (or an enlisted member) has already qualified for retirement, they must be dismissed by a court martial (the officer equivalent of a dishonorable discharge); for an enlisted member who is retirement eligible (over 20 years of service), they must be awarded a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge to remove their retirement eligibility.

For members (officer & enlisted) who are over 18 years of service, they are basically in a 'safety zone' and cannot be involuntarily separated short of actions involving misconduct (side note: In the Navy, separation for failing to conform to height and weight standards is not considered involuntary unless mitigated by a medical issue).

Yes ... some people get in trouble and still retire ... it is the law. Yes, they will still get their benefits since they were already eligible at the time of the adjudication of the misconduct.Dammit, I made a plea too late.

I think everyone understands the difference in the legality of dismissing/punishing officers. The argument is about how stupid those regs are. The shocking part is that the officers are supposed to be the ones we respect and follow, yet it's a culture of "Do as I say, not as I do".

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 05:11 PM
For the sake of all that is good, let's not get into the ridiculousness of how much officers get away with simply because they're officers. I can only handle hearing so much justification of such injustices from our resident officers without going crazy.

To be clear, I am not saying I agree with how it is different, just pointing out that there are really specific & legal differences in personnel and administrative actions that most people are not aware of. I completely concur that these differences create a perception that officers 'get away with more' and that often it allows them to finish out their obligated service (getting full pay and benefits while they do) until they separate where an enlisted member could be ADSEP'd short of their EAOS. I had a CO who began the process of separating an officer for a DUI (he did not have the authority to separate). As the bureaucracy chugged along the officer did not promote to O3 and then separated at the end of his obligate service prior to the separating being ordered.

Blaming the local Commander isn't necessarily blaming the right person; they only have so much legal authority to adjudicate offenses against an officer. If they are trying to do the right thing, the right thing can take a long time. If they are covering something up then yeah ... that is not right. But in the case of the rules just being different, if you want to blame anyone blame Congress, they are the only ones with authority to change it.

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 05:15 PM
Dammit, I made a plea too late.


Sorry ... :)


I think everyone understands the difference in the legality of dismissing/punishing officers.

No ... not everyone does ... that is obvious just from the comments in this thread.


The argument is about how stupid those regs are. The shocking part is that the officers are supposed to be the ones we respect and follow, yet it's a culture of "Do as I say, not as I do".

Concur, there are some bad officers out there. Some are a "do as I say, not as I do" crowd, but I don't think that is the culture (at least in the USMC and USN) ... far from it. So far those have been the minority for me, same with enlisted folks. Most (O & E) do their jobs, want to be treated with respect and allowed to do their jobs.

Rusty Jones
06-16-2016, 05:17 PM
Sorry ... :)



No ... not everyone does ... that is obvious just from the comments in this thread.



Concur, there are some bad officers out there. Some are a "do as I say, not as I do" crowd, but I don't think that is the culture (at least in the USMC and USN) ... far from it. So far those have been the minority for me, same with enlisted folks. Most (O & E) do their jobs, want to be treated with respect and allowed to do their jobs.

One thing I've noticed is that the contempt for officers is the worst in the Navy. It's pretty bad in the Air Force too; but there appears to be very little in the Army and Marine Corps.

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 05:23 PM
One thing I've noticed is that the contempt for officers is the worst in the Navy. It's pretty bad in the Air Force too; but there appears to be very little in the Army and Marine Corps.

Probably exacerbated by the Wardroom, Chief's Mess, Crew's Mess divide.

Personally, I think the Marine Officers have their shit together the best from both a 'taking care of people', 'being examples' and leadership. In part it is because of the attitude of the SNCO's and their guidance and support in training the new Lieutenants, in part they are (broad statement) much more involved on a day to day basis with their Marines than Company Grade Officers in the other services.

sandsjames
06-16-2016, 05:32 PM
One thing I've noticed is that the contempt for officers is the worst in the Navy. It's pretty bad in the Air Force too; but there appears to be very little in the Army and Marine Corps.I think that's because, in the Army and the Marine Corps, you'll actually see officers in the field. I can't speak for the Navy, but Air Force officers lead from an office or a staff car, always. Of course I'm not talking about the pilots, because that's an entirely different situation. But as far as the Command Staff goes, life is pretty cozy.

Mjölnir
06-16-2016, 05:40 PM
I think that's because, in the Army and the Marine Corps, you'll actually see officers in the field. I can't speak for the Navy, but Air Force officers lead from an office or a staff car, always. Of course I'm not talking about the pilots, because that's an entirely different situation. But as far as the Command Staff goes, life is pretty cozy.

In the Navy most officers (except SeALs, EOD, NCB etc.) don't 'go to the field', we go to sea (arrrrgggghhhhhhhh!!!!!). The Navy is the service (IMO) that segregates their enlisted and officers the most ... to me it is a bit ridiculous how far it is separate ... but it is what it is. Granted, most of my counterparts (folks not from a different service) don't understand why I think it contributes to an us vs. them mentality. I am not cozy with my Sailors, but am often told I am a very approachable officer ... it is possible.

I will agree with you that most USAF officers I have known did not know how to get up and go engage people. That said, one of the best officers I ever served with (2014-2016) was a USAF Col (pilot turned Intel) who was a taskmaster for work but vicious about taking care of his folks (officer & enlisted).

sparks82
06-20-2016, 04:36 PM
Is a "derog' report like a SAER (Subject Access Eligibility Report) for personnel indoctrinated into SCI? I am unfamiliar with that term.

If you were aware of your command or higher headquarters circumventing security procedures for senior personnel, did you contact your IG?

I was pretty junior and all I was told is that the BDE S2 was "handling" everything. All I had was secondhand info from the NCOIC and I never saw the derogatory report. So I don't know what all was even in it. This is the reg for reporting unfavorable information: http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_37.pdf

I can't remember the form it's been awhile. But that incident was just relayed and I don't know what even happened if anything and even if that happened. My LT didn't even get much about it. I would assume the BDE S2 was doing what they needed to do. But I don't know. I don't even know if the story that NCO told me was true.