VADM Fowler and RADM (sel) Klunder: Why Being a Mid is Worthwhile

[AF6872]

<p>Ad Nauseam, respisa loquitur, de minimus, id est. It is done the decision has been made. Imhoff was a genius and the septic tank analogy rules.</p>

[Whistle_Pig]

<p>…like trying to get a drink from Niagara Falls. You end up soaking wet, still thirsty, and all the while in danger of getting whacked on the noggin by some idiot in a barrel and losing both contact lenses in watching for him… :eek:</p>

[Tinidril]

<p>

Luigi, the internet is a wonderful thing. Perhaps you should learn how to use one of the search engines. I have learned a lot of very interesting things.</p>

<p>For example, a ‘blunt’ is not necessarily a handful of marijuana crudely wrapped with a tobacco leaf as some would wqant us to believe. It can be a commercial cigar with a rod inserted down the center creating a void in which marijuana can be packed. Common sense would indicate that the potency of the cigar, the diameter of the cigar, and the diameter of the void would all come into play as to the detectability of the marijuana. Since the purpose of the blunt is to be able to camouflage both the act of and the odor of smoking marijuana, perhaps it is effective.

</p>

<p>You’re missing the entire point, Mombee. People our age have known what a blunt was since we saw our first rap video. No one our age would have to google it. Blunts play a specific role in our pop culture and are easily recognizable even if one has never smoked one. They don’t look or smell like regular cigars. I think people our age are a lot more credible on this issue than someone who got their information from a search engine. And, I think most people would disagree that the purpose of a blunt is to camouflage what it is. The purpose of a blunt is to get high.</p>

[Whistle_Pig]

<p>REALLY??? :eek:</p>

<p>OMG, and all this time I thought this was just our friendly Naptown tobacconist’s “cigar of the month” club get-together! They told us Edie Adams was gonna bring a box of Muriel panatellas to try gratis. And when they started passing around those cheroots, well, golly, Sarge. </p>

<p>Sing it, Edie! "Whenever you walked in the joint…BAROOOMPH …I could tell you were a man of distinction, a real big spender. Good lookin’, not too bright. ‘If I inhale 2 times, will my pee come out right?’ "</p>

<p>[YouTube</a> - Muriel Cigars with Edie Adams](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVt2SkQt4gw]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVt2SkQt4gw)</p>

<p>[YouTube</a> - Muriel Cigars Commercial](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3XddPM8WsE&NR=1]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3XddPM8WsE&NR=1)</p>

[Whistle_Pig]

<p>And now we begin to see why one, even disconnected ill-conceived decision diminishes the credibility and acceptance of many that follow …especially when the motive might be deemed to be serving other than mission. USNA ought to make this one a case study on the essence of leadership. And how it can unravel quickly.</p>

[UDMom]

<p>My son (EOD Lieutenant) reports that an EOD tech in his MU was recently separated for testing positive for marijuana. No questions were asked, no second chance was offered. End of story.</p>

[mombee]

<p>

@UDMom

No questions were asked… End of story.

I doubt if it was quite this simple. The 5th Amendment guarantees even Midshipmen and ‘EOD techs’ the right of due process.</p>

[USNA86]

<p>E-mail from the Supe:</p>

<p>This email is being sent to the USNA Alumni Association Board of Trustees and the USNA Board of Directors at the request of the Superintendent, USNA. </p>

<p>Feb. 4, 2010 </p>

<p>Boards of Directors &Trustees, </p>

<p>As you are most likely aware, there have been a number of media reports regarding a recent conduct hearing here at the Naval Academy. Those reports have understandably concerned some of you. While I cannot comment on the details of the case due to privacy and legal considerations, I wanted to provide you my perspective when I consider cases of misconduct. When I hold a conduct hearing to examine an alleged violation of our Midshipmen Regulations, I am always cognizant of my solemn duty to uphold the high standards of the Navy, Marine Corps and Naval Academy. In each case, I diligently consider all evidence available, listen to all who have information related to the individual accused and the alleged misconduct, consider the professional potential of the young man or woman who stands accused, and make an impartial decision based on my principles, experience and judgment. I make that decision without regard for my own popularity, possible media reaction, or those who may choose to critique my decision in hindsight. My concern rests solely with providing the midshipman with a fair hearing and properly representing the high ideals of our institution. </p>

<p>In the particular case in question, I did not detour in any manner from my established approach to conduct hearings. I was not - in this case, nor in any previous case that I have heard while Superintendent - improperly or unduly influenced by any individual who had a stake in the outcome of my decision. </p>

<p>As blogs and media outlets began to comment on the case, they did so without the benefit of the actual facts and proceedings associated with the case. I acknowledge that when presented with the biased information that found its way into the public, a reasonable person might second-guess my decision and come to a different conclusion. The fact remains, however, that I am the one who reviewed all the evidence and received the statements from those associated with the alleged misconduct. From that evidence and those statements, I came to a decision that I continue to believe is just and proper. I will point out that some of the information unofficially provided to the public was in many instances in violation of the midshipman’s privacy rights and possibly violated Navy regulations and federal law. </p>

<p>As Superintendent, I am committed to protecting the privacy of any midshipman who faces an administrative hearing. I want to ensure that whether I return a midshipman to the Brigade or separate the midshipman from the Academy, this individual can be successful in the future. In this case, I believe the midshipman was ill-served by those who violated privacy restrictions and distributed information, some of it inaccurate. </p>

<p>I assure you that the Academy is on the right track, standards remain high, and we are graduating leaders prepared to serve their nation and the naval service with honor, courage and commitment. Thank you for your continued support. </p>

<p>Respectfully,<br>
VADM Jeff Fowler, Superintendent</p>

[Luigi59]

<p>Well I guess that proves it - The Superintendent says he made the right decision because…he said so.</p>

<p>CYA mode in high gear. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>If he had the same evidence that the Commandant had, why did they reach different decisions? </p>

<p>And the sad thing, is that if Jeff Fowler actually believes what he wrote, it is more evidence of his gullibility and inability to lead. Every Mid now knows, beyond any shadow of doubt, that he will believe anything. </p>

<p>READ IT AGAIN, JEFF - BLUNTS ARE NOT ACCIDENTALLY SMOKED. </p>

<p>THE MID LIED TO YOU AND GOT AWAY WITH USING DRUGS UNDER YOUR COMMAND.</p>

<p>ZERO TOLERANCE. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>Your honorable course is to disenroll the blunt-smoking football player and resign as Supe.</p>

<p>Otherwise, the stain remains.</p>

<p>7.3 yds per carry. Go Navy. :rolleyes:</p>

[GoNavyXC]

<p>The Brigade has not been addressed as a whole on this issue, and what is being done is EXACTLY WHAT I EXPECTED WOULD BE DONE. The powers that be are sweeping this under the rug and “letting it pass”…“time heals all wounds”, right? People were probably advising the Supt. to hold out and the Brigade’s frenzy would die down.</p>

<p>Sure you can hold out and protect yourself from the mids and the outer influences like the alumni and board of trustees, but with each day that passes, this event and other actions just like it that are not confronted head-on with the Brigade continue to eat at the core of integrity at the United States Naval Academy as time passes. If it’s ok to do things like THIS, what else is permitted, and what kind of culture are we fostering? The Brigade NEEDS clarification on this issue. This is not criticism of a superior’s actions. This is the reality of what is happening at our school. If you read the beginning of this thread, I’ve applauded Admiral Fowler on his decisions-that’s why this thread was originally made. Just when we started to have a feel-good atmosphere around here, this scandal broke out, and all of the responses since have been directed towards Mr. Curry.</p>

<p>The midshipman leadership of the Brigade cannot simply “ask” for help with this…it has to get swept under the rug and away from our attention…so we think.</p>

<p>I will tell whoever it is on May 28th that they must feel that some people will be better leaders and DESERVE it more than others. I wouldn’t have gotten the chance to explain MYSELF in front of the Supt if I got caught with drugs. I’m not that high of a priority compared to Marcus, so my case wouldn’t warrant taking up the Supt’s time, it would have just been assumed that I was gone, and that’s the end of the story. It was not so much that Marcus was retained that irks people, it is the fact that if it was them getting the boot, they know they wouldn’t get to have a discussion with the Supt, it would just be packing your bags, no explanations necessary. I’m sorry, the four-striper on the honor staff who spent 10 years in foster care, and 8 different schools moving across the state in 5 different homes is simply subordinate on all accounts to the man who gains 7.3 yards per carry. Take it for what it’s worth, but if you really want this to get out, I have all the statistics you could imagine on my possession to disprove some of the notions and favoritism that the administration has tried to sweep under the rug. This whole circus that we’ve had (even in the 2 years here, 1 as BIO, one as the Investigations Advisor) is great writing material and a facade to what’s actually going on here. Know that I will be saluting Marcus Curry one day if this is not rectified. That’s not a threat, that is simply conforming to the standards and priorities already in place. My sponsor dad (USNA '75) calls this place a country club, and now I fully believe him.</p>

<p>If I end up dead before graduation, you’ll know why.</p>

[mombee]

<p>Since unsubstantiated blogs have driven this from the very beginning, another one from the Facebook group:</p>

<p>

A second year Midshipman, Marcus Curry, has been an up and coming football player this year. He came up positive on a drug test for marijuana a few weeks ago. His chain of command recommended him for dismissal and it went to the Supt. All did not see sufficient extenuating circumstances to block the dismissal.</p>

<p>However, the Supt overrode their recommendations and gave Midn Curry punishment short of dismissal. The story was taken up in the Annapolis newspaper and raised some questions since Midn Curry was a minority and did not have anyone going to bat for him in the system. Several other black Mids on the football squad had gotten into trouble and were kicked out by the Supt. So, what made this case different?</p>

<p>I do not know the Supt. personally but have heard him speak about the Academy quite a few times on my trips back to Annapolis. Each time I found him to be level headed, honest, willing to admit mistakes, and an all around good guy. Each time I heard him speak I came away thinking things were on the right track in the Yard, and I have been a fairly strong critic of Yard management in the past. So, I was surprised when he kept Midn Curry against the recommendations of the chain of command. To be honest I was afraid this might have been a Diversity issue and not one that supported the Ethics and Honor Concept we all were inculcated with during our time by the Severn.</p>

<p>Let me give you the rest of the story. I received information that shows me apparently the right thing was done by the Supt in retaining Midn. Curry, at least in this instance. I do not know what the future holds for Mr. Curry. Perhaps he will go on to do well or maybe not. But in this instance he was treated fairly.</p>

<p>Here is the story I got from a good source. I do not have permission to name the source but you probably would know him if I did.</p>

<p>Curry, as an athlete, was not well known in his company, had a bunch of demerits, nothing serious, tardiness, room inspection, etc, so when he tested positive, it was straight to the Commandant, no tolerance, no support from his chain of command, send to the Supe for dismissal. End of story…both coach and AD assumed he was dismissed. However, the Supe dug a bit deeper and learned that a previously dismissed midshipman on his way out had called Curry to join him in Smoke Hall to share a farewell cigar…Curry took two puffs and realized something was not quite right and refused another puff…the next day coincidentally he was hit with a random drug test and just barely tested positive ( which would corroborate his story) and the dismissed midshipman was brought back for sworn disposition and stated that he gave it to Curry as a joke and that Curry realized something was amiss and refused the third puff… Now the Supe could have taken the easy way and dismissed Curry to show the brigade and the alumni how tough he is on football, minorities, druggies, etc or do what he believed in his heart to be the correct call: give the kid a break and take all the BS from the alumni.</p>

<p>The above information is for me the missing piece in this puzzle and sounds like just what I would expect the Supt. to do in a case like this. I, for one, will cut the Supt. and Midn Curry some slack in this case. I hope you will do the same.

</p>

<p>I think the Supt’s letter says it all. Even if he wanted to reveal his reasons, which he doesn’t, privacy laws would prohibit him from doing so. Therefore, the only thing that will continue to drive this is unsubstantiated blogs and those who are want to make knee-jerk reactions based on no factual information whatsoever. Even GoNavyXC has nothing but rumors to support her opinion of the actual interactions between upper leadership and Midshipman Curry. For those of you contemplating a military career, it is an example that exemplifies the loneliness and other difficulties which can be experienced by those in leadership positions whose conscious dictates the ‘right’ decision.</p>

[Luigi59]

<p>Share a farewell cigar?</p>

<p>Yeah, right. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>Do you actually believe a blunt could be smoked ON THE GROUNDS OF THE US NAVAL ACADEMY and no one would smell it? rotflmfao!</p>

<p>You’re as gullible as the Supe. </p>

<p>He knew exactly what he was smoking, there is no mistaking a blunt! Period!</p>

<p>EVERYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 30 KNOWS IT!!! CIGARS ARE NOT SHARED BY TWO MEN, BLUNTS ARE!! </p>

<p>THE SUPE WAS LIED TO AND HE FELL FOR IT!!!</p>

<p>HE NEEDS TO RESIGN. </p>

<p>7.3 yds per carry, Go Navy. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>The stain remains.</p>

[Whistle_Pig]

<p>

I will point out that some of the information unofficially provided to the public was in many instances in violation of the midshipman’s privacy rights and possibly violated Navy regulations and federal law.

</p>

<p>Notably, while quick to allege a violation of privacy and imply possibly even Navy regs, the statement is equally as quick and clear in neither denying nor proclaiming that information as inaccurate and untrue, something which could have been done without any violation of law …were that the case.</p>

<p>The silence on this is unfortunately more telling and persuasive in the context of the letter and its purpose to his governors than are the arguments for a right and righteous decision.</p>

<p>And it is essential for readers being mindful of what has been recognized both internally and externally as #1 priority in this administration in considering the evidence of this. Again, please note no addressing or refutation of that in this statement.</p>

<p>Proclaiming the 5th while at the same time attempting to explain can be revealing. This doesn’t seem so much about the “loneliness at the top” as it is about PC crowded company.</p>

<p>Doggone bloggers …How ya gonna keep 'em down on the farm. That’s what some say of Fox News, too.</p>

[mombee]

<p>

@WhistlePig

the statement is equally as quick and clear in neither denying nor proclaiming that information as inaccurate and untrue, something which could have been done without any violation of law …were that the case.

</p>

<p>Huh?</p>

<p>

As blogs and media outlets began to comment on the case, they did so without the benefit of the actual facts and proceedings associated with the case. I acknowledge that when presented with the biased information that found its way into the public, a reasonable person might second-guess my decision and come to a different conclusion.

</p>

<p>And:</p>

<p>

In this case, I believe the midshipman was ill-served by those who violated privacy restrictions and distributed information, some of it inaccurate.

</p>

<p>It appears to me that it was relatively clear that he stated that the information was inaccurate.</p>

<p>And please explain to me how one can “proclaim(ing) that information as inaccurate and untrue” without tacitly confirming that which is true. It seems you want some version of a childhood game, "you’re getting warmer, “you’re getting cooler, now you’re getting much warmer. You’re hot”., type of response. Anything in the specific denial/confirm mode of response would be a violation of policy regulations.</p>

<p>Hopefully, he will go after those who violated privacy restrictions and distributed information.</p>

[mombee]

<p>A more factual blog:</p>

<p>[WHEN</a> IT SUCKS TO BE A NAVY BLOGGER The Birddog](<a href=“http://thebirddog.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2010/01/31/when-it-sucks-to-be-a-navy-blogger/]WHEN”>WHEN IT SUCKS TO BE A NAVY BLOGGER – The Birddog)</p>

<p>

The truth is that we don’t know anything. Nobody wants to admit that, because that would make it harder to advance their agenda.

</p>

<p>Also:</p>

<p>

Something that is largely being overlooked in all the furor over the Supe’s decision on Curry is the fact that so many midshipmen have not only commented on the ruling on blogs and message boards, but actually contacted the media about it. This is the second time in the last three years that this has happened. If there’s anything that should give you concern about the future of the Naval Academy, it’s this. The very first lesson that midshipmen are taught is that before you can lead, you have to learn how to follow. It is a lesson that apparently was completely lost on some of them. This was a decision that was the Superintendent’s to make, and midshipmen’s to live with. That didn’t stop a few coddled, Generation-Y **bags that have spent a lifetime getting trophies for finishing in last place and being told how special they are from contacting blogs and newspapers to spread rumors about Curry, denying him the anonymity he is legally entitled to– anonymity that these cowards are unwilling to give up themselves. The irony lost on these tools while they pass judgment on Curry’s fitness to serve is that no CO in the fleet wants to fill his or her wardroom with self-righteous jackasses that would run to the media whenever they disagreed with a command decision. In deciding for themselves which regulations just don’t apply to them, these people violate everything they pretend to stand for.

</p>

<p>Amen.</p>

[Whistle_Pig]

<p>

@mombee

Hopefully, he will go after those who violated privacy restrictions and distributed information.

</p>

<p>Yea, boot those lousy patriotic frustrated whistle-blowers! They’re the ones dishonoring the Navy and putting the ship @ risk.</p>

<p>Now wouldn’t that be justice, hardly at work. Oh my. I feel like I’m listening to Robert Gibbs. :eek:</p>

[UDMom]

<p>WP and Luigi: You are on the money with this one.</p>

<p>For what it’s worth…I don’t want my son going down range with a liar and a pot head. There are no football teams in Afghanistan. If that isn’t the bottom line, what is?</p>

[mombee]

<p>

@WhistlePig

Yea, boot those lousy patriotic frustrated whistle-blowers! They’re the ones dishonoring the Navy and putting the ship @ risk.</p>

<p>Now wouldn’t that be justice, hardly at work. Oh my. I feel like I’m listening to Robert Gibbs.

</p>

<p>

I will point out that some of the information unofficially provided to the public was in many instances in violation of the midshipman’s privacy rights and possibly violated Navy regulations and federal law.

</p>

<p>

In this case, I believe the midshipman was ill-served by those who violated privacy restrictions and distributed information, some of it inaccurate.

</p>

<p>Surely you do not condone Midshipmen violating federal law. Or are you attempting somehow to justify in your view the misplaced logic that two wrongs do indeed make a right?</p>

<p>One doesn’t have to read too far between the lines to know that there are probably a few Midshipmen sweating right now as is, I am sure, an anonymous blogger who is either active or retired Navy. The Admiral is not happy.</p>

[UDMom]

<p>Mombee clogs these threads with frivolous posts, oblivious to the fact that others have a vested interest in something other than the fact than they graduated from the Naval Academy in 1969. He has no offspring in country, he has no child involved with a current midshipman. His only desire is to defend the Academy at all costs. I am done here. It makes me sick.</p>

<p>He should have been banned, for a forth time, long ago.</p>

[mombee]

<p>LOL. Defending the Academy is a crime and having a child “involved” with a current midshipman, makes one an expert. Probably good that you are “done here”.</p>