Comments on: SITREP

By: GEO6

GEO6 — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 04:37:31 +0000

XTC, Roger your last and commented likewise same place. GEO6

By: Anymouse

Anymouse — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 04:21:45 +0000

Oh, Jaysus: It’s Frank Flippin’ “hair plugs” Pandolfe behind this. He is all things shoe. I am so very, very, sorry TR battle group.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:44:51 +0000

Nose,
What can I say? How many times on a duty day did you, as CDO, hear the 1MC bong aboard SURFPAC unexpectedly on a Sunday? How many times did you deliberately try to get away with striking “10″ bells on time? How often was a buddy’s hard hat filled with talcum powder while in DSRA? This was standard SWO humor for the guys. With the women SWOs it would have taken a scanning tunneling electron microscope to find even a single humor atom back in the day.
OTOH, we have been witness to several videos here at chez Lex-online, that seem to reflect well on some of our young SWO women officers so it may be getting better out there. They were dressed as snipes now that I think about it and snipes are typically well endowed with a sense of humor. Now that I think about it I wonder if the videos were originally created for focsle follies. I wouldn’t know about them since the closest I ever got to one of those things was doing a Q-Route lead through for a battle group transiting the Red Sea back in 1984. We stayed in the route we’d “swept” but the carrier persisted in staying about a mile to port of the swept channel. It was probably just their way of expressing the opinion that we’d wasted a month or more mollycoddling a bunch of semi-worthless HM-14 types aboard to no good purpose.

By: XBradTC

XBradTC — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:10:33 +0000

Geo6,

I’ve addressed your points over at the Flight Deck.

http://www.neptunuslex.com/Wiki/2008/12/13/a-modest-defense-of-the-indefensible/

By: blackeagle603

blackeagle603 — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:36:48 +0000

first they stop keelhauling the new guys…

it’s all downhill from there.

thank you Patty Schroeder.

By: NotEnoughSand

NotEnoughSand — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:06:35 +0000

My take:

There is no such thing as a “clear order” to keep things “clean and decent.” What is clean and decent to one person might be offensive to another, and a video edited to appear “suggestive” definitely falls right in the tricky grey area where it’s hard to put in one box or the other.

It seems like the RADM left the determination what what is “clean” and what goes too far to the squadron CO’s. And then having given them this authority, reneged when he didn’t agree with the decision he empowered them to make.

Hence why the Admiral needs “outside authority” to handle this. This is incident is apparently a failure of his leadership, so he’ll need someone above him to give him the ole foot-in-the-ass.