Tuesday, May 21, 2019

When the U.S. Navy Blinked: Part VIII of the Report of the Investigative, Congressional Sub-Committee on the Racist, 1972 Black Mutinies Aboard the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk and the U.S.S. Constellation



Part I: “Remember the Kitty Hawk! Remember the Constellation! West Point’s Female Black Supremacists are Continuing a Grand U.S. Military Civil Rights Tradition!
“Mutiny! Two Racist Mutinies the U.S. Navy Has “Disappeared,” and the Shadow Navy Command Structure”
;

Part II: “The Congressional Report on the Racist, Black Mutinies in 1972 aboard the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk and the U.S.S. Constellation: Findings”;

Part III: “The Racist, 1972 Black Mutinies aboard the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk and the U.S.S. Constellation: Opinions of the Investigative, Congressional Sub-Committee”;

Part IV: “Mutiny! Recommendations: Opinions of the Investigative, Congressional Sub-Committee on the Racist, 1972 Black Mutinies aboard the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk and the U.S.S. Constellation;

Part V: “The Mutiny on the Kitty Hawk: ‘Kill the son-of-a-bitch! Kill the white trash! Kill, kill, kill!’ The Report of the Investigative, Congressional Sub-Committee on the Racist, 1972 Black Mutinies aboard the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk and the U.S.S. Constellation;

Part VI: “The Mutiny on the Constellation;

Part VII: “Permissiveness and Appeasement”;

Part IX: “A Navy of Saboteurs”;

Part X: “Black Supremacism in Uniform”;

Part XI: “ The Shadow Navy: White Surrender, and the Black Supremacist Takeover”; and

Part XII: “Integrating Unfit Racists into This Man's Navy.”


Re-posted by Nicholas Stix


“It is often stated that young people today demand more than just an order; they demand to know the reasons behind such an order. This "fact" is often given as justification for their slower response to directives.

“Whether young people today may be more inquisitive than those of past years has no relation to the maintenance of good order and discipline. Military discipline demands nothing less than immediate response to orders. The need for this immediacy is obvious in situations where lives are at stake. To demand a similar response during routine operations and on "minor" matters is essential to proper training for emergency situations and appropriate responsiveness to commands which may be given in wartime.

“The subcommittee found a reluctance on the part of some petty officers, junior officers and seniors alike, to demand strict and immediate response to orders. Instead, there seems to be an attitude on the part of certain supervisory personnel that if they fail to explain in detail every order or command, the junior may not comply. Indeed, there is also the feeling that such failure to comply will be supported by various senior personnel and/or representatives of the juniors; be they councils, committees, or representatives.”

Morale

Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King once agreed that morale is a "conviction of excellence." In fact, morale too is most severely tested during periods of routine operations. In war, morale is almost self-generating. In periods of normal operations, it must be carefully nurtured.

[N.S.: The notion that morale is a “conviction of excellence” sounds vacuous to me. I suppose the writer was invoking the words of a naval gray eminence as a form of triangulation, as cover for his criticisms of the service.]

The subcommittee observed extremes of high and low morale during its investigation. The majority of naval personnel appear to have substantial pride in the Navy, their unit and themselves. Others couldn't care less.

[“The majority” clearly refers to whites; “others” refers to blacks. Remember that a majority of black seamen committed mutiny on the Kitty Hawk.]

The subcommittee found a confusion as to what is "excellence" and what standards of excellence naval personnel are expected to meet. Clearly, in the area of good order and discipline, there has been confusion as to the expected standards. That confusion reaches to the top levels of the service. If this had not been so, why, then, while denying that permissiveness does exist and claiming that firm discipline is the order of the day, was there a need on November 14, 1972 to issue Z-117, exhorting the Navy to strengthen and maintain its control over good order?

Instances of confusion and, as discussed later, misplaced perceptions of performance standards, destroy the "conviction" so essential to good morale and esprit de corps.

The position that high morale is indicated by rising reenlistment rates is not entirely accepted by the subcommittee. The Congress has, in the past 2 years, provided far more pay, allowances and other related benefits than even the services themselves have requested. This was done to relieve the historically adverse effect of lower pay in the military than was available in comparable civilian employment. Higher enlistment and reenlistment rates were clearly influenced by these actions.

It may well be that, given the unfortunate state of the Nation's economy, with the lack of sufficient employment opportunities in the civil sector, military life now has a certain appeal based upon financial rewards. Certainly this aspect cannot be overlooked when considering the meaning of rising reenlistment rates.


Appearance

Traditionally indicative of high morale has been pride in the uniform and in one's appearance in the uniform. The current relaxation of the standards of appearance for Navy men has caused a lessening in the pride that some sailors take in their appearance and, thus, in their service.

Admittedly, Z-57 and subsequent clarifying messages concerning the standards of appearance, were not designed to permit Navy personnel to become sloppy and slovenly in their appearance and grooming. Nonetheless, such has been the effect.

Considerable testimony to the effect that the uniform seems to mean less today than it did several years ago was received by the subcommittee. Through its personal observation as well as the opinions given it by active duty personnel from all grades and ranks, including retired Navy personnel, and from private citizens, the subcommittee received clear and irrefutable evidence that the men of the naval service do not present the smart appearance that once was their unique trademark.

While this has undoubtedly been as a result of individual abuse of relaxed regulations, it has, in fact, caused a service-wide problem for all Navy personnel. Until such time as there is insistence on clear-cut standards for a smart appearance while in the uniform of the United States Navy, the general morale and discipline will be adversely affected.


Responsiveness to command

"Aye, aye, sir," traditionally means, "I understand your orders and will comply with them, sir". It may well be that a general abandonment of this phrase has lessened the sense of immediacy that it implies.

It is often stated that young people today demand more than just an order; they demand to know the reasons behind such an order. This "fact" is often given as justification for their slower response to directives.

Whether young people today may be more inquisitive than those of past years has no relation to the maintenance of good order and discipline. Military discipline demands nothing less than immediate response to orders. The need for this immediacy is obvious in situations where lives are at stake. To demand a similar response during routine operations and on "minor" matters is essential to proper training for emergency situations and appropriate responsiveness to commands which may be given in wartime.

The subcommittee found a reluctance on the part of some petty officers, junior officers and seniors alike, to demand strict and immediate response to orders. Instead, there seems to be an attitude on the part of certain supervisory personnel that if they fail to explain in detail every order or command, the junior may not comply. Indeed, there is also the feeling that such failure to comply will be supported by various senior personnel and/or representatives of the juniors; be they councils, committees, or representatives
.

The Special Subcommittee on Recruiting and Retention of Military Personnel stated: "While we have an 'army of the democratic', we cannot have a 'democratic army'… Working by consensus or majority rule would not run an assembly line, nor would it be effective in a governmental agency." This statement has clear application to the military services.

Young men and women, especially in an all-volunteer force such as the Navy, must know from the beginning of their service that immediate and unquestioning response is expected of them at all times and that failure to meet that expectation will result in disciplinary action.

This is not to say, however, that the reasons for a particular order should never be given. The subcommittee believes, however, that the option to explain an order must remain with the person issuing that order and that the response by the junior will be immediate regardless of his senior's decision as to whether or not the directive is to be explained.

The subcommittee was particularly concerned to find that some petty officers and commissioned officers were willing to accept noncompliance until such time as they had fully explained the reasons for their orders. This attitude is not acceptable.



Frequency of disciplinary infractions

Soon after the appointment of this subcommittee, the Navy released to the press statistics which indicated that the number of court-martial cases and the numbers of cases tried by Captain's Mast (nonjudicial punishment) had declined over the past several years. The Navy has suggested that this decrease indicates that sailors are more responsive to commands and, therefore, that discipline is being maintained at a greater level than previously experienced.

[Mark that date: 1972. Already then, the Navy was peddling fakestats!]

The subcommittee is concerned that the figures may indicate a tendency on the part of authority to ignore or appease rather than to prosecute offenders.

The preponderance of testimony indicates that those in authority turn too frequently to negotiation and then to appeasement rather than immediately to fair and firm enforcement of existing regulations. As an illustration, we cite the efforts on the part of senior officers to deal with the members of the so-called "beach detachment" from U.S.S. Constellation rather than to invoke basic disciplinary procedures for offenses committed aboard the ship. That the decision in this matter was made far above the commanding officer of Constellation is clear. The result has been the creation of an environment of leniency, appeasement, and permissiveness.

The maintenance of good order and discipline relies on the certain knowledge that offenses will not be tolerated and will be subject to swift and equitable action. There is nothing wrong with punishment when it is deserved. A system which hesitates to punish when it is deserved is very wrong.

The subcommittee believes that the Uniform Code of Military Justice is an equitable system of law for the military, and may even surpass civil law in the protection of an individual's rights in court actions. Its appropriate utilization is a deterrent to unlawful conduct and is essential to the maintenance of good order and discipline.



5 comments:

Anonymous said...

" a reluctance on the part of some petty officers, junior officers and seniors alike, to demand strict and immediate response to orders. "

Afraid. Afraid to ordering the negro sailor to follow a command and having the negro sailor either just refuse to obey or attack you.

Anonymous said...

ESPN BLINKS (MAYBE)SAYS NO MORE POLITICS (RACE BAITING)--I DON'T BELIEVE THEM
(Breitbart)John Navarro
ESPN President Jimmy Pitaro conceded defeat Monday by finally admitting, “Without question our data tells us our fans do not want us to cover politics.”
Well, no shit.

You needed your data to tell you that, Jimmy?


You needed to convene something to do a tabulation that deliver some data, Jimmy?

Was it the 15 million lost subscribers? Was that the “data?”

How about the endless complaints across social media, the editorials…?

Maybe the layoffs? Those massive layoffs — were the layoffs the data, Jimmy?

Perhaps it was the ratings crash?

Consumer sentiment?

Seriously, Jimmy, please do share with us this data of which you speak.

After years and years and years and years of Disney straight up lying to us, telling us again and again that the infusion of left-wing politics in its sports coverage was not hurting the network, here we have no less than the president of ESPN taking a knee.


Here’s his whole comment, where Pitaro also makes clear he has sat down with his anchors and told them to shut up about their personal political opinions and to focus instead on the players and games:
“Without question our data tells us our fans do not want us to cover politics, ”Pitaro said. “My job is to provide clarity. I really believe that some of our talent was confused on what was expected of them. If you fast-forward to today, I don’t believe they are confused.”

Naturally, the far-left L.A. Times buries its own headline by burying this news deep in the interview.

But let’s compare Sunday’s comments to what ESPN told us back in January of 2017:

So many of you write in every time we say something that you disagree with politically, even though we don’t talk politics around here. We talk race, we talk about cultural issues — we don’t talk politics. So many of you write in, ‘That’s why ESPN is losing subscribers, because of its liberal leanings.’ It’s just a basic misunderstanding of what is happening with ESPN that confirms to your biases. That is not why ESPN is losing subscribers at all. ESPN is losing subscribers because in 2017, all of the technology has changed and 99 million of you have been paying for something that 98 million of you may not be using at any given time. It’s not about the politics of the company. The company doesn’t have politics.


My personal favorite was when ESPN’s media apologists blamed the ratings death spiral on everything but politics:


A deeper dive shows the primary causes of this decline are likely cord-cutting and increased competition from the Internet ― not politics ― as people turn away from linear television and to their computers to follow sports, including live events, which now air on Hulu and Amazon.

Talk about fake news.

Of course it was all ridiculous at the time, and we all knew it, but this is how far a propaganda outlet like Disney is willing to go to push propaganda, and this is how bad things have to get before it finally stops.

Worst of all for ESPN was the permanent damage to its brand, a brand that once enjoyed universal goodwill.



Screwing up something like ESPN takes real talent and effort because ESPN had a near-monopoly on sports, which is why it was absurd to blame all of its problems on bad games or whatever… Sports fans have no place else to go, so of course it was the divisive left-wing politics, the 24/7 virtue signaling, the constant sucker punches aimed at the tens of millions of sports fans who did not vote for Hillary.

And it wasn’t that ESPN got “political.”

That too is a lie.

If something is “political” it allows both sides — all sides to have a say.

No, ESPN was PARTISAN… And there is a big difference between political and partisan.
GRA:Agree,but this is like Lesta Holt or Don Lemon promising to broadcast an impartial news program.If you keep the same employees,you get the same results.No change foreseen.The black announcers will not stop and the liberal white announcers will not stop.
--GRA

Anonymous said...

Note:That last article about ESPN was by John Nolte--Breitbart.Next:
TRUMP AGREES WITH GR ANONYMOUS--FOXNEWS GOING DOWNHILL,

CHARLIE SPIERING20 May 201910,270
1:09
President Donald Trump questioned Monday a decision by Fox News executives to host a town hall for Mayor Pete Buttigieg(Buttplug).
“What’s going on with Fox by the way? What’s going on there?” Trump asked. “They’re putting on more Democrats than you have Republicans, something very strange is going on at Fox folks, something very strange.”

Trump commented on Sunday’s town hall with Buttigieg during a rally with his own supporters in Pennsylvania.


The president said that he watched the event but found it strange that moderator Chris Wallace allowed Buttigieg to trash network stars, Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson.


“He was knocking the hell out of Fox and Fox just put him in. Someone is going to have to explain the whole Fox deal to me,” he said.

In April, Trump also questioned Fox News for hosting a town hall for Sen. Bernie Sanders.

“So weird to watch Crazy Bernie on Fox News,” Trump wrote. “Not surprisingly, Bret Baier and the ‘audience’ was so smiley and nice.”
GRA:Trump is a little late,but correct.FOX is moving center,maybe even left of center.Even if their anchors don't espouse leftist views,many of their guests speakers ARE leftist/commie/racists--who take up much of the airtime.Trump is on the right track,so to speak.
--GR Anonymous

Anonymous said...

jerry pdx
Those raceless "teens" at it again, well in this case they had clear video's of the perps who beat a firefighter who stepped in to stop them harassing an elderly couple at a restaurant. No details on what they did to the elderly couple but the firefighter had to get treatment at a hospital: https://www.foxnews.com/us/off-duty-fdny-firefighter-attacked-by-teens-after-defending-elderly-couple
The faces are clear to see but I'm wondering how they know for sure they are all "teens", did they show their ID's? A couple look like they could be in their 20's. But you know when it's blacks, they're always looking for ways to mitigate what they do. Just how strong is the "don't snitch" code anyways? No way people couldn't recognize them but if the black community shows that racist solidarity maybe they won't get any tips. I thought there was a similar incident a while ago and did a little research and I was right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MujCBuvG1YA
In January of this year 3 racist violent negro's (that's redundant) beat a man who intervened when they were harassing an elderly couple in a fast food restaurant. What is it about negro's hassling elderly folks at restaurants anyways? A new kick for them? I know the articles and videos didn't say what race the elderly folks or victims were but I'm going with the odds and assuming they were white.
Notice in the video the news team interviewing black and hispanic people on the street and the black "reporter", remember when I was wondering about the call that goes out in media newsrooms for black reporters to find black people on the street to pose and posture with worried concerned faces every time gangs of negro's go wild on the streets attacking whites? Yup, it's SOP for the black crime coverup business.

Anonymous said...

We've had 7 murders this year in GR,I'm guessing 5 are unsolved--all are black.No one gives up the goods--unless the reward gets high enough.Then,all of a sudden,the info needed to find the black perp,appears.
--GRA