Navy to investigate lewd videos shown on carrier

Cancel8

Canceled
"The Navy said Sunday it will investigate "clearly inappropriate" videos broadcast to the crew of nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in which a top officer of the ship used gay slurs, mimicked masturbation and opened the shower curtain on women pretending to bathe together.

The star of the videos, made in 2006 and 2007, is a former Top Gun pilot who now commands the same ship, the Norfolk-based USS Enterprise, which was deployed in the Middle East at the time and is weeks from deploying again.

The Virginian-Pilot newspaper reported on the videos in its Saturday editions and posted an edited version of one video on its website.

Capt. Owen Honors appeared in the videos while he was the USS Enterprise's executive officer — the second in command — and they aired on the ship's closed-circuit television. Honors took over as the ship's commander in May.

It's not immediately known why the videos are surfacing now. The Virginian-Pilot quoted anonymous crew members who said they raised concerns aboard the ship about the videos when they aired, but they were brushed off.

It's clear from the videos that Honors had already gotten complaints when some of them were made. "Over the years I've gotten several complaints about inappropriate material during these videos, never to me personally but, gutlessly, through other channels," he said in the introduction to the video posted by the newspaper.

In the same segment, Honors uses a derogatory term for gays.

Next comes a sequence of what appear to be outtakes in which Honors and others curse, followed by clips in which he and others are shown making hand motions that mimic masturbation.

Honors segues to the next segment by saying, "Finally let's get to my favorite topic ... chicks in the shower." Next are shown clips of pairs of women and a pair of men pretending to shower together. No nudity is shown, but the men's and women's bare shoulders imply they are nude.

Other clips in the video show a man in drag and a mock rectal examination.

Navy spokesman Cmdr. Chris Sims said in a statement sent to The Associated Press that the videos "were not acceptable then and are not acceptable in today's Navy."

Executive officers and other leaders "are charged to lead by example and are held accountable for setting the proper tone and upholding the standards of honor, courage and commitment that we expect sailors to exemplify," he said.

Sims said U.S. Fleet Forces Command "has initiated an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the production of these videos."

In a statement to the Virginian-Pilot on Friday, however, the Navy said it had put a stop to videos with "inappropriate content" on the Enterprise several years ago.

"It is unfortunate that copies of these videos remained accessible to crewmembers, especially after leadership took action approximately four years ago to ensure any future videos reflected the proper tone," the Navy said.

It also said the videos "were intended to be humorous skits focusing the crew's attention on specific issues such as port visits, traffic safety, water conservation, ship cleanliness, etc."

A phone listing for Honors was not immediately available. He is a 1983 alumnus of the U.S. Naval Academy and was a naval aviator before holding command. He attended the U.S. Naval Fighter Weapons School, also known as Top Gun.

The newspaper reported that the videos were made during the Enterprise's two six-month deployments to the Middle East in 2006 and 2007.

Commissioned in 1961, the Enterprise is the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. It is scheduled to sail two more deployments before it is decommissioned in 2013. It can carry a crew of more than 5,800.

The commanding officer of the Enterprise at the time the videos were made, Lawrence Rice, was later promoted to the rank of the rear admiral and now works at the Norfolk-based U.S. Joint Forces Command. A message left with the command seeking comment from him on Sunday was not immediately returned.

The video posted by the newspaper included clips of past "movies" Honors had made — including several statements in which he holds his higher-ups blameless for the material.

"As usual, the admiral and the captain have no idea about the contents of the video or movie this evening, and they should not be held accountable in any judicial setting," Honors says."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...VkMm5Q?docId=bb48cc7de702447b90e51d1ee22b4fda
 
Thank God I'm out.

What happened to the days when men could relax, and also mitigate a lot of combat induced tensions - as well as sexual frustrations - with a few lewd movies?

PC correctness really sucks sometimes.
 
Does using government personnel and equipment to record this kind of stuff constitute "wasteful spending"?
 
Thank God I'm out.

What happened to the days when men could relax, and also mitigate a lot of combat induced tensions - as well as sexual frustrations - with a few lewd movies?

PC correctness really sucks sometimes.

Damn, I agree, don't like the negative terms used for gays, but a lot of people do it, not that that is an excuse, it is just mindless, like some profanity people use.
 
Does using government personnel and equipment to record this kind of stuff constitute "wasteful spending"?
Maybe if you could turn all humans in the Navy into machines and force them to only think and act like asexual automatons you might have a point. However, some recreational use of "government" property becomes the norm among people in the service. Especially on ships that are at sea up to a year at a shot. There must be some expectation that these people will be people.
 
Maybe if you could turn all humans in the Navy into machines and force them to only think and act like asexual automatons you might have a point. However, some recreational use of "government" property becomes the norm among people in the service. Especially on ships that are at sea up to a year at a shot. There must be some expectation that these people will be people.

Would that rationale work for you in other situations?
 
Would that rationale work for you in other situations?
Again it would depend on circumstances. People will be people, even if they are members of the military. Did the Captain's actions cross the line? Maybe. I haven't seen the video. However, suggesting that they take no recreation, for instance using the "government" owned equipment to watch CSI or other entertainment, is just foolish. These people have put themselves on the line for you, you cannot expect them to act as anything other than human, or you should expect inhuman action from them.

You cannot have it both ways. They live and work there, spend every minute of the day asleep or awake on that "government equipment", would you have them stare at gray walls with no means of entertainment at all? "Waste" at this point is meaningless. Sailors and soldiers deserve some form of humanity. Is it "wasteful" say to set aside some space for a library? To give them access to movies? To allow them to create and perform team-building exercises that include taping themselves acting foolishly? It isn't. It creates a more effective fighting force.
 
Again it would depend on circumstances. People will be people, even if they are members of the military. Did the Captain's actions cross the line? Maybe. I haven't seen the video. However, suggesting that they take no recreation, for instance using the "government" owned equipment to watch CSI or other entertainment, is just foolish. These people have put themselves on the line for you, you cannot expect them to act as anything other than human, or you should expect inhuman action from them.

You cannot have it both ways. They live and work there, spend every minute of the day asleep or awake on that "government equipment", would you have them stare at gray walls with no means of entertainment at all? "Waste" at this point is meaningless. Sailors and soldiers deserve some form of humanity. Is it "wasteful" say to set aside some space for a library? To give them access to movies? To allow them to create and perform team-building exercises that include taping themselves acting foolishly? It isn't. It creates a more effective fighting force.

He was the XO, according to the news reports.

Does the same reasoning apply to these government employees?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584665,00.html
 
He was the XO, according to the news reports.

Does the same reasoning apply to these government employees?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584665,00.html
Do they have a home to go to? They do. The comparison is infantile.

He was the XO on the ship when he filmed the video, which was him acting foolish. Again. Did he cross the line? Maybe. I haven't seen the video. Your post that I quoted was far more general than that though.

The people who serve on that ship, while out at sea, have zero places to "go home" to and no place to go that isn't on "government equipment" where they could possibly find a way to gain any form of entertainment.

Using "government equipment" to create a livable environment for them is a necessity. Films are made that show leaders acting silly (again, so you don't get the wrong idea I don't know if he crossed the line here) on a regular basis during different forms of team building recreation. Was this what happened here? (I'll repeat it again because you seem to lose it in your sweeping infantile generalizations). I don't now. He may have crossed the line. But from the description, read above, it seems that a sailor used some crude language and acted silly. Saying it is "wasteful" government spending is nonsense. What we should be looking for is whether he crossed a line that the Navy shouldn't tolerate, not whether we should force sailors to live in conditions worse than prisoners so they aren't using "government equipment" for entertainment.

Lock those idiots in a box, don't let them out at all for a year, give them some time off but they must stay within the box... If you do that you may have some form of valid comparison to what those men and women do every day for you.

What you appear to be asking for from them is impossible if you expect to have any form of effective fighting force on the seas.
 
I don't know if "they have a home to go to".

Is that relevant?

It is relevant. The sailors on that ship have nowhere else to go while at sea other than someplace on "government equipment".

He was the XO on the ship when he filmed the video, which was him acting foolish. Again. Did he cross the line? Maybe. I haven't seen the video. Your post that I quoted was far more general than that though.

The people who serve on that ship, while out at sea, have zero places to "go home" to and no place to go that isn't on "government equipment" where they could possibly find a way to gain any form of entertainment.

Using "government equipment" to create a livable environment for them is a necessity. Films are made that show leaders acting silly (again, so you don't get the wrong idea I don't know if he crossed the line here) on a regular basis during different forms of team building recreation. Was this what happened here? (I'll repeat it again because you seem to lose it in your sweeping infantile generalizations). I don't now. He may have crossed the line. But from the description, read above, it seems that a sailor used some crude language and acted silly. Saying it is "wasteful" government spending is nonsense. What we should be looking for is whether he crossed a line that the Navy shouldn't tolerate, not whether we should force sailors to live in conditions worse than prisoners so they aren't using "government equipment" for entertainment.

Lock those idiots in a box, don't let them out at all for a year, give them some time off but they must stay within the box... If you do that you may have some form of valid comparison to what those men and women do every day for you.

What you appear to be asking for from them is impossible if you expect to have any form of effective fighting force on the seas.
 
It is relevant. The sailors on that ship have nowhere else to go while at sea other than someplace on "government equipment".

He was the XO on the ship when he filmed the video, which was him acting foolish. Again. Did he cross the line? Maybe. I haven't seen the video. Your post that I quoted was far more general than that though.

The people who serve on that ship, while out at sea, have zero places to "go home" to and no place to go that isn't on "government equipment" where they could possibly find a way to gain any form of entertainment.

Using "government equipment" to create a livable environment for them is a necessity. Films are made that show leaders acting silly (again, so you don't get the wrong idea I don't know if he crossed the line here) on a regular basis during different forms of team building recreation. Was this what happened here? (I'll repeat it again because you seem to lose it in your sweeping infantile generalizations). I don't now. He may have crossed the line. But from the description, read above, it seems that a sailor used some crude language and acted silly. Saying it is "wasteful" government spending is nonsense. What we should be looking for is whether he crossed a line that the Navy shouldn't tolerate, not whether we should force sailors to live in conditions worse than prisoners so they aren't using "government equipment" for entertainment.

Lock those idiots in a box, don't let them out at all for a year, give them some time off but they must stay within the box... If you do that you may have some form of valid comparison to what those men and women do every day for you.

What you appear to be asking for from them is impossible if you expect to have any form of effective fighting force on the seas.

Relevant?

http://www.ig.navy.mil/complaints/Complaints (Misuse Official Time).htm
 
Please read this portion of the above posts again so you can get past this stupidity.

Did he cross the line? Maybe. I haven't seen the video.

I've bolded it so you may understand.

I was answering specifically the more general question "was this government waste".

What you appear to be expecting from these men and women would create an ineffective fighting force on the seas. Comparing them to people who go home every night and can find other places than "government equipment" to find entertainment is simplistic nonsense. Expecting them to live pristine lives with no means of entertainment because they use "government equipment" is asinine and would create a lifestyle worse than we expect for our prisoners.
 
Please read this portion of the above posts again so you can get past this stupidity.

Did he cross the line? Maybe. I haven't seen the video.

I've bolded it so you may understand.

I was answering specifically the more general question "was this government waste".

What you appear to be expecting from these men and women would create an ineffective fighting force on the seas. Comparing them to people who go home every night and can find other places than "government equipment" to find entertainment is simplistic nonsense. Expecting them to live pristine lives with no means of entertainment because they use "government equipment" is asinine and would create a lifestyle worse than we expect for our prisoners.

So your position is that using government personnel and equipment to produce shipboard videos is justified because to disallow such practices constitutes deprivation?
 
I found these comments interesting:

"You appear to be of the impression that the armed forces, including the Navy should not strive for higher standards than our society at large.

Lots of things are "okay" in civilian society that are not okay for the military.

You can't wear certain types of clothing on liberty, display many body piercings, completely cover your body with visible tattoos, download pornography, use file-sharing software, etc.

All of these are intended to preserve good order and discipline. What is acceptable at colleges and civilian cubicles is NOT always acceptable for the military.

The Navy draws its sailors from society, but must continue to set higher standards than your analogy.

Lack of complaints doesn't equate to being right.

Some sailors (including NCO's and officers) won't complain for fear of retribution.

A senior officer in Honors' position must be above reproach at all times. It is a high standard, but that is the only way to ensure our airmen, soldiers, sailors and Marines... all volunteers, will continue to trust in their Commanders when orders are given that may mean life and death.

I couldn't have put it better myself. Though the videos themselves may be immature and boorish, it's shameful that an XO of a capital ship-of-the-line should have ANY role in their production, let alone the lead role."

http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/...probe-lewd-videos-shown-to-carrier-crew/page3
 
So your position is that using government personnel and equipment to produce shipboard videos is justified because to disallow such practices constitutes deprivation?
That is just one form of training regularly used specifically in team building which enhances the effectiveness of our Navy. You spend a year locked on a boat with limited access to others, tell me what kind of deprivation you feel even with the limited videos available to you.
 
Back
Top