The West Point Communist, How Cultures Rot, And The Whistleblower’s Letter…

West Point graduate and infantry officer Spenser Rapone recently caused a sensation through his advocacy and support of communism, while being an “official socialist organizer” of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Rapone recently posted a photo of himself as part of a declaration of support for professional football player Colin Kaepernick, including the phrase “Communism will win” with the tag “Veterans for Kaepernick.”  Rapone later posted a second photo of himself in uniform with a Che Guevara T-shirt underneath his jacket.That led to scrutiny of the hundreds of pro-Communist tweets by the former cadet, including one  calling Defense Secretary James Mattis “evil” and “vile” and another saying he will “happily dance” on the grave of Sen. John McCain.

This was not extensively covered by the mainstream media—After all, what’s the matter with Communists, as long as they don’t help Donald Trump?—though some attention was paid when Senator Rubio demanded that the Army remove Rapone. The Army said last week is it investigating and that the posts “in no way reflect the values of the U.S. Military Academy or the U.S. Army.”

I sure hope not!

Now the military community and others are asking how this is possible, and how West Point could produce a  graduate like Rapone.  In response to the episode, retired LTC Robert M. Heffington has written an open letter about what he sees as the deterioration of the culture at the storied military academy. Heffington was an assistant professor at West Point for several years, until this past August.

Note, please…

I. This is how one blows a whistle.

II.  Heffington describes how cultures rot: inattention,  poor leadership, refusal to apply standards, corruption from political agendas, silence from within.

III. Desperate and politically driven efforts to achieve diversity at the expense of integrity and quality are a major factor.

IV. West Point is a part of the higher education community. It would be surprising if it were immune from the same deterioration that the rest of America’s colleges and universities are suffering from. Thus this passage…

“…an entire semester of military history was recently deleted from the curriculum (at West Point!). In all courses, the bar has been lowered to the point where it is irrelevant. If a cadet fails a course, the instructor is blamed, so instructors are incentivized to pass everyone. Additionally, instead of responding to cadet failure with an insistence that cadets rise to the challenge and meet the standard, the bar for passing the course itself is simply lowered. This pattern is widespread and pervades every academic department.”

V. Before I read the letter, I guessed that it would have a passage like this one, and sure enough:

“The plebe American History course has been revamped to focus completely on race and on the narrative that America is founded solely on a history of racial oppression. Cadets derisively call it the “I Hate America Course.” Simultaneously, the plebe International History course now focuses on gender to the exclusion of many other important themes.”

VI. Repairing a broken culture is a long and difficult process. It involves…








Dedication to standards and values

Measurable goals

New leadership


Refusal to compromise

Routine Assessment of progress

 Robert M. Heffington is an Ethics Hero. Here is his remarkable and remarkably disturbing letter:

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

Before you read any further, please understand that the following paragraphs come from a place of intense devotion and loyalty to West Point. My experience as a cadet had a profound impact upon who I am and upon the course of my life, and I remain forever grateful that I have the opportunity to be a part of the Long Gray Line. I firmly believe West Point is a national treasure and that it can and should remain a vitally important source of well trained, disciplined, highly educated Army officers and civilian leaders. However, during my time on the West Point faculty (2006-2009 and again from 2013-2017), I personally witnessed a series of fundamental changes at West Point that have eroded it to the point where I question whether the institution should even remain open. The recent coverage of 2LT Spenser Rapone – an avowed Communist and sworn enemy of the United States – dramatically highlighted this disturbing trend. Given my recent tenure on the West Point faculty and my direct interactions with Rapone, his “mentors,” and with the Academy’s leadership, I believe I can shed light on how someone like Rapone could possibly graduate.

First and foremost, standards at West Point are nonexistent. They exist on paper, but nowhere else. The senior administration at West Point inexplicably refuses to enforce West Point’s publicly touted high standards on cadets, and, having picked up on this, cadets refuse to enforce standards on each other. The Superintendent refuses to enforce admissions standards or the cadet Honor Code, the Dean refuses to enforce academic standards, and the Commandant refuses to enforce standards of conduct and discipline. The end result is a sort of malaise that pervades the entire institution. Nothing matters anymore. Cadets know this, and it has given rise to a level of cadet arrogance and entitlement the likes of which West Point has never seen in its history.

Every fall, the Superintendent addresses the staff and faculty and lies. He repeatedly states that “We are going to have winning sports teams without compromising our standards,” and everyone in Robinson Auditorium knows he is lying because we routinely admit athletes with ACT scores in the mid-teens across the board. I have personally taught cadets who are borderline illiterate and cannot read simple passages from the assigned textbooks. It is disheartening when the institution’s most senior leader openly lies to his own faculty-and they all know it.

The cadet honor code has become a laughingstock. Cadets know they will not be separated for violating it, and thus they do so on a daily basis. Moreover, since they refuse to enforce standards on each other and police their own ranks, cadets will rarely find a cadet at an honor hearing despite overwhelming evidence that a violation has occurred. This in tum has caused the staff and faculty to give up even reporting honor incidents. Why would a staff or faculty member expend the massive amount of time and energy it takes to report an honor violation-including writing multiple sworn statements, giving interviews, and testifying at the honor hearing-when they know without a doubt the cadet will not be found (or, if found, the Superintendent will not separate the cadet)? To make matters worse, the senior leadership at West Point actively discourages staff and faculty from reporting honor violations. l was unfortunate enough to experience this first hand during my first tour on the faculty, when the Commandant of Cadets called my office phone and proceeded to berate me in the most vulgar and obscene language for over ten minutes because I had reported a cadet who lied to me and then asked if “we could just drop it.” Of course, I was duty bound to report the cadet’s violation, and I did. During the course of the berating I received from the Commandant, I never actually found out why he was so angry. It seemed that he was simply irritated that the institution was having to deal with the case, and that it was my fault it even existed. At the honor hearing the next day, I ended up being the one on trial as my character and reputation were dragged through the mud by the cadet and her civilian attorney while I sat on the witness stand without any assistance. In the end, of course, the cadet was not found (despite having at first admitted that she lied), and she eventually graduated. Just recently a cadet openly and obviously plagiarized his History research paper, and his civilian professor reported it. The evidence was overwhelming-there was not the slightest question of his guilt, yet the cadet was not found. The professor, and indeed all the faculty who knew of the case, were completely demoralized. This is the new norm for the cadet honor system. In fact, there is now an addition to the honor system (the Willful Admission Process) which essentially guarantees that if a cadet admits a violation, then separation is not even a possibility. In reality, separation is not a possibility anyway because the Superintendent refuses to impose that sanction.

Academic standards are also nonexistent. I believe this trend started approximately ten years ago, and it has continued to get worse. West Point has stated standards for academic expectations and performance, but they are ignored. Cadets routinely fail multiple classes and they are not separated at the end-of-semester Academic Boards. Their professors recommend “Definitely Separate,” but those recommendations are totally disregarded. I recently taught a cadet who failed four classes in one semester (including mine), in addition to several she had failed in previous semesters, and she was retained at the Academy. As a result, professors have lost hope and faith in the entire Academic Board process. It has been made clear that cadets can fail a multitude of classes and they will not be separated. Instead, when they fail (and they do to a staggering extent), the Dean simply throws them back into the mix and expects the faculty to somehow drag them through the academic program until they manage to earn a passing grade. What a betrayal this is to the faculty! Also, since they get full grade replacement if they must re­take a course, cadets are actually incentivized to fail. They know they can re-take the course over the summer when they have no other competing requirements, and their new grade completely replaces the failing one. ST AP (Summer Term Academic Program) is also now an accepted summer detail assignment, so retaking a course during the summer translates into even more summer leave for the deficient cadet.

Even the curriculum itself has suffered. The plebe American History course has been revamped to focus completely on race and on the narrative that America is founded solely on a history of racial oppression. Cadets derisively call it the “I Hate America Course.” Simultaneously, the plebe International History course now focuses on gender to the exclusion of many other important themes. On the other hand, an entire semester of military history was recently deleted from the curriculum (at West Point!). In all courses, the bar has been lowered to the point where it is irrelevant. If a cadet fails a course, the instructor is blamed, so instructors are incentivized to pass everyone. Additionally, instead of responding to cadet failure with an insistence that cadets rise to the challenge and meet the standard, the bar for passing the course itself is simply lowered. This pattern is widespread and pervades every academic department.

Conduct and disciplinary standards are in perhaps the worst shape of all. Cadets are jaded, cynical, arrogant, and entitled. They routinely talk back to and snap at their instructors (military and civilian alike), challenge authority, and openly refuse to follow regulations. They are allowed to wear civilian clothes in almost any arena outside the classroom, and they flaunt that privilege. Some arrive to class unshaven, in need of haircuts, and with uniforms that look so ridiculously bad that, at times, I could not believe I was even looking at a West Point cadet. However, if a staff or faculty member attempts to correct the cadet in question, that staff/faculty member is sure to be reprimanded for “harassing cadets.” For example, as I made my rounds through the barracks inspecting study conditions one evening as the Academic Officer in Charge, I encountered a cadet in a company study room. He was wearing a pair of blue jeans and nothing else, and was covered in tattoos. He had long hair, was unshaven, and I was honestly unsure ifhe was even a cadet. He looked more like a prison convict to me. When I questioned what he was doing there, he remained seated in his chair and sneered at me that he “was authorized” because he was a First Class cadet. I proceeded to correct him and then reported him to the chain of command the next morning. Later that day I received an email from the Brigade Tactical Officer telling me to “stay in my lane.” I know many other officers receive the same treatment when attempting to make corrections. It is extremely discouraging when the response is invariably one that comes to the defense of the cadet.

That brings me to another point: cadets’ versions of stories are always valued more highly by senior leaders than those of commissioned officers on the staff and faculty. It is as if West Point’s senior leaders believe their job is to “protect” cadets from the staff and faculty at all costs. This might explain why the faculty’s recommendations are ignored at the Academic Boards, why honor violations are ignored (and commissioned officers are verbally abused for bringing them to light), and why cadets always “win” when it comes to conduct and disciplinary issues.

It seems that the Academy’s senior leaders are intimidated by cadets. During my first tour on the faculty (I was a CPT at the time), I noticed that 4th class cadets were going on leave in civilian clothes when the regulation clearly stated they were supposed to be wearing a uniform. During a discussion about cadet standards between the BTO and the Dept. of History faculty, I asked why plebes were going on leave in civilian clothes. His answer astonished me: “That rule is too hard to enforce.” Yet West Point had no problem enforcing that rule on me in the mid-1990s. I found it impossible to believe that the several hundred field grade officers stationed at West Point could not make teenagers wear the uniform. This anecdote highlights the fact that West Point’s senior leaders lack not the ability but the motivation to enforce their will upon the Corps of Cadets.

This brings me to the case of now-2LT Spenser Rapone. It is not at all surprising that the Academy turned a blind eye to his behavior and to his very public hatred of West Point, the Army, and this nation. I knew at the time I wrote that sworn statement in 2015 that he would go on to graduate. It is not so much that West Point’s leadership defends his views (Prof. Hosein did, however); it is that West Point’s senior leaders are infected with apathy: they simply do not want to deal with any problem, regardless of how grievous a violation of standards and/or discipline it may be. They are so reticent to separate problematic cadets (undoubtedly due to the “developmental model” that now exists at USMA) that someone like Rapone can easily slip through the cracks. In other words, West Point’s leaders choose the easier wrong over the harder right.

I could go on, but I fear that this letter would simply devolve into a screed, which is not my intention. I will sum up by saying this: a culture of extreme permissiveness has invaded the Military Academy, and there seems to be no end to it. Moreover, this is not unintentional; it is a deliberate action that is being taken by the Academy’s senior leadership, though they refuse to acknowledge or explain it. Conduct and behavior that would never be tolerated at a civilian university is common among cadets, and it is supported and defended by the Academy’s senior leaders in an apparent and misguided effort to attract more applicants and cater to what they see as the unique needs of this generation of cadets.

Our beloved Military Academy has lost its way. It is a shadow of what it once was. It used to be a place where standards and discipline mattered, and where concepts like duty, honor, and country were real and they meant something. Those ideas have been replaced by extreme permissiveness, rampant dishonesty, and an inexplicable pursuit of mediocrity. Instead of scrambling to restore West Point to what it once was, the Academy’s senior leaders give cadets more and more privileges in a seeming effort to tum the institution into a third-rate civilian liberal arts college. Unfortunately, they have largely succeeded. The few remaining members of the staff and faculty who are still trying to hold the line are routinely berated, ignored, and ultimately silenced for their unwillingness to “go along with the program.” The Academy’s senior leaders simply do not want to hear their voices or their concerns. Dissent is crushed-I was repeatedly told to keep quiet at faculty meetings, even as a LTC, because my dissent was neither needed nor appreciated.

It breaks my heart to write this. It breaks my heart to know first-hand what West Point was versus what it has become. This is not a “Corps has” story; it is meant to highlight a deliberate and radical series of changes being undertaken at the highest levels of USMA’ s leadership that are detrimental to the institution. Criticizing these changes is not popular. I have already been labeled a “traitor” by some at the Academy due to my sworn statement’s appearance in the media circus surrounding Spenser Rapone. However, whenever I hear this, I am reminded of the Cadet Prayer:

” … suffer not our hatred of hypocrisy and pretense ever to diminish. Make us to choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong, and never to be content with a half-truth when the whole can be won. …that scorns to compromise with vice and injustice, and knows no fear when truth and right are in jeopardy.”

West Point was once special, and it can be again. Spenser Rapone never should have been admitted, much less graduate, but he was-and that mistake is directly attributable to the culture of permissiveness and apathy that now exists there.

Sincerely and Respectfully,

Robert M. Heffington

LTC, U.S. Army (Retired), West Point Class of 1997

23 thoughts on “The West Point Communist, How Cultures Rot, And The Whistleblower’s Letter…

  1. “II. Heffington describes how cultures rot: inattention, poor leadership, refusal to apply standards, corruption from political agendas, silence from within.”

    I’d submit that corruption from political agendas is the overwhelming source of this. Not inattention or poor leadership. This has all been by design.

  2. Some arrive to class unshaven, in need of haircuts, and with uniforms that look so ridiculously bad that, at times, I could not believe I was even looking at a West Point cadet.

    This is exactly what happened to the US Navy under the leadership of CNO Elmo Zumwalt. The Wikipedia article says, in relevant part:

    He assumed duties as Chief of Naval Operations and was promoted to full admiral on July 1, 1970, and quickly began a series of moves intended to reduce racism and sexism in the Navy. These were disseminated in Navy-wide communications known as “Z-grams”. These included orders authorizing beards (sideburns, mustaches, and longer groomed hair were also acceptable) and introducing beer-dispensing machines to barracks. Not all of these changes were well received by senior naval personnel.[citation needed] The measures to reduce discrimination against women and racial minorities were adamantly opposed by some.

    While this may seem a good thing (and no doubt the emphasis on reducing sexism and racism was an unalloyed good thing), the result of the liberalization of the Navy was a complete breakdown in discipline. Pot smoking, drugs, slovenly uniforms and poor training where the norm. When I was in, sexism and racism were in strong decline, particularly racism.

    Sexism was a tougher nut to crack because the Navy had a particular aversion to women mixed with men because of the risk of underway pregnancy and competition over a limited number of females far from port, and the manning problems associated therewith. Most women serving in ships served on tenders and short-deployment craft, and in the nuclear navy, they served exclusively at reactor training prototypes and at US Naval Nuclear Power School. I had two female instructors at the MARF prototype in Ballston Spa, where I did my training. They were staff reactor operators, and damned good ones.

    But that changed shortly after Ronald Regan was elected. No more long hair, no more facial hair until you were out of school, frequent uniform and room inspections including dogs for locating drugs, pot and drugs got you dishonorably discharged, urinalysis was conducted randomly and often to verify compliance. When I left in 1986, the Navy had transformed from its downward spiral to an effective fighting force where discipline, pride in country and unit, and a high state of readiness was the norm.

    It’s clear from the letter that the rot began around the time that President Obama took office, but it could’ve begun under the latter part of the Bush Administration and just accelerated under Obama. Obama was not a leader, he was a cult figure. Bush was so damaged at the end of his presidency he couldn’t have led a starving man to a McDonalds if it was right across the street.

  3. I can vouch for the culture rot that’s taken place within the West Point cadet ranks as far back as 1990. I worked directly with cadets during their rotation through training battalions at Ft. Benning. The rot I witnessed surrounding the cadets like it was their armor of ignorance and it was a night and day difference from Soldiers that were in OCS at the same time.

  4. These issues are the result of the PC culture that civilian leadership has foisted on all things military. Results are demanded, not those of honor and integrity but of achievement of feminist and progressive goals.

    I am retiring from the Marine Corps, things have changed and in terms of accomplishing the mission only a few changes have been good. The core of our military is the infantry, the best of the best of our officers strove to become infantry officers, the most demanding and dynamic job a young officer can have. To be successful you have to be in the top 10 percent of physical performance, be mature, have heart and character. The service academies strove to develop those types of leaders, the type that could be successful infantry officers. With that as the bar, our academies, all of them, have provided the nation with some of the best leaders has given the nation a steel core that helps strengthen the whole country and provides us with resolve and honor that has helped to drive the nation during times of strife.

    Civilian control of our military is essential but is also the cause of the rot. Many of the issues such as DADT and the official acceptance of gays in the service doesn’t matter much, the fight and dissent on this issue was due to concerns of political correctness and social engineering effecting the performance of the military, creating a distraction from, in terms of gays in the military it has never hurt us and we have all know some, as a leader I don’t give a shit who you sleep with so long as conformity and uniformity is achieved where it matters most, that the chemistry of the unit is stable. That is that issue in a nut shell.

    Now the issue that is very much hurting our academies and the military is the unattainable push for equality, again the core of our military is the infantry, the pinnacle of being a good soldier is to be an infantryman, it is where the bar is set the highest, success requires achieving and maintaining peak mental and physical condition. The infantry is the essence of the military and women can only be artificially successful as an infantryman.

    Over the last couple of decades the push has been focused of the individual achievement of women, for achievements sake, not as a multiplier of available manpower or enhancement of performance but to be able to lay claim to being just as effective soldiers as men, it is a desire to be able to make a claim, not to realize it. Standards remain different, there is an acceptance that requirements must be flexible to the individual so as not to become the focus of ire from civilian leadership. It all flows from the top, civilian authorities select generals not solely based on merit or performance but more and more on politics, those who are willing to tow the political correctness line are promoted, those who focus on effectiveness and strive to be apolitical are shown the door or are passed over.

    We finally have a female graduate from the infantry officer course, she should be applauded, it is an amazing achievement. With that said she was allowed to graduate, despite being injured, likely permanently. Based solely on her ranking she would likely not get an infantry platoon, she just didn’t make the cut. I would support women being in the infantry if they could truly be successful. Right now the school of infantry, enlisted infantry training has a female graduation rate of 30 percent, 98 percent for males, the school is less demanding than being in an actual infantry unit. Of the 70 percent that don’t make it over half have injuries that will permanently effect them. This is just the start though, to be successful these women will have to make it into the top 10 percent to be allowed to reenlist, it is unlikely any will make it naturally.

    These young women deserve better, they are good Marines, honorable and hard working. Too many of them are broken for life, destroyed backs, knees, ankles, shattered and separated hips, I see them EVERY week. We are tolerating this shit because a few feminist, the loudest of which would never even have the heart to spend one day in these Marines boots, the Duckworths and McSallys of this world who have no idea what combats arms is really is all about. These female veteran politicians, pilots and guardsmen are trusted to make sound, rational and intelligent decisions instead they focus on advocacy instead of leadership.

    The artificiality and relaxing of standards that we have to accept due to the goals of our civilian leadership drives mediocrity throughout the services. Our military is weaker today because feminist and progressive leadership want to wish something into being that is just not possible at this time.

  5. There’s a Cadet Prayer? No wonder these courageous changes were so necessary. West Point is clearly in the evil grip of the hetero-patriarchy, the theocracy, and white supremacists. We must continue to deconstruct these archaic systems with their Puritan morals. Just keep tearing everything down, comrades, until you get to the sweet peace, prosperity, and equality hiding at the bottom of the rubble of civilization.

  6. I wonder if the prevalence of sexual assault in the military arises from this same institutional rot in the U.S. military.

    Colonel Heffington should be awrded the highest non-combat military honor.

    • A large part of the “prevalence” sexual assault is alcohol, simply put young people, usually underage, not knowing their limit, causing a ruckus, getting caught, all the young woman has to say is sexual assault and disciplinary action for the drinking stops. Luckily things are changing some for the young men, they no longer necessarily get screwed over in this situation but it does raise the feminist hackles due to prosecution rates.

      • In that kind of environment, the fact that consensual sex is prohibited in many cases would create or aggravate incentives to lie about being raped.

        Obviously, loosening restrictions on consensual sex, just to diminish or dissolve these incentives, would have side effects. If only there were an independent organization or agency that can investigate the veracity of such claims without having a stake in the reputation of West Point or its leadership…

  7. Which Senator nominated this guy? Aren’t nominees for appointments vetted for security clearances? And reviewed annually? What the fuck?

  8. Eccentric.

    But… And you knew there would be a but… while I think he’s full of it, he is following in the tradition of some of the most revered figures in recent US military history.

    William J Donovan, founder of the Office of Strategic Services, (which after WWII became the CIA) was just as unconventional.

    Major Evans Carlson, of Carlson’s Raiders, who iintroduced the Chinese socialist phrase “strive together” as Gung Ho into the USMC was even more left wing.

    My personal opinion is that he’d likely be a farnarkling disaster, and there’s no place for such extreme individuality in a modern armed force. He takes it too far.

    • Sue, the factor that allowed them and really anyone with any extreme views to succeed is patriotism and oath to our country, this in a time when a man’s oath meant something, honor wasn’t a dirty word.

      We have leaders now, such as Hillary, who break oaths, intentional or not, and most of society doesn’t bat an eye. During that time to break an oath was to become an outcast, to be branded as a traitor.

      • Interestingly, to my view in any case, just a day or two ago Steve of NJ said that in his concept a position of opposition to the Vietnam War should have been condemned for patriotic reasons. This shocked me. Therefor, I question the Conservative’s understanding of 1) the sovereign individual and citizen and 2) the forced patriotism that I notice in our present.

        While it seems strange indeed that a man at a military college in the US would be a communist, there are a number of things to be said about that before one could make a jusdgment. The first is that, according to some, the US itself at the highest levels has become a sort of ideological mirror of conformism attempted in the Communist societies. Politically correct thought and speech-control, and many of the terms of hyper-egalitarianism that are completely prevalent in our culture right now, mirror the communist sloganism and the coercion of communist propaganda.

        It seems disingenuous to point to HRC as breaking oaths, if only because, in a republic of sovereign and free-thinking people who are truly free the whole idea of a forced oath should itself be questioned. What stands behind an ‘oath’ is in most cases a declaration to recognize and uphold certain values. But as I said (and only as an example which is an illustrative one) Steve recently indicated that his ‘oath’ would sound like neo-fascistic subservience to power, not to ideals.

        The entire notion of What to serve, Who to serve, and even What service means, is in fantastic disarray right now. When you or someone else refers to the Nation, and demands allegience to it, one is now more than ever duty-boumd to ask: What ‘nation’ are you speaking about? Because in Steve’s sense what he is referring to is not the nation-of-people but rather a usurporious faction that has, extra-democratically, para-militarily, and immorally inserted itself into government. And they manipulate opinion through the dubious mechanisms of PR and propaganda-communication. Everyone should clearly see this because it is completely obvious.

        So, I would say, because I think it is true, that the present tendency of many people is to show great confusion about what ‘patriotism’ is and what it should mean. What they refer to as patriotism looks more like authoritarian shaming and social coercion, and in that sense I would draw a parallel to the Soviet propaganda. From a position outside of America numerous intellectuals and philosophers see and refer to American political and social conformism. What is this? How has it come about? Tocqueville wrote about it. How can it be countered?

        I also do not understand why, necessarily, a communist or a socialist political ideology could not function in America and why, necessarily, it is condemned. The level of collusion between industrry and government is unreal and extraordinary. The ‘marriage’ between the military establishment and private industry real and known. More propert to a communistic or socialistic system. And then the ideological coercion To have achieved a population that can’t or won’t think for itself, and then a system to maintain it, looks to me to be a sort of attitude and perspective-control more proper to a communistic, authoritarian culture. If this is so, a critique needs to be circulated.

        To what shall my oath declare service to? I need a very clear outline. I need for this to be articulated in precise terms. To a Nation that is free on a world-scale to invade and occupy sovereign nations? (I know that I will say this and that it is like water off a duck’s back: this is normalcy for a certain sort of patriot!)

        And then what is ‘honor’? Please tell me exactly what *honor* is to mean! Honor to whom? To what exactly?

        Because you-plural have lost the intellectual ability to define important issues, and to separate-out thought-control from your ‘patriotic’ and declared ‘values’, you do not help anyone to get clear about what, in truth, to serve, and you seem (from my perspective) to be part of the problem.

        • I, _____, having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.” (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

          There you go.

          • That does not mean a great deal, or offer much to what I am saying. Since my suggestion is that ‘the Constitution’ has been substantially subverted and that all manner of different levels of engineering go on and have gone.

            I cited an example of a blind ‘patriotic’ subservience to State power which could not be considered to be in the spirit of constitutional values. It would be a constitutional necessary to oppose an improper or unjustifiable war. Numerous recent American wars are not defensible and should be condemned by all moral people.

            When in a system such as ours there is a marriage between industry and military, and when government serves private power and capital, that there is grave danger to the Constitution and to consititutional values. How can this be spoken about in our present? And who is doing it?

            When that happens (corruption at that level) I am uncertain how to talk about it. But it seems to be the case in our present. Therefor, how to broach the subject and work toward return to proper values?

            Et cetera et cetera.

            Not empty question of course, but many will roundly avoid them!

  9. An officer is given his power of command as an extension of the president’s authority, which is turn given to him by the Constitution and the American people. To see such a perversion of standard is disgusting.

    This allows Cadets to learn that essential mantra all enlisted members of the military know but can’t protest, “Different ranks, different spanks.” It’s a privilege they will achieve and maintain all throughout their career, whether or not they are aware if it.

    The rot of apathy has infected the real military as well and you see the effects these affirmative action graduates have when they breeze into their commission and lead a platoon for the first time. Officers of poor moral standing and lacking courage kill the morale of the men they lead and poison the well that espirit de corps flows from.

    I have seen a CO fail a drug test right before a deployment only to be assigned halfway through to command the same Company he had been removed from.

    Any enlisted soldier who did the same would be immdiately separated from the service. This is one example of the rampant abuse of power that has been plauging the military’s officer corps for decades. It’s not new and I recommend anyone looking into this thing to check out the people at militarycorruption . com (which is banned by all affaes and government computers).

    This poor calibre officers don’t deserve the loyalty of the men they command but will receive it just the same.

  10. Thank God for the Virginia Military Institute. My daughter is a Rat at VMI and the Honor Code is alive and well at the Institute. Since she arrived in August six cadets have been drummed out for honor code violations. They are literally drummed out. My daughter says that the entire Corps is awakened in the middle of the night and must stand at attention as the charges are read aloud. The Corps is then ordered to never again utter the former cadets name. Uniform and haircut standards are strictly enforced. Rats are not allowed to have civilian clothing in the barracks and all cadets must be in uniform while they are in Rockbridge County. The incredible thing about VMI is that only 55% of the Corps commissions. That means that the 45% who have no intention of commissioning have chosen to attend the Institute knowing they have to adhere to a strict military lifestyle and honor code. VMI cadets take pride in the Spartan lifestyle of the barracks and the uncompromising adherence to the rules. As a retired infantry officer who commissioned via ROTC at a large southern university I can tell you that I have been impressed with the quality of the cadets at VMI in the few short months that my daughter has been there. LTC Heffington’s letter and the articles about 2LT Rapone were widely circulated among VMI cadets and families. This story has reinforced the Institute’s belief in their process of developing citizen soldiers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.