• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Air Force Academy Informants

futureflyr said:
This story is going around Bancroft pretty quickly. I didn't see it on here and was wondering what everyone else thought. It definitely seems like a lot of people made a lot of bad decisions on all sides. From the Gazette: http://www3.gazette.com/projects/project/usafa-informant-program/
Click to expand...
OMG, sounds like an edict from the 3rd Reich, or KGB... in an Officer Corps where the backbone is "TRUST AND CONFIDENCE", there has to be a better way to weed out the very few undesireable potentials. Having the vast majority of non-offenders spying on each other would just foster mistrust in the Middie/Cadet Corps, and the "I've got stab your back" spirit would end up in the dumpster begin. :(:eek:

It seems that the sledgehammer approach to curb all ills, has become punishing entire groups of innocents for the sins of the very few. An easy way to cover butts, and show the 'big bosses' you're taking appropriate action. Just another sign of the cancerous PC'ness that has permeated our society/military, creating suspicion, eroding communication, and seemingly rendering nearly everyone 'easily offended'.:(

There has to be a better way than imploring future Military Officers to rat each other out. I'd bet it was conjured up by some senior GS-99 "sandcrab", certainly no one in the USAFA (I would hope)?:rolleyes:
BzB
 
The further the USAF has shunned the culture and traditions of the Army from where it was born, the worse these issues have become. I'm not saying that they should still be a part of the Army, but rather the Army had figured the whole honer, duty, country thing and the USAFA invented traditions just for the sake of having them.

On a side note, I think the USAF low percentage of trigger pullers might have something to do with this also.
 
Symptom of a larger problem in the military as a whole. Despicable practice and I hope those responsible for its implementation fry.
 
lowflier03 said:
Symptom of a larger problem in the military as a whole. Despicable practice and I hope those responsible for its implementation fry.
Click to expand...

I'll relieve your suspense: they won't. The law doesn't seem to apply to agencies like OSI.

Too bad those people aren't out hunting and interrogating terrorists. Oh, wait, we aren't allowed to do that any more...
 
OSI and NCIS do this stuff on a regular basis in all settings. If you are naive enough to think that the "thought police" aren't active in your organization, think again. I saw it run rampant on the carrier. They operate in a quasi legal environment (UCMJ) with little oversight.
 
BusyBee604 said:
......There has to be a better way than imploring future Military Officers to rat each other out. I'd bet it was conjured up by some senior GS-99 "sandcrab", certainly no one in the USAFA (I would hope)?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Think less random bureaucrat and more 'special agent' types. I would guess OSI was tasked to crack down on cadet shennanigans, nothing particularly wrong with that, but went about it like they would any old criminal investigation without consideration for the somewhat unique status of the cadets involved (the honor code, etc).

e6bflyer said:
OSI and NCIS do this stuff on a regular basis in all settings. If you are naive enough to think that the "thought police" aren't active in your organization, think again. I saw it run rampant on the carrier. They operate in a quasi legal environment (UCMJ) with little oversight.
Click to expand...

Like the article says OSI agents don't answer to the local commanders and don't have to keep them in the loop, for very good reasons, but an unfortunate side effect is when folks like the cadets in the article are caught in the middle and left hanging in the end sometimes. I have worked with law enforcement and most of the informants they used had been flipped, caught between serving time or ratting out their associates for leniency. The female cadet in the article did actually admit to doing drugs so her eventual dismissal is no surprise. Another former cadet interviewed who was an informant is now commissioned but his story is only briefly touched on. As for the cadet who is the main focus of the article, I am not sure we got the complete story about what he did and how much was sanctioned by OSI. His story about being recruited strikes me as being a little bit too benign, not unbelievable but certainly left it a bit open to me why the OSI would bring him in and focus on him as an informant in the first place. We certainly aren't getting both sides of the story.

With all of that said I would be wary of using cadets as informants given their unique status of the cadets and the academies, especially when what they are asked to do is contrary to some of the core values of the school. The 'not tolerate' clause in the honor code shouldn't be used as a bludgeon by law enforcement or the school administration, there were some levers in place at my school to prevent that from happening with the honor code and were generally followed with a few notable exceptions while I was there. If that is allowed to happen it can have a very corrosive effect on the cadets and the school as a whole.
 
jmcquate said:
On a side note, I think the USAF low percentage of trigger pullers might have something to do with this also.
Click to expand...

I don't think that it's limited to just the USAF.... and they probably have about the same percentage of "trigger pullers" as the Navy.
 
ryan1234 said:
I don't think that it's limited to just the USAF.... and they probably have about the same percentage of "trigger pullers" as the Navy.
Click to expand...
Assuming that every SWO, every Submariner, every SOF-type and every aviator (among others in the Navy, like SEABEEs) is a "trigger puller"…I'd like to see the data. Not sure it exists.;)
 
Renegade One said:
Assuming that every SWO, every Submariner, every SOF-type and every aviator (among others in the Navy, like SEABEEs) is a "trigger puller"…I'd like to see the data. Not sure it exists.;)
Click to expand...
Agree, That's what I meant by "trigger puller".
 
Renegade One said:
Assuming that every SWO, every Submariner, every SOF-type and every aviator (among others in the Navy, like SEABEEs) is a "trigger puller"…I'd like to see the data. Not sure it exists.;)
Click to expand...

URL is 48% of the officer corps. RL is 12%; Staff is 30%; LDO/CWO is 10%.
 
Renegade One said:
Assuming that every SWO, every Submariner, every SOF-type and every aviator (among others in the Navy, like SEABEEs) is a "trigger puller"…I'd like to see the data. Not sure it exists.;)
Click to expand...

Guess I was just thinking of all the TACPs, ALOs, AFSOC dudes, RPAers, Missileers, and most all Air Combat Command and Global Strike Command aviators. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top