Captain accused of berating academy guards

[CommunityEditor]

At least three complaints have been filed against the commanding officer of an Annapolis Navy base after he allegedly unleashed a torrent of curses and insults at Naval Academy gate guards before speeding onto the yard without their permission on two separate mornings in late October, according to police documents and an interview with one of the guards.

Capt. Michael Fierro, commanding officer of Naval Support Activity Annapolis, is accused of berating three sentries, calling them “motherf———,” “ignorant sons of b———,” and “pieces of s—-” before driving onto academy grounds without being waved through on Oct. 21-22, according to copies of written reports of “violent behavior” made by two Navy sentries and a civilian academy employee and given to the Department of Defense Police Department in Annapolis last month. Documents containing the statements were obtained by Navy Times.

One of the sentries, Operations Specialist 2nd Class Stuart Guarino, told Navy Times that Fierro grew angry when he saw an unarmed sentry in a dungaree uniform manning the gate while Guarino used the bathroom inside the guardhouse. The other sentries wore camouflage, he said.

Guarino said Fierro jumped from his personal car, ran inside the guardhouse and banged on the bathroom door.

When Guarino emerged, he said Fierro cursed him out and accused him of “eating breakfast” instead of doing his job.

“He looked like he was so mad that he was about to cry,” Guarino said, adding that the other sailor was new to Annapolis and had been sent to the guardhouse by his command in his dungarees. He did not yet own the camouflage uniform.

Guarino said the guard in dungarees was needed at the last minute because the regular sentry had been tasked to drive an unnamed four-star admiral to Andrews Air Force Base when he finished his visit to the Naval Academy.

According to the documents, Fierro claimed to be a “friend” of that admiral.

The next morning, according to the three written statements, Fierro returned to the same gate and cursed out Guarino and a second sentry, this time with “arms flying” and “fingers jabbing to their faces,” according to a statement by the civilian Naval Academy employee who witnessed the incident while waiting to drive on academy grounds. Guarino said Fierro was angry that word had gotten out about the previous day’s incident.

Guarino said there were several cars idling behind Fierro’s while he allegedly berated the two sentries for several minutes.

“This is our commanding officer in front of some people who we are supposed to have some kind of authority over,” he said. “He was embarrassing us, degrading us. This guy has power over the next three years of my life. He can do whatever he wants.”

As CO of NSA Annapolis, Fierro oversees the academy guards.

The civilian employee, who watched the Oct. 22 incident while waiting to be waved on academy grounds, wrote that “the spit was flying from his mouth; the verbal assault was so vicious.”

“I would not scream at a dog that way,” he wrote at the end of his statement.

Fierro, a 1982 Naval Academy graduate, released a written statement to Navy Times.

“I am aware of the hotline complaint and am cooperating fully in the investigation,” Fierro wrote. “It would be inappropriate to comment further while this is being investigated.”


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2007/11/navy_academy_sentry_071108w/

[Unregistered]

this entire article sems a little one sided to me,as far as civilian witnesses,there is a big difference between them and a captain who has the responsibility and hopefuly the authority to keep his command secure,someimes loud and serious works,i say bravo zulu to the capt.im sure these guards have standards and standing orders ,that were not bieng inforced, as an old salt who use to make mistakes i use to except my responsibility for my mistakes and carry on as best i could ,mybe these sailorswere wrong.ever think of that?

[Unregistered]

The sailors were in the right, the officer is guilty of conduct unbecoming, and if you are an old salt, you should have learned to spell during your time in the Navy.

[Unregistered]

What despicable conduct, at the training campus for future Naval leaders, no less! An example need to be set. Anything less than forced immediate retirement at the next lower rank would be an injustice to the sailors he has humiliated and a disgrace to the U.S. Navy!

[Unregistered]

There is NEVER any excuse for that kind of behavior. Has anyone ever heard of the phrase "Praise in public, reprimand in private."

[Unregistered]

My gut tells me that this captain has a chip on his shoulder. If it would have been me, I would have restrained him. Why? If his conduct really was as bad as the article leads me to believe, I would question that officer's mental condition. I wonder if this Captain would have done what he did if the sentry was a civil service guard and not an active-duty sailor?

[Unregistered]

What? Someone actually wants to back up this Captain who is obviously got some serious issues going on. Good for the sailors for standing up to him. Noone deserves to be treated like that, not even a dog. He obviously has a very big problem and needs a psychiatric evaluation.

[Unregistered]

The sailors did nothing wrong, they were doing their job. Apparently the Captain wasn't doing his job, because he is the one in the hot seat now. Military or not, it doesn't excuse him for acting like a loud, crazy person. Anyone who would tell him Bravo Zulu for this...that's scary.....

[Unregistered]

I served under him on the USS Kinkaid. He has a history of questionable tirades. However, his methods are effective. Everyone onboard was terrified of him. He managed to get this far. I have a hard time believing that they will give him any more than a slap on the wrist. Again.

[Unregistered]

The sailors were in the right, the officer is guilty of conduct unbecoming, and if you are an old salt, you should have learned to spell during your time in the Navy.
sailors wer in their right? as an old salt you should know never never leave the post to an unguarded person not in the uniform of the day
you should thank the Captain the sentry should be removed from duty asap

[Unregistered]

I served under him on the USS Kinkaid. He has a history of questionable tirades. However, his methods are effective. Everyone onboard was terrified of him. He managed to get this far. I have a hard time believing that they will give him any more than a slap on the wrist. Again.

So he was in trouble in the past for terrorizing his crew on the Kinkaid and received a slap on the wrist? So much for Navy Core Values. No doubt everyone in his current comand is terrified of him as well. What a coward! It's a shame the gate sentry didn't give him a dose of pepper spray!

[Unregistered]

Perhaps the Captain should have reprimanded his Sailors in private, however has the Navy become so soft that Sailors who are not standing a proper watch can not be disciplined for their poor watch standing. What is the fleet coming to. We are a nation at war and the Academy is a prime target, those guards regardless of how menial they view their jobs to be, have a responsibility, a duty, to stand a proper. Accordingly the Captain as their boss has as duty to see to it that they stand their watch properly.

[Unregistered]

Hmmm....lets see - the reason the sailor was on watch in his dungarees was because the Captain had one of the sailors taken off the gate to take his Admiral "friend" to Andrews Air Force Base to catch a plane. He caused that to happen, so he needs to take a look at himself. It said so right in the article if you read it!!!!

[Unregistered]

sailors wer in their right? as an old salt you should know never never leave the post to an unguarded person not in the uniform of the day
you should thank the Captain the sentry should be removed from duty asap

Whoever the old salt is should read the facts of the article. The Captain caused the gate to be manned with a sailor out of the uniform of the day. Did he really need one of them to take the Admiral to the airport? No.

[Unregistered]

If anything, it should be quite interesting how this plays out. Flashback to 2003 when the then Supt. challenged the Marine for "not knowing who he was". The Supt. was out of uniform and the Marine's job was to ask him for the proper id. The Supt. got out of control and mad, just as this Capt. did, and the Marine pepper sprayed the Supt. What ultimately happened? The Supt was relieved of his command; the same will happen for the Capt.

[Unregistered]

Perhaps the Captain should have reprimanded his Sailors in private, however has the Navy become so soft that Sailors who are not standing a proper watch can not be disciplined for their poor watch standing. What is the fleet coming to. We are a nation at war and the Academy is a prime target, those guards regardless of how menial they view their jobs to be, have a responsibility, a duty, to stand a proper. Accordingly the Captain as their boss has as duty to see to it that they stand their watch properly.

No, the sailor's enlisted chain of command, namely his LCPO, has the duty to see to the watch being conducted properly. Any good skipper knows better than to undermine his chiefs. And all of you so-called "old salts" should know that. If the article and posting about his command of the Kincaid are true, the CAPT is not a good CO, nor is he fit for command.

[Unregistered]

guards have standards and standing orders and these were not being obeyed
they were not doing their job and the Captain was seeing to it that they knew they were not doing their job
As for the Marine who pepper sprayed the super at the Academy because he did not recognoze him out of uniform and should have, he saw him enough times. Something is very wrong in the way the people in command and in charge are treated.

The Marine should have been charged not the super

[Shrike]

Something is very wrong in the way the people in command and in charge are treated.


Are you saying they are treated more harshly than others simply by virtue of holding a command position? My experience is 180 degrees different than that.

Just because this thread deals with gate guards, I'll give an anecdotal example: At my first duty station, in the late '80's - early '90's, I became good friends with one of the base cops when we attended PME together. He told me a few stories about several members of the base's senior leadership coming through the gate while very drunk on numerous occasions. The security police's unofficial standing orders were to send a police car to escort the senior member to their on-base quarters. Meanwhile, if a junior enlisted person came through and had even the faintest whiff of beer on their breath, it was usually the end of their career.

[Unregistered]

guards have standards and standing orders and these were not being obeyed
they were not doing their job and the Captain was seeing to it that they knew they were not doing their job
As for the Marine who pepper sprayed the super at the Academy because he did not recognoze him out of uniform and should have, he saw him enough times. Something is very wrong in the way the people in command and in charge are treated.

The Marine should have been charged not the super

Well, who lost their job? The Supt and not the Marine.

[Unregistered]

This article certainly seems to be extremely one-sided. Was the Captain aware that the Sentry was sent to drive the Admiral? In addition, who gave the orders to send an untrained, unarmed, not in inform replacement to guard the gates of Annapolis? Does Guarino have a history of not following orders or deficiency in his job performance, etc? I am not sure there is any job where an employee can leave their position with-out having a qualified person fill in unless it is an extreme medical emergency or extenuating circumstance. Having to go to the bathroom certainly isn't one of them. If Captain Fierro has a history of being critical regarding protocol, then as Sentry assigned under him YOU FOLLOW PRODICOL. It is the Sentry's duty and responsibility to follow Naval Academy Procedure and do his job accordingly. Had a terrorist driven a car bomb through the unarmed gates of Annapolis that day killing that unnamed Admiral, then it would have been the Captain's fault for not posting an armed guard on the gate. Captain Fierro has the ultimate responsibility to keep the Academy safe. National Security comes first and foremost. Guarino abandoned his post and should accept the FACT that he neglected his duties by placing the entire Naval Academy at risk. We all have been verbally assaulted at one point or another in our life and they certainly are not pleasant. Sometimes verbal assaults just happen through road rage, fighting over parking spots, by a disgruntled cashier, by controlling family members, irritated sports fans and even police officers. In the non-military world, Guarino’s actions would be considered gross negligence and warrant immediate dismissal or severe reprimand. I am certain when all the details come about, we will see a clearer picture of what really transpired. This is still America and we are innocent until proven guilty.

[Unregistered]

This article certainly seems to be extremely one-sided. Was the Captain aware that the Sentry was sent to drive the Admiral? In addition, who gave the orders to send an untrained, unarmed, not in inform replacement to guard the gates of Annapolis? Does Guarino have a history of not following orders or deficiency in his job performance, etc? I am not sure there is any job where an employee can leave their position with-out having a qualified person fill in unless it is an extreme medical emergency or extenuating circumstance. Having to go to the bathroom certainly isn't one of them. If Captain Fierro has a history of being critical regarding protocol, then as Sentry assigned under him YOU FOLLOW PRODICOL. It is the Sentry's duty and responsibility to follow Naval Academy Procedure and do his job accordingly. Had a terrorist driven a car bomb through the unarmed gates of Annapolis that day killing that unnamed Admiral, then it would have been the Captain's fault for not posting an armed guard on the gate. Captain Fierro has the ultimate responsibility to keep the Academy safe. National Security comes first and foremost. Guarino abandoned his post and should accept the FACT that he neglected his duties by placing the entire Naval Academy at risk. We all have been verbally assaulted at one point or another in our life and they certainly are not pleasant. Sometimes verbal assaults just happen through road rage, fighting over parking spots, by a disgruntled cashier, by controlling family members, irritated sports fans and even police officers. In the non-military world, Guarino’s actions would be considered gross negligence and warrant immediate dismissal or severe reprimand. I am certain when all the details come about, we will see a clearer picture of what really transpired. This is still America and we are innocent until proven guilty.

It sounds like from your reply that you have Guarino and FIerro mixed up.

[Unregistered]

How could that be when Captain Fierro was DOING his job and Guarino was on the John. I wonder how that civilian Navel Academy's family would feel regarding Guarino if the terrorist in the above mentioned article not only killed the Admiral, but him as well due to Guarino failure to perform his duties.

[Unregistered]

We did see that behavior displayed on the Kinkaid pretty often. He did put fear into his crew...people actually started doing their job properly.

[Unregistered]

Well let me give you all some facts about the Naval Academy or NSA Annapolis as it is now known. Let me start with I was stationed there until September of this year standing the gates. There are so many issues there and I am thinking that none of or not many of you know how things are there. Manning is an issue. Im not sure what the current is but it's not sufficient for what we are called to do. So that being said, that is part of the reason that a sentry was in Utilities instead of the required BDU's. May still be a waiting list for the BDU's as I speak but then again I left in September so don't take this as fact. Thats how it was when I was there. So from time to time things happen that are not stated in the SOP's or any other rules that we are to follow. If you are ever in the area stop by and watch the day today operations of the gate sentries.
Regardless of what your stature, position in the military ranking system, or who you may "think" you are doesn't count for that conduct at any time or place. I mean this is the Naval Academy. Is it not. This is not a Base, that is a military installation and thats it. No ships or anything like that. We are ambassadors to the public right? We were told from the time I reported to the time I left active duty our composure on the gate is reflective upon the public and we are constantly in the public eye. So for all of you idiots that think that captain is right. Practice what you preach right? Doesn't make it right either way. He is a Captain in the World's Finest Navy. He has no special rights, well i should say that he shouldn't. But for you all that have served you know that as not being factual. No matter what branch of service, enlisted or officer, our UCMJ and general orders are the same. Also we are a nation at war against terrorism. Every base or installation I have been to is 100% ID check. So for those of you siding with the forced to resign Admiral. Refer to my previous sentences. You are still in the Navy and the rules apply. I don't care if you are my dad. Show your ID. I cant tell you how many times I was spoken to about doing my job correctly, and they were trying to yell at me. So reprimand me for doing my job. You're an Idiot.
Things at NSA Annapolis do not happen the way they should and in my 10 years served I cant recall them ever happening that way. Like I said I was stationed there for 3 years. Been there, done it, and I have a lotof brown T-Shirt still. I have seen this Captain in action. Most times a decent person. But he has his times as everyone else does. But conduct on the gates, in public needs to be controlled. If you cant control it then maybe you need to rethink your position where you are at. No exceptions. Just because you are a Captain shouldn't grant you the authority to do what you want on gate but tell us we have to be this way. BS!! The CO is wrong. Thats Fact. You can't argue fact. Probably wouldn't be so bad had it been had nobody else been trying to pass through the gates. But when a civilian sees this and reports this? Come on people use your head. The is totally UNPROFESSIONAL period. If you think it is professional then you are an idiot.
Everyone there has had issues with the CO from military people being yelled at to civilian, police, fire department. Just stop by and ask them.
Why doesn't that Admiral have a personal driver like others do? Why does everyone try to make excuses for the CO. Contain yourself as professional and as courteous as you are told to do throughout your military career. No exceptions. I beg/ask all of you to go there and question people that are there working there civilian and military and ask them about what goes on there. There is a time and place for things to happen. Not on the gates. That is the first view that anyone coming from the public to the Academy will see. So seriously people use your head when reading and thinking about it. Doesn't matter who is right or wrong here really does it? What does matter is WHERE it happened and WHO was allowed to view this behavior from either person. That is the real problem here. But it takes times like this for people to see how our Navy really is. Kind of sad for me even though I am not still in. The whole thing is sad. Go there and find outthe facts. Its all there. Still the CO was wrong and totally out of line. Thats all I have to say for now.

[Unregistered]

As a old Tin Can Sailor, I don't believe leaving your post for any reason, is making you the right. Leaving your post as a sentry in a security position was a Court Marshall offense, never mind verbal abuse. As a Marine who guard all Naval Installations this is unheard of. Our Nation is currently in a war, as unpopular as it may seem to some people, a war non the less. Lets get real and give the Military a chance to look into the affair. No snap judgements.

[Unregistered]

Let me put this to rest... The Sentry did not have to abandon his post to use the Head. The gate houses are new and have a pretty state of the art set up complete with video monitoring and a Head built in. Simply put, the Sentry made two steps to the rear of the gatehouse and was in the head!

As you can tell I work for the egomaniac that we call our CO. He and his civilian XO (who is a retired Capt) are micro-managers in the truest since. You would be amazed at some of the BS they micro-manage.

As a 20 yr civilian employee I know my job. I was doing it before they arrived and will be doing it after they depart. Why they need to tell me how to empty a trash can or something on that simple of a plane is beyond me but they do. These guys restrict the "Law Enforcement" authority of our Base Police, they have alienated the fire dept and treat them like dirt. The folks in supply and MWR are treated well by him but everyone else is expected to kiss his @ss. The "good" Captain is well known for always backing the "uniform" but rarely the "dress shirt."

In regards to the Capt's behavior, I too was once a subject of a similar rant from him. Fortunately, as a civilian I told him that we wouldn't yell at me or use profanity when speaking with me. When he continued his rant I walked away! Wisely for him and thankfully for me nothing further happened.

Like someone else said, we are not an operations base or installation. We are university that is of military bearing. Nothing more! So treat the place like what it is and we will all get along.

[Unregistered]

While everyone is so concerned about the how “civilians view the Sentries at the Naval Academy…..Ambassadors of the world, etc.”, we really should be concerned about how the rest of the world is viewing this incident, including the terrorists. The civilians mentioned were not visitors to Annapolis, but Naval Academy employees. Maybe these employees were not supportive of the CO and the changes he is enforcing. Looking for a way to get rid of them so they can go back to NOT GETTING their job done. If there are problems with the staffing of the gate, the Sebtries should have addressed it immediately and resolved internally. Furthermore, Annapolis IS considered a prime terrorist target. Some of you may be in denial about this; however, we ARE at WAR. It wasn’t that long ago in American History when Sentries were shot, hung and court marshaled for abandoning their post. Yes, we have evolved to be more civilized and perhaps the CO could have used better judgment when addressing the Sentries the 2nd day. But it is a sad day in our military, when we disregard the years of service a CO has given our country because we do not agree with his methods of getting military personnel to actually do their job. Obviously, whomever chose this CO for this postition, knew his methods, their effectiveness and felt that changes needed to made at Annapolis. While you may not appreciate his micro-managing of the Academy and him telling you how he wants you to do your job, he is the CO. Ther isn't an employee out there who hasn't been in the same situation, if the boss say to do it X,Y,Z, you do it X,Y,Z. Our enemy will view this as another sign of weakness. An effective CO is punished for reprimanding a Sentry for not doing his job. Osama Bin-Laden must be chuckling in his cave, while he plans his next attack. Maybe he will choose Annapolis as a target. He can time his attack based upon the timing of Guarino daily constitutional or maybe plan a pipe bomb in the garbage can.

[Unregistered]

sailors wer in their right? as an old salt you should know never never leave the post to an unguarded person not in the uniform of the day
you should thank the Captain the sentry should be removed from duty asap

the bottom line is. the captain should had gotten on the person that sent the sailor out there w/o a uniform and talk to that person in a military manner. teach our kids in a military manner and not like they on the street. would you like somebody to cuss you out? treat people the same way you want to be treated. nobody wants to give RESPECT!!!!!!! people do make mistakes and forget where they are at but how are they gonna take care of this situation. i hope they don't let it go because other officer think they can get away with it. rab

[Unregistered]

the bottom line is. the captain should had gotten on the person that sent the sailor out there w/o a uniform and talk to that person in a military manner. teach our kids in a military manner and not like they on the street. would you like somebody to cuss you out? treat people the same way you want to be treated. nobody wants to give RESPECT!!!!!!! people do make mistakes and forget where they are at but how are they gonna take care of this situation. i hope they don't let it go because other officer think they can get away with it. rab

Poor Sentry, his feelings are hurt......RESPECT is EARNED...I am sure this CO and his XO would NEVER disrespect a sailor for DOING their JOB....what a great message to send out there....DON'T do your JOB....or DO IT YOUR WAY.....get reprimanded....then COMPLAIN about getting reprimanded and PUNISH the CO.....great military system you want to promote....YEAH hat will work....

[Unregistered]

As a old Tin Can Sailor, I don't believe leaving your post for any reason, is making you the right. Leaving your post as a sentry in a security position was a Court Marshall offense, never mind verbal abuse. As a Marine who guard all Naval Installations this is unheard of. Our Nation is currently in a war, as unpopular as it may seem to some people, a war non the less. Lets get real and give the Military a chance to look into the affair. No snap judgements.

He did NOT leave his post, he was simply using the restroom which is provided for his use in the gate house; as it is in all the gate houses.

[Unregistered]

While everyone is so concerned about the how “civilians view the Sentries at the Naval Academy…..Ambassadors of the world, etc.”, we really should be concerned about how the rest of the world is viewing this incident, including the terrorists. The civilians mentioned were not visitors to Annapolis, but Naval Academy employees. Maybe these employees were not supportive of the CO and the changes he is enforcing. Looking for a way to get rid of them so they can go back to NOT GETTING their job done. If there are problems with the staffing of the gate, the Sebtries should have addressed it immediately and resolved internally. Furthermore, Annapolis IS considered a prime terrorist target. Some of you may be in denial about this; however, we ARE at WAR. It wasn’t that long ago in American History when Sentries were shot, hung and court marshaled for abandoning their post. Yes, we have evolved to be more civilized and perhaps the CO could have used better judgment when addressing the Sentries the 2nd day. But it is a sad day in our military, when we disregard the years of service a CO has given our country because we do not agree with his methods of getting military personnel to actually do their job. Obviously, whomever chose this CO for this postition, knew his methods, their effectiveness and felt that changes needed to made at Annapolis. While you may not appreciate his micro-managing of the Academy and him telling you how he wants you to do your job, he is the CO. Ther isn't an employee out there who hasn't been in the same situation, if the boss say to do it X,Y,Z, you do it X,Y,Z. Our enemy will view this as another sign of weakness. An effective CO is punished for reprimanding a Sentry for not doing his job. Osama Bin-Laden must be chuckling in his cave, while he plans his next attack. Maybe he will choose Annapolis as a target. He can time his attack based upon the timing of Guarino daily constitutional or maybe plan a pipe bomb in the garbage can.

The civilian employees you referenced work for the NAVAL ACADEMY and the Superintendent of the Naval Academy, not the CO of NSA Annapolis. And who are you to say these employees need to get back to "not doing their jobs"? Give me a break.

[Unregistered]

While everyone is so concerned about the how “civilians view the Sentries at the Naval Academy…..Ambassadors of the world, etc.”, we really should be concerned about how the rest of the world is viewing this incident, including the terrorists. The civilians mentioned were not visitors to Annapolis, but Naval Academy employees. Maybe these employees were not supportive of the CO and the changes he is enforcing. Looking for a way to get rid of them so they can go back to NOT GETTING their job done. If there are problems with the staffing of the gate, the Sebtries should have addressed it immediately and resolved internally. Furthermore, Annapolis IS considered a prime terrorist target. Some of you may be in denial about this; however, we ARE at WAR. It wasn’t that long ago in American History when Sentries were shot, hung and court marshaled for abandoning their post. Yes, we have evolved to be more civilized and perhaps the CO could have used better judgment when addressing the Sentries the 2nd day. But it is a sad day in our military, when we disregard the years of service a CO has given our country because we do not agree with his methods of getting military personnel to actually do their job. Obviously, whomever chose this CO for this postition, knew his methods, their effectiveness and felt that changes needed to made at Annapolis. While you may not appreciate his micro-managing of the Academy and him telling you how he wants you to do your job, he is the CO. Ther isn't an employee out there who hasn't been in the same situation, if the boss say to do it X,Y,Z, you do it X,Y,Z. Our enemy will view this as another sign of weakness. An effective CO is punished for reprimanding a Sentry for not doing his job. Osama Bin-Laden must be chuckling in his cave, while he plans his next attack. Maybe he will choose Annapolis as a target. He can time his attack based upon the timing of Guarino daily constitutional or maybe plan a pipe bomb in the garbage can.

Noone knew his methods before he got there and if those truly are his methods, than he needs to be discharged from the Navy. What changes were needed at Annapolis? He is only the CO of NSA Annapolis, a tenant command and not the Naval Academy. We have a Superintendent for that job.

[Unregistered]

Poor Sentry, his feelings are hurt......RESPECT is EARNED...I am sure this CO and his XO would NEVER disrespect a sailor for DOING their JOB....what a great message to send out there....DON'T do your JOB....or DO IT YOUR WAY.....get reprimanded....then COMPLAIN about getting reprimanded and PUNISH the CO.....great military system you want to promote....YEAH hat will work....

Okay people, grow up!!!! The only reason the CO was so pissed off the 2nd day was because he was "upset" that it "got out" how he screamed and carried on the previous morning. The CO needs to abide by the rules and show his ID just like anyone else has to. Get over it.

[Unregistered]

Okay people, grow up!!!! The only reason the CO was so pissed off the 2nd day was because he was "upset" that it "got out" how he screamed and carried on the previous morning. The CO needs to abide by the rules and show his ID just like anyone else has to. Get over it.

Guarino should have done his job. Why are you feeling sorry for a pathetic excuse for a soldier who should have just dealt with the consequences of leaving his post. Guarino is not someone I would want to have to command or have standing next to me or defending Annapolis if there were a situation or attack at the gate.

[Unregistered]

Noone knew his methods before he got there and if those truly are his methods, than he needs to be discharged from the Navy. What changes were needed at Annapolis? He is only the CO of NSA Annapolis, a tenant command and not the Naval Academy. We have a Superintendent for that job.

Love to have you tell Noone that to his face, and your opinion comes from your extensive experience and years as a CO, like to know of what ? Being CO of NSA Annapolis is a thankless and unappreciated position. The Sentry was wrong. The CO was right.

[Unregistered]

How was the CO doing his job? I would like to know were you work and do the same to you and see if you can restrain yourself in not punching me in the face. The bathroom is ON POST at USNA so he did not leave his post. Are you saying that in your daily job, 8-10 hours you dont take a leak?? Give me a break and be realistic, you are nuts. And whose fault was it the unarmed guard was on the gate?? I dought an E5 had that kind of authority.


How could that be when Captain Fierro was DOING his job and Guarino was on the John. I wonder how that civilian Navel Academy's family would feel regarding Guarino if the terrorist in the above mentioned article not only killed the Admiral, but him as well due to Guarino failure to perform his duties.

[Unregistered]

How was the CO doing his job? I would like to know were you work and do the same to you and see if you can restrain yourself in not punching me in the face. The bathroom is ON POST at USNA so he did not leave his post. Are you saying that in your daily job, 8-10 hours you dont take a leak?? Give me a break and be realistic, you are nuts. And whose fault was it the unarmed guard was on the gate?? I dought an E5 had that kind of authority.


Don't have a problem with the guard taking a leak, but I do have a problem with him leaving the post to an unguarded person not in the uniform of the day while he was taking his leak.

[Unregistered]

Captain Fierro's reputation prceded him as a stern and fair Naval Officer. He was appointed to the job because of the Lax of secutity at USNA, He saw the breach in security and addressed it. It is his responsiblity for the protection of all personel on the base. If a car bomb had exploded while the guard had no weapons and people were killed whose fault would it be. Not the sentry but the CO. People forget too soon the lessons we should have learned from history. These are all the responses we recieved after the bombing of Pearl Harbor athe World Trade Center. Someone was not paying attention.

[Unregistered]

While everyone is so concerned about the how “civilians view the Sentries at the Naval Academy…..Ambassadors of the world, etc.”, we really should be concerned about how the rest of the world is viewing this incident, including the terrorists. The civilians mentioned were not visitors to Annapolis, but Naval Academy employees. Maybe these employees were not supportive of the CO and the changes he is enforcing. Looking for a way to get rid of them so they can go back to NOT GETTING their job done. If there are problems with the staffing of the gate, the Sebtries should have addressed it immediately and resolved internally. Furthermore, Annapolis IS considered a prime terrorist target. Some of you may be in denial about this; however, we ARE at WAR. It wasn’t that long ago in American History when Sentries were shot, hung and court marshaled for abandoning their post. Yes, we have evolved to be more civilized and perhaps the CO could have used better judgment when addressing the Sentries the 2nd day. But it is a sad day in our military, when we disregard the years of service a CO has given our country because we do not agree with his methods of getting military personnel to actually do their job. Obviously, whomever chose this CO for this postition, knew his methods, their effectiveness and felt that changes needed to made at Annapolis. While you may not appreciate his micro-managing of the Academy and him telling you how he wants you to do your job, he is the CO. Ther isn't an employee out there who hasn't been in the same situation, if the boss say to do it X,Y,Z, you do it X,Y,Z. Our enemy will view this as another sign of weakness. An effective CO is punished for reprimanding a Sentry for not doing his job. Osama Bin-Laden must be chuckling in his cave, while he plans his next attack. Maybe he will choose Annapolis as a target. He can time his attack based upon the timing of Guarino daily constitutional or maybe plan a pipe bomb in the garbage can.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with Guarino personally. It has to do with the fact that the CO acted out like a crazy person. Bin Laden could care less about this. If a terrorist wants to target Annapolis or the Naval Academy, what uniform is being worn has nothing to do with it.

[Unregistered]

Captain Fierro's reputation prceded him as a stern and fair Naval Officer. He was appointed to the job because of the Lax of secutity at USNA, He saw the breach in security and addressed it. It is his responsiblity for the protection of all personel on the base. If a car bomb had exploded while the guard had no weapons and people were killed whose fault would it be. Not the sentry but the CO. People forget too soon the lessons we should have learned from history. These are all the responses we recieved after the bombing of Pearl Harbor athe World Trade Center. Someone was not paying attention.

The security is the same as it was before he arrived, no different.

[Unregistered]

Guarino should have done his job. Why are you feeling sorry for a pathetic excuse for a soldier who should have just dealt with the consequences of leaving his post. Guarino is not someone I would want to have to command or have standing next to me or defending Annapolis if there were a situation or attack at the gate.

I don't feel sorry for the soldier, I feel sorry for you backing up a crazy, out of control Captain. That is disturbing. Rank means nothing when one acts like a madman who deserves to be holed up in a padded room.

[Unregistered]

I miss the days when a good ass chewing was acceptable and then it was the end of it. The CO should know things have changed and now needs to pencil whip instead and potentially end careers. The sentry should have gone to mast and punished....and the CO should have done it with a smile...

You guys calling for the CO's head need to remember that things could have been much worse for these so called sentries.....they got yelled at instead

The pussification of the Navy continues

Lcdr/Ret

[Unregistered]

"Like someone else said, we are not an operations base or installation. We are university that is of military bearing. Nothing more! So treat the place like what it is and we will all get along."


BINGO

The quote above illustrates the problem the CO was trying to correct. The attitude is obvious and must have been pervasive around the command. Sad....

[Unregistered]

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with Guarino personally. It has to do with the fact that the CO acted out like a crazy person. Bin Laden could care less about this. If a terrorist wants to target Annapolis or the Naval Academy, what uniform is being worn has nothing to do with it.

Maybe not, but having a soldier with a gun might. Remember he left the gate unarmed. The Navy has great job security….that should be the new recruitment campaign. You don’t gotta do your job, if you get yelled at you can try to get your boss fired…and you still get paid. There would be a line outside the recruitment offices. There are several Americans out there killing themselves trying to make a living for their families. They can’t afford to mess up, because if don’t do their job, they get fired and their families don’t eat. The average Joe, can’t stop working to take a leak, he has to wait for his break or for proper relief to arrive. While you may be willing to take a chance that Bid Laden isn’t using this incident to demonstrate to his people how weak our military is, then think again. 9/11 wasn’t that long ago, how soon we forget.

[Shrike]

If a car bomb had exploded while the guard had no weapons and people were killed whose fault would it be. Not the sentry but the CO.

How is an armed guard going to stop someone from slowly driving up to the gate and detonating a car bomb?

[Unregistered]

Don't have a problem with the guard taking a leak, but I do have a problem with him leaving the post to an unguarded person not in the uniform of the day while he was taking his leak.

I was working at the USNA on the day in question and I observed 2 armed sentries in BDUs and 1 unarmed sentry in the standard blue work uniform. Like it has been said before, the gate has a restroom built into it. So how did this guy abandon his post? Even if the 2nd armed sentry departed and what was left was one armed and one unarmed sentry, does this prohibit the armed person from using the restroom? While we may be at "War," the security posture has been at ThreatCon "A" for quite a while.

If Annapolis is such a rich target then why has CNIC, an ultimately the Supt, allowed the emergency services (Gate Sentries, Police, Fire-EMS) to be reduced by downsizing the number of on-duty personnel and equipment resources? I would agree that the USNA within a mile of the MARYLAND State Capitol and 25 miles from the White House with Mids from every state in the union plus 20 other countries would be a pretty huge symbolic target but not everyone feels that way, including those that allowed staffing cuts in emergency services to move forward.

[Unregistered]

"Like someone else said, we are not an operations base or installation. We are university that is of military bearing. Nothing more! So treat the place like what it is and we will all get along."


BINGO

The quote above illustrates the problem the CO was trying to correct. The attitude is obvious and must have been pervasive around the command. Sad....

The CO is going about it the wrong way and he is preaching to the wrong folks. The folks in the Supt's office has repeatedly said we are a "institute of higher learning." There whre the Stars reside is where the attitude or high security posture should begin but when they don't lead in that manner it is impossible for me to believe that the E-5 pulling Sentry duty could effectively make any true impact on the "law attitude."

What needs to happen is someone come in and give the troops the responsibility of their position, the authority to carry it out and the respect to leave them alone as they do it! And should a person error in how they carry out their duties, be responsible enough to counsel the individual in a setting and manner that is conducive to correcting the error while allowing the person to maintain their dignity and respect amongst their peers and the community in which they serve!

[Unregistered]

The CO is going about it the wrong way and he is preaching to the wrong folks. The folks in the Supt's office has repeatedly said we are a "institute of higher learning." There whre the Stars reside is where the attitude or high security posture should begin but when they don't lead in that manner it is impossible for me to believe that the E-5 pulling Sentry duty could effectively make any true impact on the "law attitude."

What needs to happen is someone come in and give the troops the responsibility of their position, the authority to carry it out and the respect to leave them alone as they do it! And should a person error in how they carry out their duties, be responsible enough to counsel the individual in a setting and manner that is conducive to correcting the error while allowing the person to maintain their dignity and respect amongst their peers and the community in which they serve!

OK. So it they don't do their job (ex. the sentry), do we offerring them a couch and an therapist, soldiers need to earn respect from their CO's by following orders and doing their job. It is very sad when soldier feel they are entitled to certain priviledges that most everyone else on the planet has to earn. Marines - The Few, The Proud, The Sensitive.

[Unregistered]

guards have standards and standing orders and these were not being obeyed
they were not doing their job and the Captain was seeing to it that they knew they were not doing their job
As for the Marine who pepper sprayed the super at the Academy because he did not recognoze him out of uniform and should have, he saw him enough times. Something is very wrong in the way the people in command and in charge are treated.

The Marine should have been charged not the super

Regardless if the Marine recognized the Supe or not; EVERYONE passing through the gates is REQUIRED to provide proper ID. I think it's time the brass realizes they aren't the rockstars they think they are!

[Unregistered]

Don't have a problem with the guard taking a leak, but I do have a problem with him leaving the post to an unguarded person not in the uniform of the day while he was taking his leak.

Next time, we'll just have him piss his pants!!

[Unregistered]

Captain Fierro's reputation prceded him as a stern and fair Naval Officer. He was appointed to the job because of the Lax of secutity at USNA, He saw the breach in security and addressed it. It is his responsiblity for the protection of all personel on the base. If a car bomb had exploded while the guard had no weapons and people were killed whose fault would it be. Not the sentry but the CO. People forget too soon the lessons we should have learned from history. These are all the responses we recieved after the bombing of Pearl Harbor athe World Trade Center. Someone was not paying attention.

OK, let's be real; a car pulls up, flashes an ID and the bomb goes off. No one is going to exist to draw a weapon anyway!

[Unregistered]

you are an idiot.. the bathroom is in the post! stop trying to stick up for some CO who thinks he is some rockstar asshole. The E-5 didnt put the unarmed guy on the gate, obviously his chain of command thought it was ok so why are you taking it out on him??


Don't have a problem with the guard taking a leak, but I do have a problem with him leaving the post to an unguarded person not in the uniform of the day while he was taking his leak.

[Unregistered]

you are an idiot.. the bathroom is in the post! stop trying to stick up for some CO who thinks he is some rockstar asshole. The E-5 didnt put the unarmed guy on the gate, obviously his chain of command thought it was ok so why are you taking it out on him??

Because in the real world, people have to actually do their job. The E-5 made a choice to take a leak, leaving his post, even if it is few steps back. He was caught by his CO and was reprimanded. The consequence for a bad decision on the guards part. So take the reprimand. End of story. Most civilian bosses think they are rock stars, so what is your point. There isn't an employee out there who hasn't had their butt handed to them when they mess up at one point in their careers. Why are we in the military any different. Soldiers should't assume it is OK because it is only a few seconds or minutes. If soldiers in the military don't perform their duties, for whatever reason, we fail the people and the country we have taken an owth to serve.

[TJMAC77SP]

Does anyone else think that Captain Fierro posted at least one of these ‘unregistered’ posts?

[Unregistered]

Does anyone else think that Captain Fierro posted at least one of these ‘unregistered’ posts?

Yes! I was thinking that same thing myself!

[Unregistered]

He was caught by his CO and was reprimanded. The consequence for a bad decision on the guards part. So take the reprimand. End of story.

So reprimand him... Do in private, with respect and with the sense of mind that you are taking a corrective action. Don't be little the Sentry on post in front of the entire community that is supposed to look at the Sentry as an authoritative official. And then don't do it a second time in as many days. Unprofessional!!!

It is unfortunate that we are being served a dish of brass is the best meal. To the contrary, I believe if it wasn't for the wonderful men and women wear stripes we wouldn't need the brass.

My USNA graduate daughter hasn't forgot that she originated from an enlisted family and I see an outstanding officer in her (I'm biased I know) because she treats everyone with respect and dignity in all situations. She learned the hard way that the enlisted personnel are the gears of our defense and officers are just the grease that makes the gears work smoothly. Maybe this Captain should learn that his actions is the sand contamination in the grease that slows the gears and eventually causes the engine to seize.

If I were the NDW Commandant - the Captain's boss - I would have to find him a new place to be because all of this discussion has lead me to believe that this Capt has lost his effectiveness and ability to lead in a manner fitting for a Commanding Officer!

[Unregistered]

Does anyone else think that Captain Fierro posted at least one of these ‘unregistered’ posts?

Think again...isn't him...

[Unregistered]

Yes! I was thinking that same thing myself!


NOPE, you got it wrong AGAIN

[Unregistered]

NOPE, you got it wrong AGAIN

Yeah..sure..prove it! Like he would admit it if it was him....

[Unregistered]

I worked for this Captain and the abuse that he lets off is unjust. If his day is bad you get cursed out? How does that look for the military? And for anyone to say that the sentry was work is as dumb as the next man who says its okay. Lets be real if you get cursed out by anybody in front of a group of people who do or don't know you, you would be offended. Don't be stupid.

[Unregistered]

Yeah..sure..prove it! Like he would admit it if it was him....

and you are unregistered because ??? Why do you find it so hard to believe that there are people out there who believe in freedom of speech, respect for the chain of command, & responsibility to do our duty to serve our Country. A forum is used to voice ALL opinions, not just the ones YOU agree with.

[Unregistered]

If I were the NDW Commandant - the Captain's boss - I would have to find him a new place to be because all of this discussion has lead me to believe that this Capt has lost his effectiveness and ability to lead in a manner fitting for a Commanding Officer!

Amen! Well stated! He can't hold his troops to any standard he is unable to meet himself and I suspect if this Capt were to retrospectively comment on his behavior he would have to admit that his approach was less than acceptable for a CO or a person of the caliper he holds himself out to be.

[Unregistered]

In May I graduated from the Academy and was commissioned as an Ensign. I now await my first post Academy assignment in Pensecola and will be departing Annapolis shortly. During the months since I completed my academic program I have been assigned to various offices around The Yard. One of those temporary assignments was working under the Captain. While I found him to be demanding of perfection, which I appreciated, I found he has zero tolerance for anything else. Knowing what little I do know about our service I know perfection is often desired but sometimes impossible to achieve. Since the Captain is brutually hard on those that don't reach his level of expectation for perfection I can't help but wonder what kind of leader he really is. With all due respect to the Captain, I don't see how his actions fostered an environment whereby improvement was the primary goal. Instead, I believe the Captain failed in providing the sentry the respect needed to provide an environment where the sentry could take steps towards bettering his performance levels. Essentially, the Captain wasted an opportunity to steer a wayward ship in the right direction. Sadly, I have seen this attitude several time while at the Academy but this one is probably the most blatant. I will use the as an example of how not to lead our sailors as I move into the fleet.

[Shrike]

I worked for this Captain and the abuse that he lets off is unjust. If his day is bad you get cursed out? How does that look for the military? And for anyone to say that the sentry was work is as dumb as the next man who says its okay. Lets be real if you get cursed out by anybody in front of a group of people who do or don't know you, you would be offended. Don't be stupid.

One of the basic tenets of leadership taught at any level of military PME is "Praise in Public, Reprimand in Private."

[Unregistered]

Not surprising but still very sad. Looks like he may be on track for an early retirement from the Navy. I read the comments mentioned. There are at least two that look very much like he wrote them in defense of himself. And a very poor defense it was! One of the comments nailed it "conduct unbecoming an officer". IF those guards were doing ANYTHING wrong there's a time and a place for dealing with it. Where it happened in this case was a very poor decision made by the Captain. Unless those guards were placing people in imminent danger the discipline could have waited for a more appropriate time and place. Captain Fierro has more than once and on numerous occasions with many different people both civilian and military shown himself to be unfit for his station of duty and it is very surprising he's made it this far in his career. Several of the commenters mentioned concern for the Captain's mental health and suggested that perhaps he seek some. Maybe an early retirement would give him the time he would need to do just that. It can't be good for the morale of the troops to know that their CO is a loose cannon that could blow without a moment's notice. Nor could it be good to know that he is so untrustworthy with their respect and reputation as to just rip it to shreds in a tirade of rage over what probably amounts to nothing but a mere misunderstanding on his part. I thought captains were taught to remain calm under fire. Hair trigger reactions like his have gotten people killed.

That's my take on the mess. The Rear Admiral who cussed out the gate sentry and then tried to cover up for it by having the guy move was sent packing. Why would they do less to a Captain at the same installation attempting to do the same or a similar thing. Is he that much better than a Rear Admiral?

A very sad state of affairs going on there. :o(

[Unregistered]

LOL. You guys kill me...terrorists! Al Queda is watching. LOL

For years the gates at NAB Little Creek were guarded by unarmed pregnant females, reading comic books.
then for over a year the SRO in the hampton Roads area removed the "guards" all together, because the "tax payers" had to right to come and go on the base thier taxes paid for.

This captain was wrong. He's one of those types that thinks an enlisted man's place is under his feet.

He should be careful, in todays world he may be powerful on base, but off base, he's just a man.
A man who can be "reached out to", a man who can be on the recieving end of some thing much worse than what he was giving out.

[Unregistered]

Not surprising but still very sad. Looks like he may be on track for an early retirement from the Navy. I read the comments mentioned. There are at least two that look very much like he wrote them in defense of himself. And a very poor defense it was! One of the comments nailed it "conduct unbecoming an officer". IF those guards were doing ANYTHING wrong there's a time and a place for dealing with it. Where it happened in this case was a very poor decision made by the Captain. Unless those guards were placing people in imminent danger the discipline could have waited for a more appropriate time and place. Captain Fierro has more than once and on numerous occasions with many different people both civilian and military shown himself to be unfit for his station of duty and it is very surprising he's made it this far in his career. Several of the commenters mentioned concern for the Captain's mental health and suggested that perhaps he seek some. Maybe an early retirement would give him the time he would need to do just that. It can't be good for the morale of the troops to know that their CO is a loose cannon that could blow without a moment's notice. Nor could it be good to know that he is so untrustworthy with their respect and reputation as to just rip it to shreds in a tirade of rage over what probably amounts to nothing but a mere misunderstanding on his part. I thought captains were taught to remain calm under fire. Hair trigger reactions like his have gotten people killed.

That's my take on the mess. The Rear Admiral who cussed out the gate sentry and then tried to cover up for it by having the guy move was sent packing. Why would they do less to a Captain at the same installation attempting to do the same or a similar thing. Is he that much better than a Rear Admiral?

A very sad state of affairs going on there. :o(

I wrote that quote, served World War II and Korean War, from Florida. Web site can track who is posting. Bet my pension it isn't Captain Fierro. He has remained silent on the issue. Wonder how many post have come from the sentry and his buddies.

[Unregistered]

LOL. You guys kill me...terrorists! Al Queda is watching. LOL

For years the gates at NAB Little Creek were guarded by unarmed pregnant females, reading comic books.
then for over a year the SRO in the hampton Roads area removed the "guards" all together, because the "tax payers" had to right to come and go on the base thier taxes paid for.

This captain was wrong. He's one of those types that thinks an enlisted man's place is under his feet.

He should be careful, in todays world he may be powerful on base, but off base, he's just a man.
A man who can be "reached out to", a man who can be on the recieving end of some thing much worse than what he was giving out.

Off Base, he would be making six digits,...how little you know of corporate america.

[Unregistered]

Off Base, he would be making six digits,...how little you know of corporate america.

Hmmm..I'd like to see him get a six figure job after all of this!!!!

[Unregistered]

Hmmm..I'd like to see him get a six figure job after all of this!!!!

Hmmmmm. Quess you've never been on the trading floor on Wall Street (talk about yelling) or PROFESSIONAL Corporate Security, where the guard who have been fired and blacklisted for LIFE. I'd be more worried about the guard than the Captain, who has how many degrees ???

[Unregistered]

Your Comment Is Unbelievable, Can't Hold It Awhile, Use Depends I Work In A Security Position In A Sports Facility
While We Do Not Carry Guns, We Carry Radios And Are In Full Uniform And Cannot Leave To Go To The Bathroom Without First Notifying Our Supervisor And Waiting To Be Covered
With A Person In Uniform And With A Radio And We Check Bags For Suspicious Items Before Letting Them In And On The Grounds
Iif We Left Without Doing This We Would Be Replaced Immediately And Sent Home
I Remember One Of Our Young Men Got Ill While Working, Vomitting And He Was Afraid To Leave, Even After I Rushed Over To Cover Him, Because I Had Gotten Somebody To Cover For Me Until The Supervisor Gave Him The Ok

[TJMAC77SP]

Hmmmmm. Quess you've never been on the trading floor on Wall Street (talk about yelling) or PROFESSIONAL Corporate Security, where the guard who have been fired and blacklisted for LIFE. I'd be more worried about the guard than the Captain, who has how many degrees ???

So, he is qualified to work the trading floor on Wall Street (or maybe the Chicago Board of Trade) because he can yell loudy? You believe that the primary talent of corporate security executives is that they too can yell loudly ?

[Unregistered]

Hmmmmm. Quess you've never been on the trading floor on Wall Street (talk about yelling) or PROFESSIONAL Corporate Security, where the guard who have been fired and blacklisted for LIFE. I'd be more worried about the guard than the Captain, who has how many degrees ???

It should not matter how many "degrees" that captain has. If he's wrong. He's wrong. It's the captain who's got the problem and it's the captain who should be concerned about how he's going to defend his unprofessional behavior. All the pandering about all the other non-issues surrounding what he did is minor compared to the problem he created because of his inability to conduct himself in a manner befitting his rank. It is through past examples that we learn to do things better today. We should not be about repeating past errors simply because popular people in prominent positions were the performers. Nor should an error be repeated or lauded as acceptable simply because the outcome was favorable. We should know by now that the end does not always justify the means. As in this case the captain's actions were overboard for the situation. It is very obvious that no one was placed in imminent danger, therefore, he could have dealt with any supposed error in a more professional manner. Both his reputation and honor as well as the other gentleman's would have been spared and this whole mess would not be in discussion as it is now. We're all grown ups here. There is absoultely no excuse for that kind of behavior. The captain should be ashamed of his behavior. Even IF he were right he still could have dealt with it in a much more professional manner!

[Unregistered]

I hope the new CO just simply pencil whips all these sniveling whiners. No yelling. no ass chewing...just a career ending mast....Make them wish all they had gotten was an ass chewing in public.

BTW...That BS about reprimand in private is bogus. It's not a hard and fast rule. There are times where an example needs to be presented...

[Unregistered]

I hope the new CO just simply pencil whips all these sniveling whiners. No yelling. no ass chewing...just a career ending mast....Make them wish all they had gotten was an ass chewing in public.

BTW...That BS about reprimand in private is bogus. It's not a hard and fast rule. There are times where an example needs to be presented...

Okay, enough is enough..the CO obviously has some serious mental issues he needs addressed; and anyone who would dare stick up for him, I have seriously question their mental stability. They must be as crazy as him. He made the whole issue..he caused it. The guard did nothing wrong. He needs to admit he was wrong and lost his mind and deal with it..then move on. The whole issue has become as big as it is because he has not come forward like a real man and accepted that he screwed up. Admit your faults and accept your punishment...learn and move on with your life. But no, he has to keep turning around to make it be about the guard. And for the person who asked how many degrees the guard has????? That has absolutely NOTHING to do with this issue. And if you really think the CO could get a job on Wall Street, then maybe you know somebody who could pull some strings and get him a job!!!!!

[Unregistered]

I hope the new CO just simply pencil whips all these sniveling whiners. No yelling. no ass chewing...just a career ending mast....Make them wish all they had gotten was an ass chewing in public.

BTW...That BS about reprimand in private is bogus. It's not a hard and fast rule. There are times where an example needs to be presented...

He cannot send him to mast for that..I don't know how that man can sleep at night..with this on his concience. And he is not a "new" CO, he's been here and he's on his way out the door.....

[Unregistered]

Does anyone else think that Captain Fierro posted at least one of these ‘unregistered’ posts?

Probably. It still isn't going to save his career. No officer worth the name has any business treating subordinates the way Fierro did. Fierro needs to be retired, probably as a CDR. At worst he should be subject to UCMJ action. BEAT IT, MIKE!!!

[Unregistered]

I say hold the Security Officer responsible for this! Rumor has it he isn't worth a XXXX.

[Unregistered]

I say hold the Security Officer responsible for this! Rumor has it he isn't worth a XXXX.

Back up your accusations...cause from what I've heard he is definitely not the one to be looking at for this!!!

[Unregistered]

I know for a fact that the CIVILIAN security officer, a known @ss kisser, is horrible. The gates are monitored at all times by surveilance equipment. The footage from those two days had disappeared, under the SECO's order, within 24 hours of the grievance being filed. If you don't wanna believe it, that's fine. Wait until the official report comes out.

[Unregistered]

I know for a fact that the CIVILIAN security officer, a known @ss kisser, is horrible. The gates are monitored at all times by surveilance equipment. The footage from those two days had disappeared, under the SECO's order, within 24 hours of the grievance being filed. If you don't wanna believe it, that's fine. Wait until the official report comes out.

Well that's quite interesting...and opens a whole new can of worms, wouldn't you agree?

[Unregistered]

who is the one to be looking at hot shot? nobody likes a tease! And I hope the SECO did order the tapes to be erased, then people will really understand how deceptive that place is.....


Back up your accusations...cause from what I've heard he is definitely not the one to be looking at for this!!!

[Unregistered]

who is the one to be looking at hot shot? nobody likes a tease! And I hope the SECO did order the tapes to be erased, then people will really understand how deceptive that place is.....

I never said who was to be looked at but we know the good Captain is the problem. If the SECO did order the tapes to be erased, then he was directed to by the Captain..the whole gov't is crooked and corrupt.

[Unregistered]

this is one quote I can not argue with!!


I never said who was to be looked at but we know the good Captain is the problem. If the SECO did order the tapes to be erased, then he was directed to by the Captain..the whole gov't is crooked and corrupt.

[Unregistered]

Probably. It still isn't going to save his career. No officer worth the name has any business treating subordinates the way Fierro did. Fierro needs to be retired, probably as a CDR. At worst he should be subject to UCMJ action. BEAT IT, MIKE!!!

Actually, I think most of the posts have come from the guard and his supporters, they are way too personal to be from outside the base.....Yeah, get rid of the Captain, so that everyone can go back to doing things their way...no one should be told how to do their job...leave everyone alone and we will all get along.....pretty pitiable, but then everyone will be happy and life will go on....

[Unregistered]

Actually, I think most of the posts have come from the guard and his supporters, they are way too personal to be from outside the base.....Yeah, get rid of the Captain, so that everyone can go back to doing things their way...no one should be told how to do their job...leave everyone alone and we will all get along.....pretty pitiable, but then everyone will be happy and life will go on....

This is too much for a sane person to stomach! The fact is this guy screwed up really bad. It wasn't the guard either. The FACT is the Captain needs help. If he can not control his behavior and act like an adult much less the officer that he is supposed to be then perhaps he needs to rethink the job he has and consider a new line of business. There's nothing difficult about that assessment. The FACT is that no self respecting individual - WHOEVER they may be - would ever deal with a situation the way the Captain has chosen to do so. NO ONE - military or otherwise - would EVER deal with a situation in the manner in which he chose. BECAUSE they would already know that to deal with a situation in such a manner would be detrimental to all parties concerned. There is NO BENEFIT to this kind of behaviour EVER. AGAIN - as stated before - this guard OBVIOUSLY was placing NO ONE in imminent danger. THEREFORE, the situation definately could have been dealt with in a more adult and professional manner. Most certainly his choice was not correct and has caused more problems than it solved. All the name calling in the world is not going to correct the damage that has been done. The FACTS are the facts.

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

BTW...That BS about reprimand in private is bogus. It's not a hard and fast rule. There are times where an example needs to be presented...Quite right, and would you like to tell everyone when "an example needs to be presented"?

How about if I make it slightlyeasier for you and exempt "training situations" where almost everyone expects that "an example" will be made?

OK. here goes.

1. In which of the following situations would it normally be appropriate for "an example" to be made:

a. The action presents a grave risk to the life of the actor or others
b. The action presents a serious risk to the life of the actors or others
c. The action presents a risk to the life of the actor or others
d. The action presents no risk to the life of the actor or others
e. The action presents a grave risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
f. The action presents a serious risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
g. The action presents a risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
h. The action presents no risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
i. The action is part of a long-standing behaviour set that is prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
j. The action is part of a recently developed behaviour set that is prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
k. The action is an isolated incident that is prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
l. The action is not prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
m. The action is personally repugnant to the person making an example, but generally acceptable to everyone else
n. The action is personally repugnant to a minority of the command, but generally acceptable to everyone else.
o. The action is personally repugnant to a majority of the command, but acceptable to a significant minority
p. The action is personally repugnant to the vast majority of the command, but legal
q. The action is personally repugnant to the vast majority of the command, and illegal
r. The action is actually completely in accordance with training and doctrine but the person making an example doesn't know that
s. The action is actually in accordance with training and doctrine, but the person making an example doesn't agree with that training/doctrine

and

2. To achieve maximum effectiveness, when "making an example" the person making it should appear

a. Completely out of control
b. Barely in control
c. In control and acting with icy, dispassionate, calmness
d. In control and acting with deliberation but conviction
e. Nervous and tentative
f. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but not caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of
g. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but also caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of
h. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but also caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of because they want that person to be the best service member that that person can be
i. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but also caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of because they want that person to be the best service member that that person can be because some of the responsibility for the action belongs to them as well

I don't know how you feel about it, but my "management theory" was always "The General is responsible for the actions of the Privates." because it is the job of the Corporals to ensure that the Privates didn't misbehave, and it was the job of the Sergeants to ensure that the Corporals didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Warrant Officers and Subalterns to ensure that the Sergeants didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Captains to ensure that the Warrant Officers and Subalterns didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Majors to ensure that the Captains didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Colonels (both types) to ensure that the Majors didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Generals (all types) to ensure that the Colonels didn't misbehave, and were doing their job.

In other words, whenever anyone, at any level, misbehaves, someone up the line hasn't done their job - so they bear some responsibility for that misbehaviour.

(BTW, "ensure that the __[fill in the blank]__ were doing their job" doesn't mean that the person who was supposed to be doing the ensuring does it for them. The last thing that you want to see is some O-5 doing an E-2s job. [In this case, the Captain should probably have called the Officer of the Day, who would then have called the Officer commanding the Guard, who would then have called the Sergeant of the Guard - by which time the Guard would probably have been crapping themselves to the point where not much more needed to be done to prevent any reoccurance of the incident. [I mean, how would you feel if you were an E-2 just standing there while (FOR EXAMPLE) an O-5, O-3, O-1, WO-2, E7, E-5, and E-3 slowly assembled around you waiting to see how the E-3 described your actions and what "corrective behaviour" they prescribed?])

(Ensign, are you taking notes?)

[Unregistered]

what? this is confusing to i'm sure everyone except you. So you think it is okay to go completely off the rocker when nothing was done wrong? Oh because you make more money then the person you are yelling at? This is the problem with the military... officers think enlisted are trash... plain and simple...

Quite right, and would you like to tell everyone when "an example needs to be presented"?

How about if I make it slightlyeasier for you and exempt "training situations" where almost everyone expects that "an example" will be made?

OK. here goes.

1. In which of the following situations would it normally be appropriate for "an example" to be made:

a. The action presents a grave risk to the life of the actor or others
b. The action presents a serious risk to the life of the actors or others
c. The action presents a risk to the life of the actor or others
d. The action presents no risk to the life of the actor or others
e. The action presents a grave risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
f. The action presents a serious risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
g. The action presents a risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
h. The action presents no risk of bodily harm to the actor or others
i. The action is part of a long-standing behaviour set that is prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
j. The action is part of a recently developed behaviour set that is prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
k. The action is an isolated incident that is prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
l. The action is not prejudicial to discipline and/or effectiveness
m. The action is personally repugnant to the person making an example, but generally acceptable to everyone else
n. The action is personally repugnant to a minority of the command, but generally acceptable to everyone else.
o. The action is personally repugnant to a majority of the command, but acceptable to a significant minority
p. The action is personally repugnant to the vast majority of the command, but legal
q. The action is personally repugnant to the vast majority of the command, and illegal
r. The action is actually completely in accordance with training and doctrine but the person making an example doesn't know that
s. The action is actually in accordance with training and doctrine, but the person making an example doesn't agree with that training/doctrine

and

2. To achieve maximum effectiveness, when "making an example" the person making it should appear

a. Completely out of control
b. Barely in control
c. In control and acting with icy, dispassionate, calmness
d. In control and acting with deliberation but conviction
e. Nervous and tentative
f. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but not caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of
g. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but also caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of
h. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but also caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of because they want that person to be the best service member that that person can be
i. Personally embarassed that they have been placed in a situation where one of their personnel has forced them to have to "make an example" but also caring about the long-term consequences to the person they are making an example of because they want that person to be the best service member that that person can be because some of the responsibility for the action belongs to them as well

I don't know how you feel about it, but my "management theory" was always "The General is responsible for the actions of the Privates." because it is the job of the Corporals to ensure that the Privates didn't misbehave, and it was the job of the Sergeants to ensure that the Corporals didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Warrant Officers and Subalterns to ensure that the Sergeants didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Captains to ensure that the Warrant Officers and Subalterns didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Majors to ensure that the Captains didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Colonels (both types) to ensure that the Majors didn't misbehave, and were doing their job, and it was the job of the Generals (all types) to ensure that the Colonels didn't misbehave, and were doing their job.

In other words, whenever anyone, at any level, misbehaves, someone up the line hasn't done their job - so they bear some responsibility for that misbehaviour.

(BTW, "ensure that the __[fill in the blank]__ were doing their job" doesn't mean that the person who was supposed to be doing the ensuring does it for them. The last thing that you want to see is some O-5 doing an E-2s job. [In this case, the Captain should probably have called the Officer of the Day, who would then have called the Officer commanding the Guard, who would then have called the Sergeant of the Guard - by which time the Guard would probably have been crapping themselves to the point where not much more needed to be done to prevent any reoccurance of the incident. [I mean, how would you feel if you were an E-2 just standing there while (FOR EXAMPLE) an O-5, O-3, O-1, WO-2, E7, E-5, and E-3 slowly assembled around you waiting to see how the E-3 described your actions and what "corrective behaviour" they prescribed?])

(Ensign, are you taking notes?)

[Unregistered]

what? this is confusing to i'm sure everyone except you. So you think it is okay to go completely off the rocker when nothing was done wrong? Oh because you make more money then the person you are yelling at? This is the problem with the military... officers think enlisted are trash... plain and simple...

Actually this particular officer seems to have little to no distinction between anyone. He yells at everyone. Which makes what he did to the guard not unusual behavior for him. But for any captain or anyone at all really it was very POOR JUDGEMENT and very POOR BEHAVIOR. When the officers are supposed to set the example his is one that should never be the example! The captain is supposed to be the leader. Where's the leadership in that? Yelling loudly does not make anyone a leader. It just makes them a loud mouth. And really, in the end, who really listens to a loud mouth. We're all too busy plugging our ears to block the noise!

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

what? this is confusing to i'm sure everyone except you.I'm sorry that I subjected you to information overload.

So you think it is okay to go completely off the rocker when nothing was done wrong?A conclusion that any sane and logical person would make if they completely ignored 100% of what I said and pretended that I said something different.

Oh because you make more money then the person you are yelling at?Did the examples confuse you that much? Sorry.

This is the problem with the military... officers think enlisted are trash... plain and simple...And, somehow, you think that this is something new in the military?

BAD officers think enlisted ranks are trash.

BAD officers abuse their subordinates.

BAD officers create more harm to the military than the worst enlisted person.

BAD officer think that they have to kowtow to the enlisted ranks and be their "buddy".

BAD officers are not willing to discipline their subordinates.

BAD officers discipline their subordinates inappropriately.

On the other hand a BAD enlisted person (amongst other things) condemns all officers without actually knowing what an officer does and how they are supposed to be doing it.

BTW, the answers to each situation set out in Question 1 is either "Yes." or "No.". I'm sorry but I really can't reduce the options any more than that.

Heck, I'll even give you a hint on Question 2 - the key word in the question is the word "maximum" so start with Option a. and compare it to Option b. asking yourself "Which would work better?" then take the one that would work the best and compare it to Option c. asking yourself "Which would work better?" then take that one and .... [repeats] .... compare it to Option i. asking yourself "Which would work better?". Once you have answered that final two object comparison you have the actual answer to Question 2.

[Unregistered]

so what is your explination of what the difference between abuse and discipline is? Because you sound like you are confused with all this "smart talk".


I'm sorry that I subjected you to information overload.
A conclusion that any sane and logical person would make if they completely ignored 100% of what I said and pretended that I said something different.
Did the examples confuse you that much? Sorry.
And, somehow, you think that this is something new in the military?

BAD officers think enlisted ranks are trash.

BAD officers abuse their subordinates.

BAD officers create more harm to the military than the worst enlisted person.

BAD officer think that they have to kowtow to the enlisted ranks and be their "buddy".

BAD officers are not willing to discipline their subordinates.

BAD officers discipline their subordinates inappropriately.

On the other hand a BAD enlisted person (amongst other things) condemns all officers without actually knowing what an officer does and how they are supposed to be doing it.

BTW, the answers to each situation set out in Question 1 is either "Yes." or "No.". I'm sorry but I really can't reduce the options any more than that.

Heck, I'll even give you a hint on Question 2 - the key word in the question is the word "maximum" so start with Option a. and compare it to Option b. asking yourself "Which would work better?" then take the one that would work the best and compare it to Option c. asking yourself "Which would work better?" then take that one and .... [repeats] .... compare it to Option i. asking yourself "Which would work better?". Once you have answered that final two object comparison you have the actual answer to Question 2.

[Unregistered]

so what is your explination of what the difference between abuse and discipline is? Because you sound like you are confused with all this "smart talk".

No confusion. Bad is BAD it doesn't matter on what side of the uniform you're standing. A bad method which gives a favorable result is still not a good method. Bad is bad. There's nothing confusing about that. If you shot a gnat with a cannon and in the process took out an entire house would the loss be acceptable because you got the gnat? It is possible your answer to that would also indicate your management style as well. The loss of the house being acceptable would equate to the public berating of perhaps personal under your command. Maybe that's the quick and dirty way to perform a job you really don't want to take the time to do properly. Bad is BAD. You can't get around that.

[Unregistered]

No confusion. Bad is BAD it doesn't matter on what side of the uniform you're standing. A bad method which gives a favorable result is still not a good method. Bad is bad. There's nothing confusing about that. If you shot a gnat with a cannon and in the process took out an entire house would the loss be acceptable because you got the gnat? It is possible your answer to that would also indicate your management style as well. The loss of the house being acceptable would equate to the public berating of perhaps personal under your command. Maybe that's the quick and dirty way to perform a job you really don't want to take the time to do properly. Bad is BAD. You can't get around that.

Yeah, Yeah we know bad is bad and the Captain sure was BAD!!!!!!!!!!

[Unregistered]

There is only two ways this will turn out... 1) He will quickly retire and go away. Or 2) He will be promoted to Admiral because most other officers seems to support another of their own that $h!ts on an enlisted person or a civilian. I am betting on the second choice!

Having spent 40 yrs associated with the Navy / Marine Corps I somewhat understand the "enlisted" thing but why the civilians draw such hatred from officers is beyond me. From my perspective, civilians are the stability of every military base because the enlisted/officers come and go on a frequent basis. The civilians are the caretakers of the facilities with all of the long term institutional knowledge on how to grease the gears that make the base turn. I will say I see this anti-civilian attitude much more in the Navy circles than I did in 23 yrs in the USMC world. Go figure, Marines are a more orderly and respectful group than are most Sailors.

[Unregistered]

blah blah blah....wait until the official findings are made public...we are all innocent until proven guilty!

[Unregistered]

We should all focus more attention on the war and what we can do to directly impact and help our brothers and sisters in arms who are ducking bullets every day versus ugly diatribes.

I am an '83 graduate, and knew the now Captain in passing back then. Suffice it to say that some things never change, and the CO has some long standing impulse control issues, to be diplomatic about it.

That being said, I am most reminded of the "The Caine Mutiny" and the ending soliliquy. In essense, it is easy to judge people, especially military personnel, from the relative sanity and safety of a distant arm chair, and forget their overall service and acomplishments.

Lets sum this up. In the grand scheme of things, a career naval officer who has dedicated his life to the service, had a momentary brain cramp, and went overboard correcting a sailor who committed a minor offense, real or perceived. Regardless of who did what to who, a butt chewing, deserved or not, occurred in the US military. I am shocked (he said with dripping sarcasm).

In my day, such an infraction would hardly merit pause, nevermind an investigation and all this hoop-lah. Everyone needs to grow thicker skins and move on with their lives. The CO will continue to do his job as best he can, and make some mistakes along the way. In this case, a sailor got his ego bruised, and a mildly interesting story to tell. Trust me when I say that the CO has certainly suffered through more than a few whithering instructional periods in his career. We all have, and are none the worse for wear.

It's an imperfect world and there are much bigger fish to fry and issues to be addressed. My hope and expectation is that the Admiral who will ultimately handle this will give it all the attention it deserves and tell everyone involved to get a grip, dismiss it, and move on as quickly as possible.

[Unregistered]

We should all focus more attention on the war and what we can do to directly impact and help our brothers and sisters in arms who are ducking bullets every day versus ugly diatribes.

I am an '83 graduate, and knew the now Captain in passing back then. Suffice it to say that some things never change, and the CO has some long standing impulse control issues, to be diplomatic about it.

That being said, I am most reminded of the "The Caine Mutiny" and the ending soliliquy. In essense, it is easy to judge people, especially military personnel, from the relative sanity and safety of a distant arm chair, and forget their overall service and acomplishments.

Lets sum this up. In the grand scheme of things, a career naval officer who has dedicated his life to the service, had a momentary brain cramp, and went overboard correcting a sailor who committed a minor offense, real or perceived. Regardless of who did what to who, a butt chewing, deserved or not, occurred in the US military. I am shocked (he said with dripping sarcasm).

In my day, such an infraction would hardly merit pause, nevermind an investigation and all this hoop-lah. Everyone needs to grow thicker skins and move on with their lives. The CO will continue to do his job as best he can, and make some mistakes along the way. In this case, a sailor got his ego bruised, and a mildly interesting story to tell. Trust me when I say that the CO has certainly suffered through more than a few whithering instructional periods in his career. We all have, and are none the worse for wear.

It's an imperfect world and there are much bigger fish to fry and issues to be addressed. My hope and expectation is that the Admiral who will ultimately handle this will give it all the attention it deserves and tell everyone involved to get a grip, dismiss it, and move on as quickly as possible.

It's quite apparent you didn't know this person half as well as you think you did.

[Unregistered]

I stated I only knew him in passing, and was also giving a nod to some of the remarks from people under his command on Kincaid and the base. It is a given that he can be unpleasant at times. Not sure where you fall in the continuum of endless opinions on the Captain's management style, but the point of my post was that it doesn't matter. I personally do not believe his actions were prudent, but I'm behind the CO from the perspective that he should be allowed to do his job as he sees fit, and that he has earned that right. I'm most offended that such a trivial event in the grand scheme of things has merited more than 10 pages of posts when it is barely worthy of a footnote. If I wasn't clear in my previous post of where I lined up on this issue, I hope this post clarifies things.

[Unregistered]

I stated I only knew him in passing, and was also giving a nod to some of the remarks from people under his command on Kincaid and the base. It is a given that he can be unpleasant at times. Not sure where you fall in the continuum of endless opinions on the Captain's management style, but the point of my post was that it doesn't matter. I personally do not believe his actions were prudent, but I'm behind the CO from the perspective that he should be allowed to do his job as he sees fit, and that he has earned that right. I'm most offended that such a trivial event in the grand scheme of things has merited more than 10 pages of posts when it is barely worthy of a footnote. If I wasn't clear in my previous post of where I lined up on this issue, I hope this post clarifies things.

I can understand where you are coming from. People at the Academy are quite aware of his ways and there have been numerous outbursts such as this one. The difference is that this one was witnessed by someone outside of our agency and reported. If it was serious enough for them to report, you have to think about his actions and wonder how he got this far in his career. Its a shame he cannot control his emotions...it's obvious this will put a mark on his career. I actually kind of feel bad for him.

[Unregistered]

In the spirit of the upcoming Turkey Day... Put a fork in him, he's done! Well, maybe not being that he is a graduate of the almighty USNA and they tend to protect their own. But anywhere else, he'd be done!

[Unregistered]

In the spirit of the upcoming Turkey Day... Put a fork in him, he's done! Well, maybe not being that he is a graduate of the almighty USNA and they tend to protect their own. But anywhere else, he'd be done!

If the USNA protects their own then what happened to the Rear Admiral who blew up at a sentry? I agree that if the offense is not as public as these two cases they tend to try to protect their own. But in a lot of cases when the offense made the news as these did they were dealt with far more harshly. The other problem that was not in the Rear Admiral's favor and is not in this Captain's either is their notorious attitude and anger problem. It didn't make either one of them very popular or well liked. Therefore, in light of that, it does not bode well in this case.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;60298]guards have standards and standing orders and these were not being obeyed
they were not doing their job and the Captain was seeing to it that they knew they were not doing their job
As for the Marine who pepper sprayed the super at the Academy because he did not recognoze him out of uniform and should have, he saw him enough times. Something is very wrong in the way the people in command and in charge are treated.

The Marine should have been charged not the super[/QUOTE


If the guard was doing the job he was trained to do then the marine's were correct in thier actions. Everyone has to follow the same rules, 100% id check is 100% id check, not 99 or 98%. I have a good freind who is an SP, and when I come to the gate if it is 100% id check, then he checks me ID and I hang out with him all the time.
As for this Captain, he created this situation when he sent his guard on limo service duty. Dumb call by the Captain, not the sailors. Now if the sailor did not follow his protocol for his job then the Captain should have straighted him out. Maybe he should have used a different tactic, but some leaders choose to use fear to lead. This is common among weak leaders. This is also a common tactic used in the training environment to scare the H#$# out of you so you don't forget next time. Remember basic training? Your tech school? Shoot, some of my early days as an airman.

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

so what is your explination of what the difference between abuse and discipline is? Because you sound like you are confused with all this "smart talk".This coming from a person who isn't able to answer a series of simply "Yes/No" questions?

Go back and answer the questions first.

Once you have answered them then the answer to this latest question should be apparent - but I will give you a hint. }} Proportionality {{

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

blah blah blah....wait until the official findings are made public...we are all innocent until proven guilty!Nope. But you have the right to be CONSIDERED innocent.

Whether or not you are convicted has absolutely no bearing on whether or not you did the deed.

However, whether or not you did the deed should have some bearing on whether or not you are convicted. (It doesn't always, but it is supposed to.)

[Unregistered]

What say everyone call a time-out for Thanksgiving week. As the article said, the incident and probably everthing else this officer has done is presently under investigation.

Many good points being made in this discussion thread, but not really coming across clearly due to pour riting scills and badd gramer!

[Unregistered]

I stated I only knew him in passing, and was also giving a nod to some of the remarks from people under his command on Kincaid and the base. It is a given that he can be unpleasant at times. Not sure where you fall in the continuum of endless opinions on the Captain's management style, but the point of my post was that it doesn't matter. I personally do not believe his actions were prudent, but I'm behind the CO from the perspective that he should be allowed to do his job as he sees fit, and that he has earned that right. I'm most offended that such a trivial event in the grand scheme of things has merited more than 10 pages of posts when it is barely worthy of a footnote. If I wasn't clear in my previous post of where I lined up on this issue, I hope this post clarifies things.


I agree, we need to move on. The guard couldn't walk a step in the Captain's shoes and GOD help our military if we send out the message that every enlisted man can file a complaint against their CO's whenever they are disciplined. The posts will never end. Below is the definition of Command, FYI

com·mand (kə-mănd')

v., -mand·ed, -mand·ing, -mands.

v.tr.
To direct with authority; give orders to.
To have control or authority over; rule: To have at one's disposal:

To exercise dominating, authoritative influence over:
To dominate by physical position;
v.intr. To give orders.
To exercise authority or control as or as if one is a commander.
n. The act of commanding. An order given with authority.
The authority to command: an admiral in command.
Possession and exercise of the authority to command: The jurisdiction of a commander. A military unit, post, district, or region under the control of one officer.

Hope this helps one understand what it is to command.

Next is insubordination:

insubordination
Insubordination is the act of a subordinate deliberately disobeying a lawful order. Conversely, the property of being properly obedient to a superior is called subordination.

Insubordination is typically a punishable offense in hierarchical organizations which depend on people lower in the chain of command to do as they are told.

Military
The concept of insubordination is most often associated with military organizations, as military organizations have a chain of command and lawful orders given by a commissioned officer (CO) or noncommissioned officer (NCO) are expected to be carried out by the person to whom the order is given.

Questions anyone ????

[Unregistered]

I agree, we need to move on. The guard couldn't walk a step in the Captain's shoes and GOD help our military if we send out the message that every enlisted man can file a complaint against their CO's whenever they are disciplined. The posts will never end. Below is the definition of Command, FYI

com·mand (kə-mănd')

v., -mand·ed, -mand·ing, -mands.

v.tr.
To direct with authority; give orders to.
To have control or authority over; rule: To have at one's disposal:

To exercise dominating, authoritative influence over:
To dominate by physical position;
v.intr. To give orders.
To exercise authority or control as or as if one is a commander.
n. The act of commanding. An order given with authority.
The authority to command: an admiral in command.
Possession and exercise of the authority to command: The jurisdiction of a commander. A military unit, post, district, or region under the control of one officer.

Hope this helps one understand what it is to command.

Next is insubordination:

insubordination
Insubordination is the act of a subordinate deliberately disobeying a lawful order. Conversely, the property of being properly obedient to a superior is called subordination.

Insubordination is typically a punishable offense in hierarchical organizations which depend on people lower in the chain of command to do as they are told.

Military
The concept of insubordination is most often associated with military organizations, as military organizations have a chain of command and lawful orders given by a commissioned officer (CO) or noncommissioned officer (NCO) are expected to be carried out by the person to whom the order is given.

Questions anyone ????

You really don't get it..he was NOT disciplined, he was screamed at and cussed out by a crazy man. Everybody around here knows how he is. And with all your "Insubordination" and "obedient" talk, it sounds like you have a really big issue with wanting to be in charge of everyone and think you are better than everyone..maybe not, but it sure seems like it from your "detailed" post on that baloney.

Crazy is Crazy..that's the whole moral of this story. Doesn't matter if you are a Captain, CO, Petty Officer, civilian, etc.

[Unregistered]

I agree, we need to move on. The guard couldn't walk a step in the Captain's shoes and GOD help our military if we send out the message that every enlisted man can file a complaint against their CO's whenever they are disciplined. The posts will never end. Below is the definition of Command, FYI

com·mand (kə-mănd')

v., -mand·ed, -mand·ing, -mands.

v.tr.
To direct with authority; give orders to.
To have control or authority over; rule: To have at one's disposal:

To exercise dominating, authoritative influence over:
To dominate by physical position;
v.intr. To give orders.
To exercise authority or control as or as if one is a commander.
n. The act of commanding. An order given with authority.
The authority to command: an admiral in command.
Possession and exercise of the authority to command: The jurisdiction of a commander. A military unit, post, district, or region under the control of one officer.

Hope this helps one understand what it is to command.

Next is insubordination:

insubordination
Insubordination is the act of a subordinate deliberately disobeying a lawful order. Conversely, the property of being properly obedient to a superior is called subordination.

Insubordination is typically a punishable offense in hierarchical organizations which depend on people lower in the chain of command to do as they are told.

Military
The concept of insubordination is most often associated with military organizations, as military organizations have a chain of command and lawful orders given by a commissioned officer (CO) or noncommissioned officer (NCO) are expected to be carried out by the person to whom the order is given.

Questions anyone ????

What kind of image were the senrties exposing when visitors came through the gate…that they were on the same level as a TSA agent. I saw the damage at Bhopal towers, have brought back bodies in peacetime when the sentry did not do their job properly. Keep an eye on the charges filed against the "Fort Dix Six", when an alert sentry possibly stopped a tragedy at that base.

The Captain's job is to command, not babysit. If a sentry charged with the ultimate protection of those inside decides to play basic training recruit…it is the Commander's job to correct it. Give me a break " berated " them. The terrorists will "behead" us mercilessly when able. Tell those insubordinates to join the boy scouts or do their job properly.

[Unregistered]

What kind of image were the senrties exposing when visitors came through the gate…that they were on the same level as a TSA agent. I saw the damage at Bhopal towers, have brought back bodies in peacetime when the sentry did not do their job properly. Keep an eye on the charges filed against the "Fort Dix Six", when an alert sentry possibly stopped a tragedy at that base.

The Captain's job is to command, not babysit. If a sentry charged with the ultimate protection of those inside decides to play basic training recruit…it is the Commander's job to correct it. Give me a break " berated " them. The terrorists will "behead" us mercilessly when able. Tell those insubordinates to join the boy scouts or do their job properly.

Are you living under a rock?? The Captain acted nutier than a fruitcake and corrected noone. The very thing he was complaining about, he caused!!! It was not a big deal, what a big deal is how he made a complete a## of himself - because now everyone in the whole USA knows about him and his tirades!! I heard about this from someone out of the country.

[Unregistered]

Let's not lose sight of where we are speaking about. This is the US Naval Academy with over 7 miles of unsecured and unprotected shore line. A place where none of the emergency services; police or fire, have assigned or access to a boat for routine or emergency conditions. A place where water patrols are unheard of. A place where the entire Naval Station is without a Sentry. A place where there are a huge number of holes or uncontrolled access points in the fence line. A place where many of the building are not even inside of a fence line. A place where the "show" is much more important than the true condition.

The Sentries are posted for symbolic purposes only. They are rarely given any authority to do more than wave almost everyone through. They are often subjected to ridicule from "Superiors" for challenging "clusters, birds and stars" when they demand entry without base stickers or without properly displaying the required ID. And lord forbid, don't impede an officer's spouse! That will surely get you a trip to the brig (wait, we don't have one of those... Hmmmm, you will get house arrest, and be on your honor to remain in some plush BEQ room)

If this Capt was serious about the security posture of his command he would have taken steps to beef it up a year and half ago when he blew into town instead of tearing it down. I remember the speech, 'we are going to do the mission more efficiently with less personnel and equipment. We are going to save the Navy millions of dollars while not reducing the quality of services we provide." Then it was cut, cut, cut. Work harder with less. So how do you do a manpower intensive mission with less personnel and equipment while still maintaining high levels of security and readiness? You can't! But the Capt will look good when he has a few dead "bullet catchers" on the ground and he stands before the cameras after the fact to proclaim "We did our best to repel the aggressors..."

Give me a freakin' break. If you want the emergency services to be capable and successful then give them the people and tools to do the job. Any thing short is nothing more than cake icing - looks good but hides a burnt and ruined cake.

[Unregistered]

I heard about this from someone out of the country.

Like this poster I too heard about this from someone out of state... And I work on the Yard. Sad but true, almost everything here that paints an ugly picture is factual.

[TJMAC77SP]

Two Points…..

1. I love the “I agree, we need to move on. The guard couldn't walk a step in the Captain's shoes and GOD help our military………” That is called trying to get the last word in through the back door. If you agree that the matter (thread) should be put to rest then just say so, or better yet, say nothing. If on the other hand you disagree then say “ I don’t agree, the guard couldn't walk a step in the Captain's shoes and GOD help our military………” Do you know my ex-wife by any chance?

2. I STILL think Captain Fierro is posting here.

[Unregistered]

Two Points…..

1. I love the “I agree, we need to move on. The guard couldn't walk a step in the Captain's shoes and GOD help our military………” That is called trying to get the last word in through the back door. If you agree that the matter (thread) should be put to rest then just say so, or better yet, say nothing. If on the other hand you disagree then say “ I don’t agree, the guard couldn't walk a step in the Captain's shoes and GOD help our military………” Do you know my ex-wife by any chance?

2. I STILL think Captain Fierro is posting here.

NOPE......you can't even get THAT straight....pretty sexist statement if you ask me....remember, those standards have changed too...pretty soon we will have to ask permission to see if it is a good time to talk to the guard about having to do his DUTY correctly. Pussification of the NAVY goes ON....FYI, I am on the other side of the planet from the Captain....I just support the whole idea that soldiers should do the duties assigned to them and take their lumps when they don't....so if YOU DISAGREE, then YOU should say NOTHING....

[Unregistered]

Let's not lose sight of where we are speaking about. This is the US Naval Academy with over 7 miles of unsecured and unprotected shore line. A place where none of the emergency services; police or fire, have assigned or access to a boat for routine or emergency conditions. A place where water patrols are unheard of. A place where the entire Naval Station is without a Sentry. A place where there are a huge number of holes or uncontrolled access points in the fence line. A place where many of the building are not even inside of a fence line. A place where the "show" is much more important than the true condition.

The Sentries are posted for symbolic purposes only. They are rarely given any authority to do more than wave almost everyone through. They are often subjected to ridicule from "Superiors" for challenging "clusters, birds and stars" when they demand entry without base stickers or without properly displaying the required ID. And lord forbid, don't impede an officer's spouse! That will surely get you a trip to the brig (wait, we don't have one of those... Hmmmm, you will get house arrest, and be on your honor to remain in some plush BEQ room)

If this Capt was serious about the security posture of his command he would have taken steps to beef it up a year and half ago when he blew into town instead of tearing it down. I remember the speech, 'we are going to do the mission more efficiently with less personnel and equipment. We are going to save the Navy millions of dollars while not reducing the quality of services we provide." Then it was cut, cut, cut. Work harder with less. So how do you do a manpower intensive mission with less personnel and equipment while still maintaining high levels of security and readiness? You can't! But the Capt will look good when he has a few dead "bullet catchers" on the ground and he stands before the cameras after the fact to proclaim "We did our best to repel the aggressors..."

Give me a freakin' break. If you want the emergency services to be capable and successful then give them the people and tools to do the job. Any thing short is nothing more than cake icing - looks good but hides a burnt and ruined cake.


That's Great...any other information we can give to the terrorists on US Naval Academy....

[Unregistered]

NOPE......you can't even get THAT straight....pretty sexist statement if you ask me....remember, those standards have changed too...pretty soon we will have to ask permission to see if it is a good time to talk to the guard about having to do his DUTY correctly. Pussification of the NAVY goes ON....FYI, I am on the other side of the planet from the Captain....I just support the whole idea that soldiers should do the duties assigned to them and take their lumps when they don't....so if YOU DISAGREE, then YOU should say NOTHING....

The Captain will surely be taking his lumps soon.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=2. I STILL think Captain Fierro is posting here.....[/QUOTE]

No doubt he's been on here!

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

That's Great...any other information we can give to the terrorists on US Naval Academy....Do you mean any other information other than that which they could have obtained by a five minute (maximum) search on the Internet?

[Unregistered]

The Captain will surely be taking his lumps soon.

And what about the Sentry ????? Maybe we could give him a medal, for surviving a well derserved ass chewing, for being on the JOHN and leaving the his post at the gate to an unarmed sentry.....I'm sure we can make some sort of medal up for this poor unfortunate soul....wouldn't want his feelings to get hurt...pathetic....

[Unregistered]

And what about the Sentry ????? Maybe we could give him a medal, for surviving a well derserved ass chewing, for being on the JOHN and leaving the his post at the gate to an unarmed sentry.....I'm sure we can make some sort of medal up for this poor unfortunate soul....wouldn't want his feelings to get hurt...pathetic....

What the heck is wrong with him using the restroom? Every other sentry on every other gate or post can use the bathroom, why single him out since he did???? Duh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The freakin Naval Academy is not Iraq..get over it!!!

[Unregistered]

That's Great...any other information we can give to the terrorists on US Naval Academy....

Nah, that pretty much summed it up! Do you think they will fix these problems now? Same answer, NAH!

[Unregistered]

Do you mean any other information other than that which they could have obtained by a five minute (maximum) search on the Internet?

Or a three minute recon trip around the place! Hell, stand on the top of the Bridge and you can pretty much see it all through biniculars. If you miss anything take a scenic river boat trip around the joint to fill in any of holes in your notes.

Come on! This isn't national secrets we are talking about when it is all out in the open and observable from a public right of way. All of it is elementary for even the dumbest criminal.

[Unregistered]

blah blah blah....wait until the official findings are made public...we are all innocent until proven guilty!

No, In today's PC Navy, You are Guilty until you can prove yourself innocent...And you can't do that because all the self-righteous posts here have already convicted the man, regardless of whether they know the facts or not. Once you are accused of anything, even if you do prove yourself to be in the right, you are finished in the Navy. Just be happy that it is not YOU being put on trial in this Kangaroo Court...it can happen to you in a heartbeat, with just a slip of the tongue or misstep in the emasculated world we call the Navy these days. Agreed there are better ways to handle any situation, but should we hang a guy for hurting someone's feelings? YGBSM. Of course, just like what happened to Don Imus, the PC crowd won't stop until they get their pound of flesh. To all those crying for his head: STFB... What goes around, comes around...you'll feel the sting of being condemned because you didn't do it the way "everyone else" would. Then see how you like it.

[Unregistered]

I remember him well when he took over N3 Ops for CARGRU-7 about 6 years ago.... I distinctly remember a long list of public tirades he gave back then.... Its amazing how he has dodged scrutiny all these years until now.

This public embarrassment was a long time coming. What a shame........

[Ken]

There is a tme and place for everything. THe problem is there is a certain breed o of leader out there who thinks that leadership means beating down, cursing out and public demeaning their subordinates. In their sick mentality is perfectly ok. When their behavior (not leadership) is challenged the usually go off the deep end. Until the Navy decides to make that behavior wholly inacceptable our rranks will be infested with people such as that

[Unregistered]

No, In today's PC Navy, You are Guilty until you can prove yourself innocent...And you can't do that because all the self-righteous posts here have already convicted the man, regardless of whether they know the facts or not. Once you are accused of anything, even if you do prove yourself to be in the right, you are finished in the Navy. Just be happy that it is not YOU being put on trial in this Kangaroo Court...it can happen to you in a heartbeat, with just a slip of the tongue or misstep in the emasculated world we call the Navy these days. Agreed there are better ways to handle any situation, but should we hang a guy for hurting someone's feelings? YGBSM. Of course, just like what happened to Don Imus, the PC crowd won't stop until they get their pound of flesh. To all those crying for his head: STFB... What goes around, comes around...you'll feel the sting of being condemned because you didn't do it the way "everyone else" would. Then see how you like it.

Yes, it is called PUBLIC ASSASINATION...

[Unregistered]

There is a tme and place for everything. THe problem is there is a certain breed o of leader out there who thinks that leadership means beating down, cursing out and public demeaning their subordinates. In their sick mentality is perfectly ok. When their behavior (not leadership) is challenged the usually go off the deep end. Until the Navy decides to make that behavior wholly inacceptable our rranks will be infested with people such as that

OK...so how do you propose to command inlisted soldiers who feel that they have no accountability and want to do their job "THEIR WAY"....It was NOT the guards position to chose to leave his post to an unarmed sentry...If everyone in the military decided to chose which orders to follow and which orders to let slide, then the system fails...how do you handle a military which may be infested with soldiers who chose what orders are relevant or not, which orders apply to them or not ??? How does one command such an army ????

[Unregistered]

OK...so how do you propose to command inlisted soldiers who feel that they have no accountability and want to do their job "THEIR WAY"....It was NOT the guards position to chose to leave his post to an unarmed sentry...If everyone in the military decided to chose which orders to follow and which orders to let slide, then the system fails...how do you handle a military which may be infested with soldiers who chose what orders are relevant or not, which orders apply to them or not ??? How does one command such an army ????

He DID NOT leave his post, he went to the darn bathroom which is in the gate house...quit twisting the facts!!!!!

[Unregistered]

He DID NOT leave his post, he went to the darn bathroom which is in the gate house...quit twisting the facts!!!!!


I am not sure all the facts are present. Why did the Captain accuse the sentry of eating his breakfast on the job ??? I thought the shifts are 4 hours ??? If so, shouldn't he eat prior to taking his post...it is obvious not all the facts are present here. Also, what is the sentry's prior job performances history, has he been repremanded before....too many unknowns...

[Unregistered]

I am not sure all the facts are present. Why did the Captain accuse the sentry of eating his breakfast on the job ??? I thought the shifts are 4 hours ??? If so, shouldn't he eat prior to taking his post...it is obvious not all the facts are present here. Also, what is the sentry's prior job performances history, has he been repremanded before....too many unknowns...

Okay, for you who asking, the shifts vary and the sentry was NOT eating breakfast, he was relieving himself in the bathroom! So, don't you think the CO feels a little stupid? Banging on the door to the bathroom, accusing the sentry of eating? I know because I happen to work there. I am sure there are many others who work there who can back this up.

[Unregistered]

I am not sure all the facts are present. Why did the Captain accuse the sentry of eating his breakfast on the job ??? I thought the shifts are 4 hours ??? If so, shouldn't he eat prior to taking his post...it is obvious not all the facts are present here. Also, what is the sentry's prior job performances history, has he been repremanded before....too many unknowns...

The sentry hasn't been in any trouble...why must you assume the worst?

[Unregistered]

For those of you mature enough to figure things out and do not rely on rhetorics, normal procedure here is for this CAPT to "chew" his Security Officer, unless, there is a blatant breach of security. To think that the CAPT did it twice runs smack to a possible anger management problem. People who knew this CAPT from prior duty stations swear that they saw the same attitude from him. I can only infer one thing, this CAPT is scared stupid of his wife and he's taking it on his lowliest men. What a piece of dirt!

[Unregistered]

For those of you mature enough to figure things out and do not rely on rhetorics, normal procedure here is for this CAPT to "chew" his Security Officer, unless, there is a blatant breach of security. To think that the CAPT did it twice runs smack to a possible anger management problem. People who knew this CAPT from prior duty stations swear that they saw the same attitude from him. I can only infer one thing, this CAPT is scared stupid of his wife and he's taking it on his lowliest men. What a piece of dirt!


WOW, that is incredibly personal and really low. His wife is a cancer survivor and even while she was in the midst of suffering through extensive surgeries and chemo therapy that made her so ill that she could barely function, she took minimal time off, so that she could continue to serve her country. The Captain and his wife have dedicated their lives to serving the NAVY and our Country. With that being said, how dare you even mention her when she had absolutely nothing to do with the situation at the gate. This just proves the kind of indecent soldier we are dealing with here, absolutely no integrity whatsoever.

[Unregistered]

it is obvious you cant spell, inlisted?? or read, the bathroom is on post... if he is going to the bathroom on post how did he leave post... your sound and spelling is not making you look good...


OK...so how do you propose to command inlisted soldiers who feel that they have no accountability and want to do their job "THEIR WAY"....It was NOT the guards position to chose to leave his post to an unarmed sentry...If everyone in the military decided to chose which orders to follow and which orders to let slide, then the system fails...how do you handle a military which may be infested with soldiers who chose what orders are relevant or not, which orders apply to them or not ??? How does one command such an army ????

[Unregistered]

THIS seems personal as well


WOW, that is incredibly personal and really low. His wife is a cancer survivor and even while she was in the midst of suffering through extensive surgeries and chemo therapy that made her so ill that she could barely function, she took minimal time off, so that she could continue to serve her country. The Captain and his wife have dedicated their lives to serving the NAVY and our Country. With that being said, how dare you even mention her when she had absolutely nothing to do with the situation at the gate. This just proves the kind of indecent soldier we are dealing with here, absolutely no integrity whatsoever.

[Unregistered]

WOW, that is incredibly personal and really low. His wife is a cancer survivor and even while she was in the midst of suffering through extensive surgeries and chemo therapy that made her so ill that she could barely function, she took minimal time off, so that she could continue to serve her country. The Captain and his wife have dedicated their lives to serving the NAVY and our Country. With that being said, how dare you even mention her when she had absolutely nothing to do with the situation at the gate. This just proves the kind of indecent soldier we are dealing with here, absolutely no integrity whatsoever.


Leave the sentry alone!!!! His integrity had nothing to do with any of this bs! It was the crazy CO acting up and now he's being called out on it. So finally he can be held accountable for his crazed rantings.

[Unregistered]

THIS seems personal as well


quid pro quo

[Unregistered]

Leave the sentry alone!!!! His integrity had nothing to do with any of this bs! It was the crazy CO acting up and now he's being called out on it. So finally he can be held accountable for his crazed rantings.


So why are you so defensive, stick to your facts and leave his family out of it. If you are convinced you or the guard are in the right, what are you so worried about ? What is most likely is the Captain will probably be reassigned and the guards will get a new CO. Maybe they both will get reassigned. Either way, both of their careers will be affected by this unfortunate series of events.

[Unregistered]

So why are you so defensive, stick to your facts and leave his family out of it. If you are convinced you or the guard are in the right, what are you so worried about ? What is most likely is the Captain will probably be reassigned and the guards will get a new CO. Maybe they both will get reassigned. Either way, both of their careers will be affected by this unfortunate series of events.

I didn't bring his family into it...get your people straight!

[Unregistered]

I didn't bring his family into it...get your people straight!


OK, but you have to know that whistle blowers do not fair to well in Gov't, look at what happened to Linda Tripp and Kevin Starr. Once you make accusations, your must be prepared to defend your reputation against smears as they had to do.

[Unregistered]

OK, but you have to know that whistle blowers do not fair to well in Gov't, look at what happened to Linda Tripp and Kevin Starr. Once you make accusations, your must be prepared to defend your reputation against smears as they had to do.

Ha Ha What a joke! They were both complete idiots and this has nothing to with them. I don't have to defend anything.... I didn't make any accusations....the facts speak for themselves... Have a great evening!

[Unregistered]

Ha Ha What a joke! They were both complete idiots and this has nothing to with them. I don't have to defend anything.... I didn't make any accusations....the facts speak for themselves... Have a great evening!

Thanks, you too, just want to prepare you for the fact that this investigation is not going to be a walk in the park, that's all. Good Luck !

[Unregistered]

Posting # 5 has the right answer. As an old fleet salt myself (Ret SCPO) the rule was always "Praise in public, reprimand in private". I admit to on the spot ass chewing myself if the situation required it, but with descetion, If the Captain felt there was an infraction, he certainly has the right to correct it as any officer or senior enlisted should do. There was a proper way to handle it and, I repeat AND, if he did in fact handle it as the sentries state, he was correct in theory but wrong in method. Get the facts of the circumstances, correct the situation if needed and let the LCPO/LPO continue the disclipline / correction, Skipper. Handled correctly this would have been a non issue.

[Sgt6042]

In a way they are both wrong. In working any armed security post there has to be one armed guard ready to deal with any threat. This is especially true with access control areas. The guard in the bathroom could not deal with any threat. Anyone could have driven up shot the unarmed guard outside and driven onto the base with no one knowing. Also correct me if I am wrong, but at every access point to get on any military base there are 2 posts at the guard house. One inside the guard house and one outside of the guard house. So in this since the guard was not properly relieved of his outside past to go inside the guard house to use the head.

The captain was right is his correction of the guard on the first day. The captain made the mistake on the second day in yelling at the guard then. Both should be punished.

[Unregistered]

I stated I only knew him in passing, and was also giving a nod to some of the remarks from people under his command on Kincaid and the base. It is a given that he can be unpleasant at times. Not sure where you fall in the continuum of endless opinions on the Captain's management style, but the point of my post was that it doesn't matter. I personally do not believe his actions were prudent, but I'm behind the CO from the perspective that he should be allowed to do his job as he sees fit, and that he has earned that right. I'm most offended that such a trivial event in the grand scheme of things has merited more than 10 pages of posts when it is barely worthy of a footnote. If I wasn't clear in my previous post of where I lined up on this issue, I hope this post clarifies things. So what you're saying is that this Captain earned the right to behave like a total asshole in public?

[Unregistered]

As a former naval officer, I can say that regardless of whether the gate sentries were not standing their watch properly, there is no excuse for a member of the military behaving as this CO did. I've seen my share of screamers and spitters who use fear to purportedly "get the job done." This may work for the short term but in the end only shows what that leader lacks in terms of leadership ability. This incident shows that this CO lacks self control and does not know how to properly motivate and discipline those under his command. He should be screened for a personality disorder. Some people get a stripe on their sleeve and it goes to their head. They also forget that they work for the taxpayer and that is where they get their authority. After all of the scandals the Navy has faced over the last 15 years, you would think that this CO would know that the public is well aware of the poor behavior of CO's and use his head. In the end, would you entrust your son or daughter to the Navy seeing this kind of abusive behavior?

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;61096]I stated I only knew him in passing, and was also giving a nod to some of the remarks from people under his command on Kincaid and the base. It is a given that he can be unpleasant at times. Not sure where you fall in the continuum of endless opinions on the Captain's management style, but the point of my post was that it doesn't matter. I personally do not believe his actions were prudent, but I'm behind the CO from the perspective that he should be allowed to do his job as he sees fit, and that he has earned that right. I'm most offended that such a trivial event in the grand scheme of things has merited more than 10 pages of posts when it is barely worthy of a footnote. If I wasn't clear in my previous post of where I lined up on this issue, I hope this post clarifies things. It makes me wonder what the Captain earned, while he did earn the right to command, he did not earn the right to behave in this fashion. Everyone references the war that we are now in. Doesn't this Captain think that the military is getting enough bad publicity without him adding to it with his antics? Also, what makes this incident a "trivial event"? Is it trivial because it involves an enlisted member? While the Master-at-Arms may or may not have been wrong in his action, the Captain was dead wrong in the manner in which he carried himself. Would he have tolerated a sentry conducting himself in the same manner that the Captain did? I think not. One standard, not two...

[Unregistered]

Well I guess this is the new touchy, feely Navy. If the Old Man chews your ass, take your licks and go on down the road. This is a crock of crap. When did a sailor earn the right to appeal a “dressing down”? Did the Old man physically hurt the sailor? Did the Old Man give a morally questionable order? No, He just did his job as he saw fit. He is the Commanding Officer, it is up to him to do his job and run his base as he sees fit.

[Unregistered]

Dressing down or correcting a deficiency is one thing, being an out of control asshole is another...

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

Dressing down or correcting a deficiency is one thing, being an out of control asshole is another...Indeed. And the person who should be doing the "dressing down" an E-4 is an E-5, E-6, or (in rare occassions) an E-7.

If an O-6 wants to "dress down" someone, then that someone should be an O-5, O-4, or (in rare occassions) an O-3.

If the incident had unfolded as follows - OS2 Guarino is stood to attention and:

1. CO telephones XO and has him come to the gate house

2. XO telephones OOD and has him come to the gate house

3. OOD telephones O/C Guard Detail and has him come to the gate house

4. O/C Guard Detail telephones NCO i/c Guard and has him come to the gate house

5. NCO i/c Guard Detail says "Guarino, these gentlemen are not pleased with your performance. We'll talk later."

6. NCO i/c Guard Detail thanks O/C Guard Detail for bringing the situation to his attention and assures him that the situation will be rectified and won't reoccur.

7. O/C Guard Detail thanks OOD for bringing the situation to his attention and assures him that the situation will be rectified and won't reoccur.

8. OOD thanks XO for bringing the situation to his attention and assures him that the situation will be rectified and won't reoccur.

9. XO thanks CO for bringing the situation to his attention and assures him that the situation will be rectified and won't reoccur.

10. OS2 Guarino is dismissed to his duties.

then the only likely remaining problem would be how OS2 Guarino would be able to obtain clean underpants in order to finish his shift.++

[CPO]

Finally, The Universal Curmudgeon has put forth a persuasive and comprehensible comment. That is how the Chain of Command works. You do not have long term solutions when you don't put the Chain of Command on the spot. Granted, the C.O. APPEARS to have had a lapse of judgement with the way he addressed the guard, none of us were there when it happened and we are quick to judge. As an enlisted person, I have encountered many officers, but not all, who feel that enlisted personnel are beneath them. When I do something wrong, I don't have a problem with an @ss chewing. I take it, learn from it, and move on. However, if I didn't do something wrong, I am quick to stand my ground. Either way, I wouldn't make a public debate about it. This whole situation stinks. There can be no good that comes from this thing.

[Unregistered]

Guarino should have done his job. Why are you feeling sorry for a pathetic excuse for a soldier who should have just dealt with the consequences of leaving his post. Guarino is not someone I would want to have to command or have standing next to me or defending Annapolis if there were a situation or attack at the gate.

This sailor, whom i have had the privilege of serving with did not leave his post. As stated in an earlier comment, the head is 10 feet from the traffic lanes at the gates. If anything had happened i can assure u that guarino would have been out dealing with the situation in a matter of seconds. as for the other sentry, he did not have the proper uniform because there were none to issue him. The only reason he was put on the gate is because there was no other available option. For those of you criticizing guarino for using the head, what do you expect him to do? Pee his pants? Berating the sentries during peak traffic demonstrates a lack of professionalism expected from a senior officer in a command position regardless of where you are located. This is not the first time Capt. Fierro has berated sentries at their posts (i know, i have been on the receiving end of a few myself) and if he remains in command, will not be the last.

[Unregistered]

Finally, The Universal Curmudgeon has put forth a persuasive and comprehensible comment. That is how the Chain of Command works. You do not have long term solutions when you don't put the Chain of Command on the spot. Granted, the C.O. APPEARS to have had a lapse of judgement with the way he addressed the guard, none of us were there when it happened and we are quick to judge. As an enlisted person, I have encountered many officers, but not all, who feel that enlisted personnel are beneath them. When I do something wrong, I don't have a problem with an @ss chewing. I take it, learn from it, and move on. However, if I didn't do something wrong, I am quick to stand my ground. Either way, I wouldn't make a public debate about it. This whole situation stinks. There can be no good that comes from this thing.

I can think of a good thing that comes out of this...

[Unregistered]

Although, what the Captain did was completely innapropriate let us not distract from the overall issue at hand. The sentry blatently disregarded his responsibilities not one time, but twice. Just because the Captain acted innapropriatly should not translate to a free pass for this sailor. Let us not forget that we are in the military and not in a day care center. Perhaps its fine for the sentry to carry out his duties in the manner he was doing so at the mall, but not at a military institution where his poise and professionalism of his watch not only reflect upon the institution itself, but also serve as a deterrent for terrorists perhaps planning an attack on one of the premier military academies in the world. The Captain should explain his behavior, the sentryand the section leader be disciplined. Again, the sentry was not a seaman, he was a second class petty officer. The title to the article is completely misleading, berating the guards implies the Captain without reason humiliated the innocent squared away guards. This is not the case. How dare the section leader not only send an unqualified Sailor to stand a high visibility watch, but also wash his or her hands of the supervisory responsibility of ensuring the watch is being stood correctly. For the Captain to have felt the need to take matters into his own hands just describes the quality of people he has working for him. If Sailors took pride in their job this and many other isues throughout the fleet would not occur.

[Unregistered]

Although, what the Captain did was completely innapropriate let us not distract from the overall issue at hand. The sentry blatently disregarded his responsibilities not one time, but twice. Just because the Captain acted innapropriatly should not translate to a free pass for this sailor. Let us not forget that we are in the military and not in a day care center. Perhaps its fine for the sentry to carry out his duties in the manner he was doing so at the mall, but not at a military institution where his poise and professionalism of his watch not only reflect upon the institution itself, but also serve as a deterrent for terrorists perhaps planning an attack on one of the premier military academies in the world. The Captain should explain his behavior, the sentryand the section leader be disciplined. Again, the sentry was not a seaman, he was a second class petty officer. The title to the article is completely misleading, berating the guards implies the Captain without reason humiliated the innocent squared away guards. This is not the case. How dare the section leader not only send an unqualified Sailor to stand a high visibility watch, but also wash his or her hands of the supervisory responsibility of ensuring the watch is being stood correctly. For the Captain to have felt the need to take matters into his own hands just describes the quality of people he has working for him. If Sailors took pride in their job this and many other isues throughout the fleet would not occur.

The Chief of the Guard and other enlisted sailors are not at foult here. Capt. Fierro had a sentry pulled from his post to play chauffer and left the COG no other option but to place the individual on a gate. As for the armed sailor, having to use the head is not an option. It is a neccesity when on the gates for up to 12 hours at a time. Going inside the guardshack to do so is not blatently disregarding his duties. If u think it is, why dont u try standing in the same spot for even 4 hours and not need a chance to use the head. Think about that before u accuse a sentry of "blatently disregard(ing) his duties."

[First Person Experience]

Outside the provocation of the events at the gate, I believe nothing that happened warranted the unprofessional conduct of Capt. Fierro. It is a great example of his typical method of dealing with adversity. I also served under him on the USS Kinkaid (DD-965). I have been witness to several outburts by him including: when he proceeded to smash the phone receiver into three different pieces,after receiving a report from the bridge; when he tore a phone out of the hands of the OOD, ripped the phone base off the mounts, and threw all of the pieces over the bridge wing into the ocean; during a Captain's Mast when he engaged a seamen in a "staring contest" which went on for three hours (with all of the witnesses standing by); and as he generally made a life a living hell for his officers and crew. If you don't believe me, check the records during 2000 in which 25+ crew members left the ship on drug charges and an additional 25+ crew members reported to Balboa Hospital for mental heath treatment (these included seamean, senior chiefs, and officers). Ask anyone who served in 3rd Fleet between 2000-2001 and you will get a better flavor of Fierro's history.

[Unregistered]

As mentioned earlier, this particular O-6 has a long history of abusive, belittling outbursts against junior enlisted personnel. As someone who has gone toe-to-toe with this man, my opinion is that he suffers from a severe "Napolean" complex. At the very least, he has a hair-trigger temper that has not mellowed over time. If there is justice in this world, his next stop will be retirement.

[Unregistered]

Although, what the Captain did was completely innapropriate let us not distract from the overall issue at hand. The sentry blatently disregarded his responsibilities not one time, but twice. Just because the Captain acted innapropriatly should not translate to a free pass for this sailor. Let us not forget that we are in the military and not in a day care center. Perhaps its fine for the sentry to carry out his duties in the manner he was doing so at the mall, but not at a military institution where his poise and professionalism of his watch not only reflect upon the institution itself, but also serve as a deterrent for terrorists perhaps planning an attack on one of the premier military academies in the world. The Captain should explain his behavior, the sentryand the section leader be disciplined. Again, the sentry was not a seaman, he was a second class petty officer. The title to the article is completely misleading, berating the guards implies the Captain without reason humiliated the innocent squared away guards. This is not the case. How dare the section leader not only send an unqualified Sailor to stand a high visibility watch, but also wash his or her hands of the supervisory responsibility of ensuring the watch is being stood correctly. For the Captain to have felt the need to take matters into his own hands just describes the quality of people he has working for him. If Sailors took pride in their job this and many other isues throughout the fleet would not occur.

I've said it once and I'll say it again..the only reason he felt like he needed to take things "into his own hands" is because he has a very serious personality disorder and control problem. The sailor doesn't need a day care center, he was relieving himself, which by the way, is acceptable. There is not one regulation that states you cannot use the restroom..which is just as someone described a few postings above, in the actual guard shack, and withing feet of where they stand.

Do you know the Captain? Apparently not from your post. I can say he has serious issues and problems he needs to get checked out, as others here who know him have already posted.

[Unregistered]

Although, what the Captain did was completely innapropriate let us not distract from the overall issue at hand. The sentry blatently disregarded his responsibilities not one time, but twice. Just because the Captain acted innapropriatly should not translate to a free pass for this sailor. Let us not forget that we are in the military and not in a day care center. Perhaps its fine for the sentry to carry out his duties in the manner he was doing so at the mall, but not at a military institution where his poise and professionalism of his watch not only reflect upon the institution itself, but also serve as a deterrent for terrorists perhaps planning an attack on one of the premier military academies in the world. The Captain should explain his behavior, the sentryand the section leader be disciplined. Again, the sentry was not a seaman, he was a second class petty officer. The title to the article is completely misleading, berating the guards implies the Captain without reason humiliated the innocent squared away guards. This is not the case. How dare the section leader not only send an unqualified Sailor to stand a high visibility watch, but also wash his or her hands of the supervisory responsibility of ensuring the watch is being stood correctly. For the Captain to have felt the need to take matters into his own hands just describes the quality of people he has working for him. If Sailors took pride in their job this and many other isues throughout the fleet would not occur.

#1 - What does the mall have to do with any of this? Nothing

#2 - "Just because the Captain acted innapropriatly should not translate to a free pass for this sailor"...no kidding! And the Captain is going to be held responsible for acting inapropriately....he will either be out of here quickly, to be reassigned somewhere else or retired. If he's lucky, they might not reduce his rank before they do it.

[Unregistered]

Although, what the Captain did was completely innapropriate let us not distract from the overall issue at hand. The sentry blatently disregarded his responsibilities not one time, but twice. Just because the Captain acted innapropriatly should not translate to a free pass for this sailor. Let us not forget that we are in the military and not in a day care center. Perhaps its fine for the sentry to carry out his duties in the manner he was doing so at the mall, but not at a military institution where his poise and professionalism of his watch not only reflect upon the institution itself, but also serve as a deterrent for terrorists perhaps planning an attack on one of the premier military academies in the world. The Captain should explain his behavior, the sentryand the section leader be disciplined. Again, the sentry was not a seaman, he was a second class petty officer. The title to the article is completely misleading, berating the guards implies the Captain without reason humiliated the innocent squared away guards. This is not the case. How dare the section leader not only send an unqualified Sailor to stand a high visibility watch, but also wash his or her hands of the supervisory responsibility of ensuring the watch is being stood correctly. For the Captain to have felt the need to take matters into his own hands just describes the quality of people he has working for him. If Sailors took pride in their job this and many other isues throughout the fleet would not occur.

There is NO ACCEPTABLE time to berate or humiliate anyone..just because he is a Captain, it does NOT give him the right to do that to anyone. Hence, that is why the Captain is in so much HOT WATER!!!!!!

[Unregistered]

Outside the provocation of the events at the gate, I believe nothing that happened warranted the unprofessional conduct of Capt. Fierro. It is a great example of his typical method of dealing with adversity. I also served under him on the USS Kinkaid (DD-965). I have been witness to several outburts by him including: when he proceeded to smash the phone receiver into three different pieces,after receiving a report from the bridge; when he tore a phone out of the hands of the OOD, ripped the phone base off the mounts, and threw all of the pieces over the bridge wing into the ocean; during a Captain's Mast when he engaged a seamen in a "staring contest" which went on for three hours (with all of the witnesses standing by); and as he generally made a life a living hell for his officers and crew. If you don't believe me, check the records during 2000 in which 25+ crew members left the ship on drug charges and an additional 25+ crew members reported to Balboa Hospital for mental heath treatment (these included seamean, senior chiefs, and officers). Ask anyone who served in 3rd Fleet between 2000-2001 and you will get a better flavor of Fierro's history.

Wow....he's definitely doing that here at Annapolis..driving everyone crazy.

[Unregistered]

The Captain knowing the "Chain-of-Command" should not be reprimanding the Sailor for an incorrect uniform on watch when he was told the Sailor was sent to that position by someone else. The Captain should be looking for that person who sent the Sailor on watch in the incorrect uniform and correct the situation from the top-down, not the bottom-up. The Sailor was only following his last orders received by a superior, that superior should be reprimanded. The young Saior was just doing what he was told to do!

[Measure Man]

This seems a bit overblown to me.

So, the Captain is a bully with poor leadership ability and anger management issues.

Is that a crime now?

Was he wrong...sure. Is it a major issue? I don't think so.

[Unregistered]

Middle East Summit at the Academy.....Hmmm Maybe the Captain knew something that some of you didn't.
I would make sure my guard force was standing tall.

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

There is NO ACCEPTABLE time to berate or humiliate anyone.I wouldn't go that far.

.just because he is a Captain, it does NOT give him the right to do that to anyone.True, on the other hand, that doesn't mean that there might not be a time or a place or a person or an action occasioning which would be appropriate.

Hence, that is why the Captain is in so much HOT WATER!!!!!!Exactly. neither the time, nor the place, nor the person, nor the action occasioning were (according to the information publicly available) appropriate,

[Unregistered]

I served under him on the USS Kinkaid. He has a history of questionable tirades. However, his methods are effective. Everyone onboard was terrified of him. He managed to get this far. I have a hard time believing that they will give him any more than a slap on the wrist. Again.

One should not be terrified of their boss. If you gain the respect of your men you will not have to rain with an iron fist to get the job done.

[Unregistered]

The sailors were in the right, the officer is guilty of conduct unbecoming, and if you are an old salt, you should have learned to spell during your time in the Navy.

I could not agree more. We are talking about a commanding officer, not a company commander in boot camp. This happened in front of civilians. I would think a C.O. would be well versed in what bad P.R. can do to the military right now. Also, can we just get rid of the dungarees. If any uniform looks so bad you cannot wear it at the front gate then it should not be a question. I know they are working on that but lets speed it up and trash those things once and for all.

[Unregistered]

I live in Annapolis and am a spouse of Naval personnel , and all those in Annapolis are rude and unbecoming to everyone not just those below them in rank. They have no class and are prejudiced beasts. This man needs to be demoted. This shows what is Wrong with the military. No one wants to admit what they have done is wrong.

[Unregistered]

CO firings on track to match 2003 record

By Andrew Scutro - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Jul 10, 2007 17:41:35 EDT

NORFOLK, Va. — Commanding officer firings in 2007 are accumulating at such a rate that year-end figures could match 2003, when 26 commanders were fired — mostly for personal misconduct — sparking a fleetwide investigation into training and selection of commanding officers.

In a brief for Navy career counselors at an annual convention held in Dallas in late June, Capt. Michael Reed, inspector general for Fleet Forces Command, presented the sobering report.

Just six months into 2007, 10 commanding officers have already been relieved, Reed said, one less than for all of 2006.

Of the 10, five were relieved for personal misconduct, three for poor performance, and two were in command during a “significant event.”

If the trend continues, Reed told the attendees, 2007 could turn out to be as bad a year as the record-setting 2003.

Reed cited personal misconduct as the primary cause for the 2003 firings, saying his office thoroughly analyzed all 26 incidents.

“As I say, it’s sex, drugs and rock and roll — that’s what it is,” he said during the symposium. “And in almost every single case, somebody in the command knew about it.”

Lt. Cmdr. Steve Thompson, media officer at Fleet Forces Command, said the inspector general’s office updates its CO firing report monthly and presents it to commanding officers, executive officers and command master chiefs as “a preventive step” and a warning of “what not to do,” he said.

He said no actions like the 2003 investigation or other policy changes are planned.

“There was an uptick, but overall, there is no problem,” he said.

In the Dallas briefing, reasons for CO relief were categorized as: personal misconduct by the commander; poor command climate that led to low unit morale; substandard commander performance; and a “significant event,” such as a collision, grounding, aviation mishap or death.

Reed said about 1 percent of commanders get in trouble, but the current trend could bump up that figure.

“I’m worried we can easily get above that 1 percent threshold and get into 2 percent,” he said. “

Over the past four years, 26 COs were fired in 2003, 12 in both 2004 and 2005, and 11 in 2006. In his brief, Reed urged the audience to take action when they know something is wrong.


Mark D. Faram contributed to this report.

__________________________________________________ ________________________________
MY OPINION- NO WONDER THE MILITARY IS LOOKING AT RECRUITING EX-CONS AND KNOWN FELONS TO SUPPLEMENT IT'S RANKS.... ANY KID WITH A FINGERNAIL OF COMMON SENSE RATHER GO TO COLLEGE THAN TO ENLIST, TAKE ORDERS AND PUT THERE LIFE ON THE LINE FOR PEOPLE LIKE THIS. TODAYS MILITARY IS IN A STATE OF EMERGENCY AND EVEN THE MOST CLEVER RECRUITING SLOGAN IS NOT GOING TO HELP.

[Unregistered]

All of these posts are a waste of breathe, he has continued his temper tantrums just last week-end he relieved another gate guard. The fact that he is under investigation means nothing to him.

[Unregistered]

Although, what the Captain did was completely innapropriate let us not distract from the overall issue at hand. The sentry blatently disregarded his responsibilities not one time, but twice. Just because the Captain acted innapropriatly should not translate to a free pass for this sailor. Let us not forget that we are in the military and not in a day care center. Perhaps its fine for the sentry to carry out his duties in the manner he was doing so at the mall, but not at a military institution where his poise and professionalism of his watch not only reflect upon the institution itself, but also serve as a deterrent for terrorists perhaps planning an attack on one of the premier military academies in the world. The Captain should explain his behavior, the sentryand the section leader be disciplined. Again, the sentry was not a seaman, he was a second class petty officer. The title to the article is completely misleading, berating the guards implies the Captain without reason humiliated the innocent squared away guards. This is not the case. How dare the section leader not only send an unqualified Sailor to stand a high visibility watch, but also wash his or her hands of the supervisory responsibility of ensuring the watch is being stood correctly. For the Captain to have felt the need to take matters into his own hands just describes the quality of people he has working for him. If Sailors took pride in their job this and many other isues throughout the fleet would not occur.

What is written here is right on the point. The bahavior of the Captain is without a doubt inexcusable and no matter who you are or what you have done one does not deserve to be berated. This being said, if the watchstander has to use the head, he or she can call the COG on the radio and ask the COG to stand in for him. Peharps we all forgot of the 10 general orders of the sentry. How hard is it to cover your 6 especilly during a high volume time. Moreover, if the section leader does not have enough "qualified" personnel to fill in the necessary watches perhaps the command has either to many sections or has a disproportionate ditribution of qualified personnel. I am sure the command has standard operating proceedures for watchstanders, our high standards is what makes us different from a plain mall guard. I have stood many long watches and if I have to use the head I notify my immidiate supervisor. This did not happen! This touchy feely sentiment is ridiculous. Should the Captain be fired, forced retired, etc? No, he should be counseld by the Admiral (which is enough punishment). Should the Petty Officer and the section leader be disciplined? Absolutly. The sentry had a prior day history of substandard watchstanding and the section leader sent an unqualified "new guy" to relieve him so the sentry could be duty driver. Lets us stop being cry babies and look at this from an objective point of view.

[Unregistered]

What happened last week-end?

[Unregistered]

What happened last week-end?

Sounds like the gate guards are a problem, and continue to be one.

[james]

With all the B.S. posted on here, this is what I have concluded. The Captain acted in an unbecoming manner and no class or leadership what so ever. This individual has a huge chip on his shoulder as do most people who wuold berate and belittle others below him just to feel superior. I have personally stood watch at the gate guard sentry, we are undermanned, underfunded, and have a hard time convincing enlisted personnel to accept orders there,why? because those a-holes with their head up their butts make you want to punch and b**ch slap them.

[Measure Man]

What is written here is right on the point. The bahavior of the Captain is without a doubt inexcusable and no matter who you are or what you have done one does not deserve to be berated. This being said, if the watchstander has to use the head, he or she can call the COG on the radio and ask the COG to stand in for him. Peharps we all forgot of the 10 general orders of the sentry. How hard is it to cover your 6 especilly during a high volume time. Moreover, if the section leader does not have enough "qualified" personnel to fill in the necessary watches perhaps the command has either to many sections or has a disproportionate ditribution of qualified personnel. I am sure the command has standard operating proceedures for watchstanders, our high standards is what makes us different from a plain mall guard. I have stood many long watches and if I have to use the head I notify my immidiate supervisor. This did not happen! This touchy feely sentiment is ridiculous. Should the Captain be fired, forced retired, etc? No, he should be counseld by the Admiral (which is enough punishment). Should the Petty Officer and the section leader be disciplined? Absolutly. The sentry had a prior day history of substandard watchstanding and the section leader sent an unqualified "new guy" to relieve him so the sentry could be duty driver. Lets us stop being cry babies and look at this from an objective point of view.

I think you have it about right...

[Unregistered]

I had an ensign do the same thing to me back in 1978. Only he used his finger to poke me in the chest ! There were witnesses. He then poked me in the face ! I decked him !!!!! He pressed charges. And lost his commmision..... Officers don't have all the power !!!!! Bravo-Zulu...... to the Sailors

[Unregistered]

This seems a bit overblown to me.

So, the Captain is a bully with poor leadership ability and anger management issues.

Is that a crime now?

Was he wrong...sure. Is it a major issue? I don't think so.


Apparently, it is a crime and major issue otherwise a former Superintendent would still have a job today. He was relieved of his command for essentially the same thing. Then he was forced to retire because he kept running his mouth about it. Same thing here..the CO is ruining his own career.

[Unregistered]

What happened last week-end?

Well you must know if you are asking..please do tell!

[Unregistered]

Why would a Captain (O-6) go to an individual sailor and cuss him or her out? Usually the best thing to do would be to go through the sailor's chain of command, so that his or her immediate leadership can fix the problem. To me this is poor leadership on the Captain's part. If the sailors weren't following SOP then they should be corrected but this was the wrong way to do the right thing. Also, to publicly belittle the guards in front of others undermines their position and authority. Again, bad leadership on the Captain's part.

[Unregistered]

Sounds like the gate guards are a problem, and continue to be one.

What did YOU hear????

[Unregistered]

Middle East Summit at the Academy.....Hmmm Maybe the Captain knew something that some of you didn't.
I would make sure my guard force was standing tall.

It's been all over the national news, hardly a secret. If a terrorist wants to bomb or show up, they will. A person standing watch at the gate is no match for those crazy people.

[Unregistered]

Sounds like the gate guards are a problem, and continue to be one.

this is complete bs. the gate guards are expected to work 4 days on 2 days off in 12 hour shifts (13 when u include arriving an hour prior to your watch). these sailors practically live on the gates for days at a time. this command is understaffed for the job it is expected to do. this situation is made even worse when a sentry is pulled from teh gate to drive an admiral to Andrews AFB to catch a plane. what happened to his chauffer? and if that wasn a possibility, why didnt the capt drive him down since, according to him, they were friends? this command doesnt not receive enough funding to properly maintain/replace essential equipment let alone provide sailors with a uniform when they check on-board like they are supposed to. The sentry did nothing wrong by using the head and the relief for the "chauffer sailor" did nothing wrong by not wearing the proper uniform he had not yet received. wake up people and use some common sense here!!!!

[Unregistered]

All of these posts are a waste of breathe, he has continued his temper tantrums just last week-end he relieved another gate guard. The fact that he is under investigation means nothing to him.

Well if that is true, that just goes to show the depth of his problem. He's just trying to draw attention away from himself, but it is much to late for that.

[Unregistered]

All of these posts are a waste of breathe, he has continued his temper tantrums just last week-end he relieved another gate guard. The fact that he is under investigation means nothing to him.


Is this fact? Who was relieved and for what this time?

[Unregistered]

The Captain is obviously not a "people person." Perhaps he requires some sensitivity training. Perhaps he should conduct a Lean, Six Sigma event to perfect watchstanding at the Academy.

Many questions should be asked:

Isn't watchstanding basic to Navy skill sets? So why didn't the sailor prepare for watch like millions of men before him? (i.e. use the head before watch)

Why are the sentries being used for "duty driver?"

Why aren't these sentries in Service Dress Blues like every other sentry on ships?

Why doesn't the Captain have a Senior Enlisted Section Leader checking on his watch standers?

Why didn't the Captain take this up with the Senior Watch Officer and spread the fun out by letting it roll down hill?

MOST IMPORTANTLY - WHY DOES THE CAPTAIN RUN SUCH A SLACK OUTFIT? THIS OBVIOUSLY REFLECTS POORLY ON HIMSELF AND THE ENTIRE NAVAL SERVICE.

[Unregistered]

The Captain is obviously not a "people person." Perhaps he requires some sensitivity training. Perhaps he should conduct a Lean, Six Sigma event to perfect watchstanding at the Academy.

Many questions should be asked:

Isn't watchstanding basic to Navy skill sets? So why didn't the sailor prepare for watch like millions of men before him? (i.e. use the head before watch)

Why are the sentries being used for "duty driver?"

Why aren't these sentries in Service Dress Blues like every other sentry on ships?

Why doesn't the Captain have a Senior Enlisted Section Leader checking on his watch standers?

Why didn't the Captain take this up with the Senior Watch Officer and spread the fun out by letting it roll down hill?

MOST IMPORTANTLY - WHY DOES THE CAPTAIN RUN SUCH A SLACK OUTFIT? THIS OBVIOUSLY REFLECTS POORLY ON HIMSELF AND THE ENTIRE NAVAL SERVICE.

In response to your question "why didn't the sailor prepare for watch like millions of men before him? (i.e. use the head before watch) - millions of men ago, there probably wasn't a head available right where the sailor is standing watch; however, you cannot compare that to this place nor can you expect him to relieve himself before watch - because there is a head right there and they are allowed to use it. They cannot get in trouble for using the head on duty..the darn restroom is RIGHT THERE!

[Unregistered]

One should not be terrified of their boss. If you gain the respect of your men you will not have to rain with an iron fist to get the job done.

Boy, now there is a statement fitting to posted on the walls of "Mother B" so every Midshipman can learn them. Maybe clean it up just a tad, remove boss and insert "Superior"

This is also something that should be learned by the Capt's XO, Brian Kelm, Capt USN, RET.
He too likes to yell, cuss and scream at people. As he is now a civilian I have even less respect for him since he can't seem seperate himself and his current actions from his active duty days. If it was so great he should have never retired.

As a civilian employee I should never be instructed to stand at "Attention" and placed "At Ease." Those are military commands, the civilian public works staff and the bases secretarial pool knows nothing about the proper way to stand at attention and looks really pathetic when they do rise.

I am, on the other hand, will remain defiant and NOT rise to attention when called by the XO. Screw him too!

[Unregistered]

Amazing, nearly 200 posts about this CO's actions with the tally running about 3 to 1 against him and he still remains in Command.

But last week an F-18 squadron CO gets charged with a DUI and has his command removed from him in only a day or two after the incident.

Now this says something! Anyone wish to opine about what it is?

[Unregistered]

Amazing, nearly 200 posts about this CO's actions with the tally running about 3 to 1 against him and he still remains in Command.

But last week an F-18 squadron CO gets charged with a DUI and has his command removed from him in only a day or two after the incident.

Now this says something! Anyone wish to opine about what it is?

Yep - Article 32, UCMJ......

http://www.jag.navy.mil/html/NLSOGlakesArticle_32_investigations.htm#purpose

[Unregistered]

Boy, now there is a statement fitting to posted on the walls of "Mother B" so every Midshipman can learn them. Maybe clean it up just a tad, remove boss and insert "Superior"

This is also something that should be learned by the Capt's XO, Brian Kelm, Capt USN, RET.
He too likes to yell, cuss and scream at people. As he is now a civilian I have even less respect for him since he can't seem seperate himself and his current actions from his active duty days. If it was so great he should have never retired.

As a civilian employee I should never be instructed to stand at "Attention" and placed "At Ease." Those are military commands, the civilian public works staff and the bases secretarial pool knows nothing about the proper way to stand at attention and looks really pathetic when they do rise.

I am, on the other hand, will remain defiant and NOT rise to attention when called by the XO. Screw him too!

Go work at Mc Donalds then. Sounds like you really deserve your job.

[james]

Unfortunately nothing will change at the Naval Academy nor many graduating from there. How do I know this? I was stationed at Navsta Yard Patrol craft. These so called leaders are pumped up with so much B.S. on how they are God's gift to this world and every enlisted Sailor should be thankful for their presence. When a newly commissioned "ring knocker" reports to the real fleet they bring the same mentality as know it all. Some are so dumbfounded when they actually learn there are people smarter and better leaders than they are, from the enlisted ranks. Afterwards, they cocoon themselves around their own peers just to feel good. The best leaders I ever had came from the enlisted ranks not the officers. Too much to prove and with a big chip on their shoulders. The sentry should have peppered sprayed his ass and handcuff him for displaying violent behavior, and he was almost at tears when this occured.

[Unregistered]

sounds liike the chip is on your shoulder you do not respect those who make your rules and especialloy if they are dedicated Officers, you have the problem if you call the Captains actions violent
you must have let a very sheltered life to be speaking like this
unless you were actually there and witnessed the action, you should be quiet
the Captain has been quiet and the tapes will show how long the issue with the gurads has been going on
this should be settled internally and Gaurino should have kept it from the public also
seems like he had the ax to grind and does nnotr come out looking like a good military person
what happens when he goes into combat, will he complain then also
seems like gaurino and his friends need to grow up, cussing is not reason to charge berating
and I was not there so I do not know what was actually said
I believe half of what I see, because it may not really be what I see and none of what I hear from somebody
about somebody

[Unregistered]

Boy, now there is a statement fitting to posted on the walls of "Mother B" so every Midshipman can learn them. Maybe clean it up just a tad, remove boss and insert "Superior"

This is also something that should be learned by the Capt's XO, Brian Kelm, Capt USN, RET.
He too likes to yell, cuss and scream at people. As he is now a civilian I have even less respect for him since he can't seem seperate himself and his current actions from his active duty days. If it was so great he should have never retired.

As a civilian employee I should never be instructed to stand at "Attention" and placed "At Ease." Those are military commands, the civilian public works staff and the bases secretarial pool knows nothing about the proper way to stand at attention and looks really pathetic when they do rise.

I am, on the other hand, will remain defiant and NOT rise to attention when called by the XO. Screw him too!



whatever your position is you should be terminated for your feelings, many people would appreciate and be proud to do this and work and get paid a good salary . get a job where you can do as you like, Good luck

[Unregistered]

Is this fact? Who was relieved and for what this time?

grow up if he was removed There probably is a good reason
these people are on tape and they are watched
the Captain does not appear out of nowhere
will everything going on security is very important now
remember Fort Dix? and the sentry

[Unregistered]

Is this fact? Who was relieved and for what this time?

Another sailor was relieved when doing his job by asking for proper identification but since it was another one of the CO's friends, he was relieved from his post only for doing his job and putting up with the Marine calling him stupid.

[Bullfrog]

. Peharps we all forgot of the 10 general orders of the sentry.



I don't know about the rest of you guys, but MY Navy has 11 General Orders. Furthermore, OS2 didn't violate any one of them. Having just transferred from a command where I worked physical security for 3 years I know how these posts are laid out. The head is right in the guard shack as previously stated. SOP for head breaks is "Get in, get done, get out." OS2 wasn't reading Doonesberry on the crapper. He went in and did his business.

The fact that the CO decided to flip out on the guy is totally UNSAT behavior. No commander worth his stripes should allow that face to be put on the Navy. I know its been mentioned before in here, but the Chain of Command is in place for a reason. Its for every member of our military to utilize.

Oh, and to answer the question about uniforms, Camo BDUs are issued by the parent command for security personnel. This practice is standard for almost all shore installations as well as sea-based units that have the funding in place. One of the main reasons for this is so security folks are easily identified as such. Also, BDUs present a more military appearance that the current utility uniform.

Happy Tuesday everyone.

[Unregistered]

sounds liike the chip is on your shoulder you do not respect those who make your rules and especialloy if they are dedicated Officers, you have the problem if you call the Captains actions violent
you must have let a very sheltered life to be speaking like this
unless you were actually there and witnessed the action, you should be quiet
the Captain has been quiet and the tapes will show how long the issue with the gurads has been going on
this should be settled internally and Gaurino should have kept it from the public also
seems like he had the ax to grind and does nnotr come out looking like a good military person
what happens when he goes into combat, will he complain then also
seems like gaurino and his friends need to grow up, cussing is not reason to charge berating
and I was not there so I do not know what was actually said
I believe half of what I see, because it may not really be what I see and none of what I hear from somebody
about somebody

Guarino doesn't have an ax to grind, quite simply the Captain acted out inappropriately..cussing is one thing, spitting in someone's face and poking your fingers in their face, etc. is quite another. You're right, you were not there, however, many people who were there, waiting to be waived into the gate witnessed this and complained. It wasn't made up by the guard.

[Unregistered]

grow up if he was removed There probably is a good reason
these people are on tape and they are watched
the Captain does not appear out of nowhere
will everything going on security is very important now
remember Fort Dix? and the sentry


Hmmmmm word is the video tapes were destroyed by order of the Captain...now, if he had nothing to hide, why would he care if the tapes were viewed??????

[Unregistered]

Another sailor was relieved when doing his job by asking for proper identification but since it was another one of the CO's friends, he was relieved from his post only for doing his job and putting up with the Marine calling him stupid.


That's a shame...when people can't even show their ID when the signs clearly state "100% ID Check". Just for doing his job...not right.

[Measure Man]

In related news...

Isn't this where Pres. Bush just hosted a summit with Israeli and Palestinian leaders?

I wonder if the Capt. knew about that before the gate sentry. Does security seem a little more important now?

[Unregistered]

In related news...

Isn't this where Pres. Bush just hosted a summit with Israeli and Palestinian leaders?

I wonder if the Capt. knew about that before the gate sentry. Does security seem a little more important now?

That's a bunch of bs!! You guys need something else to complain about! Enough is enough!!! The guards are NOT the problem in this case. The Captain is. He can not control himself and has proven it time and time again over many years. AND, as we've all seen, with many witnesses. So get of the guard's cases already. The one whos actions and motives you need to be examining is the Captain's. He's the one with the UCMJ hanging over his head. And in the end his career is the one on the line. Once again, the guards did nothing wrong in this case.

[Unregistered]

Nothing is going to happen. It would have already.

[Measure Man]

That's a bunch of bs!! You guys need something else to complain about! Enough is enough!!! The guards are NOT the problem in this case. The Captain is. He can not control himself and has proven it time and time again over many years. AND, as we've all seen, with many witnesses. So get of the guard's cases already. The one whos actions and motives you need to be examining is the Captain's. He's the one with the UCMJ hanging over his head. And in the end his career is the one on the line. Once again, the guards did nothing wrong in this case.

Sheesh...I was just sayin'...

[Sgt6042]

The guard was wrong. There are no ifs ands or buts about it. He violated 3 general orders for sentries in going to the head. I have stood many gates on both Marine Corps and Navy installations. At all of them the orders clearly stat when you can leave the outside post and enter the guard house. One is when there is no vehicle traffic approaching the gate. The second is upon proper relief by another armed guard. That’s it. If he had to use the head so bad he should have called his section leader to either send someone to relieve him or come relieve him himself. There is no excuse to abandon your post to use the head.
The 3 general orders

5. To quit my post only when properly relieved.
He was not properly relieved.

2. To walk my post in a military manner, keeping always on the alert, and observing everything that takes place within sight or hearing.He couldn’t observ everything in sight if he is sitting on the john and not outside at his proper post. And the unqualified, out of uniform, unarmed guard does not count.

11. To be especially watchful at night, and, during the time for challenging, to challenge all persons on or near my post and to allow no one to pass without proper authority.
Standing gate guard it is always time for challenging. It is the most vital position on any military instillation.

[Unregistered]

The guard was wrong. There are no ifs ands or buts about it. He violated 3 general orders for sentries in going to the head. I have stood many gates on both Marine Corps and Navy installations. At all of them the orders clearly stat when you can leave the outside post and enter the guard house. One is when there is no vehicle traffic approaching the gate. The second is upon proper relief by another armed guard. That’s it. If he had to use the head so bad he should have called his section leader to either send someone to relieve him or come relieve him himself. There is no excuse to abandon your post to use the head.
The 3 general orders

5. To quit my post only when properly relieved.
He was not properly relieved.

2. To walk my post in a military manner, keeping always on the alert, and observing everything that takes place within sight or hearing.He couldn’t observ everything in sight if he is sitting on the john and not outside at his proper post. And the unqualified, out of uniform, unarmed guard does not count.

11. To be especially watchful at night, and, during the time for challenging, to challenge all persons on or near my post and to allow no one to pass without proper authority.
Standing gate guard it is always time for challenging. It is the most vital position on any military instillation.

This does not apply to the all knowing sentries, who "make their own rules to follow."

[Unregistered]

Guarino doesn't have an ax to grind, quite simply the Captain acted out inappropriately..cussing is one thing, spitting in someone's face and poking your fingers in their face, etc. is quite another. You're right, you were not there, however, many people who were there, waiting to be waived into the gate witnessed this and complained. It wasn't made up by the guard.
how many is many and the tapes will sshow the entire incident from before during and after
how long was Gaurino in the head , the Captain did not appear out of nowhere he is a busy man and has many important things to do
was he notified of a problem with the gate>
has there been problwems before with the gate and the way it is being manned
lots of unanswered questions and one sided responses
my neighbor who was asecurity personat the Coast Guard Base a navy veteran was removed from his position because they now require all to be armed and he did not choose to be armed, he has held for many years as well as the other employees, beacuse a He had to wear full uniform
on duty and could not leave hisn post for any reason without calling the CO
maybe you should walk in the Captains shoes for a month or a year or 25 years then speak
he lost his temper so how many others do he is not perfect nobody is

[Unregistered]

Sheesh...I was just sayin'...

you got to be kidding did nothing wrong
he left his post
this is the real issue
the rest is bs
he was cussed at
what would happen if this were done in the private sector he would have been more than sworn at
he would be fired
he should have taken it like a man and learned a lesson and not acted like a baby
you people who believe he did nothing wrong need to read up on the duties of the guard
and stop putting down the Captain
wonder howq many times you have cussed at someone
because he ios the Captain, attention is drawen to this, he to is human and a caring person

[Unregistered]

Unfortunately nothing will change at the Naval Academy nor many graduating from there. How do I know this? I was stationed at Navsta Yard Patrol craft. These so called leaders are pumped up with so much B.S. on how they are God's gift to this world and every enlisted Sailor should be thankful for their presence. When a newly commissioned "ring knocker" reports to the real fleet they bring the same mentality as know it all. Some are so dumbfounded when they actually learn there are people smarter and better leaders than they are, from the enlisted ranks. Afterwards, they cocoon themselves around their own peers just to feel good. The best leaders I ever had came from the enlisted ranks not the officers. Too much to prove and with a big chip on their shoulders. The sentry should have peppered sprayed his ass and handcuff him for displaying violent behavior, and he was almost at tears when this occured.

nobody was threatend in any way or in danger from the Captain, nor was he unknow to the guard
had he done this serious charges against him would have been filed
NYC Police have been fired for doing this
You cannot spray anyone without just cause and that means you or someone are in serious danger
this should not have been done to the Super at the Academy either
He knew he was the Super, and if he did not have his ID with him, he should have called his CO
not Pepperspray him, again this speaks of animosity to Officers in Command
This is Annapolis ansd these men make it what it is that is the Officers and USNA grads

you people who resent this, should ask for transfers
You are representing the USA and all it stands for and should be proud to serve and or work there

[Measure Man]

you got to be kidding did nothing wrong
he left his post
this is the real issue
the rest is bs
he was cussed at
what would happen if this were done in the private sector he would have been more than sworn at
he would be fired
he should have taken it like a man and learned a lesson and not acted like a baby
you people who believe he did nothing wrong need to read up on the duties of the guard
and stop putting down the Captain
wonder howq many times you have cussed at someone
because he ios the Captain, attention is drawen to this, he to is human and a caring person

I dunno know why you're barking at my post...

I don't have particularly strong feelings on this either way...I don't think its a crime for a commander to yell at people...but, I have no knowledge of this commander and his history.

Nor do I have much knowledge on the rules for being a sentry in the Navy.

I wasn't putting down the Captain...perhaps you are quoting the wrong post. I think he probably acted a bit inappropriately and is due some private counseling...but doubt he should be relieved of command, sent to jail...or any of the other things some are suggesting here. I think this whole ordeal is blown out of proportion.

As for me...I've been on the receiving end a couple times with O-6s cussing me out...and I certainly didn't cry about it...just all in a day's work as far as I'm concerned.

[Unregistered]

The Chief of the Guard and other enlisted sailors are not at foult here. Capt. Fierro had a sentry pulled from his post to play chauffer and left the COG no other option but to place the individual on a gate. As for the armed sailor, having to use the head is not an option. It is a neccesity when on the gates for up to 12 hours at a time. Going inside the guardshack to do so is not blatently disregarding his duties. If u think it is, why dont u try standing in the same spot for even 4 hours and not need a chance to use the head. Think about that before u accuse a sentry of "blatently disregard(ing) his duties."
How do you know that Captain Fierro did what you said he did ? Did you witness it?
more hearsay
The guards at Buckingham Palace walk for 8 hours without a break
the secret they take a pill
as for 12 hour shifts, I do that every day for 4 months and Doctors and Nursed do iit as well as Police and Fire people, we learn to adjust

[Unregistered]

Outside the provocation of the events at the gate, I believe nothing that happened warranted the unprofessional conduct of Capt. Fierro. It is a great example of his typical method of dealing with adversity. I also served under him on the USS Kinkaid (DD-965). I have been witness to several outburts by him including: when he proceeded to smash the phone receiver into three different pieces,after receiving a report from the bridge; when he tore a phone out of the hands of the OOD, ripped the phone base off the mounts, and threw all of the pieces over the bridge wing into the ocean; during a Captain's Mast when he engaged a seamen in a "staring contest" which went on for three hours (with all of the witnesses standing by); and as he generally made a life a living hell for his officers and crew. If you don't believe me, check the records during 2000 in which 25+ crew members left the ship on drug charges and an additional 25+ crew members reported to Balboa Hospital for mental heath treatment (these included seamean, senior chiefs, and officers). Ask anyone who served in 3rd Fleet between 2000-2001 and you will get a better flavor of Fierro's history.
I guess you are the perfect person, you never loose your temper and because he is in Command he should be perfect
would love to watch your every move

[Unregistered]

So what you're saying is that this Captain earned the right to behave like a total asshole in public?
he had the safety of the people on his mind and until you walk in somebodys shoes
you should shut your mouth

so easy to judge someone

[Unregistered]

The guard was wrong. There are no ifs ands or buts about it. He violated 3 general orders for sentries in going to the head. I have stood many gates on both Marine Corps and Navy installations. At all of them the orders clearly stat when you can leave the outside post and enter the guard house. One is when there is no vehicle traffic approaching the gate. The second is upon proper relief by another armed guard. That’s it. If he had to use the head so bad he should have called his section leader to either send someone to relieve him or come relieve him himself. There is no excuse to abandon your post to use the head.
The 3 general orders

5. To quit my post only when properly relieved.
He was not properly relieved.

2. To walk my post in a military manner, keeping always on the alert, and observing everything that takes place within sight or hearing.He couldn’t observ everything in sight if he is sitting on the john and not outside at his proper post. And the unqualified, out of uniform, unarmed guard does not count.

11. To be especially watchful at night, and, during the time for challenging, to challenge all persons on or near my post and to allow no one to pass without proper authority.
Standing gate guard it is always time for challenging. It is the most vital position on any military instillation.

OBVIOUSLY someone can not read. YOU don't have all your facts straight. It might serve the purposes of this discussion to limit comment to only those who KNOW what they are talking about and can therefore comment intelligently. Reacting for reaction's sake is just a bunch of HOT AIR!!! Given the REAL FACTS. The ONLY one who can truly be at fault here is CAPTAIN FIERRO and his inability to control himself and act in a manner befitting his position. Do not comment unless you KNOW what you're talking about!!! Blind comments are, in this case, getting really stale and boring.

[Unregistered]

nobody was threatend in any way or in danger from the Captain, nor was he unknow to the guard
had he done this serious charges against him would have been filed
NYC Police have been fired for doing this
You cannot spray anyone without just cause and that means you or someone are in serious danger
this should not have been done to the Super at the Academy either
He knew he was the Super, and if he did not have his ID with him, he should have called his CO
not Pepperspray him, again this speaks of animosity to Officers in Command
This is Annapolis ansd these men make it what it is that is the Officers and USNA grads

you people who resent this, should ask for transfers
You are representing the USA and all it stands for and should be proud to serve and or work there

The REALITY is...the Supt was FIRED!!! For doing what the CO did. And, by the way, for whoever said "nothing has happened", just wait, as the investigation is still ongoing.

[Unregistered]

How do you know that Captain Fierro did what you said he did ? Did you witness it?
more hearsay
The guards at Buckingham Palace walk for 8 hours without a break
the secret they take a pill
as for 12 hour shifts, I do that every day for 4 months and Doctors and Nursed do iit as well as Police and Fire people, we learn to adjust

Of course we know it happened..read all the posts!!! It is FACT not rumor.

[Unregistered]

I guess you are the perfect person, you never loose your temper and because he is in Command he should be perfect
would love to watch your every move

Noone is perfect, that is for sure - but is fairly obvious from reading about his history on that ship that he has major issues.

[Unregistered]

he had the safety of the people on his mind and until you walk in somebodys shoes
you should shut your mouth

so easy to judge someone

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck...

[Unregistered]

I guess you are the perfect person, you never loose your temper and because he is in Command he should be perfect
would love to watch your every move

Of course no one is perfect. Most normal people do lose their tempers from time to time. But most normal people know how to control themselves in public - at least. It must be noted that this Captain is not being watched 24/7. He has no one with cameras and recorders following him around. However! Being in a leadership position puts him in the light of being a primary example for the rest of those in his command to follow. For that very reason he is being watched by everyone in his command. And rightfully so. AND!! For that very reason he should conduct himself in an exemplary manner. Every judgment he makes should be tempered with the wisdom of his years and position. It is very obvious by this incident and MANY MANY others in the past that this man does not understand that fact. He has more than once conducted himself in a manner which has embarrassed his command and shown him without wisdom.
Just because he is in command it gives him no right to tear into anyone he pleases at any time he sees fit. There are rules of order and conduct. They apply to EVERYONE from the bottom up. He is no more outside those rules than anyone else. Being in command is not a pass to act in any manner he wishes.
Now. There is more than sufficient evidence that the guards were acting in accordance with orders given them. The guard in the restroom was NOT off his post given the fact that the restroom is actually located IN THE SENTRY HOUSE right there next to the gate. There were TWO guards at the gate besides the one in the restroom. One of those guards were armed and in uniform along with the one "out of uniform". There were several people waiting to be waved in through the gate the day Captain Fierro decided to execute instant justice. Anyone there could see that the Captain's actions were out of order and ill-timed. Quite obviously a bad management decision. Just because bad management decisions have not always ended in appropriate reactions does NOT mean they were good decisions - no matter what the business setting. The end does not always justify the means. The military can STILL be tough and ready without officer's trying to rule by mean-spirited bully tactics.

[Sgt6042]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;62263]OBVIOUSLY someone can not read. YOU don't have all your facts straight./QUOTE]

FACT: The guard left his post with out being properly relieved. You can not be relieved from an armed post by someone who is UNARMED. I don’t care what branch of the US military you are in you don’t do it. In today’s world that’s telling the terrorist to come blow the place up. And for those that say its not a target because its not a main installation wake up. Being able to kill that many leaders of ones enemy in just one attack is worth it. The Captain obviously saw a problem at the gate and thought it needed to be corrected on the spot. Does he have to use the COC no he is the CO of the base he can make changes on the spot and then notify the chain of command. Was he right in his actions this day? I don’t know the article posted says he belittled the guard but doesn’t say how. A lot of conjecture on this. Did he cuss while he yelled at the guard? If so the guard needs to suck it up. Did he touch the guard and spit on him (deliberately spit not spit from yelling)? If so the CO is in the wrong.

[Unregistered]

nice try Mr. Captains buddy..
you sound like an idiot, read this and maybe you will understand because you dont sound like you stood anything at any installation, always somebody trying to sound more important then they are and then ends up sounding like a jack.
1.The head is on post. Maybe you should read some before you post nonsense.

2. sight OR hearing... if the head cant be used on post why in the hell would it be there.... you are amazing

3. doesnt even make sense in this case...

I want to hear you defend this cause you sound.... well



The guard was wrong. There are no ifs ands or buts about it. He violated 3 general orders for sentries in going to the head. I have stood many gates on both Marine Corps and Navy installations. At all of them the orders clearly stat when you can leave the outside post and enter the guard house. One is when there is no vehicle traffic approaching the gate. The second is upon proper relief by another armed guard. That’s it. If he had to use the head so bad he should have called his section leader to either send someone to relieve him or come relieve him himself. There is no excuse to abandon your post to use the head.
The 3 general orders

5. To quit my post only when properly relieved.
He was not properly relieved.

2. To walk my post in a military manner, keeping always on the alert, and observing everything that takes place within sight or hearing.He couldn’t observ everything in sight if he is sitting on the john and not outside at his proper post. And the unqualified, out of uniform, unarmed guard does not count.

11. To be especially watchful at night, and, during the time for challenging, to challenge all persons on or near my post and to allow no one to pass without proper authority.
Standing gate guard it is always time for challenging. It is the most vital position on any military instillation.

[Unregistered]

[

FACT: The guard left his post with out being properly relieved. You can not be relieved from an armed post by someone who is UNARMED. I don’t care what branch of the US military you are in you don’t do it. In today’s world that’s telling the terrorist to come blow the place up. And for those that say its not a target because its not a main installation wake up. Being able to kill that many leaders of ones enemy in just one attack is worth it..

1) I have stood sentry post on a number of installations and witnessed those at the USNA. For the record, it has not been unusual for someone to stand sentry duty solo. Is there a OPNAVINST that requires 2 armed sentries at all times? I don't think so!

2) All of the bases in Tidewater had unmanned gates for a number of yours. Was the Admiral that made that decision demoted or fired? Probably not! So temporarily having an unarmed sentry on the gate while the armed sentry is in the can is not a capital offense.

3) The Sentry Posts at the USNA is for show.

4) If the Capt is so innocent then why was he directed by his boss to attend Anger Management Counseling? A reliable source from his office says he spends 1 hr 3 days a week speaking with a therapist.

5) Been told the investigation will likely conclude next week. I guess we will see then

[bomber1379]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;62263]OBVIOUSLY someone can not read. YOU don't have all your facts straight./QUOTE]

FACT: The guard left his post with out being properly relieved. You can not be relieved from an armed post by someone who is UNARMED. I don’t care what branch of the US military you are in you don’t do it. In today’s world that’s telling the terrorist to come blow the place up. And for those that say its not a target because its not a main installation wake up. Being able to kill that many leaders of ones enemy in just one attack is worth it. The Captain obviously saw a problem at the gate and thought it needed to be corrected on the spot. Does he have to use the COC no he is the CO of the base he can make changes on the spot and then notify the chain of command. Was he right in his actions this day? I don’t know the article posted says he belittled the guard but doesn’t say how. A lot of conjecture on this. Did he cuss while he yelled at the guard? If so the guard needs to suck it up. Did he touch the guard and spit on him (deliberately spit not spit from yelling)? If so the CO is in the wrong.

They guy was taking a leak! The CO was way out of line in my book. Nobody deserves to be talked to in such a manner. There was another sentry on post to cover him so it's not like they left the front door open for Osama, who by the way is waiting in the bushes waiting for you to pee so he can take over the world.

[Unregistered]

The REALITY is...the Supt was FIRED!!! For doing what the CO did. And, by the way, for whoever said "nothing has happened", just wait, as the investigation is still ongoing.

that was not the right thing to do to the Superintendent
very bad decision for a career Navy man to be treatred with such little respect
Imagine the President walking into the White House without ID and being stopped and then pepper sprayed

very sad to say that that could happen because of somebody disliking Officers above them
the Sentry did recognize him and if there was a problem should have called his superior

[Unregistered]

Of course we know it happened..read all the posts!!! It is FACT not rumor.

How many of the posts actually witnessed the incidents?
How many are repeat responders?

[Unregistered]

Noone is perfect, that is for sure - but is fairly obvious from reading about his history on that ship that he has major issues.
again hearsay, having a temper is a major Issue? since when
how about the serious issues the real issues, His Military record
his work record
he seems to have been around and is dedicated to the cause
are you military and what have youn done?

[Unregistered]

Of course no one is perfect. Most normal people do lose their tempers from time to time. But most normal people know how to control themselves in public - at least. It must be noted that this Captain is not being watched 24/7. He has no one with cameras and recorders following him around. However! Being in a leadership position puts him in the light of being a primary example for the rest of those in his command to follow. For that very reason he is being watched by everyone in his command. And rightfully so. AND!! For that very reason he should conduct himself in an exemplary manner. Every judgment he makes should be tempered with the wisdom of his years and position. It is very obvious by this incident and MANY MANY others in the past that this man does not understand that fact. He has more than once conducted himself in a manner which has embarrassed his command and shown him without wisdom.
Just because he is in command it gives him no right to tear into anyone he pleases at any time he sees fit. There are rules of order and conduct. They apply to EVERYONE from the bottom up. He is no more outside those rules than anyone else. Being in command is not a pass to act in any manner he wishes.
Now. There is more than sufficient evidence that the guards were acting in accordance with orders given them. The guard in the restroom was NOT off his post given the fact that the restroom is actually located IN THE SENTRY HOUSE right there next to the gate. There were TWO guards at the gate besides the one in the restroom. One of those guards were armed and in uniform along with the one "out of uniform". There were several people waiting to be waved in through the gate the day Captain Fierro decided to execute instant justice. Anyone there could see that the Captain's actions were out of order and ill-timed. Quite obviously a bad management decision. Just because bad management decisions have not always ended in appropriate reactions does NOT mean they were good decisions - no matter what the business setting. The end does not always justify the means. The military can STILL be tough and ready without officer's trying to rule by mean-spirited bully tactics.

were you there did you witness this?
your story varies from others

[Unregistered]

That's a bunch of bs!! You guys need something else to complain about! Enough is enough!!! The guards are NOT the problem in this case. The Captain is. He can not control himself and has proven it time and time again over many years. AND, as we've all seen, with many witnesses. So get of the guard's cases already. The one whos actions and motives you need to be examining is the Captain's. He's the one with the UCMJ hanging over his head. And in the end his career is the one on the line. Once again, the guards did nothing wrong in this case.

I sure hope the gurad is transferred immediately for the all the fuss he has made over this
he did not handle it as it should have been and again we do not know the whole truth because people tend to exaggerate and I suspect this is being done
also all his friends with the feeling that the guard was in his right should be transferred to some place else

[TJMAC77SP]

When this thread started I thought I knew the story. Now I believe that somehow national security was endangered and in fact the sentry should have been keelhauled. Does the Navy still do this? I am beginning to see extraterrestrial influence here. Perhaps the Illuminati or Masons are involved.

Come on folks........Whether there was a violation by the sentries on post or not the captain's tirade was certainly in the realm of overreacting. Any supervisor, myself included, is I am sure, guilty of this from time to time. Does he deserve any serious punishment? Of course not. Does he deserve a counseling session with his boss? Probably. Of course that counseling will take (or has already taken) place in private and perhaps this itself will be a lesson to the captain. And if there was indeed an infraction by the sentries then I am sure they too will be or already punished. Again, not earth-shattering stuff here.

This is such a non-event. People on both sides of this issue have really gotten wrapped around the axle with very little reason. Get a grip and get over it. I think 23 pages of posts devoted to this is a bit much............

[Unregistered]

When this thread started I thought I knew the story. Now I believe that somehow national security was endangered and in fact the sentry should have been keelhauled. Does the Navy still do this? I am beginning to see extraterrestrial influence here. Perhaps the Illuminati or Masons are involved.

Come on folks........Whether there was a violation by the sentries on post or not the captain's tirade was certainly in the realm of overreacting. Any supervisor, myself included, is I am sure, guilty of this from time to time. Does he deserve any serious punishment? Of course not. Does he deserve a counseling session with his boss? Probably. Of course that counseling will take (or has already taken) place in private and perhaps this itself will be a lesson to the captain. And if there was indeed an infraction by the sentries then I am sure they too will be or already punished. Again, not earth-shattering stuff here.

This is such a non-event. People on both sides of this issue have really gotten wrapped around the axle with very little reason. Get a grip and get over it. I think 23 pages of posts devoted to this is a bit much............

While I completely understand how you think that 23 pages of posts regarding this subject is hard to believe, most people on here have seen him in action and know his ways. They are not good, they are horrible. If this had been on incident, then yes, I would totally agree with you; however, it is quite apparent to all that know him and have either served with him or under him that there is more going on than meets the eye. He does need serious medical attention and counseling.

From an earlier post, it said he was receiving counseling, and if that is true, I hope it helps him.

[Unregistered]

that was not the right thing to do to the Superintendent
very bad decision for a career Navy man to be treatred with such little respect
Imagine the President walking into the White House without ID and being stopped and then pepper sprayed

very sad to say that that could happen because of somebody disliking Officers above them
the Sentry did recognize him and if there was a problem should have called his superior

No, you are wrong. If you were right, the Supt would still have a career in the Navy - which, by the way, he doesn't. He got relieved of his command for acting the way he did AND then, he got retired because he kept running his mouth about it. He got what he deserved.

Just because someone is an Admiral or a Captain, they do NOT walk on water and noone has to bow at their feet.

[Unregistered]

that was not the right thing to do to the Superintendent
very bad decision for a career Navy man to be treatred with such little respect
Imagine the President walking into the White House without ID and being stopped and then pepper sprayed

very sad to say that that could happen because of somebody disliking Officers above them
the Sentry did recognize him and if there was a problem should have called his superior

That had NOTHING to do with anyone disliking the Supt....he caused what happened...by HIS actions and acting out inappropriately.

[Unregistered]

were you there did you witness this?
your story varies from others

Okay, let me first say that it is not my post you are questioning, but I felt like I could answer. Yes, many people witnessed this. There is no "story", the facts are the facts and the article is totally accurate. Those of us working there can vouch for that. There IS in fact a head right on the post and the sentries can use it whenever they need to.

[Unregistered]

that was not the right thing to do to the Superintendent
very bad decision for a career Navy man to be treatred with such little respect
Imagine the President walking into the White House without ID and being stopped and then pepper sprayed

very sad to say that that could happen because of somebody disliking Officers above them
the Sentry did recognize him and if there was a problem should have called his superior

Don't even try to compare this to the President walking into the White House without an ID! I am quite sure the President wouldn't have ripped someone's head off for asking for their ID, which is stated right on the sign when you drive up "100% ID CHECK"!!!!!!!!!! That means EVERYONE!!!! No excuses...

[Unregistered]

again hearsay, having a temper is a major Issue? since when
how about the serious issues the real issues, His Military record
his work record
he seems to have been around and is dedicated to the cause
are you military and what have youn done?


Having a bad temper is one thing, acting like he did is quite another!!!!

[Unregistered]

again hearsay, having a temper is a major Issue? since when
how about the serious issues the real issues, His Military record
his work record
he seems to have been around and is dedicated to the cause
are you military and what have youn done?

This incident will affect his military and work record.......as someone said many postings ago, this is nothing new. He's just been lucky enough to "know people" in the right places to get him jobs. I don't see that happening again. Not now that is out in the open for the whole world to see.

[Unregistered]

I sure hope the gurad is transferred immediately for the all the fuss he has made over this
he did not handle it as it should have been and again we do not know the whole truth because people tend to exaggerate and I suspect this is being done
also all his friends with the feeling that the guard was in his right should be transferred to some place else

He is not going to be transferred...wake and smell the coffee!! The only person that is going to be transferred or forced to retire is the CO!!

[bomber1379]

That's a bunch of bs!! You guys need something else to complain about! Enough is enough!!! The guards are NOT the problem in this case. The Captain is. He can not control himself and has proven it time and time again over many years. AND, as we've all seen, with many witnesses. So get of the guard's cases already. The one whos actions and motives you need to be examining is the Captain's. He's the one with the UCMJ hanging over his head. And in the end his career is the one on the line. Once again, the guards did nothing wrong in this case.

I gotta agree with that, since when did it become a crime to go pee-pee when the urge strikes you?

[TJMAC77SP]

Well, I tried.

24 pages and counting……. When this thread is done, not only will Captain Fierro be retired but the sentry who used the latrine will be as well.

[Unregistered]

The sailors were in the right, the officer is guilty of conduct unbecoming, and if you are an old salt, you should have learned to spell during your time in the Navy.
the guard was not doing his job

[Unregistered]

While I completely understand how you think that 23 pages of posts regarding this subject is hard to believe, most people on here have seen him in action and know his ways. They are not good, they are horrible. If this had been on incident, then yes, I would totally agree with you; however, it is quite apparent to all that know him and have either served with him or under him that there is more going on than meets the eye. He does need serious medical attention and counseling.

From an earlier post, it said he was receiving counseling, and if that is true, I hope it helps him.

wonder how many of these comments come from people who really know the Captain or were in his presence whent they occured or are the just rumors being repeated over and over
yoyu are making a big deal about nothing serious
the serious and endangering thing was done by the Guard
are you in the Military and if so for how long?

[Unregistered]

No, you are wrong. If you were right, the Supt would still have a career in the Navy - which, by the way, he doesn't. He got relieved of his command for acting the way he did AND then, he got retired because he kept running his mouth about it. He got what he deserved.

Just because someone is an Admiral or a Captain, they do NOT walk on water and noone has to bow at their feet.

I sure hope you are not serving our Country or being paid with Us dollars you have a problem they do not walk on water but they do command respect

maybe he was releived to satisfy the media and the crybabies
would this have been handled the same if it were enlisted man aginst enlisted man
or civilian against civilian

[Unregistered]

That had NOTHING to do with anyone disliking the Supt....he caused what happened...by HIS actions and acting out inappropriately.

and you think the gurad acted approprately? You do not think he was throwing his weight around?
getting rid of good men because of something like this is dumb to say the least

[Unregistered]

The REALITY is...the Supt was FIRED!!! For doing what the CO did. And, by the way, for whoever said "nothing has happened", just wait, as the investigation is still ongoing.

he should have not been fired it is bercause or people like you that they try to keep happy that this was done
wonder how much action you have seen

[Unregistered]

Of course we know it happened..read all the posts!!! It is FACT not rumor.

what makes the posts true sounds like a bunch of people trying to stir trouble
Maybe the Captain was making them tow the line and they do not like this

[Unregistered]

1) I have stood sentry post on a number of installations and witnessed those at the USNA. For the record, it has not been unusual for someone to stand sentry duty solo. Is there a OPNAVINST that requires 2 armed sentries at all times? I don't think so!

2) All of the bases in Tidewater had unmanned gates for a number of yours. Was the Admiral that made that decision demoted or fired? Probably not! So temporarily having an unarmed sentry on the gate while the armed sentry is in the can is not a capital offense.

3) The Sentry Posts at the USNA is for show.

4) If the Capt is so innocent then why was he directed by his boss to attend Anger Management Counseling? A reliable source from his office says he spends 1 hr 3 days a week speaking with a therapist.

5) Been told the investigation will likely conclude next week. I guess we will see then

have you seen how West Point is Guarded?
you think the Guards are for show, you have a lot to learn
Many important visitors come to the Naval Academy

wise up and grow up

[Unregistered]

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but MY Navy has 11 General Orders. Furthermore, OS2 didn't violate any one of them. Having just transferred from a command where I worked physical security for 3 years I know how these posts are laid out. The head is right in the guard shack as previously stated. SOP for head breaks is "Get in, get done, get out." OS2 wasn't reading Doonesberry on the crapper. He went in and did his business.

The fact that the CO decided to flip out on the guy is totally UNSAT behavior. No commander worth his stripes should allow that face to be put on the Navy. I know its been mentioned before in here, but the Chain of Command is in place for a reason. Its for every member of our military to utilize.

Oh, and to answer the question about uniforms, Camo BDUs are issued by the parent command for security personnel. This practice is standard for almost all shore installations as well as sea-based units that have the funding in place. One of the main reasons for this is so security folks are easily identified as such. Also, BDUs present a more military appearance that the current utility uniform.

Happy Tuesday everyone.


were you there do you know how llong he was in there?

[Unregistered]

Hmmmmm word is the video tapes were destroyed by order of the Captain...now, if he had nothing to hide, why would he care if the tapes were viewed??????

where did you hear rhis from whom?

[Unregistered]

That's a shame...when people can't even show their ID when the signs clearly state "100% ID Check". Just for doing his job...not right.

were you there?

[Unregistered]

this is complete bs. the gate guards are expected to work 4 days on 2 days off in 12 hour shifts (13 when u include arriving an hour prior to your watch). these sailors practically live on the gates for days at a time. this command is understaffed for the job it is expected to do. this situation is made even worse when a sentry is pulled from teh gate to drive an admiral to Andrews AFB to catch a plane. what happened to his chauffer? and if that wasn a possibility, why didnt the capt drive him down since, according to him, they were friends? this command doesnt not receive enough funding to properly maintain/replace essential equipment let alone provide sailors with a uniform when they check on-board like they are supposed to. The sentry did nothing wrong by using the head and the relief for the "chauffer sailor" did nothing wrong by not wearing the proper uniform he had not yet received. wake up people and use some common sense here!!!!

the circumstances surrounding the Admiral do not enter into this
again you sound like you do not like the Brass
not uncommon for a Captain and an ASdmoral to be friends is is?
no more so than an enlisted man to be forends with his superior
and since when should you decide what the Captain should do?

[Unregistered]

Unfortunately nothing will change at the Naval Academy nor many graduating from there. How do I know this? I was stationed at Navsta Yard Patrol craft. These so called leaders are pumped up with so much B.S. on how they are God's gift to this world and every enlisted Sailor should be thankful for their presence. When a newly commissioned "ring knocker" reports to the real fleet they bring the same mentality as know it all. Some are so dumbfounded when they actually learn there are people smarter and better leaders than they are, from the enlisted ranks. Afterwards, they cocoon themselves around their own peers just to feel good. The best leaders I ever had came from the enlisted ranks not the officers. Too much to prove and with a big chip on their shoulders. The sentry should have peppered sprayed his ass and handcuff him for displaying violent behavior, and he was almost at tears when this occured.
cusssing is violent behavior?
have you ever cussed at someone? maybe you should be peppersprayed?

[Unregistered]

With all the B.S. posted on here, this is what I have concluded. The Captain acted in an unbecoming manner and no class or leadership what so ever. This individual has a huge chip on his shoulder as do most people who wuold berate and belittle others below him just to feel superior. I have personally stood watch at the gate guard sentry, we are undermanned, underfunded, and have a hard time convincing enlisted personnel to accept orders there,why? because those a-holes with their head up their butts make you want to punch and b**ch slap them.

so you have a temper also?