Military | News

BigGayDeal.com

Navy Cmdr Temporarily Relieved of Duties Over Raunchy Video

Ohonors Captain Owen Honors will be temporarily relieved of his command of the USS Enterprise following controversy over the raunchy videos he produced and broadcast to the ship in 2006 and 2007, NBC's Jim Miklaszewski reported this evening.

Honors will not be in command of the Enterprise when it leaves for Afghanistan in a couple of weeks.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Silliness. He should just apologize for using the "fag" insult-- and say why he knows it was wrong to use it-- and they should keep him in his position. Honestly, this is mostly much ado about nothing. It seems like if he can illustrate why casual homophobia is hurtful (and it is, and yet his use of "fag" did seem only to be thoughtless rather than from deep-seated hate)then he'll maintain his leadership abilities.

    Posted by: Derek Pearce | Jan 3, 2011 6:56:41 PM


  2. Somebody was out to get this guy or some group or organization see political traction in it, and want to make an example out of him while furthering their agenda.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 3, 2011 7:01:07 PM


  3. This is a much stronger response than I ever would have expected. I agree that there's likely more to the story---perhaps the rumors about him being gay are true and someone has an ax to grind.

    I wonder if this would have happened in the absence of DADT repeal. Also, did he say fag, or was it just the guy sitting to his right (left on screen)?

    Posted by: Paul R | Jan 3, 2011 7:13:16 PM


  4. Paul R.-

    All three of the personas were CAPT Honors. In the middle, CAPT Honors as XO. To his right, his Aviator persona. To his left, his Surface Warfare Officer [SWO] persona. This is an example of the professional quality of the video produced by the USS Enterprise Public Affairs office.

    Posted by: Karl | Jan 3, 2011 7:21:06 PM


  5. @Derek Pearce
    So you think his using derogatory epithets is just silliness? What if he were using the "n" word to describe a black soldier? Not so silly or funny all of a sudden is it? The "f" word is not a frivolous word and it's denigrating to all LGBT people. I think the Navy response was appropriate. Creating an atmosphere where homophobia, bigotry and hate flourish is not a silly matter even if it's done in a "funny" video.

    Posted by: Brad | Jan 3, 2011 7:30:21 PM


  6. His use of the "f" word was not funny. But shall we say this is a "teachable moment"? He would never use the "n" word because he'd be fired for sure-- and as of right about now, the "f" word will equally be off limits. But I'm willing to cut him some slack IF he were to show/say why it's wrong and apologized.

    Posted by: Derek Pearce | Jan 3, 2011 7:35:18 PM


  7. Also, I wouldn't be one bit surprised to hear he's gay. No search on him reveals anything about being married and he certainly has some, er, fixations it would seem. The whole split personality on screen thing (and the components each persona represents) is just too psychologically delicious. Almost feel sorry for him.

    Posted by: Derek Pearce | Jan 3, 2011 7:44:01 PM


  8. Picard would not be amused.

    Posted by: anonymous | Jan 3, 2011 7:44:48 PM


  9. His use of expense equipment, designed for important informational tasks -- not goofball videos -- was what really got him into trouble.

    That plus the story getting out to the world at large.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jan 3, 2011 7:47:07 PM


  10. 1)Some gay group or organization got their hands on these vids and publicized them. Many professional gay organizations are also 'Progressive' and anti-military, so this was a win-win in their eyes; getting the issue of homophobia and un-PC language in the news and embarrassing the military.

    2)The Brass will hang the XO out to dry. This is unwanted publicity and The Brass actually have their own PC driven agenda to adhere to.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 3, 2011 7:55:10 PM


  11. yet ratbastard i would bet that if some dem used gov equipment to make a video lampooning xtians you would be clutching your pearls and screaching for the head

    conserva-gays are strange hypocrites

    Posted by: mstrozfckslv@yahoo.com | Jan 3, 2011 8:07:22 PM


  12. I am not a conservative as you would define it, nor as it's commonly defined in 2011 America. I'm certainly not Republican. Not 'Progressive' [as it's commonly defined in 2011 America] nor Democrat. What's so hard to understand about that, MSTROZFCKSLV?

    The real, traditional meanings of many words like liberal and conservative have been high-jacked by political correctness and it's neo-con opposite.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 3, 2011 8:24:33 PM


  13. But he's been making these movies for years, so clearly they were considered acceptable use of the equipment at one time. I wonder what the previous videos contained.

    @Karl: thanks. I guess I had read that, but I'm awful with people's faces, and if they change their appearance even slightly I have a hard time recognizing them. I've walked right past close friends many times, though that's usually because I'm thinking about something. And that video was so inane that I wasn't watching it too closely!

    Posted by: Paul R | Jan 3, 2011 8:29:59 PM


  14. Blech... all that verbal diarrhea coming out of your mouth, Ratbastard. How can anyone possibly understand you or get your point when you make none? You're as hollow as Sarah Palin and her twitter account.

    Posted by: JM | Jan 3, 2011 8:46:12 PM


  15. i guess some gays dont feel too equal,if it was a racial issue his firing wouldnt be a issue(oh wait he wasnt fired),but some gays dont think they deserve the same action when it happens to a homophobe ..i hope this makes people think there is REAL consequences for spewing ignorance willy-nilly

    Posted by: sal | Jan 3, 2011 9:22:56 PM


  16. @JM,

    ...Verbal diarrhea? I think I was pretty succinct.

    ...Is name dropping Palin one of the talking points you've been instructed to use or do lack original thought?

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 3, 2011 9:25:57 PM


  17. i mean if u see some of the forums and the sexist and homophobic stuff said to support this guy,there was a guy who said it was BETTER when women didnt serve along men!!!!!and he had a bucnh of people supporting his comment!!!i cant believe people HERE of all places will push that garbage too

    Posted by: sal | Jan 3, 2011 9:27:06 PM


  18. Just becuase something has been going on for a period of time doesn't mean it was apropriate. I remember being invited to the Tail Hook get together in Vegas and was amazed when i was told what to expect. I opted out but a video leaked, and all of a sudden it was a "disgrace" and the tradition ended. This is no different. An XO needs to be held to a higher standard and treat all those under his command with respect. The video was clearly in bad judgement regardless of how long it had been going on or how many he made.

    Also, I feel sorry for the poor guy who was sitting at the Public Affiars desk when this broke over the holiday. The initial statement from the Navy purported to defend the video....ooops

    Posted by: Secret Identity | Jan 3, 2011 9:46:08 PM


  19. That guy should be court-martialed for conduct unbecoming of an officer and summarily discharged--dishonorably. Period.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Jan 3, 2011 9:59:49 PM


  20. This is ridiculous. He was told to stop years ago, and did. Clearly someone has an axe to grind, and PC thuggery wins out when the ship deploys in two weeks.

    Something stinks here. Someone filed complaints, got his superiors to tell him to stop, he stops, and then almost five years later someone anonymously runs to the press to air grievances publicly.

    Nice job. Way to keep the ship's morale up. Hang the XO out to dry two weeks before deployment.

    Posted by: DR | Jan 3, 2011 10:01:21 PM


  21. I should say B is a reason for his dismissal, not A.

    Posted by: Derek Pearce | Jan 3, 2011 10:05:47 PM


  22. Okay that last post made no sense because the post I tried before it disappeared. The gist was... never mind. This is still a bit to do about nothing IF he apologizes.

    Posted by: Derek Pearce | Jan 3, 2011 10:14:17 PM


  23. From what I understand, there were complaints and nothing was done, rather he was promoted! That's at least as big a problem as this closet case.

    Posted by: David R. | Jan 4, 2011 12:17:07 AM


  24. have i missed a statement from the white house on this?

    Posted by: grego | Jan 4, 2011 2:31:25 AM


  25. Wow. I can't believe people are sticking up for this douchenozzle. He showed extremely poor judgement and a lack of maturity and leadership in choosing to do these in the first place. Apologizing doesn't make up for that fact.
    ARTICLE 133—CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER AND GENTLEMAN
    "Conduct violative of this article is action or behavior in an official capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the person as an officer, seriously compromises the officer’s character as a gentleman, or action or behavior in an unofficial or private capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the officer personally, seriously compromises the person’s standing as an officer.

    There are certain moral attributes common to the ideal officer and the perfect gentleman, a lack of which is indicated by acts of dishonesty, unfair dealing, indecency, indecorum, lawlessness, injustice, or cruelty."

    Luckily, the Top Brass at the Navy took this seriously and relieved him of his duties. I'm glad Derek, Ratbastard and DR aren't the ones in charge of maintaing discipline and enforcing the rules. We should all expect the commander of 6000 sailors and marines on a nuclear powered aircraft carrier to have more sense than this clown.
    If he had obeyed the rules, none of this would have happened to him. It is ridiculous to blame the people who brought this to light.

    Posted by: StillmarriedinCA | Jan 4, 2011 3:15:58 AM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Watch: Blizzard Daredevil Skis at 40 MPH Down NYC's Park Avenue« «