To a point, Jonesy, however, Jim Loy did not appoint Admiral Allen to the position of Commandant. Although I am sure that a very short list (no more then 6 names are submitted) of potential Commandants was prepared by Admiral Loy and submitted to the Secretary for selection and submission to the Senate, who since 1947 has the statuatory responsibility to confirm service chiefs and to also confirm Flag and General Officer selections. These are not always "rubber stamp" selections Jonesy...

Based on the list you posted I fail to see anything that you list as wrong or innapropriate in my opinion. I challenge you to research the last 2 Service Chiefs from each branch to see where they went upon retirement and what they do for a living.

Using your implied thought processes then I too should be added to your list of ne'er do wells and scallywags - for upon retirement I was hired by a company who was hired by Lockheed Martin to prepare their Deepwater Proposal. Oh gosh Jonesy - do you know why I was hired? Same reason them evil, criminal (which is the message you are trying to convey about ADM Loy) Senior Service Officers - I had something the company needed in an employee - Coast Guard Knowledge. If I wanted to hire someone to drive my cousin's 62' Motor Yacht in Florida I would consider looking at retired Coast Guard Afloat COs and OINCs. If I wanted to develop a new fighter jet, I would try to hire some TOPGUN. If I want to pay to get laid I would temporarily hire a someone with experience in that area of expertise...

Tim, well you were hired not because of your ability to network and affect decisions. Why not hire a retired Captain for Lockheed's board since the Captain probably will have more specific knowledge about the technical field as well as have inside info on the internal Coast Guard politics and machinations?

Thank you for your statement
"Based on the list you posted I fail to see anything that you list as wrong or innapropriate in my opinion." Perhaps Sac Metal will be able to absorb your statement. Anyhow Sac the liberal lion seems to love his Coast Guard more for its marine safety regulation side of business

This message has been edited. Last edited by: KeepingUpWithJones,

quote:

Tim, well you were hired not because of your ability to network and affect decisions

Ah grasshopper, you do not know me at all, nor my "contacts", or why I was hired other then what I told you. An example of what you don't know, I arranged a meeting, post 9/11, with the S Directorate at CGHQ. Missing from the meeting was the Coast Guard Engineer (i.e. the Assistant Commandant for Systems, the Admiral that is.) Present were 5 CG Captains and one civilian. Four people in the meeting, other then myself and the VP from my company, knew me personally.

You presume that because I was a CWO4 F&S that I had either limited contacts or knowledge. Sorry for your lack of insight.

quote:

Based on the list you posted I fail to see anything that you list as wrong or innapropriate in my opinion." Perhaps Sac Metal will be able to absorb your statement

AJ, I am afraid it is you who needs to absorb my statement; you have implied beginning with the thread title:

quote:

Lockheed Martin Paid Deepwatery Lobbyist $120,000

and proceeding through your posts that ADM Loy is guilty of wrong doing. You know that "guilt by association" thing that you imply.

About his response to the Washington Post? I suspect they hear that comment alot, from many people.

The real problem with our government is the Congress...I've said it many times - they are the same ones who cry foul yet their pockets are lined with gelt from the same people they investigate.

Tim, I was saying you were hired for your technical and administrative ability. Not because you can call a Commandant and convince him to change his mind for the unknowing benefit of the contractor.

I never said Adm Loy (retired) was guilty of anything. Please provide the statement were I said he was. Also, what I provided was public information, such as the Washington Post article, etc.

quote:

Well Dave it hasn't changed much at all since the 2 star Admiral, except that the retired powers to be are savvy enough to disguise their efforts enough to not warrant criminal charges or media attention corruption is even more rampant because the powers to be have figured out how to make it less blatant or conspicuous

quote:

Now getting back from viewing all the distracting theatrics, I would say to Tim Hecht that it is different in the Coast Guard since it is a smaller service. Hence, there is likelihood of the "good ole boy system" be even more pervasive. For example, a former Commandant has more of a chance of "influencing" a Commandant (that he handpicked?). Put the pieces together, and look at how Admiral Collins followed Admiral Loy. Collins was a Deepwater kool-aid drinker. Admiral Loy was compensated $300,000 from Lockheed. More sophisticated minds want to know.

AJ - a funnier game of semantics I haven't seen since a few years back on a long drawn out thread by a member of the boards who felt he was wrongly seperated by the service. He tried to manipulate his words in a manner similar to you - man up AJ; I did not fall off the trollop wagon yesterday - your whole purpose of this thread is to imply that Admiral Loy is guilty of rigging the Deepwater contract to go to LM Ship Systems, picking a "pet" replacement Commandant; and being "paid off" by LMSS in the form of Lobby fees, 2 jobs (Cohen Group and LMSS) and paid $300K in stocks. When someone calls you on the implications of your thread and posts you immediately deny you have said ADM Loy committed crimes. Have you said that directly? NO. Have you and do you imply illegal acts committed by ADM Loy? You sure do - anyone reading your posts (with the exception of one or two of your crones) reads exactly the same implications (very poorly disguised at that) that I and almost everyone else does...

On the other comment AJ - you don't know me, my contacts, or my level of influence I may or may not have.

For an example, and not trying to brag about it - only to illustrate my point that you really don't know about me - without giving you any details about which one, or how, or my relationship to the "contact" (or why I can) I assure you that I am one phone call away from being able to talk to a former US Vice-President. And AJ, you know what? It really isn't a big deal - nor would I ever even think about trying to use those contacts for any reason - but I assure you that it is a real connection. Could I reach out to a former US VP? Yes. Would I? 99.999999999% chance of no.

Keep posting though - its interesting how you claim to not accuse anyone of committing a crime - even though in my educated and experienced mind you do.

Tim, I said that the Coast Guard is such a small service that it creates easier opportunities for conflict of interest than compared to the Navy. And that there are retired Admirals that are able to handle matters that may be ethically questionable without drawing attention to warrant any investigations. I never stated that
anyone specifically committed a crime, and then cited that crime.

Admiral Loy is a public official. The benefits of having a fruitful pension plan as well as the network contacts justify the scrutiny. If Sac Metal can make public comments about Petraus or any other public official that does not share his beliefs and ideology, then why should Admiral Loy and other senior retired Coast Guard officials not? What makes the likes of Loy that special?

Yes, Admiral Collins when he served as Commandant was an over-eager Deepwater supporter in my opinion. Just look at his comments about the 123 WPB success, such as at the first commissioning of the 123 WPB. So look at those comments he made along with Rear Admiral Stillman, and weigh them against all the
engineering concerns that were pointing to the 123 WPB faulty design!

AJ - you seem to always take the path of diversion when confronted with the fact that, call it what you will, you imply that Adm. Loy has done something wrong WRT Deepwater. You cite a list of specific items, that are public record, to support your thinly disguised claim.

Several times, when I have tried to address this accusation you divert the conversation to others...my comments do not apply to RADM Stillman, SacrificialMetal, or anyone else, they are addressed to you about your assertions. This is a thread you started; they are your implications that I and others have questioned. So, how about replying to my comments about your comments and do not divert please.

Tim,
To make that statement I implied, then you have to know what my intent was. It was not to discredit. It was to pass on the very public information that can be found through research. I disagree with your statement. I stated the facts that are online in the Washington Post, SEC director stocks ownership database, etc. Why are you accusing me of making innuendos? Are you being pressured by "external" forces to put pressure on me?

I doubt there will be anything new to report unless something else comes out in the papers, which is probably unlikely. I do not think there will be any new news links to post here in regards to this subject that you seem alarmed about.

Remember Tim, said officials and and many others are public officials. So tax payer comments made in regards to their capacities are very much protected by our 1st Amendment. Their salaries, pensions and benefits warrant this type of public and media scrutiny. To make threats of slander and libel to this goes beyond implying that said public officials are above the law and ethical standards. Just because there is a "retired" after their title, they continue to use their public official affiliations and former capacities to pursue matters of private interest. Hence, the being in the "public eye" legal test applies. If not, then Admiral Loy should not have been hired by Lockheed because he was an Admiral and Commandant. He should not be working in a capacity that places a premium on him being a former Commandant if you feel like he should not be considered in the public eye. Again that is my opinion.

But if you look, my comments have been about the status quo and "the system". My comments were fact-based and any opinions you perceived are being misconstrued. I reported about campaign donations to Rep. Murtha (who is a public official) which was available on the Internet. That is an example of reporting trends.

It is to bring up trends that people deny ever exist. What is wrong with that? Didn't the current Commandant state that transparency is important?


A. J.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: KeepingUpWithJones,

AJ - the graphic says it the best. My opinion, my counterpoint to your point is that you are implying that he has done something wrong. You imply through your comments that ADM Loy used his position to award LMSS the Deepwater Contract, have a personal choice made into the Commandant, and has been rewarded finacially by LM for his efforts. It does not take rocket science to figure out what you imply...

The real question is why do you feel it is necessary to let others know what is a matter of public record? If any public official did something that wasn't a matter of public record then I would really be intersted in knowing that.

Like I said AJ - you play a fun game...imply wrong doing and then claiming you aren't doing it. What's funny is if you came right out and said that you felt that ADM Loy was doing something wrong, although I would disagree with you, I would respect your opinion a lot more then how and what you are trying to do now.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Nobodyaskedmebut,

Tim, I don't need to need to make that statement that said person did something wrong. I present the facts of the circumstances. I let the posters here read the facts and they can decide whatever they want to decide and think.

A. J.

I would have to say the thing that surprises me is that you feel a need to post info that is already in the public domain. Do you believe the posters here are so incompetent or illiterate that they can't find it without your assistance?

quote:

Originally posted by KeepingUpWithJones:
Tim, I don't need to need to make that statement that said person did something wrong. I present the facts of the circumstances. I let the posters here read the facts and they can decide whatever they want to decide and think.

A. J.

AJ, I am pretty sure that most readers have formulated their opinions; and they are not what you think.

quote:

Originally posted by Ex_CG_GM:
I would have to say the thing that surprises me is that you feel a need to post info that is already in the public domain. Do you believe the posters here are so incompetent or illiterate that they can't find it without your assistance?

Ex CG GM: if you can be honest just one time here, then I ask you be so now. Did you know that James Loy had $300,000 in Lockheed stock? Would you know how to find that info on the Internet?

A. J.

AJ - your comments to EX_GM are pushing the limits of becoming a personal attack - you are saying he is dishonest and question if he can find and navigate his way through the LM Website. I will say something though, some of your information about LM is flawed.

I began using personal computers in 1980. I worked for Apple Computer for 17 years. I began using the internet when it was a mere child. Yes, I know how to search for info.

The $300,000 in stock is similar to stock options. It is not an outright grant of $300K. Nor is it at all unusual.

quote:

Originally posted by Nobodyaskedmebut:
AJ - your comments to EX_GM are pushing the limits of becoming a personal attack - you are saying he is dishonest and question if he can find and navigate his way through the LM Website. I will say something though, some of your information about LM is flawed.

Tim, I never took the info from LM's site other than that Admiral Loy is on their board of directors. I never said Ex CG GM is dishonest, please read what I posted.

What info I posted about LM is flawed? I very much post info on LM that is in revered sources like the GAO and IG reports as well as newspapers.

I never said Admiral Loy got an outright grant. For whatever services he provided to Lockheed, he has $300,000 in Lockheed stock.

A. J.

AJ, quite clearly you asked Ex_GM to be honest this time {

quote:

Ex CG GM: if you can be honest just one time here, then I ask you be so now. Did you know that James Loy had $300,000 in Lockheed stock? Would you know how to find that info on the Internet?

} I read your posts; I am a lot smarter then you try to think I am; we could turn it over to the court of public opinion and conduct an informal poll...and ask the other readers what they think you meant to say. Since this is a discussion that involves differing opinions, and like a certain part of the anatomy, unless thay are surgically removed, we all have them...are you willing to throw it out there and vote on it?

I await your response!

quote:

they think you meant to say

There is the flaw of your approach Tim. You are trying "mind reading". I don't subscribe to this effort on your part. But I am willing to say you are being pressured by military.com management or perhaps some other "external forces".

I do not agree with this approach.

quote:

Originally posted by KeepingUpWithJones:

quote:

they think you meant to say

There is the flaw of your approach Tim. You are trying "mind reading". I don't subscribe to this effort on your part. But I am willing to say you are being pressured by military.com management or perhaps some other "external forces".

I do not agree with this approach.

Sure AJ, or whoever you really are, believe that; it is about as truthful as your denials about accusing Adm Loy of wrongdoing or your denial about calling Ex_GM a dishonest person. Are you really are unable to grasp the concept of being responsible for your posts or is everything always someone else's fault?