Ex West Point prof’s letter on corruption, cheating and failing stds

[cptau 169]

The follow letter was written by LTC (USA, ret.) Robert M. Heffington, a former USMA Professor as an open letter to graduates of the United States Military Academy at West Point. 

Heffington became a aware of the views of Spenser Rapone at West Point and saw the Academy take no action to prevent his commissioning.  

 

 

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2017/10/exclusive-former-west-point-professors-letter-exposes-corruption-cheating-and-failing-standards-full-letter/

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely and Respectfully,

Robert M. Heffington

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

 

[aujeff11 6,243]

Discussing Mr Rapone will make for an interesting discussion. 

Given our American values, how can you stop a communist from graduating from West Point? And also, how can you let a Communist graduate from West Point? 

[alexava 6,973]

I read the first couple paragraphs. Sounds like ax grinding. 

[Beaker 2,457]

28 minutes ago, alexava said:

I read the first couple paragraphs. Sounds like ax grinding. 

Respectfully disagree.   I am a former Army officer, combat arms and one of my best friends is a WP grad and taught there.  I was asked to submit a packet to teach there.   Carefully chosen words and backed up with examples.    I saw that photo and almost puked.  The pervasive change in culture has permeated West Point.   Sad.  

West Point used to be a bastion of standards and excellence.    

1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

Discussing Mr Rapone will make for an interesting discussion. 

Given our American values, how can you stop a communist from graduating from West Point? And also, how can you let a Communist graduate from West Point? 

Enforce the da** standards.  

[aujeff11 6,243]

20 hours ago, Beaker said:

Enforce the da** standards.  

Standards have been getting more lax for years. Hair is getting longer, black socks are acceptable with PT’s, and the socks get lower and lower below the ankles. Not to mention check the box training isn’t really all that effective. Contrary to what many believe though, just because he doesnt love America, that doesn’t mean he isn’t an American with the same rights as everyone else. What standard is being broken by not discriminating against this cadet? 

[Strychnine 1,802]

16 hours ago, aujeff11 said:

Standards have been getting more lax for years. Hair is getting longer, black socks are acceptable with PT’s, and the socks get lower and lower below the ankles. Not to mention check the box training isn’t really all that effective. Contrary to what many believe though, just because he don’t love America, that doesn’t mean he isn’t an American with the same rights as everyone else. What standard is being broken by not discriminating against this cadet? 

 

This is correct.  An Army officer does not take an oath to support and defend Capitalism or to oppose Communism, it is instead to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.  As the Constitution provides a means of updating it, a Communist is not necessarily violating their ideology or personal beliefs by swearing to support and defend it.  Conscientious objection would enable him to avoid having to take up arms against fellow Communists.  There has to be something he can do that does not involve combat or handling classified information.

While he does not strike me as a promising Army officer waiting to happen, people can grow up.

[aujeff11 6,243]

5 hours ago, Strychnine said:

 

This is correct.  An Army officer does not take an oath to support and defend Capitalism or to oppose Communism, it is instead to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.  As the Constitution provides a means of updating it, a Communist is not necessarily violating their ideology or personal beliefs by swearing to support and defend it.  Conscientious objection would enable him to avoid having to take up arms against fellow Communists.  There has to be something he can do that does not involve combat or handling classified information.

While he does not strike me as a promising Army officer waiting to happen, people can grow up.

Correct. I fully agree with this post.

 

[AU64 10,122]

6 hours ago, Strychnine said:

 

This is correct.  An Army officer does not take an oath to support and defend Capitalism or to oppose Communism, it is instead to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.  As the Constitution provides a means of updating it, a Communist is not necessarily violating their ideology or personal beliefs by swearing to support and defend it.  Conscientious objection would enable him to avoid having to take up arms against fellow Communists.  There has to be something he can do that does not involve combat or handling classified information.

While he does not strike me as a promising Army officer waiting to happen, people can grow up.

Wondering though......isn't it true that Army officers are not supposed to engage in political activities and promoting Communism in this fashion would seem to be a violation of that rule or regulation or whatever it is. 

And considering that all Communist governments are enemies of the US in one form or another, I would be greatly concerned with giving that officer access to any information that could be even remotely detrimental to the US if shared with one of those governments.  So perhaps assigning him to permanent latrine duty would be the safest assignment for him and for the US Army.

[aujeff11 6,243]

18 minutes ago, AU64 said:

Wondering though......isn't it true that Army officers are not supposed to engage in political activities

Maybe. I think UCMJ is more concerned with partisan politics though. 

Edit: Looks like I may be wrong 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/05/08/us/west-point-cadets-photo/index.html

[AU64 10,122]

4 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Maybe. I think UCMJ is more concerned with partisan politics though. 

Could be ...though I figure Communism is a political thing which makes it partisan too since the Communist Part has had candidates for President for decades. 

I have a couple nephews ...both Colonels in the Air Force and  neither vote and they won't talk politics even with me... Their dad taught at USMA for a number of year and I've passed the "letter" along to see if he will give me his view....been retired for quite some time by still well connected with  USMA grads. .

[AU64 10,122]

On 10/13/2017 at 9:34 AM, alexava said:

I read the first couple paragraphs. Sounds like ax grinding. 

You ought to read it all then....sounds like a clash of cultures and generations perhaps but USMA is probably under pressure to get and keep students who have graduated from a permissive educational concept and not used to discipline the West Point Way..   The civilian authorities have imposed numerous social changes on the military, many of which are resisted by the military who experience the negative effects of them.  

So after being told to "deal with it"  it's not surprising that the people who actually have to "deal with it" each day find the adjustment difficult...... or perhaps they consider the changes to be detrimental to military order and the future effectiveness of our military services as did the author of the letter. . 

[aujeff11 6,243]

18 minutes ago, AU64 said:

You ought to read it all then....sounds like a clash of cultures and generations perhaps but USMA is probably under pressure to get and keep students who have graduated from a permissive educational concept and not used to discipline the West Point Way..   The civilian authorities have imposed numerous social changes on the military, many of which are resisted by the military who experience that negative effects of them.  

I don’t have a problem with letting in communists so the next statement may seem conflicting. 

Making political statements with the uniform or in uniform shouldn't be allowed. And that goes for any political beliefs. I’m old school in thinking that the soldiers are members of the team and that individuals don’t belong there. If a communist wants to serve in the military, he should exercise his political beliefs on his own time while off duty. Same with traditional partisan politics as well. Also, I don’t have a problem with military bases having a communist civic club for off duty entertainment if that was desired years from now any more than I have a problem with military bases having Protestant services. 

 

[Strychnine 1,802]

2 hours ago, aujeff11 said:

I don’t have a problem with letting in communists so the next statement may seem conflicting. 

Making political statements with the uniform or in uniform shouldn't be allowed. And that goes for any political beliefs. I’m old school in thinking that the soldiers are members of the team and that individuals don’t belong there. If a communist wants to serve in the military, he should exercise his political beliefs on his own time while off duty. Same with traditional partisan politics as well. Also, I don’t have a problem with military bases having a communist civic club for off duty entertainment if that was desired years from now any more than I have a problem with military bases having Protestant services. 

 

 

Personally, I would rather a Communist openly state their beliefs when joining the military.  I would be more concerned with Communists hiding their affiliation in order to subvert or spy against the United States.  An honest person gives me nothing to fear, regardless of Communist ideology.

Take this guy, for example.  He has basically condemned his Army career.  Unless several superior officers are complete morons, he will never be put in a position with access to classified material, and likely not any combat role.  He will struggle for promotions, be ostracized by basically everyone, and not be respected.  If superiors are dumb enough to allow him access to classified material, then we have a much bigger problem than communists joining the military openly.

[AU64 10,122]

31 minutes ago, Strychnine said:

 

Personally, I would rather a Communist openly state their beliefs when joining the military.  I would be more concerned with Communists hiding their affiliation in order to subvert or spy against the United States.  An honest person gives me nothing to fear, regardless of Communist ideology.

Take this guy, for example.  He has basically condemned his Army career.  Unless several superior officers are complete morons, he will never be put in a position with access to classified material, and likely not any combat role.  He will struggle for promotions, be ostracized by basically everyone, and not be respected.  If superiors are dumb enough to allow him access to classified material, then we have a much bigger problem than communists joining the military openly.

Did not affect the career of the shooter out in Texas who was identified as a potential problem well before he shot more than 40 people at Fort Hood   In his case it was almost as if everyone was afraid to address the issue. As the writer of the letter indicated, we do in fact have a bigger problem than the communist smart ***.    He's just symptomatic...