Tiger Al 0 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 MIAMI -- The Navy lawyer who led a successful Supreme Court challenge of the Bush administration's military tribunals for detainees at Guantanamo Bay has been passed over for promotion and will have to leave the military, the Miami Herald reported Sunday.Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift, 44, will retire under the military's ''up or out'' promotion system. Swift said last week he was notified he would not be promoted to commander. He said the notification came about two weeks after the Supreme Court sided with him and against the White House in the case involving Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who was Osama bin Laden's driver. ''All I ever wanted was to make a difference -- and in that sense I think my career and personal satisfaction has been beyond my dreams,'' Swift said. The Pentagon had no comment Sunday. Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said Swift was ''a no-brainer for promotion.'' AP LINK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Liger 0 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Boo hoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger in Spain 0 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 No mention of the other 2000 LCDR's that didn't get promoted either. I bet President Bush personally denied his promotion. At least he didn't wind up like that Russian journalist that exposed Putin's Chechnya policy. Now that is what you call dealing with critics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 If any of you think this has nothing to do with politics, think again. We deal with promotions and nominations on our Committee, and let me say that is one of the most political things we deal with. Once you reach a certain level, your promotion/nomination is based just as much on your politics as your qualifications for the position. I don't think that should necessarily be the case, but this is how the current system is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Liger 0 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 If any of you think this has nothing to do with politics, think again. We deal with promotions and nominations on our Committee, and let me say that is one of the most political things we deal with. Once you reach a certain level, your promotion/nomination is based just as much on your politics as your qualifications for the position. I don't think that should necessarily be the case, but this is how the current system is. What's your point? I'm resisting the urge to draw conclusions for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,055 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 No mention of the other 2000 LCDR's that didn't get promoted either. I bet President Bush personally denied his promotion. At least he didn't wind up like that Russian journalist that exposed Putin's Chechnya policy. Now that is what you call dealing with critics. TIS longing for some serious tyranny, instead of this mamby pamby crap we have here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 If any of you think this has nothing to do with politics, think again. We deal with promotions and nominations on our Committee, and let me say that is one of the most political things we deal with. Once you reach a certain level, your promotion/nomination is based just as much on your politics as your qualifications for the position. I don't think that should necessarily be the case, but this is how the current system is. What's your point? I'm resisting the urge to draw conclusions for you. I was pretty sure that I had made my point, which was I would not be surprised if politics was a reason he did not get promoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,055 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 If any of you think this has nothing to do with politics, think again. We deal with promotions and nominations on our Committee, and let me say that is one of the most political things we deal with. Once you reach a certain level, your promotion/nomination is based just as much on your politics as your qualifications for the position. I don't think that should necessarily be the case, but this is how the current system is. What's your point? I'm resisting the urge to draw conclusions for you. I was pretty sure that I had made my point, which was I would not be surprised if politics was a reason he did not get promoted. Maybe you could spell it out more clearly for Liger, given his impairments and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Liger 0 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 If any of you think this has nothing to do with politics, think again. We deal with promotions and nominations on our Committee, and let me say that is one of the most political things we deal with. Once you reach a certain level, your promotion/nomination is based just as much on your politics as your qualifications for the position. I don't think that should necessarily be the case, but this is how the current system is. What's your point? I'm resisting the urge to draw conclusions for you. I was pretty sure that I had made my point, which was I would not be surprised if politics was a reason he did not get promoted. Maybe it did. Then again, maybe it didn't. Maybe the guy was a slacker. Maybe he didn't pull his weight around the office. Maybe the general consensus among his peers and superiors alike was that he didn't need to go up any further. MAYBE he knew before he became popular that his career was toast so he did what he did in attempt to bolster himself. Lot of maybes there but who knows? I'm not ruling out that politics didn't play a role as they certainly do play a role in military promotions...always have. Going from O-4 to O-5....I seriously doubt the President pulled the plug. His denial to O-5 was kept strictly within Navy ranks and I'm pretty sure the officers that made up his promotion board were of O-6 and/or O-7 rank where politics are just as prevalent as they are in the halls of Congress when confirming general officers. I submit it's pretty stupid to say the President is behind this...he's way to busy for something so trivial. If we could get copies of his last three or four evaluation reports (or whatever the Navy calls them) then we'd know for sure if politics was the reason. If he received superior ratings and remarks then I'd say politics was the reason. However, even receiving average to above average ratings will not cut it when making O-5 and higher, generally speaking. Oh well. Maybe you could spell it out more clearly for Liger, given his impairments and all. That were a direct result of having been married to a liberal. Damn impairments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger in Spain 0 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said Swift was ''a no-brainer for promotion.'' Did this dude sit in on the promotion board? How can he make this assertion if he didn't. Of course, these claims of political interference is coming from the same folks who were absolutely certain Karl Rove was guilty of outing Valerie Plame. TIS longing for some serious tyranny, instead of this mamby pamby crap we have here! You liberals are always bellowing that Bush is silencing the media and is no different than Hitler. I am showing you the difference between Bush and fascism. If Bush were as evil as you nincompoops make him out to be; Helen Thomas and several others wouldn't be sitting in the White House press corps today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCTAU 3,351 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 It's pretty much a life lesson. Go against the boss and lose, things do not bode well for you. Same thing happens every day in business. No martyrs in business, just unemployed people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.