I do not see how anyone "stepped in it" to use a phrase noted above. Unless the emails were fraudulent, false or altered and Larry was aware of that fact then Larry has done nothing more than make public emails that he was privy to.

Curious, when it comes to certain celebrities the attitude seems to be, hear no evil, speak no evil and see no evil. With regard to other celebrities, the attitude of some is that nothing they hear, see or speak is anything but evil.

Guys, Larry Shores is a good dude. Someone I know decently well, and a guy that has helped me out on a several occasions and asked for nothing in return. A very accomplished hunter, and successful business man as well.

Boddington is a guy that I have known for 22 yrs now. I guided him for the 1st time when I was just 19 yrs old, here in Colorado's high country for elk. We've hunted together on a couple of other occasions, and have communicated throughout the years. He was one of several guys who wrote me a glowing recommendation letter, that was included with my application and CV, when I took the exam to become a licensed PH in TZ. But rest assured, and ask him yourself, I have NO hero-worship for him or anyone else.

But what I am shocked, surprised, and frankly boon-doggled by, is the complete lack of concern by some that these sort of accusations/insinuations could have a monstrous negative impact on CB's livelihood!!!!!!! The very way he supports himself, his family, etc.

I said it recently here on AR, and I'll say it again. My daddy gave me 2 pieces of advice when dealing with others in life. He said, "If you want to see a grown man react in a way that you never expected he could, do one of two things. Mess with his family, or mess with his livelihood - and then watch what he's capable of". In this case, its looks like AR is messing with BOTH!

I know nothing of the issue here, nor do I care to. I do know what its like to become known in the hunting biz (gained our reputation to start with by shooting LOTS of big muleys/whitetails in eastern CO) and I was shocked to see the naysayers come out of the wood work, with the more success we gained. Folks I had never heard of, knew more about me - than I knew about me apparently??? Accusations of things I had never done, or places I had never even been to, but by god I was the bad guy in some folks eyes??

My caution, and plea to some here - would simply be this. Many of you are in this gig for a hobby, a passion, even an obsession, and that's awesome! But some like Craig actually rely on this for their livelihood!!! I don't mean to insinuate that he's then exempt from criticism - but the internet is a powerful thing. And how often have we all seen it, that an accusation/insinuation that we KNOW to be false, is being told by someone else as truth??? Damaging a man's rep is one thing, damaging his ability to earn a living, is another story - IMO.

Let "due process" takes it course, then pass your judgment if need be.

I hired a young man about 8 months ago that had a short stint in the military and then went on to obtain his MBA from a local institution. I thought he would have gained some discipline from the military and MAYBE some useful knowledge from his graduate program.
I have found out from many hires before that most MBA's are suspect however this young mans enthusiasm turned out to be his greatest asset.
His biggest challenge is his obsession with what he "learns" off the internet. He is s expert on everything although he has no personal experience in anything...
He constantly trips all over himself. The internet can be a tool if you apply a little logic and common since along with it. I take it all with a grain of salt. I ask you, do you believe what your listen to on the evening news?? The network has the people working for them called editors...They decide what they want you to hear or how to present the message.
People have a tendency to edit on forums as well.


EZ

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Being a Marine does not make one a good person the same way that being a priest does not necessarily make someone a good person.

Yes, definitely not the same way. The selection process that leads to Colonel and BGEN selectee is much stricter. I have no doubts at all about Craig Boddington.

quote:

Originally posted by Recono:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Being a Marine does not make one a good person the same way that being a priest does not necessarily make someone a good person.

Yes, definitely not the same way. The selection process that leads to Colonel and BGEN selectee is much stricter. I have no doubts at all about Craig Boddington.

Recono,

Shootaway is mentally ill and has morphed from the village idiot to the village troll. It's best to just ignore the little shit.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Guys, Larry Shores is a good dude. Someone I know decently well, and a guy that has helped me out on a several occasions and asked for nothing in return. A very accomplished hunter, and successful business man as well.

Boddington is a guy that I have known for 22 yrs now. I guided him for the 1st time when I was just 19 yrs old, here in Colorado's high country for elk. We've hunted together on a couple of other occasions, and have communicated throughout the years. He was one of several guys who wrote me a glowing recommendation letter, that was included with my application and CV, when I took the exam to become a licensed PH in TZ. But rest assured, and ask him yourself, I have NO hero-worship for him or anyone else.

But what I am shocked, surprised, and frankly boon-doggled by, is the complete lack of concern by some that these sort of accusations/insinuations could have a monstrous negative impact on CB's livelihood!!!!!!! The very way he supports himself, his family, etc.

I said it recently here on AR, and I'll say it again. My daddy gave me 2 pieces of advice when dealing with others in life. He said, "If you want to see a grown man react in a way that you never expected he could, do one of two things. Mess with his family, or mess with his livelihood - and then watch what he's capable of". In this case, its looks like AR is messing with BOTH!

I know nothing of the issue here, nor do I care to. I do know what its like to become known in the hunting biz (gained our reputation to start with by shooting LOTS of big muleys/whitetails in eastern CO) and I was shocked to see the naysayers come out of the wood work, with the more success we gained. Folks I had never heard of, knew more about me - than I knew about me apparently??? Accusations of things I had never done, or places I had never even been to, but by god I was the bad guy in some folks eyes??

My caution, and plea to some here - would simply be this. Many of you are in this gig for a hobby, a passion, even an obsession, and that's awesome! But some like Craig actually rely on this for their livelihood!!! I don't mean to insinuate that he's then exempt from criticism - but the internet is a powerful thing. And how often have we all seen it, that an accusation/insinuation that we KNOW to be false, is being told by someone else as truth??? Damaging a man's rep is one thing, damaging his ability to earn a living, is another story - IMO.

Let "due process" takes it course, then pass your judgment if need be.

Thank you Aaron.

It is obvious that some here have a difficult time reading. Let me be crystal clear:

1- I accused CB of nothing.
2- I did refer to a hunt where someone one else alleged that CB did an illegal hunt. I used the word "alleged".
3- I posted some e mails that I had received unaltered except for removing 2 names (which I clearly disclosed) . These e mails did accuse CB (actually his wife) of participating in an illegal hunt.
4- If one took the time to read those e mails, it is clear that the target was Greg Pennicott. The gentlemen who started these communications could care less about CB. They clearly care about one of their countrymen allegedly conducting illegal hunts.
5- These e mails were posted here on AR by me for one reason and one reason only. Many here have come to conclusions about the matter with zero knowledge of the man or the matter. Some who have never met him refuse to believe that any of it is true. These e mails clearly prove that my reference to an "alleged " illegal hunt were not simply made up by me.

I still say this is the worst case of ass kissing I have ever seen on AR.

quote:

I still say this is the worst case of ass kissing I have ever seen on AR

No it is not.

The worst one was when Cal accused those of us who did not agree with Mark Sullivan's way of hunting of not being fit to walk in his shoes

Actually, I would not want to be in ANYONE's shoes!

I prefer my own.

quote:

3- I posted some e mails that I had received unaltered except for removing 2 names (which I clearly disclosed) . These e mails did accuse CB (actually his wife) of participating in an illegal hunt.

Larry

So, if as shown in the emails it is his wife, then isn't
the issue of Craig / illegal hunting a non event ?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I do not see how anyone "stepped in it" to use a phrase noted above. Unless the emails were fraudulent, false or altered and Larry was aware of that fact then Larry has done nothing more than make public emails that he was privy to.

Curious, when it comes to certain celebrities the attitude seems to be, hear no evil, speak no evil and see no evil. With regard to other celebrities, the attitude of some is that nothing they hear, see or speak is anything but evil.

+1 Mike. Larry's emails though redacted, paint a different picture than the explantion proffered. Pilots etc have been interviewed re flight paths etc.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by Recono:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Being a Marine does not make one a good person the same way that being a priest does not necessarily make someone a good person.

Yes, definitely not the same way. The selection process that leads to Colonel and BGEN selectee is much stricter. I have no doubts at all about Craig Boddington.

I believe the issue of CB's appropriate military title was settled more than a decade ago . . . I believe it is Colonel. Perhaps the defenders of CB will care to comment on that issue. I sort of doubt it.

Gentlemen:

To be clear , I redacted the names of the 2 individuals involved in contacting the authorities because one of them has no idea I possess these e mails. I thought it only fair to name neither publically yet. One promises to comment publically as soon as he gets home.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Gentlemen:

To be clear , I redacted the names of the 2 individuals involved in contacting the authorities because one of them has no idea I possess these e mails. I thought it only fair to name neither publically yet. One promises to comment publically as soon as he gets home.

posted 26 May 2013 21:07 Hide Post

"Well ladies and gentlemen, I have to say that this is about the biggest exhibition of ass kissing I have seen in a while. I have known a lot more than I have publicized. I was never going to post the following. I quite frankly got sickened by the ass kissing going on here. It is absolutely shocking to me.

The following are e mails related to this matter. I have removed the names of 2 people. I will let them decide if they want to comment further.

You make up your mind."


From your original post, it is clear you have already made up your mind, and you have posted these hearsay and imcomplete email copies in an effort to clearly influence the minds of others. It's as if you have the secret scoop on the real CB, and you want to let everyone know that you can confirm to the "ass kissers" that he is not the man many think he is.

I find it fascinating that Jailee Wilson, the territory director has filed no charges thus far against anyone in this case to our knowledge (or do you have evidence to the contrary?). As I said earlier, until the proper authorities have evidence and have filed charges, then these hearsay emails should have been kept private. The impression that most will infer from these posted emails is that Larry has an interest in the character assassination of CB before any real evidence has been provided or any charges have been filed. This is a tactic as old as time used unethically to achieve one's desired outcome, whether true or not.

Unless real evidence is provided and charges have been filed, then all that Larry's emails exhibit is one thing and one thing only; a dispute between jealous guides in Australia that will go to no ends to damage the reputation of CB to further their selfish interests. I have read each and every one of the emails thoroughly, and see nothing of real proof of any wrongdoing, just accusations by a competitor guide. And if that guide wants to be taken seriously, I would think that he would make formal allegations through the legal process, and work on his spelling and correct use of grammer. It would be nice to hear from Jailee Wilson as to the progress of their investigation and whether charges are pending.

You can say you haven't accused CB of anything, but in reality that's just what you tried to accomplish; damaging his reputation before any real evidence was provided or any charges were filed in an effort to shut up the "ass kissers". In my mind, it was a cowardly and intense lapse in judgement. You may be validated down the road, I doubt it, but your tactics are lowly at best.

Wether Austrailian authorities choose to prosecute has no bearing on what has transpired. Again these alleged incidents were not made up out of thin air by Aussies with an ax to grind. Larry has simply put contradictory evedece out there that some choose not to like. I find it unfortunate for CB but he started the thread. Larry is as straight up as they come with no ax to grind except his unwillingness to swallow lage quantities of BS.

Jeff

Well, apparently there were a lot of people on this forum who were present on the hunt. Oddly, I didn't see any of them there. As I have said, I didn't hunt or shoot a banteng, and I was not present when one was taken. I did go in later for photos, and the hunt has already been aired on television, so I don't think there is any veil of secrecy involved here (for Gawd's sake). "If" the hunt was conducted in the park, then there could be issues with the outfitter and the other hunters in the party...but the only accusations I have heard have been against me personally, and that is impossible. As I also said, I trust Greg Pennicott (with my reputation as well as the conduct of the hunt.)
I do not believe we were in the park. I have been in the area before, although it was many years ago, and I do have some sense of where the park lies. In recent years the banteng has expanded quite far south of the park, although not a lot of people know this. The banteng is protected IN THE PARK, but is not a protected species in Australia (as I understand). The area is pretty much accessible only by boat or helicopter. I do not know Jailee Wilson, but I have corresponded with her and given my summation and suggested she contact Greg Pennicott, which I know she has. I also know--directly from her--that the allegation was in fact raised by a competitive outfitter. I have no official correspondence from anyone, and it is my understanding that the matter has been laid to rest in Australia. Until I hear different, that's what I know. Sorry you guys don't have anything better to worry about. Cheers, Craig

This thread is another reminder of why I hunt alone or with someone from a very small group of like minded individuals. I wonder how many others read most threads or watch most hunting TV and like me, are concerned about the fact that far to often I am glad to not have to hunt or share a camp with them. Fishing is just the opposite. I can enjoy fishing with 9 out of 10 fishermen.

I should perhaps add that I have emailed Greg Pennicott and asked him to chime in on this forum, but whether he's out hunting or avilable I cannot say. Obviously his livelihood is also at risk, perhaps more than mine. During the hunt I asked the hard questions, and Greg assured me before, during, and afterwards that the hunt was completely legal. Although this was our first hunt together, I've known him for years; he has a good reputation, and of course he knew full well that it was being filmed. It doesn't make logical sense that he would take any chances. Therefore I fully and completely believe that the hunt was perfectly legal...but I am not capable of verifying our position on the ground to you guys or anyone else; only Greg and the local pilot (who ranches just to the south) could do that. I understood some months ago that this has been done to the satisfaction of the Australian authorities, so I am puzzled as to where this is coming from at this late date. Now I have to go to the range and get some work done.
Cheers, C

Saeed, your comments on the marketing skills of Conrad whomever are well founded. You seem to know a lot about it. The fact that you have chosen to give an advertising boost to Alan Vincent any time anyone opens this part of AR is proof. I have hunted with him and agree he is a great PH but always thought it a bit strange he is so prominently featured here in the African Hunting section every time it is opened.

A Boddington fan.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Recono:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Being a Marine does not make one a good person the same way that being a priest does not necessarily make someone a good person.

Yes, definitely not the same way. The selection process that leads to Colonel and BGEN selectee is much stricter. I have no doubts at all about Craig Boddington.

I believe the issue of CB's appropriate military title was settled more than a decade ago . . . I believe it is Colonel. Perhaps the defenders of CB will care to comment on that issue. I sort of doubt it.

Doubt away, fool. AFAIK, he is retired, and certainly not on active duty, thus I used no title at all. However, I did make mention of the United States Marine Corps selection process which led to his rank of Colonel, and which also led to his becoming a BGEN selectee, though he was never actually promoted to that rank, despite a premature frocking by his immediate superior, as I recall. Perhaps you recall it, also.

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:
Recono,

Shootaway is mentally ill and has morphed from the village idiot to the village troll. It's best to just ignore the little shit.

Sorry, I've been away for a while. Thanks for the "Heads up!"

quote:

Originally posted by Recono:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Recono:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Being a Marine does not make one a good person the same way that being a priest does not necessarily make someone a good person.

Yes, definitely not the same way. The selection process that leads to Colonel and BGEN selectee is much stricter. I have no doubts at all about Craig Boddington.

I believe the issue of CB's appropriate military title was settled more than a decade ago . . . I believe it is Colonel. Perhaps the defenders of CB will care to comment on that issue. I sort of doubt it.

. . . which also led to his becoming a BGEN selectee, though he was never actually promoted to that rank, despite a premature frocking by his immediate superior, as I recall.

Yes, a selection that the Senate denied and refused to confirm and returned to the President.

Look the gentleman served 30+ years in the military, I respect him for that. Just another example though of how people tend to see what they want to see when they look at some one or something.

From what I have read, he was instructed by his superior officer to wear a 1 Star, partly
because the command required it. One person objected after quite some time.

IMHO, it is a non issue.

quote:

Originally posted by 505G:
IMHO, it is a non issue.

Yea, you are probably right it is just one of those pesky little Constitutional requirements.

When the "other" thread came up, I looked it up on the net.

This was the best write up I read.
http://www.stripes.com/news/of...ully-frocked-1.10896

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Guys, Larry Shores is a good dude. Someone I know decently well, and a guy that has helped me out on a several occasions and asked for nothing in return. A very accomplished hunter, and successful business man as well.

Boddington is a guy that I have known for 22 yrs now. I guided him for the 1st time when I was just 19 yrs old, here in Colorado's high country for elk. We've hunted together on a couple of other occasions, and have communicated throughout the years. He was one of several guys who wrote me a glowing recommendation letter, that was included with my application and CV, when I took the exam to become a licensed PH in TZ. But rest assured, and ask him yourself, I have NO hero-worship for him or anyone else.

But what I am shocked, surprised, and frankly boon-doggled by, is the complete lack of concern by some that these sort of accusations/insinuations could have a monstrous negative impact on CB's livelihood!!!!!!! The very way he supports himself, his family, etc.

I said it recently here on AR, and I'll say it again. My daddy gave me 2 pieces of advice when dealing with others in life. He said, "If you want to see a grown man react in a way that you never expected he could, do one of two things. Mess with his family, or mess with his livelihood - and then watch what he's capable of". In this case, its looks like AR is messing with BOTH!

I know nothing of the issue here, nor do I care to. I do know what its like to become known in the hunting biz (gained our reputation to start with by shooting LOTS of big muleys/whitetails in eastern CO) and I was shocked to see the naysayers come out of the wood work, with the more success we gained. Folks I had never heard of, knew more about me - than I knew about me apparently??? Accusations of things I had never done, or places I had never even been to, but by god I was the bad guy in some folks eyes??

My caution, and plea to some here - would simply be this. Many of you are in this gig for a hobby, a passion, even an obsession, and that's awesome! But some like Craig actually rely on this for their livelihood!!! I don't mean to insinuate that he's then exempt from criticism - but the internet is a powerful thing. And how often have we all seen it, that an accusation/insinuation that we KNOW to be false, is being told by someone else as truth??? Damaging a man's rep is one thing, damaging his ability to earn a living, is another story - IMO.

Let "due process" takes it course, then pass your judgment if need be.

What I've found out through the years is that nobody likes a consistent winner, for a variety of reasons. The most likely reason is because there are very few of them. That's all I have to say about that, and I do personally have lots of other stuff to do besides give a ratsazz about this crap.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by 505G:
IMHO, it is a non issue.

Yea, you are probably right it is just one of those pesky little Constitutional requirements.

Are you questioning CB's integrity for donning the 1 Star while serving in a very critical position in the Iraqi War under orders from his 2 immediate supervisors?

And how many tours have you served overseas? How many command decisions have you made that effects the lives of dozens / hundreds of soldiers, knowing that the credibility of the mission rests in the hands of the very best leader possible?

Boddington has done all those with exemplary service. I guess we have to make a logical decision on whose credibility we trust.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
[QUOTE]I still say this is the worst case of ass kissing I have ever seen on AR

No it is not.

The worst one was when Cal accused those of us who did not agree with Mark Sullivan's way of hunting of not being fit to walk in his shoes.


Saeed:
Well at least I reached number one at something in my life!
Cheers,
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by 505G:
IMHO, it is a non issue.

Yea, you are probably right it is just one of those pesky little Constitutional requirements.

Are you questioning CB's integrity for donning the 1 Star while serving in a very critical position in the Iraqi War under orders from his 2 immediate supervisors?

No, but apparently the Secretary of the Navy did.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by 505G:
IMHO, it is a non issue.

Yea, you are probably right it is just one of those pesky little Constitutional requirements.

Are you questioning CB's integrity for donning the 1 Star while serving in a very critical position in the Iraqi War under orders from his 2 immediate supervisors?

No, but apparently the Secretary of the Navy did.

Actually, no. The Secretary of the Navy never questioned the integrity of anyone, including the senior officers who received letters of reprimand for by-passing the proper protocol for frocking. In fact, all these officers were given commendations for their service and the jobs they performed.

If there had been a serious breech of integrity, then all 3 of them would never have been given the opportunity to retire with full rank, or would have been prosecuted under UCMJ.

And you dodged my other questions. I don't think you can put yourself in their boots.

One cannot buy integrity, and one cannot wear a little US flag on your lapel and declare yourself a patriot. There's nothing more annoying than faux patriotism.

This is supposed to be African Hunting Forum. Those of you who have a personal agenda to destroy CB is making it something else.

I am betting that CB will make more money, if he so choses, on a series of lawsuits based on things posted here and other places than he will on selling used t-shirts. Any takers?

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

By the way, I did not bring up the rank issue, another poster did. Like I said, I respect his service. But for folks to be judging a man's character based on articles he has written, television shows they have seen or a two minute conversation at a safari show is wrong. It is wrong regardless of who the person is and is wrong whether that judgment is positive or negative.


Officials find Marine unlawfully frocked

By Sandra Jontz
Stars and Stripes

Published: August 30, 2003

ARLINGTON, Va. — A Marine Corps commander who led Marines and coalition forces during Operation Enduring Freedom was unlawfully frocked to brigadier general, a violation of U.S. military code, officials said.

Col. Craig Boddington, a reservist activated in 2001 and deployed to the Persian Gulf, had been instructed by his superior, Lt. Gen. Earl Hailston, to don the one star as he took command of the Combined Joint Task Force Consequence Management, Marine Forces, at Camp Doha, Kuwait.

Frocking is the term used when an officer is selected for promotion, assumes the responsibilities and wears the insignia, but is not being paid at the higher rank’s salary. Frocking required Senate confirmation, which Boddington did not have.

“I felt I was acting under orders from my superior,” Boddington said Friday during a telephone interview. “… Gen. Hailston felt that the combined joint task force required a brigadier general to command it. I was a selectee at the time, and we all believed conformation and frocking authority was forthcoming.”

Hailston frocked Boddington on April 3, 2001, just as Boddington took command of the CJTF-CM. He served until December 2002, when the Defense Department Inspector General’s office began an investigation following an anonymous tip. The CJTF-CM’s mission was to train forces to respond to chemical, biological, nuclear or radiological attacks against forces operating in Afghanistan.

Hailston, who since has submitted his retirement package, served as Commander of U.S. Marine Forces Pacific and U.S. Marine Forces Central Command. He could not be reached for comment Friday. Boddington’s frocking also had the blessing of now-Commandant Gen. Michael Hagee, who was subordinate to Hailston when Hailston recommended Boddington for promotion and instructed him to pin on the one star.

At the time Boddington was frocked, Hagee was commanding officer of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Lejeune, N.C.

“We concluded that Generals Hagee and Hailston and Col. Boddington violated, or caused a violation of, the standards that govern frocking of officers and wearing of the insignia of a higher grade,” reads a portion of IG report. “In that regard, all three officers knew Col. Boddington was ineligible to be frocked or to wear the rank insignia of brigadier general without Senate confirmation and yet, engaged in conduct that facilitated Lt. Gen. Hailston’s improper frocking of Col. Boddington.”

Boddington, commander of the Reserve 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Augmentation Command Element at Camp Pendleton, Calif., recently was counseled by the acting Navy Secretary, Hansford Johnson, himself, over the issue.

“I understand that I should have gone outside the chain of command for resolution, but at the time, that didn’t seem like the appropriate action,” Boddington said he told Johnson.

Johnson issued Hailston a letter of censure, and sent a letter to Hagee, noting Hagee’s “limited involvement” in the matter, but did not take any disciplinary action. “I have the utmost confidence in your ability as Commandant, and am certain that you will ensure the lessons of this incident do not go unlearned within the Marine Corps,” reads a portion of Johnson’s Aug. 25 letter.

Hagee, who is traveling in the Pacific, was not available to take questions. His public affairs staff released the following statement: “I fully admit to and accept responsibility for forwarding Lt. Gen. Hailston’s directive to Col. Boddington that he be frocked. In hindsight, I should have further questioned Lt. Gen. Hailston’s directive and pursued other alternatives.”

The tipster complained that Boddington’s wearing of the rank “was creating a morale problem for the troops ‘most of whom believe that he is not entitled to wear the star until he is actually confirmed,’” the IG report states. Investigators found no similar complaints to the Defense Hotline and no other witness voiced concern or awareness, the report states

“He’s one of the better leaders I’ve ever worked for,” said Cpl. Daniel Diaz, 23, who served as Boddington’s bodyguard while deployed to Kuwait. “Morale went up from the time he stepped on deck to the time he left.

“Even though he was a general, he would take care of Marines down to the lowest level. He’s an all-around good guy,” said Diaz, a reservist for more than 3 years.

Boddington, who has been I MACE commander for 2 years, said he knows who made the anonymous tip and why, “but I will not discuss any of that,” he said.

“Morale was somewhat better in November when temperatures were 80 degrees than in July, when it was 140 degrees,” Boddington said. “But in terms of morale being a problem within the unit because of improper frocking, I don’t believe it existed, with the one exception.”

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Officials find Marine unlawfully frocked

By Sandra Jontz
Stars and Stripes

Published: August 30, 2003

ARLINGTON, Va. — A Marine Corps commander who led Marines and coalition forces during Operation Enduring Freedom was unlawfully frocked to brigadier general, a violation of U.S. military code, officials said.

Col. Craig Boddington, a reservist activated in 2001 and deployed to the Persian Gulf, had been instructed by his superior, Lt. Gen. Earl Hailston, to don the one star as he took command of the Combined Joint Task Force Consequence Management, Marine Forces, at Camp Doha, Kuwait.

Frocking is the term used when an officer is selected for promotion, assumes the responsibilities and wears the insignia, but is not being paid at the higher rank’s salary. Frocking required Senate confirmation, which Boddington did not have.

“I felt I was acting under orders from my superior,” Boddington said Friday during a telephone interview. “… Gen. Hailston felt that the combined joint task force required a brigadier general to command it. I was a selectee at the time, and we all believed conformation and frocking authority was forthcoming.”

Hailston frocked Boddington on April 3, 2001, just as Boddington took command of the CJTF-CM. He served until December 2002, when the Defense Department Inspector General’s office began an investigation following an anonymous tip. The CJTF-CM’s mission was to train forces to respond to chemical, biological, nuclear or radiological attacks against forces operating in Afghanistan.

Hailston, who since has submitted his retirement package, served as Commander of U.S. Marine Forces Pacific and U.S. Marine Forces Central Command. He could not be reached for comment Friday. Boddington’s frocking also had the blessing of now-Commandant Gen. Michael Hagee, who was subordinate to Hailston when Hailston recommended Boddington for promotion and instructed him to pin on the one star.

At the time Boddington was frocked, Hagee was commanding officer of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Lejeune, N.C.

“We concluded that Generals Hagee and Hailston and Col. Boddington violated, or caused a violation of, the standards that govern frocking of officers and wearing of the insignia of a higher grade,” reads a portion of IG report. “In that regard, all three officers knew Col. Boddington was ineligible to be frocked or to wear the rank insignia of brigadier general without Senate confirmation and yet, engaged in conduct that facilitated Lt. Gen. Hailston’s improper frocking of Col. Boddington.”

Boddington, commander of the Reserve 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Augmentation Command Element at Camp Pendleton, Calif., recently was counseled by the acting Navy Secretary, Hansford Johnson, himself, over the issue.

“I understand that I should have gone outside the chain of command for resolution, but at the time, that didn’t seem like the appropriate action,” Boddington said he told Johnson.

Johnson issued Hailston a letter of censure, and sent a letter to Hagee, noting Hagee’s “limited involvement” in the matter, but did not take any disciplinary action. “I have the utmost confidence in your ability as Commandant, and am certain that you will ensure the lessons of this incident do not go unlearned within the Marine Corps,” reads a portion of Johnson’s Aug. 25 letter.

Hagee, who is traveling in the Pacific, was not available to take questions. His public affairs staff released the following statement: “I fully admit to and accept responsibility for forwarding Lt. Gen. Hailston’s directive to Col. Boddington that he be frocked. In hindsight, I should have further questioned Lt. Gen. Hailston’s directive and pursued other alternatives.”

The tipster complained that Boddington’s wearing of the rank “was creating a morale problem for the troops ‘most of whom believe that he is not entitled to wear the star until he is actually confirmed,’” the IG report states. Investigators found no similar complaints to the Defense Hotline and no other witness voiced concern or awareness, the report states

“He’s one of the better leaders I’ve ever worked for,” said Cpl. Daniel Diaz, 23, who served as Boddington’s bodyguard while deployed to Kuwait. “Morale went up from the time he stepped on deck to the time he left.

“Even though he was a general, he would take care of Marines down to the lowest level. He’s an all-around good guy,” said Diaz, a reservist for more than 3 years.

Boddington, who has been I MACE commander for 2 years, said he knows who made the anonymous tip and why, “but I will not discuss any of that,” he said.

“Morale was somewhat better in November when temperatures were 80 degrees than in July, when it was 140 degrees,” Boddington said. “But in terms of morale being a problem within the unit because of improper frocking, I don’t believe it existed, with the one exception.”

Again, their integrity was never questioned, only their violation of the proper procedures for frocking, which was conducted to better serve a necessary and vital mission in the Iraqi War.

There are technical violations of all kinds of rules of law and procedure. That doesn't mean that one's integrity comes into question.

Keep digging a hole, and maybe you'll end up in your first foxhole.

So it seems we are back to those pesky little "technical violations" of the Constitution.

When the wife goes to bed early and there is nothing on TV there is always AR.

Col. Boddington is not one of my heros, but he is someone I like & appreciate.
My heros are some of my friends who face trials in their lives & work hark to take care of their families under sometimes very stressful & hard situations. Yet somehow still manage to have a smile on their face & a good handshake when we meet. These are my kinda people, both male & female. They persevere.
Col. Boddington has entertained me & given me some good advice both on TV & in person. His wife Donna is an absolute sweetheart of a lady & way tougher than I'll ever be. Anyone see the hunt where both of her feet were EXTREMELY blistered & she still carried on? They have both been very nice when my wife & I visit with them in Dallas.
I like Craig, but I don't know him personally & quite frankly have problems understanding hero worship of celebrities just about as much as I don't understand people disliking someone because of their celebrity status.
I have found in my lifetime that good people usually have a bad side & most bad people have a good side. We are all human.
Here's wishing Craig & Donna a long, happy & successful life together.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
Keep digging a hole, and maybe you'll end up in your first foxhole.

. Bullseye.

I too have hunted w/ Greg Pennicott. He is meticulous and a darned good outfitter. I can't wait to hunt with him again. As for respnse to extemporaneous allegations - a big huahuh to you. (I'd say oahrah but the Army didn't teach us to spell it.)

Its amazing how when someone has military service, how many people will easily vindicate them of any capability to do wrong.

We a had returned US marine [Iraq vet.] client that wanted his commercial rotary wing, he spun his story about how he did time in the war, and in goodwill the owner of the business extended flying hrs that the ex-soldier agreed to pay at later date.
- He did a runner without paying.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
... As I said earlier, until the proper authorities have evidence and have filed charges, then these hearsay emails should have been kept private. .

sounds like you are saying Boddington is allowed to post his version of events, like he has,
but AR members should not be permitted to read anyone else's version of events.
...I certianly dont hear you suggesting that Boddington should have kept his personal account to himself.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
...The impression that most will infer from these posted emails is that Larry has an interest in the character assassination of CB before any real evidence has been provided or any charges have been filed. I have read each and every one of the emails thoroughly, and see nothing of real proof of any wrongdoing...

So far the only things AR members have before them, is one persons account of events [vs] another.
We have no real proof of anything either way, just yet.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
And if that guide wants to be taken seriously, I would think that he would make formal allegations through the legal process

The person making the allegation against Boddington, contacted an appropriate NT gov. department/authority,
[ie;regarding alleged illegal hunt in National Park]
That is the correct channel, and any appropriate official investigation and/or legal process would then rightfully proceed at the request of the gov. Dept.

Trax

I am not sure it was a good idea to publish private emails.


And what happens if as the poster above yours says, the authorities never come up with evidence or charges ?

Going to be egg over a few people's faces
if that is the outcome.

Just my HO.

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
... As I said earlier, until the proper authorities have evidence and have filed charges, then these hearsay emails should have been kept private. .

sounds like you are saying Boddington is allowed to post his version of events, like he has,
but AR members should not be permitted to read anyone else's version of events.
...I certianly dont hear you suggesting that Boddington should keep his personal account to himself.

He's the only one who was actually there that has currently posted on this forum. All else is hearsay, and apparently not very credible at that. Even the Australian authorities seemingly have found no foul.