Click here to tell us what you think about "The Navy Blues"

Dear FRONTLINE,
It is a bad sign of the times when politics interferes with the DAILY operations of our defense forces. Your "documentary" was, to say the least, disappointing. It was not up to your normal standards of excellence. The reporting seemed to be one-sided. The fact that Lt. R. HANSEN fitreps were not good and the fact that the investigations into this matter confirmed them, should have been enough. I grew up around the military, so I believe that I have a unique veiew of military life. The military is structure--it has to be. If you cannot follow the rules or make the grade, move on. Don't put the country's security at risk by "passing" on sub-standard personnel. The fact that Senator Durenburger held up the confirmation hearings for a post such as CinC-PAC (VCNO S. ARTHUR) should be investigated as criminal. The security of the entire western operations was at risk because of politics and a whiner. It seems obivious to me that Ms. Hansen had a long history of whinning. She could not make in two schools, on the job or in the NAVY! If she was as good as she says she is, why is she not flying now. She also thought it was gfood enough to take the disability retirement (AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE)! Flagging of anyone seems to me to be discriminatory. Maybe Commander R. STUMPF should hold (sue) the entire combined Congress for discrimination in the work place. Discrimination based upon rumor and NOT FACT!

Overall, a very disappointing piece in history, both for the Navy and for the US.
L.R.P.
Phoenix, AZ

Dear FRONTLINE,
Your recent episode on the 1991 Tailhook incident and susequent impact on naval aviation and the U. S. Navy as a whole, was informative, unbiased and tragic. The careers and lives of several outstanding naval officers were destroyed by the nonsensical quest to level the playing field and put women in the cockpit. There is no doubt that Karen Hultgren was a good pilot, but did the fervor to get a woman in to the "Tomcat" lead Hultgren down a path she was not ready for? As far as Ensign Hansen is concerned, the common denominator with the issues ranging from high school brawls, civilian job problems and trouble during naval flight training is Hansen herself. Enough said! Ex-Senator Durenburger, who left Washington in disgrace over financial indiscretions, had no business second guessing the Navy's decision concerning Hansen's dismissal. The people of this country lost a great leader when ADM Stan Arthur was forced to retire only for doing his job and using 30 years of naval aviation experience to make the right call. Finally, Commander Stumpf, a true warrior and a leader of men! The Navy should be embarrassed that an officer of CDR Stumpf's quality was not promoted to Captain and retained for service to his country. Let this bitter pill of "political correctness" be a lesson to us all.
G.A.G.
Windham, ME

Dear FRONTLINE,
I was shocked and angered at your latest Frontline program, "Navy Blues". The program was excellent and demonstrated the axiom of a "pendulum swinging too far" in one direction. It is clear there are more than enough victims in this changing of military culture.

It is also clear that as always there are individuals who will take an important social change and try and twist it unjustly to their advantage. I beleieve Rebecca Hansen is one such individual. Considering her performance, her own admission of a "bad flight" and flight evaluations by persons well qualified to make such jugdements she was unsafe and is nothing more than a "wash-out" in more ways than one. In a scenerio where she was a pilot and I was a passenger, I would have asked to get out of her aircraft. In this scenerio, I believe Senator Durenburger and his staff would have thought twice about getting on her plane, too.
T.C.
Ann Arbor, MI

Dear FRONTLINE,
Seldom do I log on...maybe I should do so more often? Perhaps I would if I were offered more of this kind of show to respond to! I was "channel-surfing" when I tuned into what seemed at first to be simply an airplane show...that got me hooked.However, the more I watched, the more I realized that this was an incredible story...very well told and graphically supported. Thank you!

Now that I have found out there is even more on this PBS web site, I'm likely to log-on more often!

I plan to discuss this with my daughter, a Journalism major...and share with her how impressed I was by this remarkable example of Journalism.

J.H.A.
Corona del Mar, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
I thought Peter Boyer's "New Yorker" piece was much subtler and more probing than his "Navy Blues" presentation on Frontline, BUT... I like them both.

I only wish, however, that Peter had left out the line in "Navy Blues" in which he concluded that the Navy's woes are, in essence, "a war between men and women." A comparison of the cases of Karen Hultgreen and Rebecca Hansen shows why this isn't true. Any professional woman would recognize Capt. Hultgreen as one of her own: smart, ambitious, disciplined and, most of all, willing to take her knocks and learn from them just as the men do. On the other hand, it's obvious that Rebecca Hansen is a loser in the same way that any man who whines, refuses to do his share, blames others for his mistakes, and continually fails to follow instructions is a loser. The difference between these two women has nothing to do with their gender, and the Navy reacted to their complaints in proper ways in both cases.

A personal note...I've never been a member of the military, but several generations of males in my family have been members of the military and I was formerly a Marine wife. I witnessed, or heard eye- witness tales of, several "wetting-downs" among Marine aviators, and the lewd behaviors that took place at Tailhook '91 were kindergarten antics compared to the disgusting things that normally take place at wetting-downs held in private homes, by members of a single squadron. When I lived in Hawaii in 1986-87, before I married my former husband, a Marine staff sergeant, I witnessed the aftermath of a wetting-down held at the home of my next-door neighbor, a Marine pilot who had been promoted to Captain. Unbeknownst to my neighbor, the men in the squadron had hired a stripper, using squadron recreational funds, and when she arrived at the party they grabbed my neighbor, stripped him naked and tied him to a chair. The stripper then performed oral sex on him while his buddies took pictures. How did I know this? Because my neighbor, a nice young man with whom I had become friends, called me in tears after the party ended, and asked me to come over and help him clean up the mess the other guys had left.
G.B.
Washington, D.C.

Dear FRONTLINE,
I just watched your program and as usual you did a superb job on bringing together all of the elements to provide a detailed series of events regarding the latest developments in the Navy. The events leading up to Borda's death were quite distrubing. The final reasons for his leaving office resulted from his own choosing, however, the events that lead up to that discovery (i.e. the tailhook scandle, the training and the promotion problems)clearly underscore the everpresent emphasis upon political manuevering and image-management over truth-telling and bravado.

Our political system, and the Navy which it runs, has gone amuk and, instead, we are seeing elaborate webs of deception being constructed for the maintenance of the false and self-centered ideals of an elite class.

Keep turning on the cameras to expose the malignment of our society.

Thank you.
C.R.M.
Augusta, KS

Dear FRONTLINE,
I was stunned after your program. Why did you not question the flying abilities of Ms. Hansen and Lt. Hultgreen? Could it have been that they were not great pilots? Over the years, I have witnessed the slow decay of 'the pursuit of truth' in reports from the "press" to 'make the facts somehow fit the story we are trying to tell' - and this is especially true with more liberal reporters.

Most importantly, we sacrificed two outstanding senior officers on the whim of politicians. Hansen is can be easily replaced. No so with Adm. Arthur: another will take his place but, after reports such as yours - and the intrusions by politicians in Washington, the Navy brass will never lead again in quite the same way. It is a shame that, one day we will need the leadership such as Commander Stumpf and Adm. Arthur would surely have provided and taught those under them. You have managed to 'change things' but the ramafications of your actions will not be really known for years to come.
Robert Enriquez

Dear FRONTLINE,
This was an excellent show. I was riveted to the screen. The stark portrait of American political culture was saddening to me. I remain an idealist and struggle with ethical dilemmas to gain appreciation for the depth and breadth of the human experience. The fact that American politics causes good human beings to constantly reconstruct themselves to make them acceptable to the largest block of voters is Faustian in the extreme.

It seems to me that Shakespeare exemplified both men when he wrote: "For I am one of those gentle ones that will use the devil himself with courtesy." The irony of our political system is that it was designed to be purposely adversial in an effort to contain the corrupting influence of power. Instead, the system requires the selling of the soul and the commingling of spirits such that no identifiable substance remains, save the edacious quest for power and the unquenchable need for affirmation obtained through immortality.

What a price American's demand! We seek what we cannot have because we make it unobtainable. A very thought provoking program indeed.
L.J.A.
Mt. Pleasant, MD

Dear FRONTLINE,
Tonights program was, as usual, thought provoking and captivating. The new, unfamiliar feeling, was that of reprehension. Reprehensible is the only way to describe David Durenberger's blockade of the promotion of Admiral Arthur because of a washed-out naval aviator. Ensign Hansen may feel harassed but is the conspiracy of the entire naval aviation training forces possible and would the Chief of Naval Operations and a US Senator be interviewing a male candidate who could not pass muster? Admiral Arthur has been on the frontline of our naval forces, a hero, an unselfish sailor who has chosen retirement rather than subject the Navy to further political attack. Another heroic act. Ensign Hansen 's skiing skills are obviously on par with her flying skills and she gets a lifetime disability for her derision of the Navy and incompetence on the ski slopes. Tailhook is a dinosaur but was not extinct. It is good that it is gone now but it has taken many innocent sailors along with it who deserved more than being subjected to a public relations execution by Pat Schroeder and crew.
J.W.

Dear FRONTLINE,
I was surprised (and delighted) by the even handed coverage Frontline gave to the Tailhook incident. However, I was saddened by the decline of a great institution, the US Navy, in the interest of Political Correctness.

Even more disturbing, this movement has made it possible for my daughters, not just my son, to die for questionable causes.

For once, however, PBS has done a good job in reporting on an issue.
B.E.
Townsend, MA

Dear FRONTLINE,
Why rehash the TailHook incident from '91? Haven't had your pound of flesh yet? People driven into retirement, a suicide, the morale of the Navy seriously lowered. In all those photos, the women are smiling and having a good time. What happened? Did the checks bounce? Why won't all those indignent waveoffs in congress who are worried about the mistreatment of women cry for investigations about such allegations as the "Dodd-waitress-Kennedy" sandwich, or the Clinton's "drugs for sex with young girls parties", or the Paula Jones allegations? Seems that the media has chosen to be politically correct, not morally correct. But then, to quote one of our great leaders - Henry Waxman "So what?". It is going to be interesting to see how do the next piece on "Why everybody hates the media". Turn off the lights and go home!
H.H.
Pittsburgh, PA

Dear FRONTLINE,
Oustanding presentation. As an ex Naval Aviator I was particularly impressed with your objective presentation of a sad and troubled time for U.S. Naval Aviation. There is NO excuse for sexual harrassment by anyone, ever. But the political pressures on our modern Navy were well portrayed by your excellent program. Watching America lose a fine leader like Admiral Arthur was tragic.
D.H.
Miami, FL

Dear FRONTLINE,
You failed to mention the name(s) of the sponsers of the "Tailgate" conventions. It seems to me that the decline in the appearance of dignity in the officer corps is a failure, not only of the military education system, but also the corrupting influence of the industrial complex that curries military contracts.We have been warned about this time and again over the past two generations.
B.W.
Chicago, IL

Dear FRONTLINE,
I don't expect to see grossly biassed programs that imply women should stay in their traditional place, and not push themselves into territory that should be for men only. But I saw one tonight on PBS, of all places.

The Frontline program on Tailhook and Admiral Borda's suicide failed to represent fairly and factully the issues of women's proper place in the Navy and the sexual harrassment they have had to face. The male Navy personnel shown were represented as super-competent, and, with one possible exception, innocent of any harrassment. The two women shown were presented as incompetent, as people who had pushed themselves into a role where they couldn't perform. These women, being the only ones shown, were made to stand for all Navy women. No viewer would ever get the idea from that program that there are in truth thousands of women performing well in the Navy.

The program also did not deal squarely with the problem of sexual harrassment in the Navy. No attempt was made to indicate its seriousness, pervasiveness, and unfairness. The Tailhook affair was largely glossed over as a "naval aviators need their recreation" event.

The program presented the sententious speech of James Webb, former Secretary of the Navy as the authoritative commentary on the issue. No mention was made of the fact that he is the leading and implacable opponent of expanded roles for women in the Navy. No opposing word favoring women's right to flying careers in the Navy was heard from Naval officers, although some do favor it. The politicans who attempted to hold the Navy accountable for tolerating sexual harrassment were made to look ridiculous and unreasonable. Admiral Boorda, who presumably favored an expanded role for women, was presented as a traitor to his officers.

This program was not a responsible presentation of a serious issue.
B.R.B.
Washington, DC

Dear FRONTLINE,
Aside from the anger this provoked, in the end the presentation has done a service in accurately portraying the idiocy in the idea that you can legislate human nature. The spineless officials in giving in to the braying women, Ireland, Schroeder. etal that wants to change our institutions only confirms in my opinion the downward path this country has taken in the past thiry years. Clinton is wrong, you can hate your government, but love your country. Physical and mental requirements have been reduced in many areas so women can declare their equality. God help us.
W.D.
Phoenix, AZ

Dear FRONTLINE,
I have watched and enjoyed Frontline for years and I have both agreed and disagreed with program topics and the ways in which they were presented.

However, I was never compelled to respond to a program until I watched the unfortunate "Navy Blues". So many mistakes, so many leaps of faith, so much trust without question. Was this intended to be a journalistic effort, or simply Mr. Boyer's own interpretation of the facts?

How could any true journalist; someone who is trusted to provide a balanced look at an issue, allow Rebecca Hansen to make so many unsupported charges against so many illustrious Navy men without asking for one shred of proof?

I'm certain most viewers of last night's Frontline viewed Ms. Hansen with much skepticism. She seems to have a problem with practically everyone in the Navy with whom she meets. She questions their motives, their veracity. But did anyone question Ms. Hansen's motives or veracity? Was I the only viewer to spot an extremely clear pattern of behavior on the part of Ms. Hansen; behavior suggesting she has an extremely large chip on her shoulder and attempts to mask her own personal failures by blaming any convenienct individual; even those who attempt to help?

Her service record was clear, she was not fit to fly. Yet we have all become so politically correct in this country that we allow a substandard "female" flier to call into question the handling of her case by Admiral Arthur, thus blocking a most deserved promotion and casting a cloud over one of this country's most distinguished Naval careers.

I'm certain there were some in the Navy who made military life for Ms. Hansen quite difficult. Those who stepped out of bounds should be punished. But should men like Admiral Arthur pay the price for those in our government who must take scalps, anyone's scalp, to assuage their consciences while making empty, symbolic gestures for their constituency?

Many fine individuals in our Navy have suffered the aftermath of Tailhook, becoming scapegoats for bureaucrats in Washington who have known neither the glory or the sacrifice of wearing a United States military uniform.

Congratulations Frontline! You have now joined their club.
Sincerely,
V.D.
Irvine, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
I thought "Navy Blues" was superbly objective. This conflict between capitol hill culture warriors and the sailors that we, as Americans, annoint to do our fighting for us, leave me with an anxiety that in the rush to correct(politically) a three thousand year old seafaring/warrior culture in the span of twenty years we are spuandering valuable assets like Stanley Archer. The military culture understands institutional punishment, sailors have always, and must always, be punished for their transgressions. But to subvert the viability and the mission of the United States Navy is a punishment not to the guilty sailors but to the entire nation.

Thank you for a fine presentation.
M.G.
Grand Rapids, MI

Dear FRONTLINE,
Tonight I watched a Frontline edition entitled "Navy Blues." I was at first intrigued, then, later, appalled. For, you see, I am a female Naval Flight Officer. I have not experienced these sorts of assaults that are running rampant through our Naval service as portrayed in your report. You neglected to focus on LT Paula Couphlin's activities during the Tailhook Convention, such as the "leg shaving contests." She knew what a room full of drunk aviators were capable of and held little regard for her wellbeing. Note that in one of the segments with LT Kara Hultgreen's mother, it was stated that she experienced an assault and took care of it with a swift elbow. It wasn't repeated. There is no disputing that Tailhook '91 was an unruley and often distasteful affair. It should also be mentioned that United States service members are asked to perform unruley and distasteful acts during a time of conflict. It was this convention of warriors fresh from the ugly Gulf War that Congress felt it had to punish.

I agree with the article that stated her past was an indicator of things to come. Whether she was in the right or wrong, she would have fought tooth and nail to reesablish herself. This is a dangerous business. It is not for everyone. If her grades were poor, she was attrited for both her safety and the safety of her passengers. If it were you and your camera crew coming aboard an Aircraft Carrier on an aircraft being flown by someone who was a less than average pilot, you would have a larger stake in the outcome. I wanted to express my opinion as a satisfied female in the Navy because at the end of Frontline, I had the feeling that I was obviously the only one.
T.M.
Converse, TX

Dear FRONTLINE,
Outstanding piece of work. Facts were linked together in a logical manner that explained the Navy's tribulation during this turbulant period. It showed the tremendous sacrifice that the Navy has been going through to correct its troubled culture of the past. It depicted its celebration of the first women navy fighter pilot as well as the cost of defending its standards against the backlash of political correctness.

The Navy is accustomed to operating in harsh environments far away from home. No doubt, she will weather the storm and continue to be our primary defender.
R.C.C.
Mililani, HI

Dear FRONTLINE,
As an old school retired naval aviator, I was terribly shocked by what I saw on your presentation last night. I have attended five or six Tailhook reunions, but I never observed anything like the disgusting things at Tailhook '91. We always had plenty of drinks and drunks, but everyone always had a good time without the debauchery you showed. Those involved should have been punished.

But those not involved have been punished if for no other reason that the guilty were never identified. The disgraceful treatment of CDR Bob Stumph, a real hero, having been selected for promotion by the Navy and having it denied him by the Congress is particularly aggravating.

The story of the women aviators also hurt. Both of these women had marginal flying skills. The one who crashed had had several "downs" in her progress through flight training. Enough to wash out the average male student. But the Navy bent over backward because of the PR involved to get her into the seat of an F-14. The accident shows that if she had quickly responded to the Landing Signal Officer's call for "POWER" and a wave-off there would have been no stall-spin. There was no engine failure. She and her mother had an agenda for their own glorification.

The same goes for the helicopter trainee. From what you showed of her instructor's write-ups, she was an accident looking for a place to happen. I was a flight instructor and am very familiar with flight training. That the tribulations of one student be forwarded to the VCNO and then on to Senator Durenberger for adjudication simply astounds me. The fact that Adm. Arthur's confirmation to be CINCPACFLT was held up over this is shameful. I am glad that I served in the Navy when I did, because I would never do it now.

The purpose of having armed forces is to kill people and break things in time of war. There is no place for women in combat or aboard combatant ships. It is a terrible destroyer of morale and is a diversion that detracts from combat readiness.
Sincerely,
E.H.L.

Dear FRONTLINE,
The well done "Navy Blues" is chilling confirmation that many members of Congress have not a clue about the purpose of the U.S. Military or how to supervise its activities. For her part, Representative Pat Schroeder apparently has never figured out that technical proficiency and military leadership skills are of value to the military and the nation it serves. From her perspective, the military is apparently just a convenient place to push NOW's agenda. Tailhook was not the issue here, it was the excuse.

I really agree with Dorothy Rabinowitz, The Wall Street Journal, that the image of Ms. Hansen, the former Navy flight trainee with her long confrontational record dating back to high school, whining that everyone is against her and claiming that Admiral Arthur, with all his combat missions and 11 Distinguished Flying Crosses, was somehow unfit to judge her dubious flying ability will fester in my mind for a long time. The fact that the Senate and the Navy's CNO caused Adm Arthur to retire on his principles rather than continue his career as CINCPAC is simply frightening.

People do not realize that effective military leaders do not wear rank on their collar - they earn critical subconscious respect from all those around them including superiors, peers, and subordinates. In peacetime, Congress, Courts and political appointees might fool themselves into thinking they have "ordered" away what they perceive as problems. But in wartime, people who can't pass a "peer rating" are an instant liability. This is the concept that Ms. Hansen and Representative Pat Schroeder will never understand. It may have been something that Adm Boorda understood all too well.

"Politically Correct" appointments to military leadership positions during peacetime have often led to disasters at the start of hostilities. It could be that placing women in the military especially in combat positions and applying non-military and/or other irrelevant criteria to the military promotion, command, and school selection processes are extremely bad ideas imposed by arrogant people who do not know what they are talking about. These ideas may sound progressive today, but a bunch of people may pay a very heavy price for this foolishness someday. Unfortunately, it likely will not be these misguided "armchair warrior" experts.
Eric G. Troup
MAJ, FA, USAR (Retired)
USMA Class of 1975

Dear FRONTLINE,
Disappointing program.

You missed alot, something I never expected Frontline to do.

1. You did a disservice to every officer in the Surface Navy, by excluding ADM Mike Boorda from "warrior" status. You called him a bureaucrat and implied in so doing that he was just a shore-duty paper pusher who used back-room connections to land the big job. He was commander of all NATO forces enforcing U.N. sanctions in Bosnia. He set the stage for the Bosnia peacekeeping mission. He commanded ships at sea. He wasn't a bureaucrat. He was a Sailor, who prided himself on being the best ship handler in the Navy. If you had read anything on ADM Boorda, you would have known that.

2. I've browsed the various interviews you've posted on-line, but noticed you left Hansen's out. Why? Her allegations are vital to your story, but you don't allow access to her complete transcript. At the very least, there should be an explanation of why it is missing from the available interviews.

3. Repeatedly during the program, you soft-pedaled during interviews. Durrenburger talks about how he'll be the one who'll have to answer to Hansen... you don't ask if he's afraid of this lady or her family... who you at least establish as being "controversial" in their hometown. You don't ask Durrenberger what he expected to be able to tell from reading Hansen's flight records. Is he a pilot, an instructor, what experience would he have had to allow him to understand what he was looking at. I cannot believe he would simply want to read the comments for himself and take them at "face value." Hansen says in essence it was her word against Arthur's yet you don't ask WHY her word should be taken (she actually makes a pretty good case for Admiral Arthur's word... but it's clear she's making light of his qualifications)? You put the Navy on the spot, but you don't put her on the spot. And you don't put her on-line. Is Boyer planning a book? Perhaps he doesn't want to sour a relationship with someone vital to telling "the story."

4. You didn't ask the important question about Hultgreen's funeral, was this something any person killed on active duty (or any retiree) could expect (with the exception of the having all the big brass name plates from the Pentagon in attendance.) I'll be interested in next week's program on why the Media isn't trusted. I don't think you'll see a preconception that the Media is at fault, but I hope it won't be so as self-serving and superficial as Boyer's piece.
C.M.

Dear FRONTLINE,
What an excellent program! How ironic that a president who avoided military service would select a Navy officer who had not seen combat to lead the Navy in a time of political crisis. It's been an expensive exercise. But I'll bet we were better off before the "new" Navy.
B.C.

Dear FRONTLINE,
It is unfortunate that there are no medals or veterans benefits for the "shock troops"of affirmative action, be it the Navy or any other traditionally male dominated profession. The casualty count of talented women is huge and growing . My reaction on news of Kara Hultgreen's death was that perhaps her esteemed colleagues had sabotaged her plane and wondered at the Navy's interest in proving her competence as opposed to investigating the potential results of her shipmates malice. I also was amazed at the concept that if the boys were out to get the woman who was washed out as a helicopter pilot, that the Navy would expect her trainers to provide honest apprasials of her performance which they could casually review as the truth.
N.B.

Dear FRONTLINE,
The Navy Blues was outstanding. Great for getting my blood boiling. If women want to be treated equally in the Navy then there needs to be a way of separating the quality officers like Lt. Kara Hultgreen from the dregs such as En. Hansen without sacraficing an Adm. Arthur everytime. One En. Hansen can undo the good works of ten Lt. Hultgreens. There was also no contest between the two mothers. We need more Mrs. Hultgreens and less Mrs. Hansens.
Cordially,
J.B.

Dear FRONTLINE,
A few items I would like to respond to:
1. I left the Navy in 1990, from the US Naval Academy, due in part, to the Navy's "knee jerk" reaction to criticisms about how it handled women in their branch of the service. During my 2 and 1/2 years at the Academy, I never witnessed sexual harassment of female midshipmen,but I did witness two other equally disturbing things - one, the apparent preferential treatment of female midshipmen to maintain "quotas" forced upon the Navy by ignorant members of Congress, and two, the unfortunate backlash of male midshipmen who felt they had been slighted by this preferential treatment. In short, the Navy appeared to be lowering its standards to keep the politicians happy.

2. Tailhook '91 was an unfortunate incident, but the "witch hunt" which followed was even more unfortunate. I am sincerely saddened by the destruction of CDR Stumpf's career. Here is a great warrior who has helped make my country a safe haven in today's chaotic world, and he has become a symbolic sacrifice to the disgusting scourge of political correctness. Only our country has been hurt by this witch hunt, and the only benefactors are the wallets of the so called "victims".

3. I am deeply disturbed that a former flight attendant and flight school flunkie has the audacity to think that the Navy is better off by losing the likes of the Vice (I think is it actually Deputy) Chief of Naval Operations. Our country has seriously been weakened by the loss of this great leader and warrior. Unfortunately, for some reason unknown to me, the general atmosphere of the country these days is to cut and disassemble the US Military, and that somehow, this is for the good of the country. Those who do not learn from history, are destined to repeat it, and it is apparent to me that we are headed down that course of repeating history. Don't we ever learn? The fall of the iron curtain was not caused by political correctness and liberal social engineering experiments, it was primarily caused by the fact that the Soviet Bloc has to spend 37% of its GNP to maintain its military, while the US only spent less than 5% to maintain and develop a superior military force. Peace is enforced through deterrence, which is unfortunate, but it is fact. Thats another lesson for the history books.
D.S.
Salt Lake City, UT

Dear FRONTLINE,
As an educator, I will find multiple uses for "Navy Blues." I teach courses in feminist jurispurdence, American politics, and judicial process. In each of these contexts, "Navy Blues" will enable me to raise important questions in an accessible way. The film's value results as much from its controversial nature as from its compelling treatment of questions of considerable significance to Americans. Once again, Frontline has hit the mark.
J.C.F.
Corvallis, OR

Dear FRONTLINE,
We in Canada have also had our internal problems with the navy, but it sad to see that one "airhead" female can tear down the careers of some very distinguished men.

As far as "Tailhook". Good grief, do we want all our fighting "men" to be a bunch of wimps. The old saying of boys will be boys has some merit. Dennis Miller said it all in his routine about female sportscasters in the locker room. "There are just some places where women should not want to be". If they can't take the heat then they shouldn't want to be there.
V.B.
Vancouver, British Columbia

Dear FRONTLINE,
Your excellent program, "Navy Blues", which broadcast here on October 15, made two very critical points: The first is that tradition is no excuse for inflexibility. The times are changing, and the Navy brass will have to learn to keep up or get out of the way. The second point is that courage under fire is not the moral equivalent of personal character. While we may be entitled to admire and respect our combat heroes, they are not entitled to a place on a higher ethical plane than others. The message to the Navy, and the other services as well, should be that they are responsible for the behavior of their officers and enlisted personnel and that the time of the "warrior unleashed" has passed.
R.S.
Sacramento, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
The TailHook fiasco was much ado about nothing! Been to any civilian coventions lately? There's not much difference! Navy personnel fight, work and play hard! What's the beef? I'm a retired Master Chief Petty Officer with over 20 years. It saddens me to see the navy and the rest of the military taking a beating over this. Especially the indecision over the fate of those involved. Either they were involved and need discipline or they're not. So many careers have been hung up over this because no one can make the decision to either "hire or fire". Women in the navy, from my perspective, and that's over 20 years, putting women to sea was a big mistake, at least for the U.S. navy. I've seen it work in other smaller navies, but nothing right has come out of it in the U.S. navy. Too many comprimises to crew habitibility, more cost to the U.S. tax payers in ship construction. If you want real insight to this problem, talk to the sailors who were aboard the Destroyer Tenders (AD) and Repair Ships (AR).
D.H.
San Diego, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
Excellent production. Great job of hiliting transition of the military to a "pc" establishment. After looking thru the reviews, I feel that one of the telling moments was missed or glossed over by the reviewers: James Webb's speech at the Naval Academy, in which he accused the senior Naval leadership of selling out.
J.C.

Dear FRONTLINE,
I appreciated the balanced view you gave of the tailhook scandle and Admiral Boorda in Navy Blues. Certainly the political culture of our times makes even routine decisions more political than one would imagine.

Your story is a tragedy: of the trials of real people effected by our political debates. You withold your judgement on the issue at hand, and give us pause to consider the ramifications of our ideas. Thoughtful and well-done. Bravo.
Mark Robert Hendrickson
Ensign, USNR
Pensacola, FL

Dear FRONTLINE,
I have spent 24 years as a Sailor. I feel that the program was one of the most fair and objective look at all of the issues. There is a dicotomy of influences which affect how we act and how we are percieved by the public. On one hand we are simply a reflection of society...the people we induct are the products of our society's institutions and general moral principles. On the other, we are held to a much different and higher standard than the average person in this country.

The Armed Services have always been a laboratory for social experimentation--racial integration, zero tolerance and subsequent drug testing, EEO for women in the workplace and most recently, sexual harrassment. Slowly the rest of the country has followed suit with most of the programs that the Military pioneered.

I am constantly reminded of the JFK quote that says "Any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worthwhile, I think can respond with a good deal of satisfaction, I Served in the United States Navy." The Navy has been called on to be the "First Responders" to just all of our nation's crises in foriegn policy around the globe...we have done it quickly and effectively throughout our history.

I am the Senior Enlisted Leader of a command with over 2000 military and civilian members and it has been my experience that the adage of spending 95% of your time with the 5% of the people who are problems is indeed the case. We do hold people to a higher standard. We do take the produce of society and mold them to our own standards--with better success than any other institution in the land. Compare the crime rate in our country to that of the Armed Services. We do significantly better than almost any cross sectional group that you can think of.

Tailhook represents the 5% of the problem people I spoke of above. Far and away the representative Navy member is bright, young, better educated, physically fit, healthy, highly motivated, sincere and patriotic. Our Sailors are people whom every one in this country can be proud of. They represent everything that is good about this country and the rank and file deserve better treatment than they have been subjected to since Tailhook. Scandal sells Newspapers and TV time, steady performance and the good things that happen a million times a day are overlooked each time we get negative press. I thought that although it was outside the scope of your program, it would be nice to see someone with no agenda look at all the things that make the Navy (in spite of the Tailhook legacy) one of the institutions in this country that works.
J.M.H.
Jacksonville, FL

Dear FRONTLINE,
My wife and I were disturbed by the Tailhook `91 Frontline. Everyone can remember the caution about watching sausage being made but how can it be we don't apply the same caveat to making war?

We bring young men into the service, train them kill in service to their nation, to risk life and limb for the protection we require for democracy. But we haven't -- until recently -- told them they must also be diplomats.

ADM Stanley Arthur wasn't the only distinguished officer we have lost to a squeamish interpretation of political correctness. ADM Richard Macke was another and his "failing" was to express a commonly recognized truth about three sailors who raped a young woman on Okinawa. Macke was so bold to repeat what one of the accused had said, that they should have purchased the services of a "working girl."

The nation wants it both ways but I doubt that it is possible to bring young men and women together in the stresses of combat and its aftermath without some events none of us want.

Had this been the first Tailhook, there might be some excuse for punishment of those attending. But it wasn't and the failure of the top Navy was not to foresee the problems the convention would cause and move to correct the attitudes before rather than after the events.

As for Senator Durenberger, it's a good thing he is no longer in the Senate as he and his staff have done irreparable harm not only to a set of individuals but to the process of military decisions made in the context of battle preparedness and not the comfort of a young woman's sensibilities.
B.E.
Kea`au, HI

Dear FRONTLINE,
I found the Frontline documentary "Navy Blues" to be an amazingly balanced portrayal of the events surrounding the Tailhook '91 incident and the post-Tailhook Navy. I am an active duty Naval Officer--although not an aviator--and have had to live through the Hell of the last five years. We certainly had it coming; the events surrounding Tailhook and other instances of sexual harassment and abuse were inexcusable by any standards. Change was long overdue. We should remember, however, that the Armed Forces have once again led the way in effecting social change. We led the way in racial issues, instituting a "zero tolerance" drug policy and in any number of other areas. I find that my attitudes concerning gender equality--I am in favor of such equality--oftentimes put me at odds with my civilian counterparts. Jokes, innuendos and actions that would earn me a court martial in the Navy are tolerated and even institutionalized in many civilian occupations.

I found Ms. Hansen to be her own best incriminator. While the harassment to which she was subjected represented gross misconduct on the part of her flight instructors, assuming that such allegations were true, I find it extremely naive and immature on her part to impugn the reputation of ADM Arthur. She refers, almost mockingly, to his 11 DFCs. The point that she misses completely is the fact that many of Admiral Arthur's decorations were earned with blood--often the blood of subordinates. He is naturally wary of giving "up checks" to students that others have evaluated as marginal. He wasn't being sexist; he wasn't covering his "six;" he was merely making the best, most informed decision that his vast experience and judgment permitted.

I appreciated "Frontline's" portrayal of ADM Arthur. He came off as true gentleman; probably the most heroic figure in the film. It took a lot of class to, having been done in by an arrogant, inexperienced flight candidate, speak of our democratic society and the principles of the Constitution that appoint civilian authority over the military establishment. I doubt we would've heard such gracious remarks from a Congressman or Senator under similar circumstances.

We will overcome this dark period in our history. Professionals always do. For now, all of America should subject itself to the kind of scrutiny afforded to the U.S. Navy over the past five years. Perhaps when we are able to do that we will begin to realize the "social revolution" that politicians seem so fond of promoting.

Thank you for an outstanding piece of journalism.
C.C.

Dear FRONTLINE,
It is a bad sign of the times when politics interferes with the DAILY operations of our defense forces. Your "documentary" was, to say the least disappointing. It was not up to your normal standards of excellence. The reporting seemed to be one-sided. The fact that Lt. R. HANSEN fitreps were not good and the fact that the investigations into this matter confirmed them, should have been enough. I grew up around the military, so I believe that I have a unique veiew of military life. The military is structure--it has to be. If you cannot follow the rules or make the grade, move on. Don't put the country's security at risk by "passing" on sub-standard personnel. The fact that Senator Durenburger held up the confirmation hearings for a post such as CinC-PAC (VCNO S. ARTHUR) should be investigated as criminal. The security of the entire western operations was at risk because of politics and a whiner. It seems obivious to me that Ms. Hansen had a long history of whinning. She could not make in two schools, on the job or in the NAVY! If she was as good as she says she is, why is she not flying now. She also thought it was gfood enough to take the disability retirement (AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE)! Flagging of anyone seems to me to be discriminatory. Maybe Commander R. STUMPF should hold (sue) the entire combined Congress for discrimination in the work place. Discrimination based upon rumor and NOT FACT!

Overall, a very disappointing piece in history, both for the Navy and for the US.
L.R.P.
Phoenix, AZ

Dear FRONTLINE,
Your recent episode on the 1991 Tailhook incident and susequent impact on naval aviation and the U. S. Navy as a whole, was informative, unbiased and tragic. The careers and lives of several outstanding naval officers were destroyed by the nonsensical quest to level the playing field and put women in the cockpit. There is no doubt that Karen Hultgren was a good pilot, but did the fervor to get a woman in to the "Tomcat" lead Hultgren down a path she was not ready for? As far as Ensign Hansen is concerned, the common denominator with the issues ranging from high school brawls, civilian job problems and trouble during naval flight training is Hansen herself. Enough said! Ex-Senator Durenburger, who left Washington in disgrace over financial indiscretions, had no business second guessing the Navy's decision concerning Hansen's dismissal. The people of this country lost a great leader when ADM Stan Arthur was forced to retire only for doing his job and using 30 years of naval aviation experience to make the right call. Finally, Commander Stumpf, a true warrior and a leader of men! The Navy should be embarrassed that an officer of CDR Stumpf's quality was not promoted to Captain and retained for service to his country. Let this bitter pill of "political correctness" be a lesson to us all.
G.A.G.
Windham, ME

Dear FRONTLINE,
I was shocked and angered at your latest Frontline program, "Navy Blues". The program was excellent and demonstrated the axiom of a "pendulum swinging too far" in one direction. It is clear there are more than enough victims in this changing of military culture.

It is also clear that as always there are individuals who will take an important social change and try and twist it unjustly to their advantage. I beleieve Rebecca Hansen is one such individual. Considering her performance, her own admission of a "bad flight" and flight evaluations by persons well qualified to make such jugdements she was unsafe and is nothing more than a "wash-out" in more ways than one. In a scenerio where she was a pilot and I was a passenger, I would have asked to get out of her aircraft. In this scenerio, I believe Senator Durenburger and his staff would have thought twice about getting on her plane, too.
T.C.
Ann Arbor, MI

Dear FRONTLINE,
Seldom do I log on...maybe I should do so more often? Perhaps I would if I were offered more of this kind of show to respond to! I was "channel-surfing" when I tuned into what seemed at first to be simply an airplane show...that got me hooked.However, the more I watched, the more I realized that this was an incredible story...very well told and graphically supported. Thank you!

Now that I have found out there is even more on this PBS web site, I'm likely to log-on more often!

I plan to discuss this with my daughter, a Journalism major...and share with her how impressed I was by this remarkable example of Journalism.

J.H.A.
Corona del Mar, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
I thought Peter Boyer's "New Yorker" piece was much subtler and more probing than his "Navy Blues" presentation on Frontline, BUT... I like them both.

I only wish, however, that Peter had left out the line in "Navy Blues" in which he concluded that the Navy's woes are, in essence, "a war between men and women." A comparison of the cases of Karen Hultgren and Rebecca Hansen shows why this isn't true. Any professional woman would recognize Capt. Hultgren as one of her own: smart, ambitious, disciplined and, most of all, willing to take her knocks and learn from them just as the men do. On the other hand, it's obvious that Rebecca Hansen is a loser in the same way that any man who whines, refuses to do his share, blames others for his mistakes, and continually fails to follow instructions is a loser. The difference between these two women has nothing to do with their gender, and the Navy reacted to their complaints in proper ways in both cases.

A personal note...I've never been a member of the military, but several generations of males in my family have been members of the military and I was formerly a Marine wife. I witnessed, or heard eye- witness tales of, several "wetting-downs" among Marine aviators, and the lewd behaviors that took place at Tailhook '91 were kindergarten antics compared to the disgusting things that normally take place at wetting-downs held in private homes, by members of a single squadron. When I lived in Hawaii in 1986-87, before I married my former husband, a Marine staff sergeant, I witnessed the aftermath of a wetting-down held at the home of my next-door neighbor, a Marine pilot who had been promoted to Captain. Unbeknownst to my neighbor, the men in the squadron had hired a stripper, using squadron recreational funds, and when she arrived at the party they grabbed my neighbor, stripped him naked and tied him to a chair. The stripper then performed oral sex on him while his buddies took pictures. How did I know this? Because my neighbor, a nice young man with whom I had become friends, called me in tears after the party ended, and asked me to come over and help him clean up the mess the other guys had left.
G.B.
Washington, D.C.

Dear FRONTLINE,
I just watched your program and as usual you did a superb job on bringing together all of the elements to provide a detailed series of events regarding the latest developments in the Navy. The events leading up to Borda's death were quite distrubing. The final reasons for his leaving office resulted from his own choosing, however, the events that lead up to that discovery (i.e. the tailhook scandle, the training and the promotion problems)clearly underscore the everpresent emphasis upon political manuevering and image-management over truth-telling and bravado.

Our political system, and the Navy which it runs, has gone amuk and, instead, we are seeing elaborate webs of deception being constructed for the maintenance of the false and self-centered ideals of an elite class.

Keep turning on the cameras to expose the malignment of our society.

Thank you.
C.R.M.
Augusta, KS

Dear FRONTLINE,
I was stunned after your program. Why did you not question the flying abilities of Ms. Hansen and Lt. Hultgreen? Could it have been that they were not great pilots? Over the years, I have witnessed the slow decay of 'the pursuit of truth' in reports from the "press" to 'make the facts somehow fit the story we are trying to tell' - and this is especially true with more liberal reporters.

Most importantly, we sacrificed two outstanding senior officers on the whim of politicians. Hansen is can be easily replaced. No so with Adm. Arthur: another will take his place but, after reports such as yours - and the intrusions by politicians in Washington, the Navy brass will never lead again in quite the same way. It is a shame that, one day we will need the leadership such as Commander Stumpf and Adm. Arthur would surely have provided and taught those under them. You have managed to 'change things' but the ramafications of your actions will not be really known for years to come.
Robert Enriquez

Dear FRONTLINE,
This was an excellent show. I was riveted to the screen. The stark portrait of American political culture was saddening to me. I remain an idealist and struggle with ethical dilemmas to gain appreciation for the depth and breadth of the human experience. The fact that American politics causes good human beings to constantly reconstruct themselves to make them acceptable to the largest block of voters is Faustian in the extreme.

It seems to me that Shakespeare exemplified both men when he wrote: "For I am one of those gentle ones that will use the devil himself with courtesy." The irony of our political system is that it was designed to be purposely adversial in an effort to contain the corrupting influence of power. Instead, the system requires the selling of the soul and the commingling of spirits such that no identifiable substance remains, save the edacious quest for power and the unquenchable need for affirmation obtained through immortality.

What a price American's demand! We seek what we cannot have because we make it unobtainable. A very thought provoking program indeed.
L.J.A.
Mt. Pleasant, MD

Dear FRONTLINE,
Tonights program was, as usual, thought provoking and captivating. The new, unfamiliar feeling, was that of reprehension. Reprehensible is the only way to describe David Durenberger's blockade of the promotion of Admiral Arthur because of a washed-out naval aviator. Ensign Hansen may feel harassed but is the conspiracy of the entire naval aviation training forces possible and would the Chief of Naval Operations and a US Senator be interviewing a male candidate who could not pass muster? Admiral Arthur has been on the frontline of our naval forces, a hero, an unselfish sailor who has chosen retirement rather than subject the Navy to further political attack. Another heroic act. Ensign Hansen 's skiing skills are obviously on par with her flying skills and she gets a lifetime disability for her derision of the Navy and incompetence on the ski slopes. Tailhook is a dinosaur but was not extinct. It is good that it is gone now but it has taken many innocent sailors along with it who deserved more than being subjected to a public relations execution by Pat Schroeder and crew.
J.W.

Dear FRONTLINE,
I was surprised (and delighted) by the even handed coverage Frontline gave to the Tailhook incident. However, I was saddened by the decline of a great institution, the US Navy, in the interest of Politcal Correctness.

Even more disturbing, this movement has made it possible for my daughters, not just my son, to die for questionable causes.

For once, however, PBS has done a good job in reporting on an issue.
B.E.
Townsend, MA

Dear FRONTLINE,
Why rehash the TailHook incident from '91? Haven't had your pound of flesh yet? People driven into retirement, a suicide, the morale of the Navy seriously lowered. In all those photos, the women are smiling and having a good time. What happened? Did the checks bounce? Why won't all those indignent waveoffs in congress who are worried about the mistreatment of women cry for investigations about such allegations as the "Dodd-waitress-Kennedy" sandwich, or the Clinton's "drugs for sex with young girls parties", or the Paula Jones allegations? Seems that the media has chosen to be politically correct, not morally correct. But then, to quote one of our great leaders - Henry Waxman "So what?". It is going to be interesting to see how do the next piece on "Why everybody hates the media". Turn off the lights and go home!
H.H.
Pittsburgh, PA

Dear FRONTLINE,
Oustanding presentation. As an ex Naval Aviator I was particularly impressed with your objective presentation of a sad and troubled time for U.S. Naval Aviation. There is NO excuse for sexual harrassment by anyone, ever. But the political pressures on our modern Navy were well portrayed by your excellent program. Watching America lose a fine leader like Admiral Arthur was tragic.
D.H.
Miami, FL

Dear FRONTLINE,
You failed to mention the name(s) of the sponsers of the "Tailgate" conventions. It seems to me that the decline in the appearance of dignity in the officer corps is a failure, not only of the military education system, but also the corrupting influence of the industrial complex that curries military contracts.We have been warned about this time and again over the past two generations.
B.W.
Chicago, IL

Dear FRONTLINE,
I don't expect to see grossly biassed programs that imply women should stay in their traditional place, and not push themselves into territory that should be for men only. But I saw one tonight on PBS, of all places.

The Frontline program on Tailhook and Admiral Borda's suicide failed to represent fairly and factully the issues of women's proper place in the Navy and the sexual harrassment they have had to face. The male Navy personnel shown were represented as super-competent, and, with one possible exception, innocent of any harrassment. The two women shown were presented as incompetent, as people who had pushed themselves into a role where they couldn't perform. These women, being the only ones shown, were made to stand for all Navy women. No viewer would ever get the idea from that program that there are in truth thousands of women performing well in the Navy.

The program also did not deal squarely with the problem of sexual harrassment in the Navy. No attempt was made to indicate its seriousness, pervasiveness, and unfairness. The Tailhook affair was largely glossed over as a "naval aviators need their recreation" event.

The program presented the sententious speech of James Webb, former Secretary of the Navy as the authoritative commentary on the issue. No mention was made of the fact that he is the leading and implacable opponent of expanded roles for women in the Navy. No opposing word favoring women's right to flying careers in the Navy was heard from Naval officers, although some do favor it. The politicans who attempted to hold the Navy accountable for tolerating sexual harrassment were made to look ridiculous and unreasonable. Admiral Boorda, who presumably favored an expanded role for women, was presented as a traitor to his officers.

This program was not a responsible presentation of a serious issue.
B.R.B.
Washington, DC

Dear FRONTLINE,
Aside from the anger this provoked, in the end the presentation has done a service in accurately portraying the idiocy in the idea that you can legislate human nature. The spineless officials in giving in to the braying women, Ireland, Schroeder. etal that wants to change our institutions only confirms in my opinion the downward path this country has taken in the past thiry years. Clinton is wrong, you can hate your government, but love your country. Physical and mental requirements have been reduced in many areas so women can declare their equality. God help us.
W.D.
Phoenix, AZ

Dear FRONTLINE,
I have watched and enjoyed Frontline for years and I have both agreed and disagreed with program topics and the ways in which they were presented.

However, I was never compelled to respond to a program until I watched the unfortunate "Navy Blues". So many mistakes, so many leaps of faith, so much trust without question. Was this intended to be a journalistic effort, or simply Mr. Boyer's own interpretation of the facts?

How could any true journalist; someone who is trusted to provide a balanced look at an issue, allow Rebecca Hansen to make so many unsupported charges against so many illustrious Navy men without asking for one shred of proof?

I'm certain most viewers of last night's Frontline viewed Ms. Hansen with much skepticism. She seems to have a problem with practically everyone in the Navy with whom she meets. She questions their motives, their veracity. But did anyone question Ms. Hansen's motives or veracity? Was I the only viewer to spot an extremely clear pattern of behavior on the part of Ms. Hansen; behavior suggesting she has an extremely large chip on her shoulder and attempts to mask her own personal failures by blaming any convenienct individual; even those who attempt to help?

Her service record was clear, she was not fit to fly. Yet we have all become so politically correct in this country that we allow a substandard "female" flier to call into question the handling of her case by Admiral Arthur, thus blocking a most deserved promotion and casting a cloud over one of this country's most distinguished Naval careers.

I'm certain there were some in the Navy who made military life for Ms. Hansen quite difficult. Those who stepped out of bounds should be punished. But should men like Admiral Arthur pay the price for those in our government who must take scalps, anyone's scalp, to assuage their consciences while making empty, symbolic gestures for their constituency?

Many fine individuals in our Navy have suffered the aftermath of Tailhook, becoming scapegoats for bureaucrats in Washington who have known neither the glory or the sacrifice of wearing a United States military uniform.

Congratulations Frontline! You have now joined their club.
Sincerely,
V.D.
Irvine, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
I thought "Navy Blues" was superbly objective. This conflict between capitol hill culture warriors and the sailors that we, as Americans, annoint to do our fighting for us, leave me with an anxiety that in the rush to correct(politically) a three thousand year old seafaring/warrior culture in the span of twenty years we are spuandering valuable assets like Stanley Archer. The military culture understands institutional punishment, sailors have always, and must always, be punished for their transgressions. But to subvert the viability and the mission of the United States Navy is a punishment not to the guilty sailors but to the entire nation.

Thank you for a fine presentation.
M.G.
Grand Rapids, MI

Dear FRONTLINE,
Tonight I watched a Frontline edition entitled "Navy Blues." I was at first intrigued, then, later, appalled. For, you see, I am a female Naval Flight Officer. I have not experienced these sorts of assaults that are running rampant through our Naval service as portrayed in your report. You neglected to focus on LT Paula Couphlin's activities during the Tailhook Convention, such as the "leg shaving contests." She knew what a room full of drunk aviators were capable of and held little regard for her wellbeing. Note that in one of the segments with LT Kara Hultgreen's mother, it was stated that she experienced an assault and took care of it with a swift elbow. It wasn't repeated. There is no disputing that Tailhook '91 was an unruley and often distasteful affair. It should also be mentioned that United States service members are asked to perform unruley and distasteful acts during a time of conflict. It was this convention of warriors fresh from the ugly Gulf War that Congress felt it had to punish.

I agree with the article that stated her past was an indicator of things to come. Whether she was in the right or wrong, she would have fought tooth and nail to reesablish herself. This is a dangerous business. It is not for everyone. If her grades were poor, she was attrited for both her safety and the safety of her passengers. If it were you and your camera crew coming aboard an Aircraft Carrier on an aircraft being flown by someone who was a less than average pilot, you would have a larger stake in the outcome. I wanted to express my opinion as a satisfied female in the Navy because at the end of Frontline, I had the feeling that I was obviously the only one.
T.M.
Converse, TX

Dear FRONTLINE,
Outstanding piece of work. Facts were linked together in a logical manner that explained the Navy's tribulation during this turbulant period. It showed the tremendous sacrifice that the Navy has been going through to correct its troubled culture of the past. It depicted its celebration of the first women navy fighter pilot as well as the cost of defending its standards against the backlash of political correctness.

The Navy is accustomed to operating in harsh environments far away from home. No doubt, she will weather the storm and continue to be our primary defender.
R.C.C.
Mililani, HI

Dear FRONTLINE,
As an old school retired naval aviator, I was terribly shocked by what I saw on your presentation last night. I have attended five or six Tailhook reunions, but I never observed anything like the disgusting things at Tailhook '91. We always had plenty of drinks and drunks, but everyone always had a good time without the debauchery you showed. Those involved should have been punished.

But those not involved have been punished if for no other reason that the guilty were never identified. The disgraceful treatment of CDR Bob Stumph, a real hero, having been selected for promotion by the Navy and having it denied him by the Congress is particularly aggravating.

The story of the women aviators also hurt. Both of these women had marginal flying skills. The one who crashed had had several "downs" in her progress through flight training. Enough to wash out the average male student. But the Navy bent over backward because of the PR involved to get her into the seat of an F-14. The accident shows that if she had quickly responded to the Landing Signal Officer's call for "POWER" and a wave-off there would have been no stall-spin. There was no engine failure. She and her mother had an agenda for their own glorification.

The same goes for the helicopter trainee. From what you showed of her instructor's write-ups, she was an accident looking for a place to happen. I was a flight instructor and am very familiar with flight training. That the tribulations of one student be forwarded to the VCNO and then on to Senator Durenberger for adjudication simply astounds me. The fact that Adm. Arthur's confirmation to be CINCPACFLT was held up over this is shameful. I am glad that I served in the Navy when I did, because I would never do it now.

The purpose of having armed forces is to kill people and break things in time of war. There is no place for women in combat or aboard combatant ships. It is a terrible destroyer of morale and is a diversion that detracts from combat readiness.
Sincerely,
E.H.L.

Dear FRONTLINE,
The well done "Navy Blues" is chilling confirmation that many members of Congress have not a clue about the purpose of the U.S. Military or how to supervise its activities. For her part, Representative Pat Schroeder apparently has never figured out that technical proficiency and military leadership skills are of value to the military and the nation it serves. From her perspective, the military is apparently just a convenient place to push NOW's agenda. Tailhook was not the issue here, it was the excuse.

I really agree with Dorothy Rabinowitz, The Wall Street Journal, that the image of Ms. Hansen, the former Navy flight trainee with her long confrontational record dating back to high school, whining that everyone is against her and claiming that Admiral Arthur, with all his combat missions and 11 Distinguished Flying Crosses, was somehow unfit to judge her dubious flying ability will fester in my mind for a long time. The fact that the Senate and the Navy's CNO caused Adm Arthur to retire on his principles rather than continue his career as CINCPAC is simply frightening.

People do not realize that effective military leaders do not wear rank on their collar - they earn critical subconscious respect from all those around them including superiors, peers, and subordinates. In peacetime, Congress, Courts and political appointees might fool themselves into thinking they have "ordered" away what they perceive as problems. But in wartime, people who can't pass a "peer rating" are an instant liability. This is the concept that Ms. Hansen and Representative Pat Schroeder will never understand. It may have been something that Adm Boorda understood all too well.

"Politically Correct" appointments to military leadership positions during peacetime have often led to disasters at the start of hostilities. It could be that placing women in the military especially in combat positions and applying non-military and/or other irrelevant criteria to the military promotion, command, and school selection processes are extremely bad ideas imposed by arrogant people who do not know what they are talking about. These ideas may sound progressive today, but a bunch of people may pay a very heavy price for this foolishness someday. Unfortunately, it likely will not be these misguided "armchair warrior" experts.
Eric G. Troup
MAJ, FA, USAR (Retired)
USMA Class of 1975

Dear FRONTLINE,
Disappointing program.

You missed alot, something I never expected Frontline to do.

1. You did a disservice to every officer in the Surface Navy, by excluding ADM Mike Boorda from "warrior" status. You called him a bureaucrat and implied in so doing that he was just a shore-duty paper pusher who used back-room connections to land the big job. He was commander of all NATO forces enforcing U.N. sanctions in Bosnia. He set the stage for the Bosnia peacekeeping mission. He commanded ships at sea. He wasn't a bureaucrat. He was a Sailor, who prided himself on being the best ship handler in the Navy. If you had read anything on ADM Boorda, you would have known that.

2. I've browsed the various interviews you've posted on-line, but noticed you left Hansen's out. Why? Her allegations are vital to your story, but you don't allow access to her complete transcript. At the very least, there should be an explanation of why it is missing from the available interviews.

3. Repeatedly during the program, you soft-pedaled during interviews. Durrenburger talks about how he'll be the one who'll have to answer to Hansen... you don't ask if he's afraid of this lady or her family... who you at least establish as being "controversial" in their hometown. You don't ask Durrenberger what he expected to be able to tell from reading Hansen's flight records. Is he a pilot, an instructor, what experience would he have had to allow him to understand what he was looking at. I cannot believe he would simply want to read the comments for himself and take them at "face value." Hansen says in essence it was her word against Arthur's yet you don't ask WHY her word should be taken (she actually makes a pretty good case for Admiral Arthur's word... but it's clear she's making light of his qualifications)? You put the Navy on the spot, but you don't put her on the spot. And you don't put her on-line. Is Boyer planning a book? Perhaps he doesn't want to sour a relationship with someone vital to telling "the story."

4. You didn't ask the important question about Hultgreen's funeral, was this something any person killed on active duty (or any retiree) could expect (with the exception of the having all the big brass name plates from the Pentagon in attendance.) I'll be interested in next week's program on why the Media isn't trusted. I don't think you'll see a preconception that the Media is at fault, but I hope it won't be so as self-serving and superficial as Boyer's piece.
C.M.

Dear FRONTLINE,
What an excellent program! How ironic that a president who avoided military service would select a Navy officer who had not seen combat to lead the Navy in a time of political crisis. It's been an expensive exercise. But I'll bet we were better off before the "new" Navy.
B.C.

Dear FRONTLINE,
It is unfortunate that there are no medals or veterans benefits for the "shock troops"of affirmative action, be it the Navy or any other traditionally male dominated profession. The casualty count of talented women is huge and growing . My reaction on news of Kara Hultgreen's death was that perhaps her esteemed colleagues had sabotaged her plane and wondered at the Navy's interest in proving her competence as opposed to investigating the potential results of her shipmates malice. I also was amazed at the concept that if the boys were out to get the woman who was washed out as a helicopter pilot, that the Navy would expect her trainers to provide honest apprasials of her performance which they could casually review as the truth.
N.B.

Dear FRONTLINE,
The Navy Blues was outstanding. Great for getting my blood boiling. If women want to be treated equally in the Navy then there needs to be a way of separating the quality officers like Lt. Kara Hultgreen from the dregs such as En. Hansen without sacraficing an Adm. Arthur everytime. One En. Hansen can undo the good works of ten Lt. Hultgreens. There was also no contest between the two mothers. We need more Mrs. Hultgreens and less Mrs. Hansens.
Cordially,
J.B.

Dear FRONTLINE,
A few items I would like to respond to:
1. I left the Navy in 1990, from the US Naval Academy, due in part, to the Navy's "knee jerk" reaction to criticisms about how it handled women in their branch of the service. During my 2 and 1/2 years at the Academy, I never witnessed sexual harassment of female midshipmen,but I did witness two other equally disturbing things - one, the apparent preferential treatment of female midshipmen to maintain "quotas" forced upon the Navy by ignorant members of Congress, and two, the unfortunate backlash of male midshipmen who felt they had been slighted by this preferential treatment. In short, the Navy appeared to be lowering its standards to keep the politicians happy.

2. Tailhook '91 was an unfortunate incident, but the "witch hunt" which followed was even more unfortunate. I am sincerely saddened by the destruction of CDR Stumpf's career. Here is a great warrior who has helped make my country a safe haven in today's chaotic world, and he has become a symbolic sacrifice to the disgusting scourge of political correctness. Only our country has been hurt by this witch hunt, and the only benefactors are the wallets of the so called "victims".

3. I am deeply disturbed that a former flight attendant and flight school flunkie has the audacity to think that the Navy is better off by losing the likes of the Vice (I think is it actually Deputy) Chief of Naval Operations. Our country has seriously been weakened by the loss of this great leader and warrior. Unfortunately, for some reason unknown to me, the general atmosphere of the country these days is to cut and disassemble the US Military, and that somehow, this is for the good of the country. Those who do not learn from history, are destined to repeat it, and it is apparent to me that we are headed down that course of repeating history. Don't we ever learn? The fall of the iron curtain was not caused by political correctness and liberal social engineering experiments, it was primarily caused by the fact that the Soviet Bloc has to spend 37% of its GNP to maintain its military, while the US only spent less than 5% to maintain and develop a superior military force. Peace is enforced through deterrence, which is unfortunate, but it is fact. Thats another lesson for the history books.
D.S.
Salt Lake City, UT

Dear FRONTLINE,
As an educator, I will find multiple uses for "Navy Blues." I teach courses in feminist jurispurdence, American politics, and judicial process. In each of these contexts, "Navy Blues" will enable me to raise important questions in an accessible way. The film's value results as much from its controversial nature as from its compelling treatment of questions of considerable significance to Americans. Once again, Frontline has hit the mark.
J.C.F.
Corvallis, OR

Dear FRONTLINE,
We in Canada have also had our internal problems with the navy, but it sad to see that one "airhead" female can tear down the careers of some very distinguished men.

As far as "Tailhook". Good grief, do we want all our fighting "men" to be a bunch of wimps. The old saying of boys will be boys has some merit. Dennis Miller said it all in his routine about female sportscasters in the locker room. "There are just some places where women should not want to be". If they can't take the heat then they shouldn't want to be there.
V.B.
Vancouver, British Columbia

Dear FRONTLINE,
Your excellent program, "Navy Blues", which broadcast here on October 15, made two very critical points: The first is that tradition is no excuse for inflexibility. The times are changing, and the Navy brass will have to learn to keep up or get out of the way. The second point is that courage under fire is not the moral equivalent of personal character. While we may be entitled to admire and respect our combat heroes, they are not entitled to a place on a higher ethical plane than others. The message to the Navy, and the other services as well, should be that they are responsible for the behavior of their officers and enlisted personnel and that the time of the "warrior unleashed" has passed.
R.S.
Sacramento, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
The TailHook fiasco was much ado about nothing! Been to any civilian coventions lately? There's not much difference! Navy personnel fight, work and play hard! What's the beef? I'm a retired Master Chief Petty Officer with over 20 years. It saddens me to see the navy and the rest of the military taking a beating over this. Especially the indecision over the fate of those involved. Either they were involved and need discipline or they're not. So many careers have been hung up over this because no one can make the decision to either "hire or fire". Women in the navy, from my perspective, and that's over 20 years, putting women to sea was a big mistake, at least for the U.S. navy. I've seen it work in other smaller navies, but nothing right has come out of it in the U.S. navy. Too many comprimises to crew habitibility, more cost to the U.S. tax payers in ship construction. If you want real insight to this problem, talk to the sailors who were aboard the Destroyer Tenders (AD) and Repair Ships (AR).
D.H.
San Diego, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,
Excellent production. Great job of hiliting transition of the military to a "pc" establishment. After looking thru the reviews, I feel that one of the telling moments was missed or glossed over by the reviewers: James Webb's speech at the Naval Academy, in which he accused the senior Naval leadership of selling out.
J.C.

Dear FRONTLINE,
I appreciated the balanced view you gave of the tailhook scandle and Admiral Boorda in Navy Blues. Certainly the political culture of our times makes even routine decisions more political than one would imagine.

Your story is a tragedy: of the trials of real people effected by our political debates. You withold your judgement on the issue at hand, and give us pause to consider the ramifications of our ideas. Thoughtful and well-done. Bravo.
Mark Robert Hendrickson
Ensign, USNR
Pensacola, FL

Dear FRONTLINE,
I have spent 24 years as a Sailor. I feel that the program was one of the most fair and objective look at all of the issues. There is a dicotomy of influences which affect how we act and how we are percieved by the public. On one hand we are simply a reflection of society...the people we induct are the products of our society's institutions and general moral principles. On the other, we are held to a much different and higher standard than the average person in this country.

The Armed Services have always been a laboratory for social experimentation--racial integration, zero tolerance and subsequent drug testing, EEO for women in the workplace and most recently, sexual harrassment. Slowly the rest of the country has followed suit with most of the programs that the Military pioneered.

I am constantly reminded of the JFK quote that says "Any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worthwhile, I think can respond with a good deal of satisfaction, I Served in the United States Navy." The Navy has been called on to be the "First Responders" to just all of our nation's crises in foriegn policy around the globe...we have done it quickly and effectively throughout our history.

I am the Senior Enlisted Leader of a command with over 2000 military and civilian members and it has been my experience that the adage of spending 95% of your time with the 5% of the people who are problems is indeed the case. We do hold people to a higher standard. We do take the produce of society and mold them to our own standards--with better success than any other institution in the land. Compare the crime rate in our country to that of the Armed Services. We do significantly better than almost any cross sectional group that you can think of.

Tailhook represents the 5% of the problem people I spoke of above. Far and away the representative Navy member is bright, young, better educated, physically fit, healthy, highly motivated, sincere and patriotic. Our Sailors are people whom every one in this country can be proud of. They represent everything that is good about this country and the rank and file deserve better treatment than they have been subjected to since Tailhook. Scandal sells Newspapers and TV time, steady performance and the good things that happen a million times a day are overlooked each time we get negative press. I thought that although it was outside the scope of your program, it would be nice to see someone with no agenda look at all the things that make the Navy (in spite of the Tailhook legacy) one of the institutions in this country that works.
J.M.H.
Jacksonville, FL

Dear FRONTLINE,
My wife and I were disturbed by the Tailhook `91 Frontline. Everyone can remember the caution about watching sausage being made but how can it be we don't apply the same caveat to making war?

We bring young men into the service, train them kill in service to their nation, to risk life and limb for the protection we require for democracy. But we haven't -- until recently -- told them they must also be diplomats.

ADM Stanley Arthur wasn't the only distinguished officer we have lost to a squeamish interpretation of political correctness. ADM Richard Macke was another and his "failing" was to express a commonly recognized truth about three sailors who raped a young woman on Okinawa. Macke was so bold to repeat what one of the accused had said, that they should have purchased the services of a "working girl."

The nation wants it both ways but I doubt that it is possible to bring young men and women together in the stresses of combat and its aftermath without some events none of us want.

Had this been the first Tailhook, there might be some excuse for punishment of those attending. But it wasn't and the failure of the top Navy was not to foresee the problems the convention would cause and move to correct the attitudes before rather than after the events.

As for Senator Durenberger, it's a good thing he is no longer in the Senate as he and his staff have done irreparable harm not only to a set of individuals but to the process of military decisions made in the context of battle preparedness and not the comfort of a young woman's sensibilities.
B.E.
Kea`au, HI

Dear FRONTLINE,
I found the Frontline documentary "Navy Blues" to be an amazingly balanced portrayal of the events surrounding the Tailhook '91 incident and the post-Tailhook Navy. I am an active duty Naval Officer--although not an aviator--and have had to live through the Hell of the last five years. We certainly had it coming; the events surrounding Tailhook and other instances of sexual harassment and abuse were inexcusable by any standards. Change was long overdue. We should remember, however, that the Armed Forces have once again led the way in effecting social change. We led the way in racial issues, instituting a "zero tolerance" drug policy and in any number of other areas. I find that my attitudes concerning gender equality--I am in favor of such equality--oftentimes put me at odds with my civilian counterparts. Jokes, innuendos and actions that would earn me a court martial in the Navy are tolerated and even institutionalized in many civilian occupations.

I found Ms. Hansen to be her own best incriminator. While the harassment to which she was subjected represented gross misconduct on the part of her flight instructors, assuming that such allegations were true, I find it extremely naive and immature on her part to impugn the reputation of ADM Arthur. She refers, almost mockingly, to his 11 DFCs. The point that she misses completely is the fact that many of Admiral Arthur's decorations were earned with blood--often the blood of subordinates. He is naturally wary of giving "up checks" to students that others have evaluated as marginal. He wasn't being sexist; he wasn't covering his "six;" he was merely making the best, most informed decision that his vast experience and judgment permitted.

I appreciated "Frontline's" portrayal of ADM Arthur. He came off as true gentleman; probably the most heroic figure in the film. It took a lot of class to, having been done in by an arrogant, inexperienced flight candidate, speak of our democratic society and the principles of the Constitution that appoint civilian authority over the military establishment. I doubt we would've heard such gracious remarks from a Congressman or Senator under similar circumstances.

We will overcome this dark period in our history. Professionals always do. For now, all of America should subject itself to the kind of scrutiny afforded to the U.S. Navy over the past five years. Perhaps when we are able to do that we will begin to realize the "social revolution" that politicians seem so fond of promoting.

Thank you for an outstanding piece of journalism.
C.C.

Click here to tell us what you think about "The Navy Blues"