FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   661   662   663   664   665   666   667   668   669   670   671   672   673   674   675   676   677   678   679   680   681   682   683   684   685  
686   687   688   689   690   691   692   693   694   695   696   697   698   699   700   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   >>   >|  
fense on 28 January 1953.] [Footnote 19-21: Memo, CofS, G-1, for ASA, 6 Jan 54, sub: Mass Jailing and Fining of Negro Soldiers in Columbia, S.C.; Memo, ASA for ASD (M&P), same date and sub; Memo, SecDef for President, 7 Jan 54. All in G-1 291.2 (10 Dec 53).] But the services never did get "them" off their neck, and to a large extent defense officials could only blame themselves for their troubles. Their attitude toward extending their standards of equal treatment and opportunity to local communities implied a benign neutrality on their part in racial disputes involving servicemen. This attitude was belied by the fact that on numerous and sometimes celebrated occasions the services helped reinforce local segregation laws. In 1956, for example, Secretary of the Air Force Harold E. Talbott explained that military commanders were expected to foster good relations with local authorities and in many areas were obliged to "require" servicemen to conform to the dictates of local law "regardless of their own convictions or personal beliefs."[19-22] [Footnote 19-22: SecAF statement, 1 May 56, quoted in Address by James P. Goode, Employment Policy Officer for the Air Force, at a meeting called by the President's Committee on Government Employment Policy, 24 May 56, AF File 202-56, Fair Employment Program.] This requirement could be rather brutal in practice and placed the services, the nation's leading equal opportunity employer, in questionable company. In 1953 a black pilot stationed at Craig Air Force Base, Alabama, refused to move to the rear of a public bus until the military police ordered him to comply with the state law. The Air Force officially reprimanded and eventually discharged the pilot. The position of the Air Force was made clear in the reprimand: Your actions in this instance are prejudicial to good order and military discipline and do not conform to the standards of conduct expected of a commissioned officer of the United States Air Force. As a member of the Armed Forces, you are obliged to abide by all municipal and state laws, regardless of your personal feelings or Armed Forces policy relative to the issue at hand. Your open violation of the segregation policy
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   661   662   663   664   665   666   667   668   669   670   671   672   673   674   675   676   677   678   679   680   681   682   683   684   685  
686   687   688   689   690   691   692   693   694   695   696   697   698   699   700   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

services

 
Employment
 
military
 

segregation

 

opportunity

 

standards

 

attitude

 

policy

 
servicemen
 

obliged


Policy

 

personal

 

conform

 

Forces

 

expected

 

Footnote

 

President

 

company

 

relative

 

questionable


employer
 

nation

 
leading
 

stationed

 

public

 

refused

 

Alabama

 

practice

 

brutal

 

Committee


Government

 

called

 

violation

 
meeting
 

requirement

 

Program

 

police

 
conduct
 

commissioned

 

officer


prejudicial

 

discipline

 

United

 

States

 

January

 

member

 

instance

 

officially

 

reprimanded

 

ordered