I know some of you have seen this

[Major Carrales]

Kinda falls under the "doth protest too much" concept.

No, it comes from someone attacking the organization I feel passionate abou. Most special then they are totally wrong and laced in a "veneer of validity" like NOTF, By that I mean publishing legitmate news along with this anti-CAP agendism.

Why would I "protest too much" in the Shakespearian way about things knocking persons so high above me? I just don't like it when such drivel is published because it reflects on all of us when it is spun-truths, half-truths and bold faced carnards.  Especially when it is incorrect and/or slanted.

[flyguy06]

Accoriding to this articel TP promised to make Region CC's Generals in CAP and he hasplotted to make himself a Three star General. Come on guys, this is CAP. Is it really that serious. WHo would go through so much effort and energy to obtain a rank that really means nothing. Wheather three stars or 1LT this is CAP and the pay is the same.

T'was not to long ago some people on this very forum (and in the Portal) suggested making CAP Region Commander's Brig Generals.

National CC- Major General
Vice-CC/Region Commander- Brig Generals
Wing- Colonel
Group- Lt Col
Squadron: Maj or Capt
Flight- ? 1st Lt?

Did that make those people evil?  I think not...

You are correct, this is a moot point being agendistically played into a MAJOR SIGN of EVIL and SINISTER INTENT.

Please...

Yes, you refer to me. WHat my statement was was that since CAP is aligned withthe USAF why not make the ranks aligned withthew USAF. Meaning in the USAF a Group Commander is a full Colonel and a WIng Commandr is a BG. Oh, I love the rank. I wouldnt mind being a Wing CC oneday (I doubt that happens though)

[DNall]

Not to split hairs, but that's a CAP reg, & as we all know CAP regs don't grant or inhibit AF authority over items, Congress does that.

What that actually says though is CAP will defer to the CSAF as to whether or not a specific individual in that position should have the grade that goes with it. It's basically a vote of confidence or no-confidence (in the parlamentary sense of being an informal recall veto) of that person holding that position.


Far as the idea of promoting Region commanders to Brig Gen... their span of control (people, resources, missions, total responsibility) is that of a Wg CC in the AF & the grade should be tied to that. Personally I'm not entirely sure we need regions, at least not in their current form.

[flyguy06]

I agree somwhat. But if we did that based on span of control states like Deleware and Iowa would always fall short to states like California and New York and that wouldnt be fair.

I think we do need Region Commanders. CAP is set up similar to my fraternity in that we have chapters (squadrons) Districts (wongs) Regions and a National Officer. A person in charge of each echelon and it works pretty well. I wouldnt want to be a National Cpmmandr and have to keep track of 52 people when its much easir to keep trackof 8 people and each of them keeps track of 4 to 5 people.

[Hawk200]

Kinda falls under the "doth protest too much" concept.

No, it comes from someone attacking the organization I feel passionate abou. Most special then they are totally wrong and laced in a "veneer of validity" like NOTF, By that I mean publishing legitmate news along with this anti-CAP agendism.

Why would I "protest too much" in the Shakespearian way about things knocking persons so high above me? I just don't like it when such drivel is published because it reflects on all of us when it is spun-truths, half-truths and bold faced carnards.  Especially when it is incorrect and/or slanted.

My point is that whenever there is any news posted with an anti-Pineda slant, you throw a childish temper tantrum, or blow up like a can of soda that has been in a paint shaker. That doesn't present the professional appearance that you yourself harp on. Just chill a little.

I find it hard to beleive that you don't seem to understand the Shakespeare reference. It's one thing to support your commander. That's simple loyalty. It's another thing to be rabid about it. Sometimes the loudest denial is the biggest indicator of guilt (pay attention to the sometimes part).

You come into this forum with the cyber equivalent of screaming, yelling and hollering that does no one any good. Like I said above, just chill a little. It won't matter if Pineda is guilty or innocent, your pitching a fit really won't make a bit of difference. Any organization with the strength to stand up against unfounded allegations will succeed.

[Lancer]

In the end it will the the PAOs, the good ones, that will save us from this DRIVEL!!!!

That's the the best thing you've said in a while, as a PAO. Meh.

Please, stop feeding Skip Munger's ego by posting your anger. There is not a member of CAP that respects what he, yes, he is doing, and by simply posting your reaction to his 'drivel', your doing just that.

Any member worth his salt realizes the absolute lack of value in his 'cut n'paste' news alerts and slant toward our leadership and knows to simply ignore it. He's a one man operation with no real technical skill in how he presents his 'news' and is transparent as they come.

[Major Carrales]

You know what...you guys are right.

I guess it is that I do not suffer fools well.

[Hawk200]

You know what...you guys are right.

I guess it is that I do not suffer fools well.

What I've found that works pretty well when I encounter this stuff is just a little snicker at the audacity of it. Leaves you appreciating a little humor, rather than churning up an ulcer.

[Major Carrales]

You know what...you guys are right.

I guess it is that I do not suffer fools well.

What I've found that works pretty well when I encounter this stuff is just a little snicker at the audacity of it. Leaves you appreciating a little humor, rather than churning up an ulcer.

I guess you are correct.

[O-Rex]

All:

Don't be rattled-NOTF is proof that there is the occasional feces on the sidewalks of the information super-highway....

I put it all right up there with "Bat-boy" Bigfoot, and Elvis-sightings 

[Lancer]

I say we simply petition Pylon to add 'Discussion's regarding NOTF are not allowed' to the TOS. 

[AlphaSigOU]

I say we simply petition Pylon to add 'Discussion's regarding NOTF are not allowed' to the TOS. 

Or better yet... add 'NOTF' and 'News of the Force' to the word list in the forum's censor-bot! 

[Lancer]

Or better yet... add 'NOTF' and 'News of the Force' to the word list in the forum's censor-bot! 

Good idea, but we'd end up in a debate about what the Censor-bot would replace those keywords with; or we'd end up with the censor-bot censoring itself and crash the forums. 

[MIKE]

I say we simply petition Pylon to add 'Discussion's regarding NOTF are not allowed' to the TOS. 

I've been watching this one closely, since they do have a history of getting locked.

[Psicorp]

In the end it will the the PAOs, the good ones, that will save us from this DRIVEL!!!!

That's the the best thing you've said in a while, as a PAO. Meh.
Please, stop feeding Skip Munger's ego by posting your anger. There is not a member of CAP that respects what he, yes, he is doing, and by simply posting your reaction to his 'drivel', your doing just that.

Any member worth his salt realizes the absolute lack of value in his 'cut n'paste' news alerts and slant toward our leadership and knows to simply ignore it. He's a one man operation with no real technical skill in how he presents his 'news' and is transparent as they come.

I don't have the last remaining scrap of idealism stomped out of me yet  and as such still do place faith in our leadership (BoG and NEC) and in the Air Force to squish impropriety when it arises.   

I truly believe that the people who know what is really going on (way above my pay grade) and those who are charged with oversight don't rely on any so called "news flashes" from NOTF to make decisions or to form opinions.

That being said, I do try to keep up on what the NOTF "reports" about CAP because it does tend to raise questions from within and from outside the squadron.  What I find most amusing is the comparison between what is said on this site (by individuals who *gasp* know how to verify and confirm) versus information from "sources" outside the organization.    The "Aux On/Aux Off" patch, for example, is harmless fun for us because we know that we, as an organization, are a dichotemy of military/government support and a corporation.

Just because you might not have heard it said today, I appreciate all the hard work you all do.

[Lancer]

That being said, I do try to keep up on what the NOTF "reports" about CAP because it does tend to raise questions from within and from outside the squadron.

Ok, well, there's a big difference between keeping tabs on NOTF, and doing your best 'Chicken Little' impersonation because of 'Munger's Drivel'.

[DNall]

I say we simply petition Pylon to add 'Discussion's regarding NOTF are not allowed' to the TOS. 

Or better yet... add 'NOTF' and 'News of the Force' to the word list in the forum's censor-bot! 

Now that's the kind of sneaky I like. Question is what phrase should auto insert when someone posts such prases? 

[CLB]

I hardly ever apologize when saying something like this, but I realize the sad part about it......I laughed my rear off when I read this:


"And when Pineda made his appearance during CAP operations during Hurricane Katrina, sources say, he was actually mistaken for an officer in the Guatemalan air force. I'm a general in the United States Air Force," Pineda is said to have retorted"

I'm sorry, that part about the Guatamelan AF is just too funny.  Joo unnersthand?

[DNall]

 

[NIN]

Maybe I'm wrong, but you're going to have to show me where that rule is. My understanding is the AF does not have control over any CAP grade. There was a point in CAP history where the Nat CC was a Maj Gen slot then it was reduced to Brig Gen when CAP got smaller. Then a CAP/CC decided to increase it of his own accord & we got marron grade slides shortly thereafter (they were blue before that). Here recently the AF was asked their opinion so as not to piss them off & CAP made that change. AF couldn't have stopped them if they'd disapproved, but they could have taken it out on us in other ways.

I've heard nothing about going to three-stars & I don't think that's particularly appropriate based on our combination of size, resource, & mission compared to similiar AF organizations/units, and based on the CC grade of the commands we work for. I think the AF would probably see it the same way.

Wow, I don't know where you got your information...

First, our National Commander has been a two-star in the past (ie. MG Curry, during WWII), but in the history of "volunteer national commanders" (and that change happened WAY before my time in CAP, so I only have anecdotal information and what I can read) only dates to 1975. Prior to that the "volunteer leader" was the "Chairman of the National Board" and the "National Commander" was an Air Force officer.   General Carl Spaatz (who was a retired AF officer at the time) was the Chairman of the National Board from 1948 to 1959, and subsequent Chairmen of the National Board were Colonels on appointment and then BGs. 

So, from 1975 to 1989-ish, the volunteer National Commander was a BG.  Then E.E. Harwell decided that he liked two stars better than one, and got the NB to "promote" him.  And the AF came down on us like 2 tons of bricks with the maroon shoulder marks, etc.   Prior to that, we wore hard grade on the epaulets, instead of jamming shoulder marks made for shirts onto the service coats. Ugh.

The USAF DOES assert control over the appointment of Civil Air Patrol general officers, as was pointed out.  And they certainly control the ability of Civil Air Patrol to decide when the National Commander or others can add a star where one does not currently exist.  You can't just go willy-nilly making the National Commander a 2-star (or 3-star) without some "authorization from above." That's just plain stupid.

I think this NOTF "article" is a load of steaming tripe, but that one particular point was correct:  The USAF does control general officer appointments. 

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.

I seldom never read NOTF. Why? Because its crap.  The only time I see it is when someone says "Did you see NOTF?"  So I went there and read the article and immediately regretted doing so as I felt my IQ drop another point and a half.

Meh.  Move on.