confidentiality regulations for CAP?? OPSEC?

[mynetdude]

I understand all this,

I didn't state anything specific I only mentioned a phrase and injected my opinion, if you want to know about that read this:

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=4539.msg88551#msg88551 thats the post I made.  I don't see how THAT post breaches confidentiality, sure ruffling feathers may be... and I don't claim any innocence doing so however I don't think its so bad that whoever didn't like it had to suggest to my CoC that my promotion should be held for 90 days because they DO NOT KNOW me, I do not work under them, I worked for my squadron and ONLY my CC knows me that well to make a determination not the wing.

I think the commander should have made a better informed decision rather than just playing "puppet".

[lordmonar]

Okay...just read your post...now you want my opinion?

You are showing disloyalty to your commander and wing staff.

You crossed the OPSEC line a couple of times but with it being just a SAREX you could claim it does not count....but on the other hand I can see how they can see it as a "train like you fight" situation and bring you task on that.

So...yes I can easily see how a commander could question your readiness for promotion.  Not even counting you subsequent actions here on the net.

[mynetdude]

Okay...just read your post...now you want my opinion?

You are showing disloyalty to your commander and wing staff.

You crossed the OPSEC line a couple of times but with it being just a SAREX you could claim it does not count....but on the other hand I can see how they can see it as a "train like you fight" situation and bring you task on that.

So...yes I can easily see how a commander could question your readiness for promotion.  Not even counting you subsequent actions here on the net.

whatever... no, it doesn't fall under opsec... it doesn't state time, place, people. ETC, disloyalty? Maybe... but that is their problem not mine they don't seem to address it and no I don't intend to add to the problem.

[mynetdude]

TBH if it is that bad, you can bet I won't make another post... really cya!

[ADCAPer]

whatever... no, it doesn't fall under opsec... it doesn't state time, place, people. ETC, disloyalty? Maybe... but that is their problem not mine they don't seem to address it and no I don't intend to add to the problem.

If you would like a little more information on OPSEC check out http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/a021202b.html

If you don't want to read it all, just check out the paragraph below. For some reason, CAP forgot to include the Critical Information List, or CIL with their OPSEC program. Without that CIL, what constitutes an OPSEC violation is up for some serious debate, because no ne has been told what the CIL items are, and only National can say for sure.

Identification of Critical Information

Basic to the OPSEC process is determining what information, if available to one or more adversaries, would harm an organization's ability to effectively carry out the operation or activity. This critical information constitutes the "core secrets" of the organization, i.e., the few nuggets of information that are central to the organization's mission or the specific activity. Critical information usually is, or should be, classified or least protected as sensitive unclassified information.

[Short Field]

You are showing disloyalty to your commander and wing staff.

Yep, he screwed the pooch on that one.   

RULE NUMBER ONE:  Don't ever say or post anything in public which could cause embarrassment for your superiors - especially if it can be directly attributed to you.  This specifically includes questioning their competences, professional judgement, and ablility to follow regulations.

Rules two through one hundred:  See rule one.

[MIGCAP]

The problem is that our Headquarters has not really established a security program, nor have they had proper agreements or policy put in place to do the minimum required to do the mission.  They have not put the required duty positions in place, nor have they adequately defined what protected information CAP has and where it fits into the overall scheme of the world. 

Just making a bunch of people take an OPSEC course, without making that course relevant to what they do does not cut it. Training folks on the difference between classified, FOUO, Privacy Act, etc. would certainly be a minimum requirement. This training would have to include specific examples of each type of information must be done.

CAP allegedly got into this area so we could explain to customers that we can protest their information if they read us in to what they are doing.  All we have done so far is clearly demonstrate we are not trained or prepared to deal with these folks. We are pretending again, or still perhaps.

[mikeylikey]

You are showing disloyalty to your commander and wing staff.

Sorry, I did not get the same impression.  In fact, where is it written that we have to be loyal to these people?  Once again, CAP does not equal the USAF, or remotely come close to being like the military.  Aside from titles, CAP lost it's military side about 30 years ago. 

So, as a dues paying member, in an organization chartered by the Federal Govt, I can say what ever I want about how either the people running it SUCK, or how it sucks in general.  (Now, I believe some things in CAP suck, but I support most of it) 

If I wanted to say my Wing Commander is a total tool, and has no idea how to run the Wing, and we would be better off with a monkey in charge (all of which I do say), I am allowed.  If they tried to kick me out for expressing my opinions about the Wing Commander, they would have a fight on their hands.  If I wanted to meet with my Senator or Representative and express my concerns for how badly CAP in general is being lead, I can.  I signed no contracts with CAP CORP limiting my freedom of expression. 

Getting back to the loyalty issue, I think the leadership needs to be more Loyal to the general membership, not the other way around.  For the past two years, the leadership did not do what was in the best interest of any of us.  It is only recently that those misdeeds are being rectified. 

Coming full circle to OPSEC, I do not believe mynetdude violated any OPSEC issues, and is being made an example of, most likely by someone who doesn't like him.   

[lordmonar]

Sure you have a right to say what ever you want.

But you don't have a right to a postion of authority in this the organisation.

Say what you want...but live with the consequences.

[mynetdude]

You know what some people are correct, this is probably more of a disloyalty case here than a breach of confidentiality and like I tried to point out... my promotion was held back for breach of confidentiality NOT for breaching OPSEC NOT for Maturity, NOT for backstabbing (though I would count that a maturity thing), disloyalty would also fit in with maturity as well.

Yes I agree, I didn't say I was innocent... had it been a disloyalty issue I could see some problem there and TBH if it is a first time offense and it is done by a hard working member maybe 90 days is a bit harsh? I would have accepted it at 30 days for maturity really... but no they picked the WRONG reason IMHO.

there is no case to fight, there is nothing to prove its all within the regulations if there's any IG on this board... tell me different otherwise I can't see any point in attempting a complaint especially if it came down from the wing itself anyway.

[Ned]

In fact, where is it written that we have to be loyal to these people? 

Let me help you out here. 

While there is nothing that requires loyalty per se, every CAP member is bound by our Core Value of Respect.  Take a look at the CAP Core Values and you will see the part where CAP members must:

. . .treat each other with fairness and dignity, and work together as a team.

You are certainly free to make public comments about other members that are fair and dignified.

You might also find this snippet from the USAF Core Value of "Service Before Self" helpful:

Service before self tells us that professional duties take precedence over personal desires. At the very least it includes the following behaviors:

« Rule following. [ . . .]

« Respect for others. Service before self tells us also that a good leader places the troops ahead of his/her personal comfort. We must always act in the certain knowledge that all persons possess a fundamental worth as human beings.

« Discipline and self-control. Professionals cannot indulge themselves in self-pity, discouragement, anger, frustration, or defeatism. They have a fundamental moral obligation to the persons they lead to strike a tone of confidence and forward-looking optimism. More specifically, they are expected to exercise control in the following areas:

  Anger. Military professionals and especially commanders at all echelons are expected to refrain from displays of anger that would bring discredit upon themselves and/or the Air Force.  [. . .]

   « Faith in the system. To lose faith in the system is to adopt the view that you know better than those above you in the chain of command what should or should not be done. In other words, to lose faith in the system is to place self before service. Leaders can be very influential in this regard: if a leader resists the temptation to doubt `the system', then subordinates may follow suit.

(Emphasis added.)

Once again, CAP does not equal the USAF.

True enough.  We are a little older than they are, but they seem to have come along just fine.   

So, as a dues paying member, in an organization chartered by the Federal Govt, I can say what ever I want about how either the people running it SUCK, or how it sucks in general. 

If I wanted to say my Wing Commander is a total tool, and has no idea how to run the Wing, and we would be better off with a monkey in charge (all of which I do say), I am allowed.  

Only if you disregard our Core Values and don't mind being disciplined or even terminated for insubordination.  See CAPR 35-3. Look carefully at paragraph 4(b).

While "insubordination" isn't specifically defined in our reg, in general in a military context it includes

3) Disrespect. Disrespectful behavior is that which detracts from the respect due the authority and person of a superior commissioned officer. It may consist of acts or language, however expressed, and it is immaterial whether they refer to the superior as an officer or as a private individual. Disrespect by words may be conveyed by abusive epithets or other contemptuous or denunciatory language. Truth is no defense. .

(4) Presence. It is not essential that the disrespectful behavior be in the presence of the superior, but ordinarily one should not be held accountable under this article for what was said or done in a purely private conversation.

(Emphasis added)

If they tried to kick me out for expressing my opinions about the Wing Commander, they would have a fight on their hands. 

No doubt.  But it wouldn't be a very long or difficult fight.  The courts are not very sympathetic to former members who mock and insult the organization's leaders.

If I wanted to meet with my Senator or Representative and express my concerns for how badly CAP in general is being lead, I can. 

Here, I agree with you.  And you can have any sort of private conversation about CAP and are free to express your opinions.

All of us have an obligation to try to identify problems and improve CAP.  I encourage all of us to speak candidly with our leaders and forward specific ideas and suggestions for improvement.  But it is wrong to simply bad mouth folks publicly and/or on the internet. 

And worse yet, it doesn't do any good for the organization itself.  It doesn't produce change, it just makes you feel good.

Ned Lee

[Eagle400]

it just makes you feel good.

Uh, no.  It does not make you feel good.  Not in the long run, anyway. 

Moral of the story: attack the problems, not the people.

[mynetdude]

Also another part of the story moral is if you can't say anything nice, don't say it at all.

We ALL have bad days, and we all have someone we don't like, etc.  We all do something unintentionally or would not normally do on purpose either.

We all make mistakes and poor choice of words, we can't be perfect if we could... life would be so boring or stupid that it would be pointless.  That doesn't mean we should get held back for breach of confidentiality if the problem is really a "loyalty" problem or "respect" problem.

I still believe the reason for holding promotion was wrong and incorrect.  I hold every one of my fellow members even in higher authority to highest regard. 

TBH the more I think about this, the more I have thought about past posts/threads about how CAP should be less military and the more I agree with it. I think we are going TOO pro military IMHO.  That doesn't mean if we were to not be affiliated with the military we should lose all respect and let hell break lose but "insubordination" is silly in a civilian world TBH.  To be grossly disrespectful, I can understand but I was not.

At this point I will not touch CAP at least at my current unit until they realize the matter isn't about confidentiality and the reason was way off course because there is no such thing unless they want to pursue it in an OPSEC manner and even my generalized post has no real information that would fall under OPSEC protection.

I can't even talk to the unit CC without him getting defensive, if he has to get defensive instead of working it out then there are serious issues beyond my control and I could tell you more specifically but that would be bad mouthing and having gross disrespect and would no longer be an opinion/thought.

[Short Field]

Mynetdue - don't sweat this.  A 90 day hold is nothing in the scheme of things.  Take it as a lesson learned, be a little more careful about where you discuss internal details of your organization, and press on.  It will all pass.

There is a topic on being anonymous on this board that cover the pros and cons.  While a couple of people know who I am, I intend to remain anonymous.  This forces me to be very careful about not posting stuff that would identify myself, my unit, or my wing. 

Do I intend to post stuff to rile up the folks around me or up the chain?  No.  But you never know when something you might post could be viewed as a personal attack on people in the organization.  Most people consider questioning their ability as a personal attack.  Heck, even the folks I really get upset with in our organization, I still like as people.   What you say privately is one thing - the moment you post it, it is there for everyone to see and misinterpret.

The point of this - sometimes it is better to just fade into the woodwork and come back as a new person.  I am sure there are folks in your wing that are probably taking an interest in what you post now under mynetdude.

[Ned]

"nsubordination" is silly in a civilian world TBH.  To be grossly disrespectful, I can understand but I was not.

I don't think the two terms are really all that far apart.  For all practical purposes in CAP,  I would agree that "insubordinate" means pretty much the same thing as "grossly disrespectful."

I doubt "mere" disrespect (as in failure to salute, overfamiliarity, or other kinds of discourtesy) is ever gonna get anyone 2B'd.  But gross disrespect (deliberate insults or mocking) is another thing entirely.

In all fairness, it's not just a CAP-specific issue.  If I worked for Microsoft and called Bill Gates a "tool" or suggested in a company meeting that "we would be better off with a monkey in charge" (to use a non-so-hypothetical example), I suspect I would soon be an ex-employee despite my First Amendment rights as an American.

And it would be no different if I posted the same words publicly on the internet for the world to see.


So, I  don't think this is one of those "military vs non-military" things.  It's just a matter of common courtesy, respect, and dignity.  Those qualities should be universal.



I sincerely wish you well, and hope that you can work things out with your CAP boss.  You can really make a difference as a CAP member.

Ned Lee

[mynetdude]

All good points, however I seriously think that this went too far not so much on my part (now I didn't eliminate myself entirely either as I share the same responsibility) there could have been a better way to handle it instead of doing a knee jerk slapping around.

certainly, I am fully aware the "brass" are probably reading this I can't/won't change my username I have had this name since I was 15 years old every new name I try sounds stupid as the one I have now

We ALL will live and learn with our actions and resulting actions and so forth, and part of that is myself taking a step aside for now and letting them muddle through a few things while I am not there for awhile.

You're right, 90 days is nothing really as I pointed out I don't care about that it is more the reasoning behind it.

Truly I know this topic isn't about military vs non military, however I think if we had less of military it wouldn't be different in the way of respect/disrespect just we would have less complications of promotions/grade and so forth.

[mikeylikey]

In all fairness, it's not just a CAP-specific issue.  If I worked for Microsoft and called Bill Gates a "tool" or suggested in a company meeting that "we would be better off with a monkey in charge" (to use a non-so-hypothetical example), I suspect I would soon be an ex-employee despite my First Amendment rights as an American.

Can't compare CAP to your actual job.  Working in business and providing for your self are entirely separate from being a non-paid volunteer in an organization, where you have to actually pay it for the ability to serve.  There are things you do in your job and there are things you do in CAP.  BTW.....I think Bill Gates is More than a "tool", and didn't he just step down from day to day opps at Microsoft. 

I look at CAP and say "because it is sometimes considered an instrument of the Federal Government, it is everyones right to question those in charge".  We don't pay just to be a member, we are all TAXPAYERS first, and we can call into question how Government Funded organizations are run.  It would be un-American to not question and just let known incompetents run the thing.

[Ned]

Can't compare CAP to your actual job.  Working in business and providing for your self are entirely separate from being a non-paid volunteer in an organization, where you have to actually pay it for the ability to serve.  There are things you do in your job and there are things you do in CAP. 

Maybe I'm just being dense today, but I don't see a difference in things like respect and courtesy between a workplace and a volunteer organization.  Could you elaborate a bit?

I look at CAP and say "because it is sometimes considered an instrument of the Federal Government, it is everyones right to question those in charge". 

I don't think anyone has discouraged you from "questioning those in charge."  Quite the opposite, in fact.  I encourage everyone to go to their boss with questions about the running of the organization.

But it is worth remembering that a question is a request for information.  It normally ends with a question mark.

Calling the wing commander a "tool" and suggesting that we would be better off with a monkey in charge is not "questioning."  It is merely insulting and mocking.

There is a world of difference.

We don't pay just to be a member, we are all TAXPAYERS first, and we can call into question how Government Funded organizations are run.  It would be un-American to not question and just let known incompetents run the thing.

Again, no one is suggesting that you should not aggressively address FWA or ask questions.  Heck, CAP even has a "whistle-blower protection program" in CAPR 123-2.

But calling fellow volunteers "tools" or even "incompetent" most decidely isn't questioning, constructive criticsim, or even whistle-blowing.

It's just rude, disrespectful, and insubordinate.  It is a violation of our Core Values.

And it is just wrong in so many ways.

Ned Lee

[Eagle400]

mikeylikey, I understand you hold a military commission and are fed up with the politics and corrupt individuals in CAP that would not last a day in the real military.  Well, so am I.

However, calling people names and belittling them won't do much in the end except tick people off, burn you out, and open yourself up to criticism. 

What I suggest you do is skip the CAP Chain of Command and "Whistleblower Protection Program" altogether and go straight to your elected representatives.  Write them letters about what is wrong with CAP and why so many good people get shafted every year.  Tell them about how CAP enables wannabes and sychophants to climb up the chain at the expense of others.  Conduct research and gather statistics.  Inform them that you write not just as a member, but also as a concerned citizen.  If you write enough of them, someone will listen. 

That is what is going to jump-start an effective transition from the status-quo in CAP, and unlike the military, it cannot be considered sedition; you have as much right to complain to congressmen and senators about problems in a voluntary 501(c)3 organization as anyone else.     

[mynetdude]

Look we all know disrespect isn't proper, or right.  However, aren't we allowed to make mistakes and learn from them? Fine, we are... we can also accept consequences too.  However, I don't think we need to go to such extremes especially in first time situations or if it was unintentional.  Can you be disrespectful unintentionally? I believe so, though repeat offenses would probably be more gross intent than unintent.

Obviously my problem is much bigger than I thought, as I was made aware of and I should have left when it didn't matter; kind of late for that because it matters now to ME I don't know about the others in my squadron except maybe two other individuals I won't name.

I am letting this go, I doubt I will return.