CAP Talk

Folks: Gen Pineda has struck again: this time, the California Wing Commander, Col Virginia Nelson, has been relieved of command.  Stated reason: disagreement with CAP auditors over the location of some "restricted" funds.  No funds missing, according to the email received yesterday from CAWG CC.

With all of the conversation on this thread about the good General and his firings, thought that some of you might be interested.

LtCol Jesse Munoz(or Muniz), currently of CO Wg, named as interim commander.  He is apparently a former CAWG member.

Stand by to stand by.

So how much longer do we have to live with TP?  It seems he is stacking the deck here.  Does anyone else see something weird in what has been going on?

So no money was missing and just a disagreement of location of restricted funds? Reading into that statement would say the funds were located in the wrong account.. say general vs reserve.  Administrative mumbo jumbo.

Personally then I think he should apply the same level of administrative adjudication to himself since there is a disagreement as to the location of where he was when he was "taking" his test!

Folks, this does not bode well... Not at all...

WOW!!  I knew Col Nelson when she was a Lt. back when i was a young tike!  Shes been around a while.  And of all the people in Ca they went with a someone from Co.?  I know CAP is CAP, I just always recall the Wing Comm coming from your wing.  Is this guy going to relocate to Ca. or is he going to run the wing via online confrence call?

Quote from: Flying Pig on March 25, 2007, 05:30:24 PM
Is this guy going to relocate to Ca. or is he going to run the wing via online confrence call?

I believe the interim wing commander selection is actually a California resident (or was) and was disinfranchised with or otherwise left California Wing for Colorado Wing CAP, where he has been most recently the Director of Aerospace Education for COWG. 

Do you know where he was when he was with Ca?  The name sounds familiar.

Quote from: Flying Pig on March 25, 2007, 05:54:05 PM
Do you know where he was when he was with Ca?  The name sounds familiar.

RUMINT indicates San Diego.

Does anyone know what the count is???

How many Wing/Region commanders that were in that position when King Tony took over are still holding those positions?

Seems to me the slate is just about wiped clean.

BTW...Col Nelson was to finish up her term this October as CAWG comander.

Okay, aprapos of nothing at all, can CAP members collect and submit a petition to Congress to redress problems in CAP without being keel-hauled for mutiny?

Capt. Lord

Quote from: CaptLord on March 25, 2007, 06:55:55 PM
Okay, aprapos of nothing at all, can CAP members collect and submit a petition to Congress to redress problems in CAP without being keel-hauled for mutiny?

Capt. Lord

Not unless you want to find yourself with a white van out in front of your---- {silence}

I may have to change my ID here.  So I can't be found!

I think it is ridiculous to fire someone over funds being in a wrong account or something.  If the funds were missing, that's one thing.  But we ALL know, they were not.

Col Nelson will be missed as Wing Commander!

Quote from: jason.pennington on March 25, 2007, 07:44:47 PM
I may have to change my ID here.  So I can't be found!

I think it is ridiculous to fire someone over funds being in a wrong account or something.  If the funds were missing, that's one thing.  But we ALL know, they were not.

Col Nelson will be missed as Wing Commander!

Mishandling of funds will get you fired on active duty, too.  Even if no money is missing, if you violate regulations pertaining to money the active duty side gets VERY touchy.

Part of the problem with that former Dep. National Commander, Rex Glasgow, was that he placed CAP funds into a personal checking account in order to send money in to National.  The fact that he sent the exact right abount in did not matter when the issue is "Co-mingling of official and personal funds."  He should have used money orders to send the funds by mail.

I don't know the story, and if the matter in CA is simply a misinterpretation of regulations then relief seems to be an extreme solution.  Ignorance of regulations pertaining to money, however, is just as bad from the military's persective as willful violations.

Quote from: NIN on March 25, 2007, 07:29:58 PM

Quote from: CaptLord on March 25, 2007, 06:55:55 PM
Okay, aprapos of nothing at all, can CAP members collect and submit a petition to Congress to redress problems in CAP without being keel-hauled for mutiny?

Capt. Lord

Not unless you want to find yourself with a white van out in front of your---- {silence}

And the sound of TPU clad stormtroopers coming down your street.  >:D

Ummm...wait....someone is at my door......

Fantastic lady....and such a good-natured gal that I even rested on her shoulder during a banquet in a funny moment*.

Cadets, look away; three members of a chain of command (Sq, Grp, Wg)  are about to engage in light-hearted, fun, "PDA" - so watch out.   :o

Edit: Here's a better view.

(http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/9894/virginiapy5.th.jpg) (http://img152.imageshack.us/my.php?image=virginiapy5.jpg)

* = If you want to know what we were laughing at, PM me.

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on March 25, 2007, 09:03:09 PM

Quote from: jason.pennington on March 25, 2007, 07:44:47 PM
I may have to change my ID here.  So I can't be found!

I think it is ridiculous to fire someone over funds being in a wrong account or something.  If the funds were missing, that's one thing.  But we ALL know, they were not.

Col Nelson will be missed as Wing Commander!

Mishandling of funds will get you fired on active duty, too.  Even if no money is missing, if you violate regulations pertaining to money the active duty side gets VERY touchy.

Part of the problem with that former Dep. National Commander, Rex Glasgow, was that he placed CAP funds into a personal checking account in order to send money in to National.  The fact that he sent the exact right abount in did not matter when the issue is "Co-mingling of official and personal funds."  He should have used money orders to send the funds by mail.

I don't know the story, and if the matter in CA is simply a misinterpretation of regulations then relief seems to be an extreme solution.  Ignorance of regulations pertaining to money, however, is just as bad from the military's persective as willful violations.

The following explanation is taken from another CAP-related forum:  CAWG recently had an financial audit. CAWG had some funds in different accounts than where NHQ thought they should be. The auditor said, "you need to change these things". All of the funds were accounted for just not in the accounts NHQ thought they should be. NHQ gave Col Nelson a deadline to get things done and that process was underway. TP called her today, before the deadline, and fired her.

Col. Virginia Nelson is an outstanding commander and a long-time member of CAP.  She without question has served CAP with great dedication and distinction.  To see this course of action taken by the National Commander is both disgusting and disheartening.

I, for one, count it to be a privilege to have served with Col. Nelson in various CAWG activities. 

Isn't the appoinment and authority to relieve a Wing Commander the Region Commanders authority?  Is it normal for a National Commander to breeak the chain of command by bypassing the Region Commander?

Quote from: CaptLord on March 25, 2007, 06:55:55 PM
Okay, aprapos of nothing at all, can CAP members collect and submit a petition to Congress to redress problems in CAP without being keel-hauled for mutiny?

Capt. Lord

CAP is not a Government entity.  We're a corporation.

Congress can replace our National Commander just as readily as they can replace the CEO of any other corporation.  If you were to have  a letter writing campaign, it would need to go to the Board of Governors... not Congress.

Like the regulations have ever stopped King Tony from doing what he wants.

Any excuse he can think of to can a wing/region cc is all it takes.  He wants to be king for life.  I think  he was a protoge of Idi Amin.

I lost my score card. How many Region or Wing Commanders have resigned or been replaced in the past 18 months???

Quote from: BillB on March 25, 2007, 11:51:18 PM
Isn't the appoinment and authority to relieve a Wing Commander the Region Commanders authority?  Is it normal for a National Commander to breeak the chain of command by bypassing the Region Commander?

I'm not sure exactly.  I do know that if you terminate a Commander's membership, it can't be done by the next commander up in the food chain.  It has to be two up.  (Squadron CC can be terminated by a Wing Commander only if the Wing has Groups.  Otherwise, if no Groups are present in that wing, a Squadron CC can only have their membership terminated by their Region CC.)

That, however, can be different due to the nature of termination.  However, remember, Wing CC's are not appointed by the Region CC.  As such, I don't think they would have the authority to relieve them.

Quotea Squadron CC can only have their membership terminated by their Region CC.)

Got to throw the BS flag on that one....Region commanders have 100+ more squadrons -- they are not involved in hiring squadron commanders and aren't involved in firing them either.  If you think I'm wrong, to paraphrase Jerry McGuire, "SHOW ME THE REGULATION!"

Quote from: TankerT on March 26, 2007, 12:07:46 AM
CAP is not a Government entity.  We're a corporation.

Congress can replace our National Commander just as readily as they can replace the CEO of any other corporation.  If you were to have  a letter writing campaign, it would need to go to the Board of Governors... not Congress.

The problem with that is you're talking about govt gpvt appropriated funds that should be in an acct that requires accountability checks to ensure it is spent as directed by congress & AF, versus in a less controlled acct for corporate funds that can be more easily raided.

Other than micromanagement in the extreme, my concerns lean mostly to my understanding that  CAWG was moving to a new accouting system. I don't know if it was the full wing banker solution or a group based system, but there was something going on as I recall. That & stepping in before the deadline to fix the problem. Even if she should have ultimately been relieved, doing so before it is fixed means it won't be addressed till the temp guy comes on & he may not get lots of cooperation. Now if she missed the deadline or refused to comply, then by all means, and if she did comply & then judgement after the fact was that it was too serious to take a chance in teh future, then again by all means move on. However, it is highly irresponsible to jump the gun & micromanage situations & people to the detriment of the unit & org.

I want a full report on this, I want TP to issue a written concise vision statment, I want to know why!  And Ill probably find out... in the afterlife  ::)

Quote from: RiverAux on March 26, 2007, 12:53:58 AM

Quotea Squadron CC can only have their membership terminated by their Region CC.)

Got to throw the BS flag on that one....Region commanders have 100+ more squadrons -- they are not involved in hiring squadron commanders and aren't involved in firing them either.  If you think I'm wrong, to paraphrase Jerry McGuire, "SHOW ME THE REGULATION!"

First, you are taking the quote out of context.  A Region CC is only the approving authority for a Squadron CC's termination for Wings without Groups.  If the Wing has Groups, the Wing CC is the approving authority.

Show you the regulation??? Well... lets see... could it be... the regulation titled "Membership Termination" ???  (Come on... it's not hard to find...)

For the record, check out CAPR 35-3 (Membership Termination). Specifically, Attachment 1.  (Attachment 1 is titled "Approving Authority for Membership Termination for Cause.")

Sure... wave the BS flag... but... before you do... be familiar with the regulations...

If you're too lazy to look it up... fine... but why be a jerk to the rest of us for your ignorance of the regulations?  I say that deserves the flag.

Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 25, 2007, 10:18:22 PM
Fantastic lady....and such a good-natured gal that I even rested on her shoulder during a banquet in a funny moment*.

Cadets, look away; three members of a chain of command (Sq, Grp, Wg)  are about to engage in light-hearted, fun, "PDA" - so watch out.   :o

Edit: Here's a better view.

(http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/9894/virginiapy5.th.jpg) (http://img152.imageshack.us/my.php?image=virginiapy5.jpg)

* = If you want to know what we were laughing at, PM me.

Having looked at the picture I wonder: what pray tell is the badge-type device under the nameplate of that uniformed Major?

Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 26, 2007, 01:10:17 AM
Having looked at the picture I wonder: what pray tell is the badge-type device under the nameplate of that uniformed Major?

Looks like the Air Force Recruiting Service badge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recruiter_Badge#Air_Force) to me.  Authorized for wear IAW CAPM 39-1 (http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_082203102943.pdf), table 6-2, item 14.

Which refers you to 6-5 & if not listed there then the AF reg for conditions of wear, by which you'll find it's a duty (not qualification) badge, authorized while serving on recruiting duty, So just like you can't wear an SF badge even if you are an SF in the reserves at the same time because you are not serving SF duty while in CAP.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Quote from: DNall on March 26, 2007, 01:04:06 AM
The problem with that is you're talking about govt gpvt appropriated funds that should be in an acct that requires accountability checks to ensure it is spent as directed by congress & AF, versus in a less controlled acct for corporate funds that can be more easily raided.

Other than micromanagement in the extreme, my concerns lean mostly to my understanding that  CAWG was moving to a new accouting system. I don't know if it was the full wing banker solution or a group based system, but there was something going on as I recall. That & stepping in before the deadline to fix the problem. Even if she should have ultimately been relieved, doing so before it is fixed means it won't be addressed till the temp guy comes on & he may not get lots of cooperation. Now if she missed the deadline or refused to comply, then by all means, and if she did comply & then judgement after the fact was that it was too serious to take a chance in teh future, then again by all means move on. However, it is highly irresponsible to jump the gun & micromanage situations & people to the detriment of the unit & org.

Dealing with government appropriated funds doesn't mean the solution is the government.  (I work for the government... getting politicians involved always doesn't get the right thing done, it sometimes gets the political thing done.) 

I think that one of the goals of the Wing Banking Program is designed to actually help provide better accountability of the funds, just like you are pointing out. 

Also, we don't know why she was relieved before the solution was in place.  Maybe the CA Wing CC didn't want to do it the NHQ way.  We don't know.

Could the decision to relieve her be a conspiracy?  Could be.  (Hey, we all like a good conpsiracy in America.)

Could the decision to relieve her be because of a legit reason we'll never know because of CA push-back on this issue?  Could be.

Fact is, when it comes to something like this, we probably won't know.

But, NHQ is getting tight on financial accountability.  They are taking it pretty seriously.  (A lot of it because we have Government Funds involved.)  That, I think, is a good thing.  (I'm not a financial professional, so I can't comment if it is the best way to handle it or not.)

Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 26, 2007, 01:10:17 AM

Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 25, 2007, 10:18:22 PM
Fantastic lady....and such a good-natured gal that I even rested on her shoulder during a banquet in a funny moment*.

Cadets, look away; three members of a chain of command (Sq, Grp, Wg)  are about to engage in light-hearted, fun, "PDA" - so watch out.   :o

Edit: Here's a better view.

(http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/9894/virginiapy5.th.jpg) (http://img152.imageshack.us/my.php?image=virginiapy5.jpg)

* = If you want to know what we were laughing at, PM me.

Having looked at the picture I wonder: what pray tell is the badge-type device under the nameplate of that uniformed Major?

I was waiting for the first person to turn this into a uniform thread by noticing my badge!   ;)

Seriously though......for the badge watchers, it's - specifically - an AFRS Senior Recruiter Badge (Silver Badge.)  There are three different sorts.  Rookie Cookies, Silver Badges, and Gold Badges.  Only way one gets to keep it is to retire with it or separate with it on their DD Form 214.

Now back to the thread...and back on topic.

Do I renew my membership or not?  Watching the actions of TP I am inclined not to  until he is no longer in charge.

Quote


     Re: CAWG CC Fired
« Reply #22 on: Today at 07:07:23 PM »   

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from: RiverAux on Today at 06:53:58 PM
Quote
a Squadron CC can only have their membership terminated by their Region CC.)

Got to throw the BS flag on that one....Region commanders have 100+ more squadrons -- they are not involved in hiring squadron commanders and aren't involved in firing them either.  If you think I'm wrong, to paraphrase Jerry McGuire, "SHOW ME THE REGULATION!"


First, you are taking the quote out of context.  A Region CC is only the approving authority for a Squadron CC's termination for Wings without Groups.  If the Wing has Groups, the Wing CC is the approving authority.

Show you the regulation??? Well... lets see... could it be... the regulation titled "Membership Termination"   (Come on... it's not hard to find...)

For the record, check out CAPR 35-3 (Membership Termination). Specifically, Attachment 1.  (Attachment 1 is titled "Approving Authority for Membership Termination for Cause.")

Sure... wave the BS flag... but... before you do... be familiar with the regulations...

If you're too lazy to look it up... fine... but why be a jerk to the rest of us for your ignorance of the regulations?  I say that deserves the flag.

Okay, my mind translated "termination" into relieving of command, which was the issue we were discussing.  You are correct a Region Commander is needed to terminate the membership of a squadron commander in a Wing without Groups. 

However, the issue at hand is not terminating the membership of a commander but instead it is relieving them of command.  A Wing Commander can both hire and fire their squadron commanders at will.   

Quotebut why be a jerk to the rest of us for your ignorance of the regulations?

No need for name calling...

There is zero tolerance for financial irregularities in CAP right now, even in the absence of missing funds, because of some significant problems in the not-so-distant past.  This is completely supported by the BOG, as well as the national leadership.

CAWG is in the process of going to the wing banker system.  It is a transition period right now.   

The wing finance officer is a CPA.  The wing finance officer has been assisted by a squadron finance officer who has managed a large squadron finances (larger probably than some wings). CAWG has over 5,000 members.

I seriously doubt there has been any deliberate mismanagement or nefarious activity.  My belief is probably due to the transition to the wing banker system for a very large wing.  This ain't easy stuff folks.  As the warning says..."Don't try this at home."

As a side note....we are in the middle of tax season and maybe the wing finance officer is up to her ears in handling clients and was slow in making are the switches necessary for the new wing banker system.

Quote from: RiverAux on March 26, 2007, 02:20:25 AM
No need for name calling...

Fair enough.  My apologies.  (Sincerely.)

No problem.  I probably didn't really need to go all Tom Cruise either. 

Quote from: Smokey on March 26, 2007, 03:08:24 AMCAWG has over 5,000 members.

Uh...minus a bit less than 2,000 friend (CAWG has 3,083 seniors and cadets, as of a second ago.)

But your point is still relevant.  :)

OK I knew it was in the thousands somewhere  :)

I will fall on my sword in  a moment .....no that won't be necessary-----I see the Maxwell black van out fro....

Okay just to be absolutely fair here......no one has the full picture about what is going on in CAWG.  Everyone is so quick to jump on the conspiracy theory that TP is going for another power grab for his nefarious purposes.

Is it possible that the National Commander did not have full faith and confidence in the CAWG/CC's ability to perform her assigned duties?  Is it just possible that in consultation with the PCR they decided to remove her from command and as a good leader he made the decision and the call himself instead of delegating it?

Everyone is so ready to see the dark side of the National Commander that no one, even for a minute, thinks that maybe he had reason....reason you would agree with....but he is too busy to go around and explain each and every decision to us peons.

This rant is especially aimed at all you guys who want CAP to be more like the USAF.  I was in a Group who's commander got fired after only 2 months on the job.....and we never....and I mean never got the whole straight story on why he got fired.  Lots of RUMINT but never the true story.

Bottom line here.  CAWG CC got fired.  Unless someone who works for the PCR/CC or National CC wants to step forward with their notes from the conference call.....let's just move on.

Pat, some of us do have a pretty good picture on what went on.
And it's not good. (Or even legal maybe.)

Quote from: TankerT on March 26, 2007, 12:07:46 AM

Quote from: CaptLord on March 25, 2007, 06:55:55 PM
Okay, aprapos of nothing at all, can CAP members collect and submit a petition to Congress to redress problems in CAP without being keel-hauled for mutiny?

Capt. Lord

CAP is not a Government entity.  We're a corporation.

Congress can replace our National Commander just as readily as they can replace the CEO of any other corporation.  If you were to have  a letter writing campaign, it would need to go to the Board of Governors... not Congress.

I am aware of CAP's legal status. Our complaint system requires that we go through the chain of command ( IG, etc) to resolve personnel complaint issues, but the Regs specifically permit contacting our representatives. My question goes to whether we can collectively submit petitions to Congress. Sending a petition to the BOG would almost certainly be an out of policy usurpation, as well as being pointless...

Quote from: PHall on March 26, 2007, 04:12:41 AM
Pat, some of us do have a pretty good picture on what went on.
And it's not good. (Or even legal maybe.)

Maybe...but then let's get it out on the table.  All I hear is subtle jokes about TP grabbing power again!  I get tired of it.  If you know something....make your accusation and report it to the BoG and let's git him booted!  I know that I know nothing of the situaiton.  I also know that it makes not difference to me here in NV wing.  But as CAP officers, at some point we have to show loyalty to our elected officals even if we don't like or agree with his policies and leadership style.

All I know is the CAWC CC was fired...and it had something to do with money being in the wrong accounts (not missing).  I don't know that much about wing finance but that may be enough to fire someone over...even if they already started to fix the problem.....my kid messes up the house....sure they got to clean it up...but they are going to get grounded as well!

If there is something else going on.....get it out here.

Quote from: Smokey on March 26, 2007, 03:08:24 AMCAWG has over 5,000 members.

FYI, as of the time of this post, CAWG has 3083 members.

Quote from: SarDragon on March 26, 2007, 07:31:49 AM

Quote from: Smokey on March 26, 2007, 03:08:24 AMCAWG has over 5,000 members.

FYI, as of the time of this post, CAWG has 3083 members.

Covered by Monty here (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1795.msg28790#msg28790).

Quote from: TankerT on March 26, 2007, 01:24:57 AM

Quote from: DNall on March 26, 2007, 01:04:06 AM
The problem with that is you're talking about govt gpvt appropriated funds that should be in an acct that requires accountability checks to ensure it is spent as directed by congress & AF, versus in a less controlled acct for corporate funds that can be more easily raided.

Other than micromanagement in the extreme, my concerns lean mostly to my understanding that  CAWG was moving to a new accouting system. I don't know if it was the full wing banker solution or a group based system, but there was something going on as I recall. That & stepping in before the deadline to fix the problem. Even if she should have ultimately been relieved, doing so before it is fixed means it won't be addressed till the temp guy comes on & he may not get lots of cooperation. Now if she missed the deadline or refused to comply, then by all means, and if she did comply & then judgement after the fact was that it was too serious to take a chance in teh future, then again by all means move on. However, it is highly irresponsible to jump the gun & micromanage situations & people to the detriment of the unit & org.

Dealing with government appropriated funds doesn't mean the solution is the government.  (I work for the government... getting politicians involved always doesn't get the right thing done, it sometimes gets the political thing done.) 

I think that one of the goals of the Wing Banking Program is designed to actually help provide better accountability of the funds, just like you are pointing out. 

Also, we don't know why she was relieved before the solution was in place.  Maybe the CA Wing CC didn't want to do it the NHQ way.  We don't know.

Could the decision to relieve her be a conspiracy?  Could be.  (Hey, we all like a good conpsiracy in America.)

Could the decision to relieve her be because of a legit reason we'll never know because of CA push-back on this issue?  Could be.

Fact is, when it comes to something like this, we probably won't know.

But, NHQ is getting tight on financial accountability.  They are taking it pretty seriously.  (A lot of it because we have Government Funds involved.)  That, I think, is a good thing.  (I'm not a financial professional, so I can't comment if it is the best way to handle it or not.)

No doubt. And I wasn't arguing for redress of grievances from Congress. That's a real bad idea. My point is there are a range of legitimate reasons why she may have been relieved. The way it was handled seems to fall into the recent pattern of jumping the gun, and that's disconcerting, but there could still be legit reasons & we should withhold judgement till the facts are known.

My point on wing banker though is that it is I'm sure a difficult transition where some wierdness is to be expected. One of the chief complaints about it was the viability in a large wing, and I believe CAWG is the largest currently working it. So, it stands to reason that there'd be a certain degree of slack in that matter, but also it is a politically backed item within CAP & proving it doesn't work on a large wing scale is not good for one staying in command. That's the political reasoning laid on top of the process-story I stated before. Fact is we just don't know & don't need to speculate.

I find it hard to believe that all the fired Wing and Region commanders were guilty of malfeasance, incompetence, etc.   For an organization our size to have that many misfits running it is improbable.  The number of fired commanders is staggering since TP became boss.

Were all those folks, who were appointed by his predecessors (and that would include at least two Natl CCs- given the time line) incompetent, crooks, or knuckleheads????

Could it be a power grab by a man who wants  to rule for a very long time (remember his attempt to change the rules so he could succeed himself)?

As a 35 year cop-----it smells bad. If I conducted an investigation and the evidence I came up with was that out of 60 folks, more than half were suspects in a crime it would sure peak my senses.

The responses that maybe something really was wrong with the CAWG CC and all the rest that were fired is really naive.   Even the OJ jury would convict based upon the shear number of CCs fired.

Quote from: jason.pennington on March 25, 2007, 07:44:47 PM
I may have to change my ID here.  So I can't be found!

I think it is ridiculous to fire someone over funds being in a wrong account or something.  If the funds were missing, that's one thing.  But we ALL know, they were not.

Col Nelson will be missed as Wing Commander!

Yes... I'm thinking the same thing. CG Aux ID comes to mind.

Quote
To all members of California Wing,

Major General Tony Pineda called and relieved me of command effective today. The recent audit of CAWG finances showed that while there is no money missing from CAWG, there is disagreement on the amount of restricted funds in CAWG's books. A number of you have been working to help clarify the situation and I owe you thanks for all your time and effort. MGen Pineda feels appointing a new wing commander would be beneficial in rectifying this situation. He has appointed LtCol Jesus Muniz as the interim commander. LtCol Muniz was recently a member of Sq 144 and is currently serving as the Colorado Wing Director of Aerospace Education. He can be reached at [email redacted]

I would like to thank all the members of CAWG for their hard work and dedication to our missions, to our squadrons, and to CAWG. I treasure the time I have spent with each of you. Let's all work together to continue to make CAWG the best in CAP.

Virginia Nelson

Lifted from CAPBlog (http://capblog.typepad.com/capblog/2007/03/another_one_bit.html)

Quote from: Pylon on March 25, 2007, 05:45:35 PM

Quote from: Flying Pig on March 25, 2007, 05:30:24 PM
Is this guy going to relocate to Ca. or is he going to run the wing via online confrence call?

I believe the interim wing commander selection is actually a California resident (or was) and was disinfranchised with or otherwise left California Wing for Colorado Wing CAP, where he has been most recently the Director of Aerospace Education for COWG. 

Interesting...one could read into this that our National CC does not have full faith and confidence in anyone in the current CAWG staff structure.  I think it's safe to say that the position wouldn't go to the Finance Officer, but to not select from within the Wing is making a big statement. 

In reply to the query of how many positions have changed hands, I reviewed the CAP Annual Report to Congress for 2004, the ARCs for 2005 and 2006, and today's National webpage listing of Leadership Structure.  This is less than scientific as it does not reflect those who may have held a post for too short a time period to be listed in one of the ARCs.

From 30 September 2005 to 31 December 2006, 32 Region or Wing CC jobs changed hands.  From 31 December 2006 to today's listing, 10 additional Region or Wing CC jobs have changed hands.  (Note: Col Nelson's change is already reflected on today's website.)

In a little under 18 months, 42 of 60 Region or Wing CC slots have changed.

Comparing present to National Board as of 30 September 2004, 48 of 60 Region or Wing CC slots have changed. 

(Note: 2004 & 2005 list DEWG/CC as Col Opland--2006 ARC lists Lt Col Egry acting and current listing has Col Opland again as DEWG/CC.  I included this as a change.)

This is only a snapshot of the number of management changes.

Quote from: Psicorp on March 26, 2007, 06:19:46 PMInteresting...one could read into this that our National CC does not have full faith and confidence in anyone in the current CAWG staff structure.  I think it's safe to say that the position wouldn't go to the Finance Officer, but to not select from within the Wing is making a big statement. 

Lt Col Muniz lives in California, and served COWG on a remote basis, telecommuting, so to speak. I consider his selection "from within the wing".

I think much of our discussion here is pure conjecture, and only clouds the true picture. I also think that airing this dirty laundry on a public forum is a disservice to CAWG, and CAP in general.

Quote from: NYWG Historian on March 26, 2007, 07:25:39 PM[portions redacted] From 30 September 2005 to 31 December 2006, 32 Region or Wing CC jobs changed hands.  From 31 December 2006 to today's listing, 10 additional Region or Wing CC jobs have changed hands.  (Note: Col Nelson's change is already reflected on today's website.)

In a little under 18 months, 42 of 60 Region or Wing CC slots have changed.

Comparing present to National Board as of 30 September 2004, 48 of 60 Region or Wing CC slots have changed. 

An important Q to ask - How many of these changes were NOT at the end of a regular term? I would expect the normal turnover to average around 29% of the 60 slots each year.

Quote from: SarDragon on March 26, 2007, 07:33:39 PM
Lt Col Muniz lives in California, and served COWG on a remote basis, telecommuting, so to speak. I consider his selection "from within the wing".

Fair enough, sir.

Quote from: SarDragon on March 26, 2007, 07:33:39 PM

Quote from: Psicorp on March 26, 2007, 06:19:46 PMInteresting...one could read into this that our National CC does not have full faith and confidence in anyone in the current CAWG staff structure.  I think it's safe to say that the position wouldn't go to the Finance Officer, but to not select from within the Wing is making a big statement. 

Lt Col Muniz lives in California, and served COWG on a remote basis, telecommuting, so to speak. I consider his selection "from within the wing".

I think much of our discussion here is pure conjecture, and only clouds the true picture. I also think that airing this dirty laundry on a public forum is a disservice to CAWG, and CAP in general.

Dave, I just find it interesting that the Vice Commander or any of the seven Group Commanders were not considered for the job as Interm Wing Commander.

Not exactly the "normal" way to conduct business.

Was gonna remain quiet about conspiracy theories, alleged power grabs, and all that...but one thing does strike me --- the timing of this of this change.  Having been around organizations for awhile (both sacred and secular), I have seen political moves of all sorts.  This one looks quite familiar: take out a prominient figure and the little figures will fall into place. 

We all know that National Board is August --- the CAWG was to have a change of command in late September.  What might be the implied message being sent to say the Wing Commanders of Rhode Island, Vermont, Wyoming with memberships of little over 200 --- or North and South Dakota with memberships of 300+, or Delaware pushing 400 when the Wing Commander of the 2nd largest wing in the organization (membership of 3000+) is relieved of command? 

Not saying that this is what has transpired....but then again it hasn't been the first time such a tactic has been used in an organization.

And while this may not have an direct impact on the NVWG or any other wing in CAP, it is impacting the CAWG as seen in many of the posts that are in this thread. 

Taking Chappie's thoughts one step further, if one of the biggest wings in CAP isn't immune to TP's firings no one's job is safe. This action could make TP appear to be above due process, not exactly a revelation to those reading the posts appearing in the Lobby.

Quote from: CAP Safety Dude on March 26, 2007, 02:03:35 AM
Do I renew my membership or not?  Watching the actions of TP I am inclined not to  until he is no longer in charge.

Do you work for Gen Pineda at NHQ?

If not, I'd suggest you do renew and wait him out while staying a member. Think of all the good you can do for our younger and less experienced member by providing a better example of officership! Good and bad leaders exist in all branches of the military and government. It's through perseverence through the bad ones that we learn how to become good ones. Learn on others' mistakes!

Quote from: afgeo4 on March 27, 2007, 03:54:48 AM

Quote from: CAP Safety Dude on March 26, 2007, 02:03:35 AM
Do I renew my membership or not?  Watching the actions of TP I am inclined not to  until he is no longer in charge.

Do you work for Gen Pineda at NHQ?

If not, I'd suggest you do renew and wait him out while staying a member. Think of all the good you can do for our younger and less experienced member by providing a better example of officership! Good and bad leaders exist in all branches of the military and government. It's through perseverence through the bad ones that we learn how to become good ones. Learn on others' mistakes!

Amen!!!  Not to sound self-centered....but I have invested to much time, money, and effort into this organization --- as well as developing some great relationships to let this make me not want to renew.   While it is an annoyance (big time)...it does not keep me from performing my duties or affect my commitment to the cadets and senior members/officers within our Wing.

It's not self-centered. It's one of Air Force's and Civil Air Patrol's core values:

Service Before Self

Quote from: Chappie on March 27, 2007, 04:13:14 AM

Quote from: afgeo4 on March 27, 2007, 03:54:48 AM

Quote from: CAP Safety Dude on March 26, 2007, 02:03:35 AM
Do I renew my membership or not?  Watching the actions of TP I am inclined not to  until he is no longer in charge.

Do you work for Gen Pineda at NHQ?

If not, I'd suggest you do renew and wait him out while staying a member. Think of all the good you can do for our younger and less experienced member by providing a better example of officership! Good and bad leaders exist in all branches of the military and government. It's through perseverence through the bad ones that we learn how to become good ones. Learn on others' mistakes!

Amen!!!  Not to sound self-centered....but I have invested to much time, money, and effort into this organization --- as well as developing some great relationships to let this make me not want to renew.   While it is an annoyance (big time)...it does not keep me from performing my duties or affect my commitment to the cadets and senior members/officers within our Wing.

Quote from: afgeo4 on March 27, 2007, 04:15:43 AM
It's not self-centered. It's one of Air Force's and Civil Air Patrol's core values:
Service Before Self

Agree with all of you there, but it is the kind of thing that keeps good people from accepting command or even staff positions at the Gp/Wg & above level. That in turn just lowers the bar further & further.

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950), Man and Superman (1903)

Great services are not canceled by one act or by one single error.
Benjamin Disraeli (1804 - 1881)

Thank you Colonel Virginia Nelson

Quote from: sparks on March 27, 2007, 03:11:52 AM
Taking Chappie's thoughts one step further, if one of the biggest wings in CAP isn't immune to TP's firings no one's job is safe. This action could make TP appear to be above due process, not exactly a revelation to those reading the posts appearing in the Lobby.

No one's job IS safe from the National Commander.  We all serve, ultimatly, at the pleasure of the national commander.  Is this politics or is this removing a commander who he has lost confidance in her ability to command?  Brining in an outsider and clearing out the old regime may be an attempt to fix a bigger problem with the wing.  One we know nothing about.

As far as due process goes....what due process?  The commander was informed she was releived.  Does it seem strange she was releived for a problem she was in the process of fixing?  Look at the Generals at Walter Reed.  They were trying to fix the problem....got fired anyway.

Now you all may be right.  This may be a political move to set up for the next NB.  If so, it may back fire...to much lead time for the opposition (is there an opposition?) to consolidate and plan a counter to this strike.

I'm going to give the guy the benifit of the doubt until someone from CAWG comes up with some hard evidance.  This was just the National Commander doing his job and holding a wing commander accountable for the performance of her job.

Sorry if that offends anyone....even the best leaders screw the pooch sometime and the hammer drops on them.

Quote from: PHall on March 27, 2007, 12:57:54 AM

Quote from: SarDragon on March 26, 2007, 07:33:39 PM

Quote from: Psicorp on March 26, 2007, 06:19:46 PMInteresting...one could read into this that our National CC does not have full faith and confidence in anyone in the current CAWG staff structure.  I think it's safe to say that the position wouldn't go to the Finance Officer, but to not select from within the Wing is making a big statement. 

Lt Col Muniz lives in California, and served COWG on a remote basis, telecommuting, so to speak. I consider his selection "from within the wing".

I think much of our discussion here is pure conjecture, and only clouds the true picture. I also think that airing this dirty laundry on a public forum is a disservice to CAWG, and CAP in general.

Dave, I just find it interesting that the Vice Commander or any of the seven Group Commanders were not considered for the job as Interm Wing Commander.

Not exactly the "normal" way to conduct business.

I agree on that 1000%. I can think of at least a dozen members of CAWG who I think are more suitable for selection.

[portions redacted]

Quote from: lordmonar on March 27, 2007, 06:27:57 AMIs this politics or is this removing a commander who he has lost confidance in her ability to command?  Brining in an outsider and clearing out the old regime may be an attempt to fix a bigger problem with the wing.  One we know nothing about.

From where I sit, it's all politics. BTW, the replacement is not really an outsider; he lives in California, somewhere in San Diego County.

QuoteAs far as due process goes....what due process?

Region Commanders are the appointing authority for Wing Commanders, not NHQ. All my intel sez that PCR CC was not in the loop.

QuoteThe commander was informed she was releived.  Does it seem strange she was releived for a problem she was in the process of fixing?

Yes. There was no money missing from the various "pockets". The pockets were just mislabeled.

QuoteLook at the Generals at Walter Reed.  They were trying to fix the problem....got fired anyway.

Apples and oranges. There is a great difference in the degree of the "offenses".

QuoteNow you all may be right.  This may be a political move to set up for the next NB.  If so, it may back fire...to much lead time for the opposition (is there an opposition?) to consolidate and plan a counter to this strike.

I'm going to give the guy the benifit of the doubt until someone from CAWG comes up with some hard evidance.  This was just the National Commander doing his job and holding a wing commander accountable for the performance of her job.

Sorry if that offends anyone....even the best leaders screw the pooch sometime and the hammer drops on them.

Not only did the things above happen, but  there were many other CAWG members, IMHO, more suited to replace Colonel Nelson. AFAIK, the replacement has never been a squadron or group commander, yet he is now the commander of one of the three largest wings in the organization. Something's fishy, methinks.

YMMV.

Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

Major Carrales

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. - Pastor Martin Niemöller

Many good and highly decorated commanders who have been relieved of their positions by TP have called my house to vent to my husband about their mistreatment by this egomaniac.

It all rests in the hands of the real leaders of CAP – the ones with courage and conviction to come together to rid the organization of this tiresome dictator and to act sooner rather than later - because your numbers are dwindling. 

The BOG is pressing the IG for a decision regarding the cheating scandal and the IG has enough evidence to throw the book at TP, but they have not done so.  I don't know why.  Since the initial three plus hour investigative interview, we have heard from the IG once, telephonically when my husband was posting on this forum during the National Board Meeting.  This member of the IG team said we would be getting a fax shortly, but nothing has arrived.

What is happening to good people in your organization is an atrocity that, if allowed to perpetuate, will take years from which to recover.

I wish you luck and courage.

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

Ah, I see - it's the CAP Jedi Knights...

You do need to worry about this dismissal...this isn't the Wing King you're looking for...you can go about your business...move along, move along

Quote from: ddelaney103 on March 27, 2007, 01:40:30 PM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

Ah, I see - it's the CAP Jedi Knights...

You do need to worry about this dismissal...this isn't the Wing King you're looking for...you can go about your business...move along, move along

:D That was funny!!!

Quote from: Mrs. Lisa Hayden on March 27, 2007, 09:09:36 AM
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. - Pastor Martin Niemöller

Many good and highly decorated commanders who have been relieved of their positions by TP have called my house to vent to my husband about their mistreatment by this egomaniac.

It all rests in the hands of the real leaders of CAP – the ones with courage and conviction to come together to rid the organization of this tiresome dictator and to act sooner rather than later - because your numbers are dwindling. 

The BOG is pressing the IG for a decision regarding the cheating scandal and the IG has enough evidence to throw the book at TP, but they have not done so.  I don't know why.  Since the initial three plus hour investigative interview, we have heard from the IG once, telephonically when my husband was posting on this forum during the National Board Meeting.  This member of the IG team said we would be getting a fax shortly, but nothing has arrived.

What is happening to good people in your organization is an atrocity that, if allowed to perpetuate, will take years from which to recover.

I wish you luck and courage.

Allons enfants de la CAP...!!!!

Quote from: afgeo4 on March 27, 2007, 04:15:43 AM
... It's one of Air Force's and Civil Air Patrol's core values:
Service Before Self

"Service before Self" is one of the USAF core values. The CAP parallel is "Volunteer Service".

Now, while I'm still chuckling over the earlier Jedi analogy, here's a serious question that may (or may not) have a bearing on the CAWG CC situation and this thread:

The CAP Core Values are:

INTEGRITY, VOLUNTEER SERVICE, EXCELLENCE, and RESPECT.

Does Volunteer Service trump the other three?  What happens to volunteer service when integrity, respect, and excellence are ignored?   Does anyone think that perhaps there's a reason why the adjective "Volunteer" is paired with "Service"?   I've met some CAP senior officers who use "volunteer" far too casually.  Judging by their actions they seem to be confusing "volunteer service" with "indentured service"!  ;)

My point is that the core values should be taken in their entirety.  Focusing on one at the expense of the others undermines them all.  When "service" becomes "enabling", it's time to question what we're about and what we're doing.

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM
So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

Thanks for the lesson in what I should be concerned with. ::)

I believe the Squadron and Group level are where the rubber meets the road, higher levels should exist for Support of those missions.I pray for the best here.

Quote from: BlackKnight on March 27, 2007, 03:45:52 PM
Does Volunteer Service trump the other three?  What happens to volunteer service when integrity, respect, and excellence are ignored?   Does anyone think that perhaps there's a reason why the adjective "Volunteer" is paired with "Service"?   I've met some CAP senior officers who use "volunteer" far too casually.  Judging by their actions they seem to be confusing "volunteer service" with "indentured service"!  ;)

My point is that the core values should be taken in their entirety.  Focusing on one at the expense of the others undermines them all.  When "service" becomes "enabling", it's time to question what we're about and what we're doing.

It's relatively easy to volunteer funds and assets, it's another thing altogether to volunteer your time.  The way I see it, if you can't volunteer your time and be professional, courteous, have integrity, and do what you volunteered to do well, then you're wasting your time and that of others.  It's nothing new (would be scary if it were) and it all has been said (typed) before. 

As far as endentured servitude...I've been told by "She Who Must Be Obeyed" that I am not allowed to quit CAP so long as there is a balance on a credit card for uniform purchases.  I'm beginning to wonder if she's a NHQ Secret Agent.  :P

Capt Harris,

Based on the number of CCs who have been canned (see the post on numbers by the historian further back) leads folks to believe it is a purging. What we have seen here and in other associated sites is often the reasons are very flimsy and suspicious. It's almost as if you break wind, it is reason. That wholesale slaughter does not inspire confidence in the leadership. It's hard to belive that the 40 or so who have been canned were all poor leaders.  How confident are you in hte AF leadership?  What if the SECAF SEC of Defense suddenly fired the majority of 3 and 4 stars???  For crying out loud, the libs are crying about 8 US Attorneys getting canned out of 93. (Even though Clinton fired all 93 when he took office)

I've known the CAWG finance officer for years. Both she and her husband (a Wing officer) are above board.  I have no reason to suspect or question their integrity.  Virginia Nelson is also an honorable person.  The new Wing banker thing just started and it's a learning  process. For a large Wing like CA, there are growing pains and glitches.  Nothing nefarious, just VOLUNTEERS trying to make a new program work.  It's called a learning curve.  As was said, no money is missing. There is no suspicion of deliberate wrongdoing.

The wing banker thing was just recently thrown out to all of CAP. Folks are trying to implement it. 

Those in CAWG know this was a cheap shot.

Have some of the firings been for poor leaderhip, mismanagement, etc?  Probably so.  But the numbers make folks suspicious.

Do we really do not know what the allegations of financial mismanagement are? I would be very interested in knowing the specifics. The idea that Virginia Nelson would intentionally commit a financial violation is nearly beyond the scope of credulity. Is it a coincidence that the new CC looks a lot more like TP than VN? Is there a racial, sexual or political component to this? Not a single member of CAWG or even PACR was qualified for the post? I hope someone at the DOJ runs an audit on the NCIC to see if anyone has been running CAWG staff!

Quote from: Mrs. Lisa Hayden on March 27, 2007, 09:09:36 AM
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. - Pastor Martin Niemöller

GIVE ME A BREAK! 

Please, now we're equating the removal of office of board member who had ADMITTED financial "irregularities" to genocide? Get over yourself!

And by your further comments, Mrs. Hayden, you yourself feel part of the persecuted class, despite the fact that your partner has ADMITTED in public to cheating on a test?

....please.  Save it.

You know what, I am by no means an apologist for CAPFLT001, I have strong feelings, expressed here and elsewhere, about his actions, and his alleged history, but come on.  THIS IS HOW THE "REAL" WORLD WORKS!

We all want to play in the military pool?  Guess what, welcome to the social, because in the RealMilitary®, very little is done by consensus of the rank-and-file membership, or by committee.

In many cases, unilateral decisions by a single commander are all it takes to remove "good" people from authority, with little to no recourse.

Why do they do it?  Sometimes, "because they can...".

We call strong, decisive personalties that we agree with "leaders", and those we don't "tyrants".

Do I like it?  No.

Is it "right"?  Maybe not.

Want stronger affiliation with our "brothers in blue"?  Get used to it.

Any thoughtful person would know that the use of the quote was not meant to correlate what TP does to a holocaust.  It was to say that the "good" people who sit by and do nothing while they see others being ousted for questionable reasons may find that when a target is placed on their backs, there will be no one left to speak up on their behalf. 

FYI - Another female commander was forced out by TP's hand and what makes this commander especially memorable is her attendance at a dinner where she received accolade after accolade on behalf of her stellar leadership of a squadron. The cadets who reported to her could not contain their pride when they were named squadron of the year for this particular group. 

TP has a pattern of removing people who do not suit his needs and he is not a strong leader.  He is a bully and we all know the bullies in this world are just scared little boys who are afraid that their insecurities will be discovered.

(((Tangent)))  Whats this cheating scandal people keep talking about.

My department just elected a new Sheriff.  It is her right to choose her Under Sheriff and shuffle people as she sees fit.  In the Under Sheriff job announcement one of the qualifications was "unquestionable loyalty to the Sheriff and her vision for the Department."  This is a $140K per year job.  Its how life really works.  Ive seen officers/deputies try and fight the battle, only to be disciplined for something very minor and unrelated and get transfered out of an assignment.  Guess what, battles over.  Now your even less effective that you were 5 minutes ago.  Ive seen incompotent people promoted and placed in positions of authority....Im talking some serious authority, because of their relationships, not because of their leadership resume. 

Im not saying you shouldnt speak out, but let that person be the one to speak out first if there was an injustice, then gather the facts and rally behind them if you agree.  He didn't kill her or throw her in political prison.

Ive found, both in the miltary, Law Enforcement, and CAP, that FEW people really know the whole story.  Im not saying this is the case here, but Ive seen situations where the agency was doing the person a favor by just quielty reassigning them, when someone decides that the "victim" was wronged, they pick up the sword and lead the charge and uncover what really happened, causing even further damage to the person.

I dont know everyones experiences, but I can tell you, private business, military or government, mishandling money intentional or not, is the quickest way to loose your corner office.

Quote from: Flying Pig on March 27, 2007, 08:30:56 PM
I dont know everyones experiences, but I can tell you, private business, military or government, mishandling money intentional or not, is the quickest way to loose your corner office.

In that case there ought to be quite a few members of "America's native criminal class" (Congress) looking for work.  ;D

THAT is the one exception to the rule, BlackKnight!

Quote from: Eclipse on March 27, 2007, 06:56:59 PM

Quote from: Mrs. Lisa Hayden on March 27, 2007, 09:09:36 AM
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. - Pastor Martin Niemöller

GIVE ME A BREAK! 

Please, now we're equating the removal of office of board member who had ADMITTED financial "irregularities" to genocide? Get over yourself!

And by your further comments, Mrs. Hayden, you yourself feel part of the persecuted class, despite the fact that your partner has ADMITTED in public to cheating on a test?

....please.  Save it.

You know what, I am by no means an apologist for CAPFLT001, I have strong feelings, expressed here and elsewhere, about his actions, and his alleged history, but come on.  THIS IS HOW THE "REAL" WORLD WORKS!

We all want to play in the military pool?  Guess what, welcome to the social, because in the RealMilitary®, very little is done by consensus of the rank-and-file membership, or by committee.

In many cases, unilateral decisions by a single commander are all it takes to remove "good" people from authority, with little to no recourse.

Why do they do it?  Sometimes, "because they can...".

We call strong, decisive personalties that we agree with "leaders", and those we don't "tyrants".

Do I like it?  No.

Is it "right"?  Maybe not.

Want stronger affiliation with our "brothers in blue"?  Get used to it.

I think that is a bit extreme. She was using that quote as an analogy as to what happens when people stand idly by and watch things occur when perhaps something can be done before it gets out of hand.

I don't think the tone in your reply was called for. She was expressing her opinion and not insulting, attacking or making assumptions about anyone who had commented. She was quite polite in stating her opinion.  Obvioulsy, you disagree in your opinions. In this country, no one gets dragged away for that.

Quote from: lordmonar on March 26, 2007, 06:37:53 AM
But as CAP officers, at some point we have to show loyalty to our elected officals even if we don't like or agree with his policies and leadership style.

In some instances -- and after the nonsense that has gone on under this administration, it seems to me we passed that point months ago -- loyalty must be earned.

Quote from: DNall on March 26, 2007, 08:31:01 AM
So, it stands to reason that there'd be a certain degree of slack in that matter, but also it is a politically backed item within CAP & proving it doesn't work on a large wing scale is not good for one staying in command. That's the political reasoning laid on top of the process-story I stated before. Fact is we just don't know & don't need to speculate.

There is a terrific episode of "The West Wing" in which a new member of the White House staff is presented with a dilemma to see if he is capable of "speaking truth to power".

Whether or not wing banker is a good idea, the point here is that what we need are working solutions to real problems -- in other words, objectivity rather than politics as usual.

Substance truly is more important than perseption.

As for not needing to speculate, this is OUR organization, and its time we stood up and reminded corporate officers that they are "trustees" of our fiduciary interests....they want to go corporate rather than military, fine....maybe it's time for the 'stockholders' to speak up!

Don't need to speculate?  Why, is it top secret?? CAP needs far MORE transparency, not less!!!

Also, far more accountability!!!

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 12:59:55 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on March 26, 2007, 06:37:53 AM
But as CAP officers, at some point we have to show loyalty to our elected officals even if we don't like or agree with his policies and leadership style.

In some instances -- and after the nonsense that has gone on under this administration, it seems to me we passed that point months ago -- loyalty must be earned.

Zig, let me ask you.  Putting the cheating allegation aside, since it is thus far an unproven one, what EXACTLY are you talking about when you refer to "The Nonsense?"

He has, from what I have seen, made some judgement calls with respect to senior people.

Every general I ever saw did that.

I've seen generals relieve company commanders over rumours.  I sawe a battalion commander relieved on the spot because a sergeant in one of his companies was having an affair with a female in a different company within the same battalion.

Fair or unfair, right or wrong, generals surround themselves with who they want.

Quote from: SarDragon on March 27, 2007, 06:54:28 AM
AFAIK, the replacement has never been a squadron or group commander, yet he is now the commander of one of the three largest wings in the organization. Something's fishy, methinks.

YMMV.

Numerous corporate officers  have been appointed in recent years with ZERO prior command experience at subordinate levels, some in fact with as little as 3 years CAP experience (no prior military, nothing of that sort)

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on March 28, 2007, 01:07:42 AM

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 12:59:55 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on March 26, 2007, 06:37:53 AM
But as CAP officers, at some point we have to show loyalty to our elected officals even if we don't like or agree with his policies and leadership style.

In some instances -- and after the nonsense that has gone on under this administration, it seems to me we passed that point months ago -- loyalty must be earned.

Zig, let me ask you.  Putting the cheating allegation aside, since it is thus far an unproven one, what EXACTLY are you talking about when you refer to "The Nonsense?"

He has, from what I have seen, made some judgement calls with respect to senior people.

Every general I ever saw did that.

I've seen generals relieve company commanders over rumours.  I sawe a battalion commander relieved on the spot because a sergeant in one of his companies was having an affair with a female in a different company within the same battalion.

Fair or unfair, right or wrong, generals surround themselves with who they want.

He has put incompetent, unqualified, inexperienced people in corporate officer slots -- or has allowed himself to be persuaded to doso -- for no better reason than that they would vote as told at NB.

Such hubris, such irresponsibility is unforgivable in ANY officer, let alone CAP's two star national commander.

I have been around CAP many, many years. I've seen the "outs" get "in", and vice versa.

The difference in times past was that, while you may not have liked or particularly agreed with the new crowd, there was never any question that they had "paid their dues" going up the chain, and knew what in blazes they were doing!!!

Thank you for your kind words Col. White.

Unfortunately, I know more than I care to about the current commander and the people who are being pushed out are of such high caliber that it speaks to his motives as not being in the best interest of CAP.

Quote from: Mrs. Lisa Hayden on March 28, 2007, 01:36:34 AM
Thank you for your kind words Col. White.

Unfortunately, I know more than I care to about the current commander and the people who are being pushed out are of such high caliber that it speaks to his motives as not being in the best interest of CAP.

You're welcome. Aside from the public events since he became NHQ CC, I know nothing of him personally therefore I do not comment on any of them. Appearances of it all are not good but as I said, I dont think I have any 1st hand knowledge to comment on details. I believe on speaking from experience on matters of this nature.

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

I dont think you got the irony of your post Major. You posted a message to say that you werent going to post a message. But you posted a message. Get  it now? ;D

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 12:59:55 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on March 26, 2007, 06:37:53 AM
But as CAP officers, at some point we have to show loyalty to our elected officials even if we don't like or agree with his policies and leadership style.

In some instances -- and after the nonsense that has gone on under this administration, it seems to me we passed that point months ago -- loyalty must be earned.

Negative ghost rider.....he earned his right to our loyalty by being voted in as our national commander.  And any lack of loyalty on our part is grounds for removal....such as the regional commander who invited a the former vice commander who was actively trying to undermine the National Commander's authority.

Sorry that is just the way it is.  You challenge up but support down....this is follower-ship 101!

I hear a lot about the 40 commanders who have been canned....has it really been that much?  How many quit for reasons having nothing to do with the National Commander?  I know of a lot of high profile people who were asked to resign for cause....but that is the kicker....for cause.  If you live in a supposed hot political environment you got to make sure you [mess] don't stink.

Again...that is just the way it is.

No one has said as far as I know that the CAWG CC was fired for lack of integrity.  (they were not stealing the money)...but they may have been fired for incompetence as it applies to the finances and/or their behind the door report with National/Wing.

Again...I am only speculating.....but sometimes when things get bad...like during an inspection...tempers get hot....you say something you don't mean...and the boss fires you!

It may not be that at all.  It may just be the simple fact that the blue money got put in the red pot.  The CC should have know that this was wrong, should never had allowed it be put there and should have corrected it immediately.  When audited, the error was found, national notified and the National Commander ordered her removed from office.

Again...all that is just speculation.

But so is 90% of the "General Peneda has a plan" bunch.

Unfortunately there is nothing we can do about it so long as good officers take their finger of their number for more than a second.

If we want to put a stop to this.  We need to communicate to the BoG.  They are the only ones with the ability to stop him.   I wonder how many of you who are upset about the supposed political firings have sent an E-mail or letter to someone on the BoG?  Who has voiced their opinion to the BoG about the idea of modifying the constitution to allow the National Commander two terms?  I heard a lot of grousing here and on CAP Blog.  Anyone follow up?

I for one don't care.....I know that I have not been effected by any of this yet.  I understand that the CAWG CC was a great person and was liked by a lot of people.  But bottom line is she screwed up and got canned.

So the moral of the story is...don't screw up....and use the appropriate channels to voice your dissatisfaction.  Open dissent only sets you up for the ax when next it comes....and open disloyalty IS CAUSE FOR DISMISSAL.  I would fire you if you worked for me and you were telling everyone and their brother that I was out of control.  As you would if one of your subordinates was undermining your authority within your unit.

I'm sorry!  I do not want to bring up uniforms, but....

As I watched the vote for the US CAP nametape during the Winter Board mtg, I was strucked by the number of people that DID NOT speak up against this idea.  TP asked over and over and got no response (or rather I could not hear them since the microphones in the room were not working well!).  I am new to all this about the inner workings of CAP, so does the NB usually just keep their mouths shut and raise their hands to vote in agreement with the National Commander?  Is that what he is looking for?

When is his term up?

Quote from: flyguy06 on March 28, 2007, 03:16:06 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

I dont think you got the irony of your post Major. You posted a message to say that you werent going to post a message. But you posted a message. Get  it now? ;D

I'm glad someone caught it.  Too bad it had to be explained...

Quote from: jason.pennington on March 28, 2007, 03:55:06 AM
I'm sorry!  I do not want to bring up uniforms, but....

As I watched the vote for the US CAP nametape during the Winter Board mtg, I was strucked by the number of people that DID NOT speak up against this idea.  TP asked over and over and got no response (or rather I could not hear them since the microphones in the room were not working well!).  I am new to all this about the inner workings of CAP, so does the NB usually just keep their mouths shut and raise their hands to vote in agreement with the National Commander?  Is that what he is looking for?

Well that is the rub.  Some will say that the National Commander has them all scared and that he has some secret agenda that includes springing un listed proposal on the NB and that any dissent will result in removal.

Or some will say...in the case of the U.S. CAP branch tapes....that it was some last minute addition (there is no requirement for a proposal to suggested and added to the agenda before hand as far as I know).  That no one could come up with a reason not to vote for it and it passed.  The proposal could have come from someone outside of the TP mafia.....it was BGen Coulteir (sp?) who proposed it IIRC...and there are some who would say she is definitely not part of the TP camp....I don't know.

As I said before.  There are some who see anything that goes on at NHQ to be part of some dark conspiracy to increase the power of the National Commander, move CAP away from the USAF, and to take over the Earth using subliminal messages berried in the 406 Data stream.

I just don't see it.  I see maybe someone who has strong feelings about where CAP should be going, someone who has strong feelings about what his commanders should be able to do and how they should be conducting themselves.

I do fault the National Commander for not communicating his vision for CAP to the troops.  It would certainly head off a lot of speculation on our part if we knew where he wanted to take us. 

Other than that.....missions have not dropped off.  Funding has not dropped off.  Any problems we have with local SAR agencies are the fault of people who were in charge long before Gen Peneda was elected and are not the results of his policies.  I have seen a lot of movement on a lot of optional uniforms that I don't even own.  The only thing I can say there is that my own pet wish for bling has not been elevated beyond the Wing Level as far as I know.

So...from my point of view in NVWG all is good.  Of course I have not had a CC fired.  That has got to make a lot of anxiety for those affected.  And I understand that.  Focus on the mission.  Focus on the regulations.  Do your job, do it to the best of your ability and don't sweat the politics.

When is his term up?
[/quote]

Quote from: shorning on March 28, 2007, 03:57:22 AM

Quote from: flyguy06 on March 28, 2007, 03:16:06 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

I don't think you got the irony of your post Major. You posted a message to say that you weren't going to post a message. But you posted a message. Get  it now? ;D

I'm glad someone caught it.  Too bad it had to be explained...

Bupkis!

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 28, 2007, 04:55:02 AM

Quote from: shorning on March 28, 2007, 03:57:22 AM

Quote from: flyguy06 on March 28, 2007, 03:16:06 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

I don't think you got the irony of your post Major. You posted a message to say that you weren't going to post a message. But you posted a message. Get  it now? ;D

I'm glad someone caught it.  Too bad it had to be explained...

Bupkis!

Insightful.

Quote from: shorning on March 28, 2007, 05:26:34 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 28, 2007, 04:55:02 AM

Quote from: shorning on March 28, 2007, 03:57:22 AM

Quote from: flyguy06 on March 28, 2007, 03:16:06 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

I don't think you got the irony of your post Major. You posted a message to say that you weren't going to post a message. But you posted a message. Get  it now? ;D

I'm glad someone caught it.  Too bad it had to be explained...

Bupkis!

Insightful.

Back to the topic at hand, gentlemen. Thanks.   ;)

Quote from: Pylon on March 28, 2007, 12:47:12 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 28, 2007, 05:26:34 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 28, 2007, 04:55:02 AM

Quote from: shorning on March 28, 2007, 03:57:22 AM

Quote from: flyguy06 on March 28, 2007, 03:16:06 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 01:09:04 PM

Quote from: shorning on March 27, 2007, 07:15:55 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on March 27, 2007, 06:59:39 AM
Guys...I'm sitting this one out.

I'm more concerned/preoccupied with outfitting our new cadets in Kingsville, Texas and hopefully adding a unit there in the not too distant future.

Wish us luck and help us if you can.

So you posted to tell us you're not going to post in this thread?!? ???

Yes, its a statement of just how I feel about this issue.  It's there, but I have other...better, things to be concerned about.  And so should you.

I don't think you got the irony of your post Major. You posted a message to say that you weren't going to post a message. But you posted a message. Get  it now? ;D

I'm glad someone caught it.  Too bad it had to be explained...

Bupkis!

Insightful.

Back to the topic at hand, gentlemen. Thanks.   ;)

Lets keep quoting.  It's like a wacky etch-a-sketch drawing.   ...and that's wholesome good fun, people.

There are two ways of looking at things.  Please, let's not get all caught up in the emotion and drama.

You guys all MAY be right.  This may well be a power-grab by TP in the time-honored traditions of Central American dictatorships and the Stalinist Era of the Communist Party.  I'll grant you that you may well be right on the money.

But...

Consider that there might be a different agenda at work.

TP has taken over a troubled organization.  Financially, we can't get an "Unqualified" audit.  We have suffered through several scandals from a lack of personal integrity among high-level leaders.  Our organization has been "Backwards-looking" for decades, resting on our laurels from World War II and failing to keep up with changes in the world around us.

Consider that TP just MAY be wanting to reshape CAP into a better organization, and to do so, he intentionally targets the "Old-Boy" network (and old girl, in the case of CA) and replaces them with people who are not connected, have no axes to grind, and who owe no one favors.

These are people who are perceived to have not "Paid their dues" in the trenches, but those who have paid those dues are now part of the problem, not part of the solution.  At least from the perspective of TP.

Whether you agree or not doesn't matter.

He's the general.  Generals can do whatever they want to shape, mold, and direct an organization.  If you don't like it, become a general yourself and fix it.

Any speculation as to TP's motives in doing what he does is just that... speculation.

I never met TP.  Don't know him.  But I can tell you he isn't doing anything that I haven't seen a lot of other generals do in the past.

For the record:

I contacted the BoG - all of them I could at the time. I contacted CAP and Air Force Personnel relating to CAP affairs about the situation that I was involved with.

At this last national meeting, while I was blogging here, Col Shupe (National IG team attorney) called me up and asked me to sign a permission slip for him, that he would fax it to me, but never did as of yet!

During our phone call, he informed me that the BoG, behind closed doors - I am shocked that so many of you do not know how much is done behind closed doors, but I digress... the BoG demanded a report on the Testingate Scandal, yet Shupe told me that he told them that the investigation was not yet completed!

He told me on the phone that he needed my Air University Transcript and that he had TP's. When I questioned him further on that, he then admitted that though he did not have TP's in hand, he had TP's permission slip (release form)... he told me he would be faxing and emailing me a copy to send back to him, but I still have yet to see it here...

I DO KNOW what TP was doing, recall he lives near me and I was in on some of what he was doing, the over all, not the fine details... he is now where he was shooting to be - yes, sorry folks, ACCORDING TO A FINE PLAN, back in 2001 when I first was aware of some of what he was up to.

I will say this, TP is NOT sharp enough to plan all this himself, he had help, some how, some way, a lot of other folks DO KNOW the fine details... ask Col Parker, suddenly whisked up to National HQ, how and what was going on... there is a very small group of very close folks to TP - these are the folks, if you look back, DO KNOW what went on and how, and why. I do know some names, not all, but some. Someone needs to grill Parker on what she knows and when and why... I'll say no more on that.

Finally, I am NOT a FORMER MEMBER of CAP. If your in Florida Wing or above, you can see my CAPWATCH report online. I am a CURRENT member in good standing. See, CAP is a NATIONAL organization and whistle blower laws cover this case. They had to stop the 2B proceedings and they are not allowed to block my membership renewal either - that is automatic harassment by default.

That would open up additional problems that they will never want, enough said on that issue.

Some folks will blast me as they do - I can take the heat, as I tell every one of the PDW classes we held, "For anything that might go wrong here, you can blame me; for everything that went right, you can thank all of these fine folks (Instructors and guests who do the hard work)". "The success of this weekend is not determined today or even next week, but as you go back to your units and put to use what you picked up here this weekend."

I say it every time folks... My personal goal in CAP was originally to fly the plane, it oddly enough became Professional Development and then to rewrite the CLC, update the SLS and UCC courses, I did not get to finish my personal goals for the organization, but I have taught HOW to create and conduct a Professional Development Weekend, I still have the original slide show from 2001 when I started teaching at Wing Conferences how to do them...

Lastly, the Pineda Puppies are right - TP has the absolute right to remove everyone and put in place whomever he wants - that is how it is, Col Linker, National IG told me so himself, and he is right. The problem is in HOW and WHY these things are happening. I have had calls from across the nation from folks who have either been removed, replaced, asked to step aside, or those who know of others that have been shafted, many are icons for CAP and it is shocking that they would be removed... even I simply thought that they had tired of a long run in a position and simply stepped aside to take a well deserved break, to learn that other things had been working... I am talking about folks that have done a wonderful job the entire time in their position and without seeking any higher job, replaced by a Pineda Puppy...

Oh, though I tossed myself in the fire - people seem to forget that part of it - Pineda was my SUPERIOR OFFICER, he knew that he was using his position and influence to seek personal gain - the clear cut definition of the problem... blast me all you want, but don't be a total moron... KNOW that he KNEW what he was asking for and requesting of me long BEFORE I had any idea that it was coming my way!

People know things folks, they can openly lie to IG, but they can not lie under oath... until then...

Ray Hayden, LtC, CAP
Florida Wing
Creator (with a lot of help) of the Professional Development Weekend in Florida Wing.

P.S. Everything I say here, in public would open me up for suit against me for BOTH slander and libel... that is... unless what I say is 100% true. See, the truth is the default defense for both slander and libel. Ask an attorney, I have hundreds as clients across the country, so I know... No lawsuit has hit my doorstep yet, and it never will, because if they sue me, I depose all of them - ALL OF THEM, let them lie under oath my friends...

Ask yourself how willing is LtC. Hayden to open himself up for a lawsuit when his business is Litigation Support Audio Video Production and Presentation... darn, that's long isn't it? Anyway, that's what it is... by the way, go to Barnes and Noble and "Books" and type in Ray Hayden... then buy my book!  ;D

Best wishes to all and to the future of CAP, I really would have liked to rewrite the CLC, it needs it badly!

QuoteFinancially, we can't get an "Unqualified" audit. 

That isn't because we are a troubled organization.  It was due to how we kept track of our finances at all levels (not that there have not been a few financial problems here and there).  Part of the reason for the Wing Banker program is so that we can get an unqualified audit. 

Interestingly enough, I heard that at least one wing received an "unqualified audit report" for FY 2006 even though they had not transitioned to the Wing Banker Program during the audit period. By definition that shouldn't have been possible if one accepts the rationale presented for the WBP.

Quote from: RiverAux on March 28, 2007, 07:44:48 PM

QuoteFinancially, we can't get an "Unqualified" audit. 

That isn't because we are a troubled organization.  It was due to how we kept track of our finances at all levels (not that there have not been a few financial problems here and there).  Part of the reason for the Wing Banker program is so that we can get an unqualified audit. 

Not at all necessary... short version is local funds need not be accounted for as corporate property & therefore need not be part of the audit. Works just fine on a MUCH larger scale than CAP will ever be using. But that's another subject. My view of that issue is that it's more related to rash actions not thought thru, and power grabbing.

Quote from: RiverAux on March 28, 2007, 07:44:48 PM
Part of the reason for the Wing Banker program is so that we can get an unqualified audit. 

And that, plus $1.50 will get yo a ride on the bus.

I've heard the rhetoric about all the funding opportunities we're losing with a UQA, anyone ever actually seen real evidence of this?

We could get a UQA if we all just filed the darn forms on time and then the Wing CC's did something with them. And if a unit CC doesn't, out the door...

Quote from: Eclipse on March 28, 2007, 09:11:40 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on March 28, 2007, 07:44:48 PM
Part of the reason for the Wing Banker program is so that we can get an unqualified audit. 

And that, plus $1.50 will get yo a ride on the bus.

I've heard the rhetoric about all the funding opportunities we're losing with a UQA, anyone ever actually seen real evidence of this?

CAP is NOT part of the combined federal campaign (CFC) because we cannot produce a UQA.  Other national level organistions that give out funds (such as the United Way) won't touch us with out a UQA.

Quote from: Eclipse on March 28, 2007, 09:11:40 PM
We could get a UQA if we all just filed the darn forms on time and then the Wing CC's did something with them. And if a unit CC doesn't, out the door...

That is true...but they have been yelling at squadrons for a long time now about this and nothing ever happend.  So someone (Virgina Wing IIRC) came up with the wing banking plan and forced the issue.

The Wing Banking Plan scares the bejesuus out of me. As a Squadron that is pretty good at raising and keeping money, I am afraid they are going to "nationalize" our bank account. Considering the incredibly poor financial decisions of national ( Lets invest in NASCAR!) I think we are better suited to handle our parental donations and community support than Wing or Alabama!

Capt. Lord

Flyguy....you may be sitting pretty and holding on to your CAP membership wallowing in your "whistle blower" protection.....but let's remember the chain of events here.  You did not blow the whistle until after you got fired!  CAP may have backed off just to avoid a lawsuit...but let's not kid anyone here.  IF YOUR ACCUSATIONS are true, by you own account you are just a guilty as anyone else and I would not let you within 10 feet of any activity I was running.

And any thing you say about the National Commander automatically goes through my BS filter.  You are definitely not an un bias observer on anything General Pineda does.  

Finally I am in no way shape or form a "Pineda Puppy", I don't know the guy at all except through his PR releases.  I am definitely a LEADER and a FOLLOWER and someone who runs a Professional Development Course should know what those mean.

I would be supporting anyone who occupied that job and give him the benefits of his rank and position my total support....just as I would expect any of my subordinates.

Sir, you may be think that you somehow won because of your whistle blower status....but you are not a paragon of virtue, and you certainly should not be part of any Professional Development Program.

Quote from: CaptLord on March 28, 2007, 09:38:50 PM
The Wing Banking Plan scares the bejesuus out of me. As a Squadron that is pretty good at raising and keeping money, I am afraid they are going to "nationalize" our bank account. Considering the incredibly poor financial decisions of national ( Lets invest in NASCAR!) I think we are better suited to handle our parental donations and community support than Wing or Alabama!

Capt. Lord

Let's not malign the good name of "Alabama" with "HQ CAP", alrighty? :-\ :'( ;) :)

Tis a personal request....

Quote from: CaptLord on March 28, 2007, 09:38:50 PM
The Wing Banking Plan scares the bejesuus out of me. As a Squadron that is pretty good at raising and keeping money, I am afraid they are going to "nationalize" our bank account. Considering the incredibly poor financial decisions of national ( Lets invest in NASCAR!) I think we are better suited to handle our parental donations and community support than Wing or Alabama!

Read the regulation...the money already belongs to national, always has!  The problem is that across the board squadrons have proved that they are not best suited to handle their money.  There has been huge black wholes of funding.  Money going into commander's pockets, national funds being redirected into other areas of funding.  CP funds used to fly missions, mission funds used to by radios, comm funds used to pay for electric bills.  While all this is going on National can't produce a UQA.  Which hampers fund raising on their end.

The wing banking plan does not say the squadron can't handle their own money.  It just means that wing is accounting for that money to make sure you are using it right.  Sure in theory they can divert your squadrons fund raising activities to another area....but let's give them the benefit of the doubt at this time that is not going to happen.  They certainly won't be sponsoring a NASCAR driver.  

Quote from: lordmonar on March 28, 2007, 03:30:02 AM
So the moral of the story is...don't screw up....and use the appropriate channels to voice your dissatisfaction.  Open dissent only sets you up for the ax when next it comes....and open disloyalty IS CAUSE FOR DISMISSAL.  I would fire you if you worked for me and you were telling everyone and their brother that I was out of control.  As you would if one of your subordinates was undermining your authority within your unit.

Please do not refer to me as 'ghost rider'. Thank you.

As for the rest, you are entitled to your opinion, but it seems that you are either suggesting blind obedience (and as we all know, "I was just following orders" is no longer an acceptable defense") or subversive activity (since you emphasized the word 'open'  in discussing dissent and disloyalty).

The position of national commander CAP, and the person occupying that post, is entitled to obedience, respect and cooperation from subordinates.

The individual officer, whoever it is and whenever we are concerned,
as a human being needs to earn loyalty and respect as a person.

Furthermore, there is a difference between disagreeing with a course of action , policy or plan and undermining the organization.

The tragedy of the 20th century was blind, unreasoning obedience to leaders. While this instance in CAP certainly does not rise to the epic proportions of those historic events, morally it bears some similarity...go along, get along, whether it's right or wrong.

Not worth it

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on March 28, 2007, 01:48:07 PM
Consider that TP just MAY be wanting to reshape CAP into a better organization, and to do so, he intentionally targets the "Old-Boy" network (and old girl, in the case of CA) and replaces them with people who are not connected, have no axes to grind, and who owe no one favors.

These are people who are perceived to have not "Paid their dues" in the trenches, but those who have paid those dues are now part of the problem, not part of the solution.  At least from the perspective of TP.

Whether you agree or not doesn't matter.

He's the general.  Generals can do whatever they want to shape, mold, and direct an organization.  If you don't like it, become a general yourself and fix it.

John,

This is still America.

He is a CAP general, but CAP generals, like all American generals, answer to higher authority.

It is high time that higher authority started asking questions, and providing some answers to the membership.

The National CC may indeed, as you say, have ideal motives and a brilliant plan for fixing CAP. That's for the BOG and SECAF to determine.

If this is so, if everything is proceeding toward CAP's benefit,  it would really help, as others have noted, to have his Vision Statement, as most commanders provide at the start of their term of office.

From where I sit, things get progressively more broken because we're having the CAP equivalent of 'amateur hour' on wing and region staffs....because the blind bring in their fellow newbies to 'help' them 'manage' the 'corporation'.

Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 28, 2007, 09:47:16 PM

Quote from: CaptLord on March 28, 2007, 09:38:50 PM
The Wing Banking Plan scares the bejesuus out of me. As a Squadron that is pretty good at raising and keeping money, I am afraid they are going to "nationalize" our bank account. Considering the incredibly poor financial decisions of national ( Lets invest in NASCAR!) I think we are better suited to handle our parental donations and community support than Wing or Alabama!

Capt. Lord

Let's not malign the good name of "Alabama" with "HQ CAP", alrighty? :-\ :'( ;) :)

Tis a personal request....

Alabama has a good name????

Sorry. Just kidding.  ;D

Quote from: LtCol White on March 29, 2007, 02:33:35 AM

Quote from: msmjr2003 on March 28, 2007, 09:47:16 PM

Quote from: CaptLord on March 28, 2007, 09:38:50 PM
The Wing Banking Plan scares the bejesuus out of me. As a Squadron that is pretty good at raising and keeping money, I am afraid they are going to "nationalize" our bank account. Considering the incredibly poor financial decisions of national ( Lets invest in NASCAR!) I think we are better suited to handle our parental donations and community support than Wing or Alabama!

Capt. Lord

Let's not malign the good name of "Alabama" with "HQ CAP", alrighty? :-\ :'( ;) :)

Tis a personal request....

Alabama has a good name????

Sorry. Just kidding.  ;D

OF COURSE they have a good name!

At least, now that they licked that hookworm problem! :D

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 10:36:50 PM

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on March 28, 2007, 01:48:07 PM
Consider that TP just MAY be wanting to reshape CAP into a better organization, and to do so, he intentionally targets the "Old-Boy" network (and old girl, in the case of CA) and replaces them with people who are not connected, have no axes to grind, and who owe no one favors.

These are people who are perceived to have not "Paid their dues" in the trenches, but those who have paid those dues are now part of the problem, not part of the solution.  At least from the perspective of TP.

Whether you agree or not doesn't matter.

He's the general.  Generals can do whatever they want to shape, mold, and direct an organization.  If you don't like it, become a general yourself and fix it.

John,

This is still America.

He is a CAP general, but CAP generals, like all American generals, answer to higher authority.

It is high time that higher authority started asking questions, and providing some answers to the membership.

The National CC may indeed, as you say, have ideal motives and a brilliant plan for fixing CAP. That's for the BOG and SECAF to determine.

If this is so, if everything is proceeding toward CAP's benefit,  it would really help, as others have noted, to have his Vision Statement, as most commanders provide at the start of their term of office.

From where I sit, things get progressively more broken because we're having the CAP equivalent of 'amateur hour' on wing and region staffs....because the blind bring in their fellow newbies to 'help' them 'manage' the 'corporation'.

First of all, ZZ, I did NOT say that TP had altruistic motives.  I said he MIGHT have such motives.  We have to consider such benign motives, since the explanation that I offered would fit with the evidence we can see.

Unfortunately, the more sinister motives ALSO fit with the known evidence.

All I am suggesting is that we not get ourselves caught up in emotional contagion and speculating as to motives.

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on March 29, 2007, 04:46:32 AM
First of all, ZZ, I did NOT say that TP had altruistic motives.  I said he MIGHT have such motives.  We have to consider such benign motives, since the explanation that I offered would fit with the evidence we can see.

Unfortunately, the more sinister motives ALSO fit with the known evidence.

All I am suggesting is that we not get ourselves caught up in emotional contagion and speculating as to motives.

John,

I do try to follow your example, and keep calm....I find, however, that after many years in this organization, I still get angry when members mistreat others for personal gain, or simply to make themselves feel important.

I get doubly angry when those in positions of authority, who are supposed to set a better example, use those positions for their own self-serving ends, rather than the benefit of CAP and its members.

Perhaps it is because I was a cadet officer, but I really expect the senior CAP officers (major and up) to behave like officers!!!

Unrealistic, idealistic, I know, but that's the way I am.

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 10:25:40 PM
As for the rest, you are entitled to your opinion, but it seems that you are either suggesting blind obedience (and as we all know, "I was just following orders" is no longer an acceptable defense") or subversive activity (since you emphasized the word 'open'  in discussing dissent and disloyalty).

Negative " ;D" again.  Showing loyalty to your commanders in NOT bling obedience or mindless robotism.  It is not being a yes man.  It is not "just following orders".  It is supporting the decisions of your commander in public and challenging them through channels.  This has nothing to do with breaking the law.  You don't ever do that.  Show me a policy or an order that has come from National Head Quarters that is in violation of the law.

Open discussion of dissent with your subordinates undermines the authority of your commanders and should be avoided.  Encouraging subordinates to ignore orders or to be less than excellent in their conduct is boarder line sedition.  You are free to discuss your feelings with your supervisors and to an extent to your peers.  But once you include your subordinates you begin to break up good order and discipline.

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 10:25:40 PMThe position of national commander CAP, and the person occupying that post, is entitled to obedience, respect and cooperation from subordinates.

The individual officer, whoever it is and whenever we are concerned,
as a human being needs to earn loyalty and respect as a person.

Negative  ;D again!  I did not vote for the President......but he is my Commander in Chief and has my loyalty.  His policies and orders are my policies and orders.  As a leader you can't play that game.  That is internally dishonest.  And it makes you a hypocrite to your subordinates.  How do you expect them to respect you and show you loyalty if you don't do the same for your superiors?

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 10:25:40 PMFurthermore, there is a difference between disagreeing with a course of action , policy or plan and undermining the organization.

Are you talking about your actions or the National Commanders?

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 10:25:40 PMThe tragedy of the 20th century was blind, unreasoning obedience to leaders. While this instance in CAP certainly does not rise to the epic proportions of those historic events, morally it bears some similarity...go along, get along, whether it's right or wrong.

Well first I have to question of where your evidence of immorality?  I just don't see where all you conspiracy theorists are going with this.  General Penida takes sole and undisputed control of CAP as National Commander For Life.  Why?  So that he can make it into a more powerful tool to help do the job the American People are paying us to do?  Now that sounds really morally bankrupt to me.  I have heard a lot of grousing out where and why CAP is being steered.....but in the end, we are a volunteer SAR, CP and AE organization.   

Quote from: FlyGuy1986 on March 28, 2007, 10:35:41 PM
Not worth it

Please don't hold back on my account sir.  There is no way you can win.  By your own admission, if your story is true you are a cheat who tried and failed to blackmail your fellow cheat.  If your story is false you are a petty lier who only wanted smirch the name of our national commander.  I don't want you my organization.  I don't want you representing my organization and I certainly don't want you involved in anything that has to with molding the future professional development of my fellow CAP members.

Quote from: ZigZag911 on March 28, 2007, 10:36:50 PM
He is a CAP general, but CAP generals, like all American generals, answer to higher authority.

It is high time that higher authority started asking questions, and providing some answers to the membership.

The National CC may indeed, as you say, have ideal motives and a brilliant plan for fixing CAP. That's for the BOG and SECAF to determine.

If this is so, if everything is proceeding toward CAP's benefit,  it would really help, as others have noted, to have his Vision Statement, as most commanders provide at the start of their term of office.

From where I sit, things get progressively more broken because we're having the CAP equivalent of 'amateur hour' on wing and region staffs....because the blind bring in their fellow newbies to 'help' them 'manage' the 'corporation'.

So when are you volunteering for wing staff?  As you say...the it is SECDEF's and BoG's job to steer us....maybe they are.....maybe the National Commander is taking us in the direction they want us to go?  Have you contacted anyone on the BoG?  In the mean time we need to be supporting the decisions of our appointed officers and not grousing about ever little thing they do...good or bad.

Quote from: lordmonar on March 29, 2007, 07:30:54 AM
Open discussion of dissent with your subordinates undermines the authority of your commanders and should be avoided.  Encouraging subordinates to ignore orders or to be less than excellent in their conduct is boarder line sedition.  You are free to discuss your feelings with your supervisors and to an extent to your peers.  But once you include your subordinates you begin to break up good order and discipline.

Be careful how you word that. Open discussion of dissent WITH you subordinates is to be highly encouraged & fostered as part of the decision making process, and to an extent after the fact in providing relief where they've been screwed over.

Open discussion of dissent AMONG your subordinates fosters an attitude that leads your decisions to failure, is not helpful to good order & discipline, and should be avoided or even to an extent quashed.

A VERY big difference. A good leader understand you really can't control complaining outside your midst, but you can be as transparent as possible, keep people informed, and sell them on a vision so that it becomes shared goals even if they disagree with it to an extent. Those things aren't happening, so leadership can't complain when people aren't willing to follow them beyond the bear minimum requirements.


More generally, I'd applaud what you are saying. Certainly from a military & core values standpoitn you absolutely owe your leaders unquestioned loyalty, especially when you disagree or dislike them.

The problem in CAP is the governance system is set up so subordinates select their boss, and my Wg CC basically serves as my appointed rep to that process to speak for the members of my wing... it's almost democratic in that sense, but not quite. Add to that our historical track record on retention that makes leadership responsive to fleeting concerns they think members care about. What you get is a process where our voices can cause them to flip flop on issues & chase off in this direction or that. Plus the leadership from above is physically seperated from direct control, so there is virtually no continuity or strategic consistency. Or for that matter an iron fist to crush down on them & correct the course when it goes off, instead it is allowed to keep tracking off line for years as situations get more & more extreme till it's either too late or some drastic action has to be taken.

I would note though that the Nat CC is not in charge of CAP. He is an administrator ONLY. The path of the organization as defined by congress is controlled by BoG in some areas & SAF (as delegated to A3/SHA) in others - again screwed up & problematic division of labor.

Quote from: lordmonar on March 29, 2007, 07:36:18 AM

Quote from: FlyGuy1986 on March 28, 2007, 10:35:41 PM
Not worth it

Please don't hold back on my account sir.  There is no way you can win.  By your own admission, if your story is true you are a cheat who tried and failed to blackmail your fellow cheat.  If your story is false you are a petty lier who only wanted smirch the name of our national commander.  I don't want you my organization.  I don't want you representing my organization and I certainly don't want you involved in anything that has to with molding the future professional development of my fellow CAP members.

You're getting a bit too carried away here on this. I suggest you tone it down back to the level of discussion. Things like this can be said in a private message.

Quote from: lordmonar on March 29, 2007, 07:36:18 AM

Quote from: FlyGuy1986 on March 28, 2007, 10:35:41 PM
Not worth it

Please don't hold back on my account sir.  There is no way you can win.  By your own admission, if your story is true you are a cheat who tried and failed to blackmail your fellow cheat.  If your story is false you are a petty lier who only wanted smirch the name of our national commander.  I don't want you my organization.  I don't want you representing my organization and I certainly don't want you involved in anything that has to with molding the future professional development of my fellow CAP members.

OK, I've been properly baited, and as we know, I do take the bait. After all, this is how this whole thing started anyway...

You got the "sir" right there "Captain". See, here you are publicly blasting me for "blindingly" following the request of a Colonel when I was just a lowly Major, yet you also think that if I did NOT follow his DIRECTION at the time, that I might somehow be "safe" from instant retaliation?

See, I DO KNOW TP – You – by admission, do NOT – therefore, you have entered the battle of first hand knowledge sadly unarmed – by your own admissions several times here in this very thread.

You say to follow the orders of your superior officers blindingly and fully, but when someone DID JUST THAT, then blew the whistle about it later, you blast them for doing so – isn't nice how you can "Rove" the story to fit your needs?

P.S. I did not do this "after" I got "fired", but before... (and, by the way, it was a "captain" who made a foolish demand from me at a PDW (Professional Development Weekend) that had to do with the initial "opportunity" for Pineda to rid me from his past.)

Look at the public reasons for all of TP's requests for resignations.  He has sited some obscure regulation that was not followed to the letter; and let me tell you, when TP takes the high ground, it is only to save himself from the river of BS he is about to unleash on some unsuspecting victim. 

You obviously do NOT know me either, I started the Professional Development Weekend and it has been relayed to me that just about every Major and above currently in Florida Wing has DIRECTLY benefited from my good works. Even the IG has relayed to me that he had heard wonderful things about me, during this investigation, of the good work I had accomplished (outside of this incident).

The oddest thing about you is that you are a Captain barking at a Lt. Colonel! You hang me out to dry doing the VERY SAME THING YOU PROTEST SO STRONGLY ABOUT!

Eventually the IG will have no choice but to release the truth.

Do not follow blindly, yet seek the truth and create a better, more positive vision for the future by correcting the problems of the past, rather than attacking those who stand up for the injustice that took place.

Quote from: lordmonar on March 29, 2007, 07:30:54 AM
...Show me a policy or an order that has come from National Head Quarters that is in violation of the law.

Okay, admittedly it's not "the law", but how about any of the myriad of regulations that have been issued over the last six months or so in violation of the procedures that are established by the CAP Constitution? This has been done on numerous occasions without posting the proposed changes for review.

The most notable of these would have to be  the "Emergency" change to the Financial Regulations that national put out in an attempt to cover thier bungled attempt to force everyone to immediately comply with the Wing Banking program.  Nothing like forcing an unpopular program down peoples throats by breaking your own "laws" to make sure that you have the regulations on your side.

Fly Guy:

I know neither TP, nor you.  I'm in Florida, but I'm not well-liked.  I am especially disliked by the South Florida people, although I don't know what I ever did to them.

But I do have a question.  It may call for some speculation on your part.  But, since you claim to know TP, I'll ask you to speculate if you must.

Of course, if you feel uncomfortable with this question, or if it would violate any of the 123-series regulations, just say so, and I will understand.

That being said, here's my question:

Referring to some of your earlier statements, when a 2B action was instituted against you, and you petitioned to the MARB, you claim to have asked TP to intervene in your behalf, and assign you to the volunteer staff at NHQ.  If your allegations of cheating are true, and TP knew that you had and could reveal information that would impact not only his command, but by reflecting upon his personal integrity would affect his civilian employment, why did he refuse to give you a comfortable room in the "Belly of the Beast?"

It sems to me to be a simple action.  TP could have told the MARB members that he knew all of the people involved, that there was a clash of personalities, and that he would accept you on his volunteer staff to keep peace in the family.  But, he didn't do that.

My question to you is, to the extent you know or can reasonably speculate based on your personal knowledge, why didn't he?

Quote from: FlyGuy1986 on March 29, 2007, 01:48:48 PM

Quote from: lordmonar on March 29, 2007, 07:36:18 AM

Quote from: FlyGuy1986 on March 28, 2007, 10:35:41 PM
Not worth it

Please don't hold back on my account sir. ...

OK, I've been properly baited, and as we know, I do take the bait. After all, this is how this whole thing started anyway...

Sirs,

If there is an ongoing IG investigation, then it might be prudent to let it play out.  The truth of matter will either come out, or it won't.  Either way, it is in the hands of those it should be.    

Respectfully, sirs, taking the high road is never the wrong course of action and such heated discussions/arguements about past events/actions/inactions will only lead to elevated blood pressure and ill will.