Cadet hazing

[Major Lord]

I would not denigrate a poster complaining of action against alleged abuse. Being frustrated by (alleged) inaction on the part of CAP  does not necessarily reflect his competence or standing to complain, and his lack of facts and clear articulation does not make him wrong. An ordinary CAP member may believe that just passing information to the I.G. requires an "investigation", but this is not the case. The I.G. is only obligated to begin a preliminary assessment to determine whether the presented facts reach the level of an actual violation or rules, ethics, or laws. In many cases, it never goes beyond that. My question would go more to whether or not the established protective mechanisms established by regulations were carried out in questions of abuse of Cadets. If not, heads should roll. If the CAP protective association substituted their judgment in leaving a CDC in place after allegations of abuse, every participant should swing from the yardarm. Of course, if you have the courage of your convictions, stand in the door and bar the member from entry; Would you let an abusive parent in the door if your own kid was in there? I hope not.

Does CAP sometimes cover up their misdeeds? Sure they do. We are an organization of flawed ( some might say more often than normal) human beings. I fully understand the frustration. Some time back, the CAWG "Bearfacts" ran an article referring to the donation of some very specialized gear to a number of unidentified squadrons with the presentations taking place at the National Convention. The only problem was that there were no donations, the equipment was non-existent, National never received the equipment identification to place it into inventory, and no one has been able to validate that any actual donations took place. The fact that the principals of the "donating" Company were members of the National Command staff, and ranking members of CAWG staff, apparently was not considered in what to me was an apparently  fraudulent scheme. Nonetheless, CAP's IG found no fault, and not even a retraction was published. Naturally, I found CAP's passive reaction abhorrent, but its not my 501 C-3 status that is endangered by tax shenanigans, it CAP's. I am not a Corporate Officer, so we have to hope the chips fall where they may, and that there is little collateral damage to innocents and the organization.

That being said, if you think that Cadets are being harmed in any way, draw your sword and don't put it down until you are the last man standing. Any real man will back you up.

Major Lord

[Eclipse]

I would not denigrate a poster complaining of action against alleged abuse. Being frustrated by (alleged) inaction on the part of CAP  does not necessarily reflect his competence or standing to complain, and his lack of facts and clear articulation does not make him wrong.

It doesn't make him "wrong", it's just an impossible conversation.

You can't credibly discuss three-sided situations (he-said, she-said, the truth) with only one side, and invariably the way these conversations go is that we get the gist of the story in the OP, and then from that point on the poster will inject more "detail" into the thread to support his (generally negative) assertion about CAP's handling of it, which generally just makes the story less and less credible.

The bottom line is that CAP, institutionally, has no tolerance for abuse (of any kind) or hazing, and has a robust structure to deal with it, however, just like every other similar organization, the military, and private business, the system requires the actions of human beings, all who may have an opinion about it, not to mention some personal responsibility on the part of the alleged victims in reporting / not tolerating the behavior.

I just don't like new posters who march in here with a public head of steam and start telling 2nd and 3rd-hand stories about some alleged abuse that was not handled correctly (in their opinion), and insinuating (again publicly), that CAP is institutionally disinterested in remediating these situations.

Worse still is the naive sense of anonymity that some people on this board believe they have, which in many cases results in them saying things that expose the real participants / unit / alleged victim, in ways which are both against regulations and unfair to all involved.

[Major Lord]

I agree with you about anonymous posters in general. I also don't place a lot of stock in hearsay reports of wrongdoing, especially by newbies, who may have joined this page just to throw monkey wrenches into the works to redress their private grievances. However, if we could truthfully say that CAP has acted properly, transparently, and more importantly, timely, in resolving complaints, this third-order attempt at over-site would not be required. Is this a valid case of a CAP going into CYA mode? Who knows? But clearly this has happened before, and I for one think that any allegation of Cadet abuse needs to resolved dispositively. Sunlight as they say, is the best disinfectant. We don't know enough about the truth of the allegations, but the parties directly involved will no doubt become aware of the discussion here, and hopefully, clear the air.

Major Lord

[CAPAviator]

I can understand doubt in allegations that do not reveal all the details. But look back at the beginning, the post was an effort to seek advice, not at all to point fingers or to make any claims. 

It is all simply political. I'm not at all surprised that CAP would bury this, I am not surprised members of CAP would defend their organization.

A famous political scandal we all are familiar with is the one in which we all heard the words: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." --President Bill Clinton.

It's the first response to ANY allegations of wrongdoing. To lie is a human defense. Self protection. Hide the wrong because the truth hurts. Deny the possiblity that an adult can haze and torment a child. This can't happen in our perfect world.

It took West Point Military Academy generations to learn that hazing DOES NOT work. CAP is still learning.

At this point however, as noted previously, the mere fact these allegations were brought to the attention of CAP Corporate, and whatever the reasoning, the Cadet Commander and his acompliance are gone, awareness has stopped the hazing and life is better for these cadets. From this point on, let it be a lesson to all what is wrong and let's hope it never happens again.

The End.

[Eclipse]

I'm sorry, but your OP contained loaded, unverifiable statements, in which you were either not directly involved, or indirectly complicit, you make a presumption that ignoring abuse allegations is systemic to the organization, and then you can't believe when your unsubstantiated allegations
are at least questioned?

I don't believe very many people here felt you were "seeking advice".  Because the advice is simple - abuse of any kind is not tolerated, and it
is our duty to report it immediately and properly (whatever "properly" means to the individual).

You assert that the "offenders" have left the unit, yet you failed to indicate why, other than to say the reasons "don't matter", and now you want to
somehow connect this with a completely unrelated indiscretion by someone else, and then further allege that CAP hazes cadets as a matter of course because we haven't learned our "lesson" yet?

What "lesson", exactly, is this supposed to teach?

[Eclipse]

In fact, after re-reading your scenario, it is so cartoonish that if it weren't alleged to be factual, it would look like a fumbled attempt at a hazing lecture.

Seriously, what kind of a parent would allow their child to participate in a program that causes panic attacks at every meeting?  And if the parents involved are so disconnected that they allow this to continue, including the threats of death from the CDC, then how do you expect the corporation to do anything?

Do you realize that you are alleging a conspiracy that would have to encompass the entire unit, Group (if you have them), and all the major players at the wing level just to protect some goofball who is discrediting CAP?

[abdsp51]

The op has also changed whom was allegedly conducting said hazing or maybe I am getting the acronyms mixed up,  something smells fishy and is making my spidy sense tingle.

[Johnny Yuma]

I am not a CAP legal officer nor a corporate officer.  As a BoG member, I do have a duty to protect the corporation (including correcting wrongdoing by CAP members), but that is relatively recent.  But for over 35 years before being elected to the BoG, I served as a CP officer.  Where I have had a duty first and foremost to protect our cadets from harm.

And your assertions - based on second-hand and incorrect information - are simply wrong, selectively self-serving to promote your narrow vision of CAP, and are disrespectful of the volunteers who form the backbone of this organization.

And always easily done "anonymously" on the internet.

There are more than enough folks on this forum that know who I am and a going over of my posts will tell you what Wing I'm in as well as what staff positions I hold, so I don't consider myself an anonymous poster.

I'll take Pat Lane's "second hand information" account of what happened at the board involving the original CPPT over revisionist history from NHQ, Inc. all day long. She was there as KSWG Wing Commander at the time. 

So I take it from you that someone who doesn't accept the company line as told from CAP, Inc.'s National Headquarters without question is wrong, self serving and disrespectful? You really need to get back down to the unit level again and disconnect from NHQ for a couple years and get introduced to exactly how most feel about NHQ, Inc.

Contrary to what you want to believe, I call it down the middle. There was no bigger defender of CAP here than me when that Blansett clown and his stooge were over here stirring the pot with their wild cadet abuse accusations because on the face it was B.S. I no longer so much as look at NOTF when they went from providing information to providing pontification on everything CAP. But that doesn't change the fact that NHQ, Inc has its own issues, starting with a poor record of protecting the average Joe Member and tossing Joe to the wolves if it benefits NHQ, Inc.

[Private Investigator]

...From this point on, let it be a lesson to all what is wrong and let's hope it never happens again.

The End.

I think in CAP we need to be on top of everything because we do not want CAP on 20/20 or 60 Minutes like other groups.

Thanks for the closure.