New NCR/CC??

[Nathan]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

[NCRblues]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

Uh, no sorry.
When you volunteer to be a Region/cc, the person in charge of 8 states, your press releases should be clear and consistant. Telling anyone, ever, that we are the "inactive reserve, but we hold full rank" is unacceptable.

The picture of the flight jacket is unacceptable, ESPECAILLY since his whole interview is based around him "working up the ranks".... I'm sorry, but by Colonel, you should have your uniform squared away with no problems at all.

Col. Fagan, wait no....ANY of us should correct ANY misconception that may be out about CAP. Letting someone "think" we do one thing, and then letting them find out the hard way that we don't do that is waste, fraud, and abuse....

[Nathan]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

Uh, no sorry.
When you volunteer to be a Region/cc, the person in charge of 8 states, your press releases should be clear and consistant. Telling anyone, ever, that we are the "inactive reserve, but we hold full rank" is unacceptable.

The picture of the flight jacket is unacceptable, ESPECAILLY since his whole interview is based around him "working up the ranks".... I'm sorry, but by Colonel, you should have your uniform squared away with no problems at all.

Col. Fagan, wait no....ANY of us should correct ANY misconception that may be out about CAP. Letting someone "think" we do one thing, and then letting them find out the hard way that we don't do that is waste, fraud, and abuse....

Erm, I'm not convinced you actually read my post. You simply saw that it wasn't the point you were trying to make, and attacked it. Read it again. I clearly wasn't defending his apparent actions, nor do I think that it should be acceptable to put out bad information.

Let me know when you take a closer look, and we can actually talk about it. I am definitely interested in where you saw that I advocated "waste, fraud, and abuse".

[A.Member]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters.  We must hold ourselves accountable.

[Nathan]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

[NCRblues]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

[A.Member]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

No, it doesn't.  I'm not saying he did or did not lie.  I don't know.  What I do know is there are inaccurate representations in the story that he should take upon himself to correct.   No assumptions are needed for that. 

[JeffDG]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

Col:  No, we're not at all an active reserve of the USAF.  Reporter just got his "word of the day" calendar and say "inactive" means "not active" and put the word in.

Col:  I used to have  the rank of Lt. Col.  Now I have the rank of full Col.

Generally speaking, in my experience, reporters are idiots.  From reading newspapers you would think the leading cause of aircraft accidents was the fact that people don't file flight plans for VFR.  If it comes down to me taking the word of a reporter over someone appointed to the National Executive Committee by not one, but two National Commanders...well, I'll give the Col. the benefit of the doubt. 

[NCRblues]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

Col:  No, we're not at all an active reserve of the USAF.  Reporter just got his "word of the day" calendar and say "inactive" means "not active" and put the word in.

Col:  I used to have  the rank of Lt. Col.  Now I have the rank of full Col.

Generally speaking, in my experience, reporters are idiots.  From reading newspapers you would think the leading cause of aircraft accidents was the fact that people don't file flight plans for VFR.  If it comes down to me taking the word of a reporter over someone appointed to the National Executive Committee by not one, but two National Commanders...well, I'll give the Col. the benefit of the doubt.

Yes because the first national commander was such an outstanding guy, and did amazing things for CAP....

This is amazing, if this would have been a squadron PAO, or something other than a region commander, you all would be screaming about how they need better training on how to handle publice affairs.

This man should....no MUST be held to a higher standard than the average member running around. He has a chance to fix this, the reporter is willing to do another one and fix the mistakes, yet so far he has not done so....

[Eclipse]

This man should....no MUST be held to a higher standard than the average member running around. He has a chance to fix this, the reporter is willing to do another one and fix the mistakes, yet so far he has not done so....

And you know this, how?

[a2capt]

And you know this, how?

Because

I have made contact with the St. Louis post dispatch and asked if a clarification would be coming out. They stated "we have no idea, whats in the story is what he said, its a simple Q & A set". They also told me, i was not the only one to call and question this article.  .... .. .... When i was on the phone with the newspaper they said that they would be more than happy to do another one....

[A.Member]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

Col:  No, we're not at all an active reserve of the USAF.  Reporter just got his "word of the day" calendar and say "inactive" means "not active" and put the word in.

Col:  I used to have  the rank of Lt. Col.  Now I have the rank of full Col.

Generally speaking, in my experience, reporters are idiots.  From reading newspapers you would think the leading cause of aircraft accidents was the fact that people don't file flight plans for VFR.  If it comes down to me taking the word of a reporter over someone appointed to the National Executive Committee by not one, but two National Commanders...well, I'll give the Col. the benefit of the doubt.

I agree that reporters make mistakes sometimes, as we all do.   

Here's my question though:  Did the same reporter write this blog post in Oct of 2010?
http://hometownonline.blogspot.com/2010/10/lake-saint-louis-resident-appointed.html

On September 25, 2010, Colonel Sean Fagan, of Lake Saint Louis, was recently appointed as Wing Commander for the State of Missouri's United States Air Force, Civil Air Patrol. Colonel Fagan is responsible for all the activities and assets assigned to the Missouri Wing, including it's 1200 personnel.

The headquarters for the Missouri Wing is located at Whiteman Air Force Base in Knobnoster, Missouri. The Civic Air Patrol, a division of the United States Air Force, is responsible for 98% of all inland search and rescue missions for the Air Force and State of Missouri, as well as humanitarian missions.

Colonel Fagan is a graduate of Concordia University and the United States Air Force Command and Staff College.

Has similar issues.  Coincidence?  Perhaps...

[NCRblues]

And you know this, how?

Because

I have made contact with the St. Louis post dispatch and asked if a clarification would be coming out. They stated "we have no idea, whats in the story is what he said, its a simple Q & A set". They also told me, i was not the only one to call and question this article.  .... .. .... When i was on the phone with the newspaper they said that they would be more than happy to do another one....

Thank you...but I'm sure eclipse wont accept this since its not stamped from the newspaper, sworn under oath in front of a federal judge and approved by JCS....

[CAPOfficer]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

After reviewing the article, I truly do not see any real issues.  First off, he is simply attempting to define something to an individual (and the public who will be reading this article) who most likely knows nothing about CAP.  When he references the Air Force term "inactive reserve", he does not say that he is in the inactive reserve, but that "I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve..."  He is doing nothing more than giving the reporter an example or model for comparison.  The sentence is closed by "but I still hold a full rank".  Understanding that former wing and region commanders do not always retain the rank upon leaving office, the full rank in this case (for me at least) states that he did not revert back to his previous rank, that of a Lt Col.  It may not be the best way to express it, but it is one way none the less.

You are correct, aerial reconnaissance is not one of our main missions.  However; in reviewing the article, I see a person who wanted to bring the ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance) program to center stage with the public.  Perhaps he should have given the three missions of CAP first and then got more explicit on the ARCHER program.  Because he did not, it does not imply that he does not know the three missions of CAP.  I do not believe that anyone who has previously served as a wing commander (twice) and a region commander prior to this appointment does not know the missions of CAP.

All commanders are held to a high standard, not just wing/region commanders.  As for the comment "what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power", I again disagree.  I have noted that CAP members question their superiors almost constantly. However, the method they choose in questioning those decisions is what makes it proper or improper.  While a commander's authority is derived from our Constitutions & Bylaws and regulations, I believe "power" comes from respect, not fear of questioning.

I also see no implication or potential situation of Fraud, Waste or Abuse (FW&A).  It looks as if you are implying that because he mentioned the ARCHER program, FW&A can logically be the (a) result; I disagree.

At this point, I challenge you to follow-through in correcting these "small violations" as you see them by contacting the region commander directly with your concerns on his interview.  You have already contacted the Newspaper and given a report of your findings; therefore, it is only proper now for you to speak with the region commander to corroborate or cancel out your assertions.  To do any less in my opinion will speak volumes as to why this issue was raised to begin with.

His email address can be found on the NCR Website listed under NCR Staff Roster.

[NCRblues]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

After reviewing the article, I truly do not see any real issues.  First off, he is simply attempting to define something to an individual (and the public who will be reading this article) who most likely knows nothing about CAP.  When he references the Air Force term "inactive reserve", he does not say that he is in the inactive reserve, but that "I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve..."  He is doing nothing more than giving the reporter an example or model for comparison.  The sentence is closed by "but I still hold a full rank".  Understanding that former wing and region commanders do not always retain the rank upon leaving office, the full rank in this case (for me at least) states that he did not revert back to his previous rank, that of a Lt Col.  It may not be the best way to express it, but it is one way none the less.

You are correct, aerial reconnaissance is not one of our main missions.  However; in reviewing the article, I see a person who wanted to bring the ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance) program to center stage with the public.  Perhaps he should have given the three missions of CAP first and then got more explicit on the ARCHER program.  Because he did not, it does not imply that he does not know the three missions of CAP.  I do not believe that anyone who has previously served as a wing commander (twice) and a region commander prior to this appointment does not know the missions of CAP.

All commanders are held to a high standard, not just wing/region commanders.  As for the comment "what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power", I again disagree.  I have noted that CAP members question their superiors almost constantly. However, the method they choose in questioning those decisions is what makes it proper or improper.  While a commander's authority is derived from our Constitutions & Bylaws and regulations, I believe "power" comes from respect, not fear of questioning.

I also see no implication or potential situation of Fraud, Waste or Abuse (FW&A).  It looks as if you are implying that because he mentioned the ARCHER program, FW&A can logically be the (a) result; I disagree.

At this point, I challenge you to follow-through in correcting these "small violations" as you see them by contacting the region commander directly with your concerns on his interview.  You have already contacted the Newspaper and given a report of your findings; therefore, it is only proper now for you to speak with the region commander to corroborate or cancel out your assertions.  To do any less in my opinion will speak volumes as to why this issue was raised to begin with.

His email address can be found on the NCR Website listed under NCR Staff Roster.

I'm not sure how there are NO problems with this interview.... WE CAN NOT TELL PEOPLE WE ARE (OR EVEN LIKE) THE INACTIVE RESERVE. He can not fly EVERY aircraft that CAP owns. Our main mission is in no way the ARCHER system. His uniform jacket that was shown on the front of the story is out of regs...badly. How is this not a problem. I have already sent him and email and made phone calls.

Shockingly i did not get a response back....(sarcasm)

Over half of the region staff submitted their letters of resignation because he was reappointed... this man was a pawn for pineda.

During the 2005 national boards that were held in St Louis, he was a freshly  promoted major. Pineda got elected and the next week fagan was the next wing king... He was removed from the position of region commander once....why are we trying again??? IS IT NOT TIME FOR CAP TO TRY SOMETHING NEW?

I have tried to contact him, i have tried to contact NHQ about this....(btw the standard press release the MUST follow all press realises was not attached to this one....that's a national requirement if i am not mistaken )

This is not what cap needs right now...not at all....you may all keep defending him, and others like him, and i admit one article wont do A LOT of harm, but many articles like this one will..... He is in a position of power, to the outside world his word would SEEM like law in cap.... a civilian will see the word commander and think, well he knows everything about that organization that he can.... he must be right...BUT LOW AND BEHOLD HE IS WRONG.....

[Eclipse]

And you know this, how?

Because

I have made contact with the St. Louis post dispatch and asked if a clarification would be coming out. They stated "we have no idea, whats in the story is what he said, its a simple Q & A set". They also told me, i was not the only one to call and question this article.  .... .. .... When i was on the phone with the newspaper they said that they would be more than happy to do another one....

Thank you...but I'm sure eclipse wont accept this since its not stamped from the newspaper, sworn under oath in front of a federal judge and approved by JCS....

I will absolutely accept it, in fact that is, and you missed, my point.  Why do you believe it is your mission in life to "fix" this?

This is the kind of situation that, assuming a fix is needed, is best handled in private. whether that is simply a conversation between like-minded volunteers, or someone actually appointed as a spokesperson contacting the media regarding the clarifications.

No good comes to CAP in this by a bunch a people calling this reporter and pointing out the foibles.But I see we agree on that point.

This is not what cap needs right now...not at all....you may all keep defending him, and others like him, and i admit one article wont do A LOT of harm, but many articles like this one will....

There is a difference between "defending him", and accepting the reality that in the grand scheme of the Great Plan, this requires nothing but a sigh and a couple of phone calls.

[CAPOfficer]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

After reviewing the article, I truly do not see any real issues.  First off, he is simply attempting to define something to an individual (and the public who will be reading this article) who most likely knows nothing about CAP.  When he references the Air Force term “inactive reserve”, he does not say that he is in the inactive reserve, but that “I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve…”  He is doing nothing more than giving the reporter an example or model for comparison.  The sentence is closed by “but I still hold a full rank”.  Understanding that former wing and region commanders do not always retain the rank upon leaving office, the full rank in this case (for me at least) states that he did not revert back to his previous rank, that of a Lt Col.  It may not be the best way to express it, but it is one way none the less.

You are correct, aerial reconnaissance is not one of our main missions.  However; in reviewing the article, I see a person who wanted to bring the ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance) program to center stage with the public.  Perhaps he should have given the three missions of CAP first and then got more explicit on the ARCHER program.  Because he did not, it does not imply that he does not know the three missions of CAP.  I do not believe that anyone who has previously served as a wing commander (twice) and a region commander prior to this appointment does not know the missions of CAP.

All commanders are held to a high standard, not just wing/region commanders.  As for the comment “what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power”, I again disagree.  I have noted that CAP members question their superiors almost constantly. However, the method they choose in questioning those decisions is what makes it proper or improper.  While a commander’s authority is derived from our Constitutions & Bylaws and regulations, I believe “power” comes from respect, not fear of questioning.

I also see no implication or potential situation of Fraud, Waste or Abuse (FW&A).  It looks as if you are implying that because he mentioned the ARCHER program, FW&A can logically be the (a) result; I disagree.

At this point, I challenge you to follow-through in correcting these “small violations” as you see them by contacting the region commander directly with your concerns on his interview.  You have already contacted the Newspaper and given a report of your findings; therefore, it is only proper now for you to speak with the region commander to corroborate or cancel out your assertions.  To do any less in my opinion will speak volumes as to why this issue was raised to begin with.

His email address can be found on the NCR Website listed under NCR Staff Roster.

I'm not sure how there are NO problems with this interview.... WE CAN NOT TELL PEOPLE WE ARE (OR EVEN LIKE) THE INACTIVE RESERVE. He can not fly EVERY aircraft that CAP owns. Our main mission is in no way the ARCHER system. His uniform jacket that was shown on the front of the story is out of regs...badly. How is this not a problem. I have already sent him and email and made phone calls.

Shockingly i did not get a response back....(sarcasm)

Over half of the region staff submitted their letters of resignation because he was reappointed... this man was a pawn for pineda.

During the 2005 national boards that were held in St Louis, he was a freshly  promoted major. Pineda got elected and the next week fagan was the next wing king... He was removed from the position of region commander once....why are we trying again??? IS IT NOT TIME FOR CAP TO TRY SOMETHING NEW?

I have tried to contact him, i have tried to contact NHQ about this....(btw the standard press release the MUST follow all press realises was not attached to this one....that's a national requirement if i am not mistaken )

This is not what cap needs right now...not at all....you may all keep defending him, and others like him, and i admit one article wont do A LOT of harm, but many articles like this one will..... He is in a position of power, to the outside world his word would SEEM like law in cap.... a civilian will see the word commander and think, well he knows everything about that organization that he can.... he must be right...BUT LOW AND BEHOLD HE IS WRONG.....

And I thought you were upset with the interview.  This goes a lot deeper with you than a picture or the statements he made in an interview.  Your banter about his use of words, speculative innuendos with General Pineda and now telling us what National "must" do; this about you.

You believe if you shriek loud enough, long enough, everyone else will fall in line with your banter.  Not so, shouting at people (the use of uppercase) is not necessary or acceptable in any communication.

If I am incorrect, please show me documented proof that he was removed for cause as region commander.  Show me a picture of him wearing this jacket in uniform.  Show me documented proof of a backroom deal between him and General Pineda (as his pawn). Show me how he destroyed and crippled the organization by not answering the reporters question directly, as you believe he should have.  Show me the FW&A you alluded too.  Show me all this and I will admit I was wrong; however, if you cannot...

[Mustang]

If I am incorrect, please show me documented proof that he was removed for cause as region commander.  Show me a picture of him wearing this jacket in uniform.  Show me documented proof of a backroom deal between him and General Pineda (as his pawn). Show me how he destroyed and crippled the organization by not answering the reporters question directly, as you believe he should have.  Show me the FW&A you alluded too.  Show me all this and I will admit I was wrong; however, if you cannot...

I don't know about any of that, but his statement "I can fly any airplane that the patrol has." is not presently true; according to eServices, he doesn't hold a current Form 5 in any aircraft.

[a2capt]

"the patrol"?, too. Just the wording on some of those replies bugs me, but thats not to say it wasn't edited by unfamiliar journalists. I'm willing to believe that on the wording, though not likely considering the rest of whats going on. But I would hope one wouldn't refer to their own organization in such a passive way.

[MO10]

Shocking, absolutely shocking...

I can't believe all of this over an article that appeared in the "St. Louis Post Disgrace."  Some have been able to keep their emotions and fondness for Col Kuddes in check, others...well not so much.  Over the years dealing with the press one thing is for sure.  If you don't spell it out for them a certain amount of literary license will be used; even then there is no guarantee.

I have met both of the officers discussed in this thread.  While each have their own agenda they still have the best interests of CAP in mind, whether I agreed with them or not.

While I know this will open a can of worms.  The picture of the flight jacket (which seems to be a point of contention for NCRBlues).  I can't seem to find any CAP distinctive markings...except for the wings.  Oh wait, John Q. Public won't associate those with anything other than a design of wings with a "triangle thingy" in it.

If this is type of useless "learning" that takes place on this forum I'm not sure I made a good choice by joining.