Poll
Question:
Will the "U.S." in "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" go away when Maj Gen Pineda is done as National Commander?
Option 1: Yes
votes: 30
Option 2: No
votes: 26
Make a prediction. Will CAP's new name of "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" remain, or will it be changed back to "Civil Air Patrol" when general Pineda's term as National CC is up?
Not another one of these threads... ::)
Isn't it a little early to say the the name has been changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol? There has been no formal legal name change, the web site doesn't reference it either. It may be a movement inspired by national leadership, but I doubt it's going to stick.
Quote from: ELTHunter on June 02, 2007, 08:47:23 PM
Isn't it a little early to say the the name has been changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol? There has been no formal legal name change, the web site doesn't reference it either. It may be a movement inspired by national leadership, but I doubt it's going to stick.
Have you seen the latest "Volunteer" yet?
Quote from: NEBoom on June 02, 2007, 11:14:00 PM
Quote from: ELTHunter on June 02, 2007, 08:47:23 PM
Isn't it a little early to say the the name has been changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol? There has been no formal legal name change, the web site doesn't reference it either. It may be a movement inspired by national leadership, but I doubt it's going to stick.
Have you seen the latest "Volunteer" yet?
Have you seen it in print yet? I'm talking memo, policy letter, manual or even regulation.
I mean how hard would it be to just put out a letter under his signature saying that from this date forward we will be known as the U.S. Civil Air Patrol.
Unless he knows that it will require a by-laws change and only the BoG can change those.
Quote from: PHall on June 03, 2007, 02:00:05 AMUnless he knows that it will require a by-laws change and only the BoG can change those.
I think general Pineda does know, he just doesn't care. In his mind, he can circumvent the BoG at his whim and no one should dare have the audacity to hold him accountable. And if anyone does, he just 2b's them like that [snaps fingers].
Quote from: 12211985 on June 03, 2007, 03:12:58 AM
Quote from: PHall on June 03, 2007, 02:00:05 AMUnless he knows that it will require a by-laws change and only the BoG can change those.
I think general Pineda does know, he just doesn't care. In his mind, he can circumvent the BoG at his whim and no one should dare have the audacity to hold him accountable. And if anyone does, he just 2b's them like that [snaps fingers].
Might be just a little difficult to 2b a Board of Governors member since the majority of them are not members of CAP.
Quote from: PHall on June 03, 2007, 02:00:05 AM
Quote from: NEBoom on June 02, 2007, 11:14:00 PM
Quote from: ELTHunter on June 02, 2007, 08:47:23 PM
Isn't it a little early to say the the name has been changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol? There has been no formal legal name change, the web site doesn't reference it either. It may be a movement inspired by national leadership, but I doubt it's going to stick.
Have you seen the latest "Volunteer" yet?
Have you seen it in print yet? I'm talking memo, policy letter, manual or even regulation.
Of course I haven't and neither has anyone else! But that doesn't seem to be stopping him any (which is why I asked if you saw the new "Volunteer"). I just hope they open that time capsule 65 years from now, take a look at the letter he put in there and say, "What the heck is
USCAP?"
:D
^^ Hahahah.....and then say "USCAP...that must have been a punishment from the AF. Wow......gald our name is The United States Air Force Auxilary".
Then Senior Member number 2 says "my wife and I are thinking about taking a vacation to Iraq this summer, but the travel agent says Saudi-Irania would be a better choice because they are holding the US Open this summer".
Quote from: mikeylikey on June 03, 2007, 05:32:28 PM
^^ Hahahah.....and then say "USCAP...that must have been a punishment from the AF. Wow......gald our name is The United States Air Force Auxilary".
Then Senior Member number 2 says "my wife and I are thinking about taking a vacation to Iraq this summer, but the travel agent says Saudi-Irania would be a better choice because they are holding the US Open this summer".
....Then they put their pin-on rank insignia on their AF style service coats and head out to their weekly CAP Squadron meeting.
Quote from: NEBoom on June 03, 2007, 05:45:16 PM
Quote from: mikeylikey on June 03, 2007, 05:32:28 PM
^^ Hahahah.....and then say "USCAP...that must have been a punishment from the AF. Wow......gald our name is The United States Air Force Auxilary".
Then Senior Member number 2 says "my wife and I are thinking about taking a vacation to Iraq this summer, but the travel agent says Saudi-Irania would be a better choice because they are holding the US Open this summer".
....Then they put their pin-on rank insignia on their AF style service coats and head out to their weekly CAP Squadron meeting.
In thier flying cars!
Quote from: NEBoom on June 02, 2007, 11:14:00 PM
Quote from: ELTHunter on June 02, 2007, 08:47:23 PM
Isn't it a little early to say the the name has been changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol? There has been no formal legal name change, the web site doesn't reference it either. It may be a movement inspired by national leadership, but I doubt it's going to stick.
Have you seen the latest "Volunteer" yet?
...with the logo, which we condemned?
Quote from: PHall on June 03, 2007, 02:00:05 AMI mean how hard would it be to just put out a letter under his signature saying that from this date forward we will be known as the U.S. Civil Air Patrol.
Unless he knows that it will require a by-laws change and only the BoG can change those.
It's not even something the BoG can change--it's codified into federal law, specifically Title 36, which grants exclusive use rights to the name "Civil Air Patrol", NOT "U.S. Civil Air Patrol".
Well, technically all we have control over is "Civil Air Patrol". It doesn't actually restrict us there to only using that name though personally I think for consistency sake they should match up.
The CAP Constitution is the controlling authority on our name.
Quote from: JC004 on June 03, 2007, 09:52:56 PM
Quote from: NEBoom on June 02, 2007, 11:14:00 PM
Quote from: ELTHunter on June 02, 2007, 08:47:23 PM
Isn't it a little early to say the the name has been changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol? There has been no formal legal name change, the web site doesn't reference it either. It may be a movement inspired by national leadership, but I doubt it's going to stick.
Have you seen the latest "Volunteer" yet?
...with the logo, which we condemned?
Yup. Also USCAP and all its variants appear liberally throughout.
Quote from: NEBoom on June 05, 2007, 12:47:22 AM
Quote from: JC004 on June 03, 2007, 09:52:56 PM
Quote from: NEBoom on June 02, 2007, 11:14:00 PM
Quote from: ELTHunter on June 02, 2007, 08:47:23 PM
Isn't it a little early to say the the name has been changed to U.S. Civil Air Patrol? There has been no formal legal name change, the web site doesn't reference it either. It may be a movement inspired by national leadership, but I doubt it's going to stick.
Have you seen the latest "Volunteer" yet?
...with the logo, which we condemned?
Yup. Also USCAP and all its variants appear liberally throughout.
As well as my signature, you will note. >:D ;D
In the grand scheme of things, I just don't see this as being such a big issue really.
Quote from: LtCol White on June 05, 2007, 02:38:37 PM
In the grand scheme of things, I just don't see this as being such a big issue really.
I agree, the things we argue here (uniforms, changes to monikers etc) are really ancillary issues.
The issue is not the moniker. The issue is how it got here. There was no formal legal name change or anything other than "Okay, we are now going to refer to ourselves as the U.S. Civil Air Patrol. Hope you like it!" It is a royal embarassment to everyone in the organization.
A CAP general circumventing a law that has been in place for 59 years is hardly an ancillary issue. When was the last time a CAP general did something like this?
Quote from: 12211985 on June 05, 2007, 02:59:40 PM
The issue is not the moniker. The issue is how it got here. There was no formal legal name change or anything other than "Okay, we are now going to refer to ourselves as the U.S. Civil Air Patrol. Hope you like it!" It is a royal embarassment to everyone in the organization.
A CAP general circumventing a law that has been in place for 59 years is hardly an ancillary issue. When was the last time a CAP general did something like this?
You missed the point here. Whether we are USCAP or CAP isnt that big of a deal. I don't see it as an embarrassment to the members? How does this constitute embarassing them?
If the bylaws are amended to reflect the DBA or lists USCAP as one of the many names, its no big deal. I do agree that there is concern if the change is made without following through with the appropriate legal changes eventhough they should have been done in advance of the change.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 05, 2007, 02:59:40 PM
The issue is not the moniker. The issue is how it got here. There was no formal legal name change or anything other than "Okay, we are now going to refer to ourselves as the U.S. Civil Air Patrol. Hope you like it!" It is a royal embarassment to everyone in the organization.
A CAP general circumventing a law that has been in place for 59 years is hardly an ancillary issue. When was the last time a CAP general did something like this?
Vade retro, Bufo!
It's ancillary...despite your hatred for the National Commander.
No, Maj Carrales; I have a distaste for bad leadership. That's different.
Quote from: 12211985 on June 05, 2007, 03:14:56 PM
I don't hate the National Commander; I hate what he does.
It's still ancillary... Interesting edit you made.
Just retrieved the May-June issue of "Volunteer" magazine from our mail box and flipped through it and could not believe the centerfold. Talk about hyping "U.S.Civil Air Patrol" ! It's the announcement page for the NB meeting and Conference.
I noticed that the url down at the footer still says cap.gov and not uscap.gov.
I have this conspiracy theory........
Regards,
Ken
Quote from: Major Carrales on June 05, 2007, 03:16:01 PM
Quote from: 12211985 on June 05, 2007, 03:14:56 PM
I don't hate the National Commander; I hate what he does.
It's still ancillary... Interesting edit you made.
Thanks. I do that from time to time.
::)
On these issues, I am very leaglly minded. As stated, we are Legally called C.A.P., not US CAP.the fact is that it is not ancilary. The way we may be debating it may be, but the issues is not. If MG TP wanted us to be US CAP, do it legally, and not ignore what the law or regs say. I understand that the "I don't care what the regs say. Get it done." philosphy happens in the military, I do not feel that it would really work in CAP. It really doesn't apply to our name.
Quote from: LtCol White on June 05, 2007, 03:11:08 PM
Quote from: 12211985 on June 05, 2007, 02:59:40 PM
The issue is not the moniker. The issue is how it got here. There was no formal legal name change or anything other than "Okay, we are now going to refer to ourselves as the U.S. Civil Air Patrol. Hope you like it!" It is a royal embarassment to everyone in the organization.
A CAP general circumventing a law that has been in place for 59 years is hardly an ancillary issue. When was the last time a CAP general did something like this?
You missed the point here. Whether we are USCAP or CAP isnt that big of a deal. I don't see it as an embarrassment to the members? How does this constitute embarassing them?
If the bylaws are amended to reflect the DBA or lists USCAP as one of the many names, its no big deal. I do agree that there is concern if the change is made without following through with the appropriate legal changes eventhough they should have been done in advance of the change.
As I said above
Quote from: LtCol White on June 05, 2007, 03:42:01 PM
Quote from: LtCol White on June 05, 2007, 03:11:08 PM
Quote from: 12211985 on June 05, 2007, 02:59:40 PM
The issue is not the moniker. The issue is how it got here. There was no formal legal name change or anything other than "Okay, we are now going to refer to ourselves as the U.S. Civil Air Patrol. Hope you like it!" It is a royal embarassment to everyone in the organization.
A CAP general circumventing a law that has been in place for 59 years is hardly an ancillary issue. When was the last time a CAP general did something like this?
You missed the point here. Whether we are USCAP or CAP isnt that big of a deal. I don't see it as an embarrassment to the members? How does this constitute embarassing them?
If the bylaws are amended to reflect the DBA or lists USCAP as one of the many names, its no big deal. I do agree that there is concern if the change is made without following through with the appropriate legal changes eventhough they should have been done in advance of the change.
As I said above
It's an embarassment because we have a Commander who refues, or doesn't care, about doing things properly. Then, he expects that we'll ignore those blatant illlegalities, or not be upset that it happened. Others in top management that do things illegally, get remnoved, or even tried. We have a person who's triyng to extend his reign by putting Wing Comanders that would elect him again.
OK, I can agree with that statement. Perhaps I misunderstood his earlier post where I thought he meant USCAP was embarrassing.
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:02:19 PM
We have a person who's triyng to extend his reign by putting Wing Comanders that would elect him again.
Let's keep this deabte in the realm of established facts, not innuendo or rumor.
Quote from: Major Carrales on June 05, 2007, 04:08:01 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:02:19 PM
We have a person who's triyng to extend his reign by putting Wing Comanders that would elect him again.
Let's keep this deabte in the realm of established facts, not innuendo or rumor.
Don't they say Clothes make the Man, or If it walks like a Duck, talks like a Duck, and looks like a Duck? I am not saying that he is or is not. All I'm saying is that it looks like he is- to some. do not, however, go off on that tangent. Please.
I should have put in he is/was trying to get the by-laws changed for extra/unlimited terms.
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:18:25 PM
Quote from: Major Carrales on June 05, 2007, 04:08:01 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:02:19 PM
We have a person who's triyng to extend his reign by putting Wing Comanders that would elect him again.
Let's keep this deabte in the realm of established facts, not innuendo or rumor.
Don't they say Clothes make the Man, or If it walks like a Duck, talks like a Duck, and looks like a Duck? I am not saying that he is or is not. All I'm saying is that it looks like he is- to some. do not, however, go off on that tangent. Please.
I should have put in he is/was trying to get the by-laws changed for extra/unlimited terms.
My friend, the tangent was of your design.
Quote from: Major Carrales on June 05, 2007, 04:22:20 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:18:25 PM
Quote from: Major Carrales on June 05, 2007, 04:08:01 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:02:19 PM
We have a person who's triyng to extend his reign by putting Wing Comanders that would elect him again.
Let's keep this deabte in the realm of established facts, not innuendo or rumor.
Don't they say Clothes make the Man, or If it walks like a Duck, talks like a Duck, and looks like a Duck? I am not saying that he is or is not. All I'm saying is that it looks like he is- to some. do not, however, go off on that tangent. Please.
I should have put in he is/was trying to get the by-laws changed for extra/unlimited terms.
My friend, the tangent was of your design.
I know, and I was wrong, trying to end that one.
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:18:25 PM
Quote from: Major Carrales on June 05, 2007, 04:08:01 PM
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 05, 2007, 04:02:19 PM
We have a person who's triyng to extend his reign by putting Wing Comanders that would elect him again.
Let's keep this deabte in the realm of established facts, not innuendo or rumor.
Don't they say Clothes make the Man, or If it walks like a Duck, talks like a Duck, and looks like a Duck? I am not saying that he is or is not. All I'm saying is that it looks like he is- to some. do not, however, go off on that tangent. Please.
I should have put in he is/was trying to get the by-laws changed for extra/unlimited terms.
Come to think of it...he does waddle when he walks. ;D