I've been told that the reason CAP mandated wear of the American flag patch on the BDU was because the ultramarine blue nametapes and insignia weren't enough to clash against the woodland camouflage, so they needed another contrasting color.
Can anyone confirm this?
UHH.......too many members forgot which Civil Air Patrol they were in, just looking at the Civil Air Patrol tape on the BDU's was too confusing. This was way before the geniuses decided to throw U.S. on the tapes. Good thing too, cause every time I forgot I was in the US CAP, I always seemed to forget to look at my flag patch. Now all I have to do is look at my U.S. Civil Air Patrol tape!
Quote from: 12211985 on April 02, 2007, 11:03:46 PM
I've been told that the reason CAP mandated wear of the American flag patch on the BDU was because the ultramarine blue nametapes and insignia weren't enough to clash against the woodland camouflage, so they needed another contrasting color.
Can anyone confirm this?
I don't know the real reason but that definitely wasn't it. Even Stevie Wonder can see a CAP member in BDU's.
Not to mention the fact that the US Army wears the flag the same way, so we'd still look like active duty military, even with a flag.
I sincerely think it was a two-fold reason. First, to be more patriotic. Even security guards wear the US flag! Second, to look more like the active duty military. At the time, all US Army soldiers and some USAF airmen wore reverse flags on their bdus. I'm guessing the suggestion was from a prior service soldier out of nostalgia and was supported by people from NHQ for the first reason.
Personally, even though I'm prior USAFR, the flag isn't an issue to me. I'm an American. I am proud to wear our nation's colors on my uniform. At worst, it reminds me that I'm in service to my country and not necessarily my corporate superiors.
Like most major CAP decisions, you have about a 10% chance of finding any documentation of why we did it, what alternatives were considered, or what we thought would happen. The change to US Civil Air Patrol name tapes was literally about a 20 second speech from MG Pineda which didn't make a whole lot of sense.....thats it. Probably happened about the same way for this change.
The answer is simple: Vanguard was overstocked. >:D
Quote from: mikeylikey1 on April 03, 2007, 01:06:10 AM
UHH.......too many members forgot which Civil Air Patrol they were in, just looking at the Civil Air Patrol tape on the BDU's was too confusing. This was way before the geniuses decided to throw U.S. on the tapes. Good thing too, cause every time I forgot I was in the US CAP, I always seemed to forget to look at my flag patch. Now all I have to do is look at my U.S. Civil Air Patrol tape!
Well it's possible...
http://www.auscap.org.au/ (http://www.auscap.org.au/)
Ok, I just wanted to ask if there is a rule stating we cant have subdued tapes and flags?
I mean I MIGHT even go along with the US CAP tape and accept the Flag IF they were subdued.
Im not asking out of a desire to play AD but, the simple fact is: everytime Im in BDUs and see my reflection I cring. :)
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on April 03, 2007, 07:16:42 AM
Ok, I just wanted to ask if there is a rule stating we cant have subdued tapes and flags?
I mean I MIGHT even go along with the US CAP tape and accept the Flag IF they were subdued.
Im not asking out of a desire to play AD but, the simple fact is: everytime Im in BDUs and see my reflection I cring. :)
The Army wears color flags in the US, not that it matters. I don't really like wearing it cause it's not continuity with the AF.
Whcih saying that has gotten me jumped on by some when I go one to say we should wear fewer patches when the AF wears lots on BDUs. I don't like what the Af does on that subject, but I'd be happy to go along with it if our patches weren't a rainbow bright exposion of distracting & tacky color.
Certainly most of us know how you feel & are sympathetic. It's mainly a professional image meeting outsider expectations thing to me. Anyway, NO there is no rule as such, just the AF needing to approve requested changes, and those have to be justified in writing & considered by the AETC uniform board or the CC himself.
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 07:31:48 AM
Certainly most of us know how you feel & are sympathetic. It's mainly a professional image meeting outsider expectations thing to me.
Then why are you so adamant about getting rid of the BDU's and USAF blues all together?
Subdued colors would make look like posers. The alternitive to subdued would be to eliminate all patches except name, rank and brank insignia.
Quote from: SAR-EMT1
Ok, I just wanted to ask if there is a rule stating we cant have subdued tapes and flags?
I mean I MIGHT even go along with the US CAP tape and accept the Flag IF they were subdued.
Im not asking out of a desire to play AD but, the simple fact is: everytime Im in BDUs and see my reflection I cring.
:P What fun is that, sir? I say we put every patch on the BDU that we are authorized...specialty patches, ES Patch, CPR/First Aid Patch, squadron patch, etc. If it'll fit, sew it on.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 03, 2007, 09:23:49 AM
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 07:31:48 AM
Certainly most of us know how you feel & are sympathetic. It's mainly a professional image meeting outsider expectations thing to me.
Then why are you so adamant about getting rid of the BDU's and USAF blues all together?
Subdued colors would make look like posers. The alternitive to subdued would be to eliminate all patches except name, rank and brank insignia.
He has never said get rid of the BDU and USAF blues......where did you pick that up from??
This is just me speaking now, I prefer a more minimal look on our field uniforms. Name tape, CAP tape, American Flag, maybe a cloth specialty badge. Multiple specialty badges and numerous activity patches pushes the uniform to looking like a boy scout uniform. Just add a sash and we can do the whole merit badge thing too.
I feel strongly that we should wear the U.S. Flag on our uniform but not reversed. That needs to be reserved for combat forces. For numerous reasons but mainly out of pride.
I probably missed it, but did the Air Force authorize CAP in writing to add the American Flag to the Uniform? Can anyone point me to that directive?
Capt. Lord
Quote from: LtCol White on April 03, 2007, 01:06:55 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on April 03, 2007, 09:23:49 AM
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 07:31:48 AM
Certainly most of us know how you feel & are sympathetic. It's mainly a professional image meeting outsider expectations thing to me.
Then why are you so adamant about getting rid of the BDU's and USAF blues all together?
Subdued colors would make look like posers. The alternative to subdued would be to eliminate all patches except name, rank and Branch insignia.
He has never said get rid of the BDU and USAF blues......where did you pick that up from??
No...I have suggest that we lose the USAF style uniforms so that we present a professional impression to outsiders.
Quote from: Major_Chuck on April 03, 2007, 02:55:58 PMI feel strongly that we should wear the U.S. Flag on our uniform but not reversed. That needs to be reserved for combat forces. For numerous reasons but mainly out of pride.
The only reason why the US ARMY wear the reverse flag is because they already wear a patch there. Let's not start adding new false symbolism to the reverse flag.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 03, 2007, 04:36:37 PM
I probably missed it, but did the Air Force authorize CAP in writing to add the American Flag to the Uniform? Can anyone point me to that directive?
Capt. Lord
Can anyone find the directive that says the USAF has final say so on our uniforms? But I digress. When the USAF approves uniform changes...at the most they sign a staff summer sheet or hack off on that portion of the NB minutes. They don't publish the USAF approval, they just send out the memo.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 03, 2007, 09:23:49 AM
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 07:31:48 AM
Certainly most of us know how you feel & are sympathetic. It's mainly a professional image meeting outsider expectations thing to me.
Then why are you so adamant about getting rid of the BDU's and USAF blues all together?
I assume you meant "adamant of NOT getting rid of"? As in you believe we SHOULD get rid of AF-style unifroms so that we can have CAP members looking like each other & not worry about the AF.
Well, I'll say again, if we were an independent volunteer org that exists to do community service well then it's not neccessary to wear ANY uniform, a clip on ID would be fine.
But that's not what we are. The purpose of any uniforms at all is to state solidarity with the AF, to draw credibility from them, and to set the AF example over our cadets & subordinates. That's it. It's more important to look like the AF than it is to look like each other. That's not completely possible, but we do our best as an organization.
QuoteSubdued colors would make look like posers. The alternitive to subdued would be to eliminate all patches except name, rank and brank insignia.
You think there's anyone that believes that who doesn't already think you're a poser for wearing a uniform in the first place? Screw them, they're idiots. Let me show you why...
(Analogy, not my opinion)
The ANG is really just posers right? I mean they're part-time punks doing the very minimum to stay qualified, and if we're short in an emergency we can tap the cream of that crop to be the worst guys in an active duty unit. They're all just playing real AF though, the wusses.That'd get you knocked out wouldn't it? Now why is that? Why is the part time ANG not posers for wearing the SAME uniform as active duty, but the part-time auxiliary are posers for wearing a modified uniform that looks kinda like the AF? You think maybe it has to do with training to stadards they'd expect of themselves? You think maybe not meeting those standards would get you disrespected no matter what you wear? Okay then, lets do that as nearly as reasonablly possible, and lets put uniforms in the hands of the AF to decide in conjunction with their judgement on how well we meet those standards (ie how closely they want us related to them by outsiders).
On a side-note, yeah I would agree with minimizing the patches for now, but working toward subdued. I think you look like more of a poser when you draw attention to the differences between yourself and the military.
I think the public has no idea what CAP is, and never will. The only uniforms they know exist are police or military. When they see you they will categorize you as military & will believe you meet military qualification standards & have the full backing, resources, and capabilities of DoD - that you're the best in the country for this job.
If you don't live up to their expectations for what the military should look & act like then they will lose confidence in your credibility & capability. If you actually explain to them you're a bunch of civilian volunteers with minimal training, well that's not the person they want running the search. They want a top of the line expert & they're going to freak if they don't believe they are looking at one. Again, actually meeting those standards would be desirable, but meeting the expectations of their perception is the minimum you must do to accomplish the mission.
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 06:15:02 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on April 03, 2007, 09:23:49 AM
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 07:31:48 AM
Certainly most of us know how you feel & are sympathetic. It's mainly a professional image meeting outsider expectations thing to me.
Then why are you so adamant about getting rid of the BDU's and USAF blues all together?
I assume you meant "adamant of NOT getting rid of"? As in you believe we SHOULD get rid of AF-style unifroms so that we can have CAP members looking like each other & not worry about the AF.
Well, I'll say again, if we were an independent volunteer org that exists to do community service well then it's not neccessary to wear ANY uniform, a clip on ID would be fine.
But that's not what we are. The purpose of any uniforms at all is to state solidarity with the AF, to draw credibility from them, and to set the AF example over our cadets & subordinates. That's it. It's more important to look like the AF than it is to look like each other. That's not completely possible, but we do our best as an organization.
QuoteSubdued colors would make look like posers. The alternitive to subdued would be to eliminate all patches except name, rank and brank insignia.
You think there's anyone that believes that who doesn't already think you're a poser for wearing a uniform in the first place? Screw them, they're idiots. Let me show you why...
(Analogy, not my opinion)
The ANG is really just posers right? I mean they're part-time punks doing the very minimum to stay qualified, and if we're short in an emergency we can tap the cream of that crop to be the worst guys in an active duty unit. They're all just playing real AF though, the wusses.
That'd get you knocked out wouldn't it? Now why is that? Why is the part time ANG not posers for wearing the SAME uniform as active duty, but the part-time auxiliary are posers for wearing a modified uniform that looks kinda like the AF? You think maybe it has to do with training to stadards they'd expect of themselves? You think maybe not meeting those standards would get you disrespected no matter what you wear? Okay then, lets do that as nearly as reasonablly possible, and lets put uniforms in the hands of the AF to decide in conjunction with their judgement on how well we meet those standards (ie how closely they want us related to them by outsiders).
On a side-note, yeah I would agree with minimizing the patches for now, but working toward subdued. I think you look like more of a poser when you draw attention to the differences between yourself and the military.
I think the public has no idea what CAP is, and never will. The only uniforms they know exist are police or military. When they see you they will categorize you as military & will believe you meet military qualification standards & have the full backing, resources, and capabilities of DoD - that you're the best in the country for this job.
If you don't live up to their expectations for what the military should look & act like then they will lose confidence in your credibility & capability. If you actually explain to them you're a bunch of civilian volunteers with minimal training, well that's not the person they want running the search. They want a top of the line expert & they're going to freak if they don't believe they are looking at one. Again, actually meeting those standards would be desirable, but meeting the expectations of their perception is the minimum you must do to accomplish the mission.
Well said.
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 06:15:02 PMI assume you meant "adamant of NOT getting rid of"? As in you believe we SHOULD get rid of AF-style unifroms so that we can have CAP members looking like each other & not worry about the AF.
Well, I'll say again, if we were an independent volunteer org that exists to do community service well then it's not neccessary to wear ANY uniform, a clip on ID would be fine.
But that's not what we are. The purpose of any uniforms at all is to state solidarity with the AF, to draw credibility from them, and to set the AF example over our cadets & subordinates. That's it. It's more important to look like the AF than it is to look like each other. That's not completely possible, but we do our best as an organization.
You mean we fail at it. I disagree with both of your statments about uniforms. Sure we could go with just an ID clip....but we could also go with anything we wanted. We do not wear uniforms to show our solidarity with the USAF....we wear uniforms to show solidarity with ourselves. AND that is where we are making the mistakes.
Quote from: DNall on April 03, 2007, 06:15:02 PM(Analogy, not my opinion)
The ANG is really just posers right? I mean they're part-time punks doing the very minimum to stay qualified, and if we're short in an emergency we can tap the cream of that crop to be the worst guys in an active duty unit. They're all just playing real AF though, the wusses.
That'd get you knocked out wouldn't it? Now why is that? Why is the part time ANG not posers for wearing the SAME uniform as active duty, but the part-time auxiliary are posers for wearing a modified uniform that looks kinda like the AF? You think maybe it has to do with training to stadards they'd expect of themselves? You think maybe not meeting those standards would get you disrespected no matter what you wear? Okay then, lets do that as nearly as reasonablly possible, and lets put uniforms in the hands of the AF to decide in conjunction with their judgement on how well we meet those standards (ie how closely they want us related to them by outsiders).
Sure....let's do that....I have never said we should not/could not do that. Now look around your squadron....how many would be gone? How long do you thing CAP would last if we required PT test annually? 80% of my squadron would be gone. I need say nothing more than that.
We are the CAP...not the USAF nor the ANG or USAFR. We have not combat duties and no need to be subdued. The only reason why you want to be subdued is to be more like the USAF.....that is by definition a poser....you are NOT the USAF. The ANG is not posers because they are the USAF...just the not the ACTIVE DUTY component.
Actually, the 39-1 (1-1) clearly spells out that the authority is vested in the CAP CC and USAF HQ. A thinner skinned person might infer that your answer means that CAP can create, modify, and authorize changes to the AF uniform at their sole discretion. May I assume from your response that you have reason to believe that we have no Air Force authorization to mandate the flag wear? You seemt o be a strict constructioneinst on many CAP regs, but this one seems to be a little more flexible. Am I misunderstanding you?
Capt. Lord
Quote from: lordmonar on April 04, 2007, 12:23:21 AM
You mean we fail at it. I disagree with both of your statments about uniforms. Sure we could go with just an ID clip....but we could also go with anything we wanted. We do not wear uniforms to show our solidarity with the USAF....we wear uniforms to show solidarity with ourselves. AND that is where we are making the mistakes.
I understand you & I fundamentally disagree as to the nature of CAP & flowing from that comes the nature of uniform policy.
I would say the boy scouts wear uniforms to show solidarity with themselves. There's a reason the AF decided to allow wear of an AF-style uniform, and that they retain gevernance of that uniform. I would argue that is for the reasons I've stated, and have heard exactly that from a former CAP-USAF CC. I can't tell you what the views of the CSAF, SAF, current CAP-USAF/CC, CAP/CC, NEC or NB are on the subject, I have no idea, but I strongly believe the reasons I stated are highly placed on that list.
Beyond that we'd just have to agree to disagree, respectfully.
QuoteSure....let's do that....I have never said we should not/could not do that. Now look around your squadron....how many would be gone? How long do you thing CAP would last if we required PT test annually? 80% of my squadron would be gone. I need say nothing more than that.
You want to talk PD for just a second, that's fine... The reasonable standard I mentioned is in my mind: 10-20% off the top of all requirements for reserve personnel in grade, and excludes PT. That's what we've discussed before & I'd stand by that. I think the place for a PFT is in NIMS compliance, but I'd also appreicate a self-paced health & wellness program for the rest of our members too, nothing serious or overboard.
How many people would be gone? That's a fair question I don't think anyone can answer. Let me ask you how many missions we're held back from for our lack of capability? Again I don't think that can be answered, but we're not exactly the shade under full-time firefighter SaR experts we'd should be.
I'd tell you we don't know how many people we have now. The national number is somewhere around 54k last I heard, but the literal majority of that is inactive, and that also includes sponsor, patron, & AE members. The active ES qual'd (over GES) number as near as we could estimate base don avail data was well under 12k, and the majority of that is cadets. I'd tell you we're near rock bottom now, and a smooth programmed restart would be highly benefitial to the org.
As far as people leaving, I'm not scared of that at all. Our recruiting & retention numbers indicate people are replaced just as quickly as they leave, and the main reason they leave is the org doesn't have it's crap together & doesn't actually do the real-deal stuff they joined to be part of. Or if it does then they don't get a shot at it till they've paid their dues for several years & played some politics to get in with the right crowd.
I think a redesigned program that ignores the fear you're talking about & presses ahead would then attract a whole new class og higher speed members that would take to such a program & do a lot better job by our missions than we are doing now.
QuoteWe are the CAP...not the USAF nor the ANG or USAFR. We have not combat duties and no need to be subdued. The only reason why you want to be subdued is to be more like the USAF.....that is by definition a poser....you are NOT the USAF. The ANG is not posers because they are the USAF...just the not the ACTIVE DUTY component.
Actually we are the AF Auxiliary & I'd argue as much a part of the AF as the ANG is, especially when they are on title 32 duty. Everything else is a matter of fine lines & gray area. As I said before, I think a big part of why the AF has us wearing AF-style uniforms is cause they want out members thinking that way, but still knowing the limits.
Far as combat, the majority of the military doesn't have a direct action combat job. Hell in the AF it's under 10%. The AF is by definition a support service, and we are a support service for them. Certainly we aren't trying to hide from anyone on our missions though, I've never said we were. The problem w/ the current color explosion is it's embarassing & makes you look like a poser. I know for a fact when the pubic sees that it creates doubt that you are something official that the AF would send to rescue anyone. They don't understand what they are seeing so they don't have a way putting it in any other box. To them you are either the military or some kind of whack jobs out trying to pull something over on them. The extent to which you play into their pre-concieved expectations is the extent of the credibility they'll lend you. That's the facts regardless of how we feel about it.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 04, 2007, 01:01:50 AM
Actually, the 39-1 (1-1) clearly spells out that the authority is vested in the CAP CC and USAF HQ. A thinner skinned person might infer that your answer means that CAP can create, modify, and authorize changes to the AF uniform at their sole discretion. May I assume from your response that you have reason to believe that we have no Air Force authorization to mandate the flag wear? You seemt o be a strict constructioneinst on many CAP regs, but this one seems to be a little more flexible. Am I misunderstanding you?
If I could draw you attention to the word
"AND", that would indicate that both the CAP/CC & AF/HQ have to agree on changes or they cannot be made. We all have a pretty fair understanding of how that works. And Pat is correct that there would not be a lot of publicly released documentation to support permission being given.
I don't know if it was sought & given in that case. I would have to assume it was. In general the AF is not going to deny something like that which is generally meaningless to their purpose. I might do something different in that chair, but it's all well above my paygrade.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 04, 2007, 01:01:50 AM
Actually, the 39-1 (1-1) clearly spells out that the authority is vested in the CAP CC and USAF HQ. A thinner skinned person might infer that your answer means that CAP can create, modify, and authorize changes to the AF uniform at their sole discretion. May I assume from your response that you have reason to believe that we have no Air Force authorization to mandate the flag wear? You seem to be a strict constructioneinst on many CAP regs, but this one seems to be a little more flexible. Am I misunderstanding you?
Capt. Lord
Well...I have been part of AFJROTC and AFROTC....and as far as I know...there is NO definitive regulation on how to wear those uniforms. I know there are lots of local detachment regulations...but really....they could just about wear anything they wanted to (up to and including a drill team in flight suits and chrome helmets).
OUR regulations spell out that the USAF will have final authority on USAF-style uniforms....but the USAF's AFIs say nothing about them having that authority. USC give the SECAF authority to say who can and can't wear uniforms.....but it also says that military organizations may wear uniforms with out military approval provided they wear a patch on the shoulder (such as the ACS does).
What I am getting at is....as far as I have read...the only reason why the USAF can veto changes to the USAF style uniforms is because we (CAP) says they can.
----->FLAME SHIELD<------
I AM NOT ADVOCATING THAT WE JUST DO WHAT WE WANT!
I am only pointing out that what we thing is written down in stone is not in fact written down much at all.
As for me being a little lax on the 39-1 interpetation.....it's because I know the USAF ignores it when ever they feel like it. We on active duty know where the hard lines are drawn and where you have a lot of lee way. So I don't get bent out of shape when CAP (or part of CAP) does something that is "against regulations". I think looking uniformed and professional are the most important factors.
^ I'm not saying you're right or wrong on that. SAF interprets (by tradition) AF authority over who gets to wear the uniform to mean they approve each little item that goes on "their" uniform. Ultimately they have the power to revoke wearing it &/or to cut back or off our funding. So he who has the gold makes the rules. ACA isn't formally affiliated with & doesn't get any money from the Army (some facility support), so they can do pretty much what they want & there's little penalty that can be imposed. Plus as a cadet based org they are going to get similiar treatment to JROTC.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 04, 2007, 04:53:37 AM
As for me being a little lax on the 39-1 interpetation.....it's because I know the USAF ignores it when ever they feel like it. We on active duty know where the hard lines are drawn and where you have a lot of lee way. So I don't get bent out of shape when CAP (or part of CAP) does something that is "against regulations". I think looking uniformed and professional are the most important factors.
On that we agree. It's defining what that means & why that we run into difficulty. What you're talking about though is a corrective culture that CAP doesn't have. Which is then compounded by standards... they look at our quality standards & have aproblem with the public thinking everyone in the AF is like this CAP member. That's understandable & needs a lot of work on our end.
I really am much more sympathetic to CAP members though. They get used hand-me-downs & rejected items, have to buy all their own stuff, don't have a mil expert cleaners around the corner to sew everything one perfect & crease it just right each week, they got a couple uniforms, not multiple sof the same things... it takes a lot of time to do it all yourself & just right, especially if you don't have any formal training or a boss standing over you making you do it right with serious consequences if you don't.
I just want to say Ive had folks accuse me of being a poser for wearing our current uniform: because they happen to be a vet and the color explosion looks all wrong. Ive also had a police officer give me grief - again, he was a vet- because I was in BDUs and the patches were totally unfamiliar... got even worse when -after Id said I was CAP/ AF-Aux he pointed out that while the Army wears flags, the Air Force does not. ...
- personal note: A year back my unit had a retired Army CSM sign up, his first reaction upon seeing our BDUs was "You're kidding right? " His second was, "Ok, LT, but WHY the heck arent they subdued? "
I just think subdued would help improve our image and public relations.
And that barring that, we need to ditch as many 'extra' patches as possible.
As for needing subdued because Im a poser and not a part of the USAF...
no offense, but:
As long as my membership card says "USAF Aux" then I consider myself to be part of the Total Force. - AD, Res, ANG, Aux, Civilian
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on April 04, 2007, 09:19:27 AM
I just want to say Ive had folks accuse me of being a poser for wearing our current uniform: because they happen to be a vet and the color explosion looks all wrong. Ive also had a police officer give me grief - again, he was a vet- because I was in BDUs and the patches were totally unfamiliar... got even worse when -after Id said I was CAP/ AF-Aux he pointed out that while the Army wears flags, the Air Force does not. ...
- personal note: A year back my unit had a retired Army CSM sign up, his first reaction upon seeing our BDUs was "You're kidding right? " His second was, "Ok, LT, but WHY the heck arent they subdued? "
I just think subdued would help improve our image and public relations.
And that barring that, we need to ditch as many 'extra' patches as possible.
As for needing subdued because Im a poser and not a part of the USAF...
no offense, but:
As long as my membership card says "USAF Aux" then I consider myself to be part of the Total Force. - AD, Res, ANG, Aux, Civilian
I've often got the reaction of "Civil Air Patrol still exists?" Usually it's WWII vets.
I have rarely been approached about the smurf explosion on my BDU, but I'm sure more people think it than say something.
Quote from: JC004 on April 04, 2007, 01:26:10 PM
I've often got the reaction of "Civil Air Patrol still exists?" Usually it's WWII vets.
That was my first thought when I heard about it.
Its funny, nobody has EVER called my a "Poser" or any other derogatory name when I'm in CAP uniform.
I don't wear anything on my BDU's that looks silly, except the wing patch, and that's required by the wing HQ. I wear my name, CAP, wings, GT Badge, and flag.
If a cop, vet, or anybody else who can't mind his own business were to call me a "Poser," I would probably grab my crotch and say: "Pose this" or something equally belligerent.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on April 04, 2007, 09:09:29 PM
Its funny, nobody has EVER called my a "Poser" or any other derogatory name when I'm in CAP uniform.
I don't wear anything on my BDU's that looks silly, except the wing patch, and that's required by the wing HQ. I wear my name, CAP, wings, GT Badge, and flag.
If a cop, vet, or anybody else who can't mind his own business were to call me a "Poser," I would probably grab my crotch and say: "Pose this" or something equally belligerent.
So long as there were no Cadets around . . . . .
It's not that anyone would care if they were called a poser or not. It's what people don't say. That look on their face or "OH" with the downward inflection when they thought the special forces of military SaR was coming to save the world & take care of their little issue, and what they see is raibow bright & the girl scout troop. They suddenly don't have the confidence in your ability to go find their loved ones, or that you are really there on official orders from the AF (I've been asked for written orders a few times, by cops among other things). All I'm saying is the more you play into what they expect to see, the less they will question the confidence & credibility that comes with wearing the uniform. That is how I would define professional image in our case.
Vangard is overstocked. That's priceless. I feel I'm fairly qualified to answer this question since I'm currently a MSGT in the USAFR and a CAP LTC that has served as a sqadron commander, ground team leader, wing chief of staff and region staff.
Someone (Nat CC) or some members (Wing CC's) thought it would look cool to emulate the US Army since they are on the news every night. Hence the US Civil Air Patrol tapes and American flag. The army wears the flag on all ACU's since they are often deployed overseas. The US Air Force only wears the flag on flight suits for the same reason. All Armed Forces wear US as part of their name tags for the same reason.
And I'm only going to say this once...STOP THE INSANITY, we are not and never have been and never will be deployed overseas, ever, period, end of story. We are constantly inventing more garbage to place on our uniforms to make some of us feel important or like the "real" military. It needs to stop. It is our job as general members of CAP to inform our wing commanders to advise the National Board to change this erred policy.
We are the only official Auxiliary of any of the Armed Forces and since we are the Auxiliary of the USAF it is in our best interest to represent them accordingly. Other posts are quite correct in saying we have an obligation to wear the uniform correctly and are often mistaken for "real" military due to incorrect public perceptions. Enough of my ranting, not enough of our membership believes what I'm saying or the few other CAP members that are US Air Force members who also believe me.
Semper Gumby (Always Flexible)
Quote from: Former_C/LTC on April 05, 2007, 05:05:34 PM
...we are not and never have been and never will be deployed overseas, ever, period, end of story...
That's the next change: "U.S. Air Patrol" ;D
Quote from: JC004 on April 05, 2007, 06:49:31 PM
Quote from: Former_C/LTC on April 05, 2007, 05:05:34 PM
...we are not and never have been and never will be deployed overseas, ever, period, end of story...
That's the next change: "U.S. Air Patrol" ;D
Hmmm...I like the sound of that!!!
How about US AIR FARCE....................then we would use the USAF abbreviation :o
Quote from: LtCol White on April 05, 2007, 06:54:15 PM
How about US AIR FARCE....................then we would use the USAF abbreviation :o
I still stand behind my idea of a strip on the pocket below the CAP tape that says "Former Auxiliary - US Air Force" :o
Quote from: JC004 on April 05, 2007, 06:56:18 PMI still stand behind my idea of a strip on the pocket below the CAP tape that says "Former Auxiliary - US Air Force" :o
Or just wear your "Aux On / Aux Off" patch (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1345.0) and flip it accordingly. ;)
Quote from: Major_Chuck on April 03, 2007, 02:55:58 PM
I feel strongly that we should wear the U.S. Flag on our uniform but not reversed. That needs to be reserved for combat forces.
The reason we wear the reversed flag is because the Union should be closest to the heart, hence the reversed flag on the right shoulder. It has nothing to do with combat.
As for all the comments regarding being called a "poser", I've never been called that or any other name. Maybe it has to do with the way you present yourself in uniform. If your uniform is clean and pressed and your boots are polished and you present a professional image, I see no reason for anyone to disrespect you.
Quote from: brasda91 on April 07, 2007, 01:32:49 AM
Quote from: Major_Chuck on April 03, 2007, 02:55:58 PM
I feel strongly that we should wear the U.S. Flag on our uniform but not reversed. That needs to be reserved for combat forces.
The reason we wear the reversed flag is because the Union should be closest to the heart, hence the reversed flag on the right shoulder. It has nothing to do with combat.
Uh, no that's not quite it.
The union of the flag (the part with the stars in it) is always supposed to be going forward.
So if you wear the flag on your left shoulder it would face one way and if you wore it on the right side it would face the other way.
Same rule applies to aircraft and "vessels" too. Basic rule, if it moves the union should be going forward.
Quote from: PHall on April 07, 2007, 02:02:35 AM
Quote from: brasda91 on April 07, 2007, 01:32:49 AM
Quote from: Major_Chuck on April 03, 2007, 02:55:58 PM
I feel strongly that we should wear the U.S. Flag on our uniform but not reversed. That needs to be reserved for combat forces.
The reason we wear the reversed flag is because the Union should be closest to the heart, hence the reversed flag on the right shoulder. It has nothing to do with combat.
Uh, no that's not quite it.
The union of the flag (the part with the stars in it) is always supposed to be going forward.
So if you wear the flag on your left shoulder it would face one way and if you wore it on the right side it would face the other way.
Same rule applies to aircraft and "vessels" too. Basic rule, if it moves the union should be going forward.
Exactly correct
Quote from: PHall on April 07, 2007, 02:02:35 AM
Quote from: brasda91 on April 07, 2007, 01:32:49 AM
Quote from: Major_Chuck on April 03, 2007, 02:55:58 PM
I feel strongly that we should wear the U.S. Flag on our uniform but not reversed. That needs to be reserved for combat forces.
The reason we wear the reversed flag is because the Union should be closest to the heart, hence the reversed flag on the right shoulder. It has nothing to do with combat.
Uh, no that's not quite it.
The union of the flag (the part with the stars in it) is always supposed to be going forward.
So if you wear the flag on your left shoulder it would face one way and if you wore it on the right side it would face the other way.
Same rule applies to aircraft and "vessels" too. Basic rule, if it moves the union should be going forward.
You're saying the same thing I said. And yes
I have heard that the Union should be closest to the heart.
For flag patches worn on uniforms, the blue star field always faces towards the front, with the red and white stripes behind. Think of the flag, not as a patch, but as a loose flag attached to the Soldier's arm like a flag pole. As the Soldier moves forward, the red and white stripes will flow to the back. As the proponent for standardization and authorization of heraldry items within the Department of Defense, the Institute of Heraldry addresses the apparent oddity of the reverse flag patch by stating, "When worn on the right sleeve, it is considered proper to reverse the design so that the union is at the observer's right to suggest that the flag is flying in the breeze as the wearer moves forward."
Quote from: PHall on April 07, 2007, 02:02:35 AM
The union of the flag (the part with the stars in it) is always supposed to be going forward. So if you wear the flag on your left shoulder it would face one way and if you wore it on the right side it would face the other way.
This is the RULE for it, and the official symbolism behind the rule. Some LE agencies wear a flag over the right chest pocket, and that's a standard flag, which is correct, and would place the union/field away from the heart. That's all there is to it.
The issue with combat is that the flag on mil uniforms is that it's an overseas flag worn by troops in theater with multiple allies so you can identify who is on your side despite the dif uniforms (as if we know all the flags). It is breaking the rule to wear it domestically in time of peace. The Army chose to have all their people wear it to demonstrate they're all at war & solidarity with troops in the field. The AF didn't choose to break with tradition & make up symbolic tradition as they go, so most people don't think CAP should do so either.
Oh boy, this is what I get for coming into a conversation late in the game ...
Quote from: 12211985 on April 02, 2007, 11:03:46 PM
I've been told that the reason CAP mandated wear of the American flag patch on the BDU was because the ultramarine blue nametapes and insignia weren't enough to clash against the woodland camouflage, so they needed another contrasting color.
Can anyone confirm this?
I love it when I say something sarcastically ... then it gets quoted as an actual statement and then someone goes off and tries to verify it. Dude, I really wasn't serious when I said that.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 04, 2007, 01:01:50 AM
Actually, the 39-1 (1-1) clearly spells out that the authority is vested in the CAP CC and USAF HQ.
Yep... CAPM 39-1 covers the policy from their end, and AFI 10-2701 has similar policy, specifically "The Air Force controls the configuration of the Air Force-style uniform worn by CAP members." to cover it from their end.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 04, 2007, 04:53:37 AM
Well...I have been part of AFJROTC and AFROTC....and as far as I know...there is NO definitive regulation on how to wear those uniforms.
AFOATSI 36-2001 Chapter 5 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/afoatsi36-2001.pdf) for AFJROTC, and AFROTCI 36-2008 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/36-2008.pdf) for AFROTC.
Quote from: mclarty on April 07, 2007, 06:18:33 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on April 04, 2007, 04:53:37 AM
Well...I have been part of AFJROTC and AFROTC....and as far as I know...there is NO definitive regulation on how to wear those uniforms.
AFOATSI 36-2001 Chapter 5 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/afoatsi36-2001.pdf) for AFJROTC, and AFROTCI 36-2008 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/36-2008.pdf) for AFROTC.
I think he just meant the wide lattitude local commanders have to add/take away stuff. Much like our Wg/CC have some latitude on things like cords & junk like that.
Quote from: DNall on April 07, 2007, 06:37:18 PM
I think he just meant the wide lattitude local commanders have to add/take away stuff. Much like our Wg/CC have some latitude on things like cords & junk like that.
I think it's more a symptom of detached locations without anyone watching versus official latitude to modify the standard... kinda like M*A*S*H.
No doubt, as is the case in CAP to our detriment, but I thnk there is some lattitude for school ribbons, sabre cords, & junk like that. Moreso in JROTC than the college side. Pat may not be fully aware of this, but those regs you mentioned were significantly revised recently. AFROTC really stripped down the ribbond big time. You can;t even wear all your active duty ribbons. It's downright McPeak looking. JROTC on the other hand tend to look like 20 star admirals of Nebraska. That's more a function of rewarding short attention spans, which CAP does a lot of too, unfortunately it seems to carry over with the adults as well.
Quote from: mclarty on April 07, 2007, 06:18:33 PM
Oh boy, this is what I get for coming into a conversation late in the game ...
Quote from: 12211985 on April 02, 2007, 11:03:46 PM
I've been told that the reason CAP mandated wear of the American flag patch on the BDU was because the ultramarine blue nametapes and insignia weren't enough to clash against the woodland camouflage, so they needed another contrasting color.
Can anyone confirm this?
I love it when I say something sarcastically ... then it gets quoted as an actual statement and then someone goes off and tries to verify it. Dude, I really wasn't serious when I said that.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 04, 2007, 01:01:50 AM
Actually, the 39-1 (1-1) clearly spells out that the authority is vested in the CAP CC and USAF HQ.
Yep... CAPM 39-1 covers the policy from their end, and AFI 10-2701 has similar policy, specifically "The Air Force controls the configuration of the Air Force-style uniform worn by CAP members." to cover it from their end.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 04, 2007, 04:53:37 AM
Well...I have been part of AFJROTC and AFROTC....and as far as I know...there is NO definitive regulation on how to wear those uniforms.
AFOATSI 36-2001 Chapter 5 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/afoatsi36-2001.pdf) for AFJROTC, and AFROTCI 36-2008 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/36-2008.pdf) for AFROTC.
You have a gift for research! I have seen many-a- post where CAP "old timers" deny that a regulation exists and challenges your authority to deny it! When caught, they fall back on the "standard practice" argument. Out F***'n standing work! Do you concur that we added the added the flag without USAF approval? I still have not seen any proof to the contrary.
Semper Vigilante!
Capt. Lord
Quote from: CaptLord on April 07, 2007, 07:42:50 PM
You have a gift for research! I have seen many-a- post where CAP "old timers" deny that a regulation exists and challenges your authority to deny it! When caught, they fall back on the "standard practice" argument. Out F***'n standing work! Do you concur that we added the added the flag without USAF approval? I still have not seen any proof to the contrary.
I've come across a lot of regs since being in the game, and I remember where I saw them because I know I'll use them one day. :) I honestly don't know about the flag ... I suspect it was presented to CAP-USAF during a staff meeting one day, they shrugged and said it didn't matter to them, so they implemented it.
Quote from: mclarty on April 07, 2007, 09:43:13 PM
I honestly don't know about the flag ... I suspect it was presented to CAP-USAF during a staff meeting one day, they shrugged and said it didn't matter to them, so they implemented it.
Nice to have that due dilligence staffing done so efficiently. :D
Really, there won't be a formal AF publication to the world saying they've authorized something. The only thing you'll see is NB approve it & then down the road it'll just appear in regs or a policy letter stating phase-in/out dates or whatver. Technically there should be a memo on file from the AETC/CC on file at NHQ, but I'm not promising you they kept a copy or that it ever existed in the first place. Personally, if I'm waiting on an approval from a LtGen & his aid calls to say it's been cleared, I'm not going to keep pestering the the very busy MAJCOM/CC to sign a CYA memo to keep on file just in case the uniform inquisition comes trying to find out who's to blame for what CAP looks like.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 07, 2007, 07:42:50 PM
Quote from: mclarty on April 07, 2007, 06:18:33 PM
Oh boy, this is what I get for coming into a conversation late in the game ...
Quote from: 12211985 on April 02, 2007, 11:03:46 PM
I've been told that the reason CAP mandated wear of the American flag patch on the BDU was because the ultramarine blue nametapes and insignia weren't enough to clash against the woodland camouflage, so they needed another contrasting color.
Can anyone confirm this?
I love it when I say something sarcastically ... then it gets quoted as an actual statement and then someone goes off and tries to verify it. Dude, I really wasn't serious when I said that.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 04, 2007, 01:01:50 AM
Actually, the 39-1 (1-1) clearly spells out that the authority is vested in the CAP CC and USAF HQ.
Yep... CAPM 39-1 covers the policy from their end, and AFI 10-2701 has similar policy, specifically "The Air Force controls the configuration of the Air Force-style uniform worn by CAP members." to cover it from their end.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 04, 2007, 04:53:37 AM
Well...I have been part of AFJROTC and AFROTC....and as far as I know...there is NO definitive regulation on how to wear those uniforms.
AFOATSI 36-2001 Chapter 5 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/afoatsi36-2001.pdf) for AFJROTC, and AFROTCI 36-2008 (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/msd/pubs/afoatsi/36-2008.pdf) for AFROTC.
You have a gift for research! I have seen many-a- post where CAP "old timers" deny that a regulation exists and challenges your authority to deny it! When caught, they fall back on the "standard practice" argument. Out F***'n standing work! Do you concur that we added the added the flag without USAF approval? I still have not seen any proof to the contrary.
Semper Vigilante!
Capt. Lord
Who are you comment on?
As far as I know the USAF did approve the change to add the U.S. Flag. That was so long ago that I did not think that was even in dispute. All I was saying is that there is next to zero chance, at this point in time, to ever find out why or what they thought of about it. Like I said....CAP NB sends up the proposed uniform chance under a staff summery sheet (basiclly a blue folder with a routing slip stabled to it). CAP-USAF signs concure/nonconure, the may or may not add comments and then they send it accross the hall to CAP CC and it's done.
I did comment that the only regulation or AFI that says the USAF has approval authority on USAF uniforms is a CAP regulation. The law governing the USAF dose they SECAF can designate who can wear the USAF uniform....but another law says that just about any organisation may wear military uniforms provided they where a patch on the shoulder (like we did for year until the new service coat came out)....I wounder if that change was well researched to insure it did not violate the law. ;D
Anyways...the flag is part of 39-1 has been for a long time. I'm sure if the the USAF objected they would have said something by now.
Capt. Harris,
There was a policy letter in December of 2005 issued by Gen Pineda, authorizing flags, and stating that the 39-1 would be changed to require flag wear. (Or words to that effect) The last version of the 39-1 that I have only allows flags on certain corporate uniforms: uniforms which are within the regulatory authority of CAP to change on their own initiative (arguably) If there is a copy of the 39-1 allowing/requiring flags on AF style uniforms( which would of course have to be approved by the ACTUAL Air Force) I am not aware of, and do not have a copy of this document. Since a copy of the 39-1 requiring the wear of flags on the AF style uniform has not been published ( to the best of my knowledge) the wear of the U.S. flag has not in fact been authorized by USAF. If you would care to share your documentation to the contrary, I would be delighted to review it. Oral traditions not withstanding, I would very much like to know that facts of the matter.
Anyone?
Capt. Lord
Here is a policy letter stating that the reverse flag will be worn on BDU and CAP distinctive field uniforms.
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2005_11_wear_of_American_flag.pdf
As much as I don't care for wearing the flag on the uniform, if the boss says its so, then it must be so.
Quote from: Stonewall on April 08, 2007, 02:28:12 AM
Here is a policy letter stating that the reverse flag will be worn on BDU and CAP distinctive field uniforms.
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2005_11_wear_of_American_flag.pdf
As much as I don't care for wearing the flag on the uniform, if the boss says its so, then it must be so.
Right! Now where is that pesky 39-1 change?
Capt. Lord
QuoteWe are the only official Auxiliary of any of the Armed Forces and since we are the Auxiliary of the USAF it is in our best interest to represent them accordingly.
I think you forgot that there are two auxiliaries of the Armed Forces and CAP is the junior of the two.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:30:15 AM
Quote from: Stonewall on April 08, 2007, 02:28:12 AM
Here is a policy letter stating that the reverse flag will be worn on BDU and CAP distinctive field uniforms.
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2005_11_wear_of_American_flag.pdf
As much as I don't care for wearing the flag on the uniform, if the boss says its so, then it must be so.
Right! Now where is that pesky 39-1 change?
It will be there when it comes out. For the time being, you have the policy letter. Two words to remember: "salute" and "execute". They are different than "whine" and "complain". ;) Another catchy phrase? "Lead by example".
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:30:15 AM
Quote from: Stonewall on April 08, 2007, 02:28:12 AM
Here is a policy letter stating that the reverse flag will be worn on BDU and CAP distinctive field uniforms.
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2005_11_wear_of_American_flag.pdf
As much as I don't care for wearing the flag on the uniform, if the boss says its so, then it must be so.
Right! Now where is that pesky 39-1 change?
Capt. Lord
Listen, bro. I don't want to wear the flag either. But you must understand that interim policy letters are used in lieu of actual regulations until they can be updated accordingly. Policies change all the time and they can't put out a complete manual everytime something small changes.
A written policy or change to a regulation is much like an officer giving a lawful order. Unless that order breaks a law or put your life or others in danger, then you just have to do, no matter how much you don't want to. Again, it was hard for me to sew my wing patch back on as well as the flag, but we gotta do it. Got it? Don't fight it, unfortunately I'm right on this.
Quote from: shorning on April 08, 2007, 02:36:45 AM
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:30:15 AM
Quote from: Stonewall on April 08, 2007, 02:28:12 AM
Here is a policy letter stating that the reverse flag will be worn on BDU and CAP distinctive field uniforms.
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2005_11_wear_of_American_flag.pdf
As much as I don't care for wearing the flag on the uniform, if the boss says its so, then it must be so.
Right! Now where is that pesky 39-1 change?
It will be there when it comes out. For the time being, you have the policy letter. Two words to remember: "salute" and "execute". They are different than "whine" and "complain". ;) Another catchy phrase? "Lead by example".
Okay, the old timers agree that "shut up and do what you are told" is the best policy. ( Thats what made CAP the organization it is today....) Lets see your regulatory justifcation. Based on the reponses I have seen, there is a tacit implication that CAP can change the military uniform on its own authority. I reject this presumption
Ab initio. I am not whining and complaining. I am asking for a legal justification of an act that appears to be proscribed by public law and CAP regulations.
Capt. Lord
Has it been more than 90 days since those ICLs were issued? ;D
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:45:06 AM
I reject this presumption Ab initio. I am not whining and complaining. I am asking for a legal justification of an act that appears to be proscribed by public law and CAP regulations.
Then you're only following the changes in the uniform manual and not any of the policy letters?
Quote from: shorning on April 08, 2007, 02:52:28 AM
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:45:06 AM
I reject this presumption Ab initio. I am not whining and complaining. I am asking for a legal justification of an act that appears to be proscribed by public law and CAP regulations.
Then you're only following the changes in the uniform manual and not any of the policy letters?
Not at all! CAP is free to issue policy letters and uniform changes on its own authority for any Corporate Uniform. ( and other policies within its charter and authority) It does not appear that CAP has the legal authority to change the Uniform of the United States Air Force without their authority. I am asking for the written authority that must have been granted for CAP to do so. Following changes? I follow them very closely! If CAP issued a policy requiring you to arm all Cessnas with Ruger 10-22's and cabbages, would you carry it out or ask for clarification and legal justification? Thats just what I am doing.
Capt. Lord
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 03:03:56 AM
I follow them very closely! If CAP issued a policy requiring you to arm all Cessnas with Ruger 10-22's and cabbages, would you carry it out or ask for clarification and legal justification? Thats just what I am doing.
Capt. Lord
If you've got a legal question, I suggest contacting your local CAP legal officer. I'm sure they can help you as ours (at the group level) is more than willing to help out in these matters. She can look into the consititution and bylaws as it relates to CAP's authority to change policy on the AF style uniform.
You gotta choose your battles man. This one ain't worth it.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 03:03:56 AM
I am asking for the written authority that must have been granted for CAP to do so.
Then you are asking the wrong audience. Perhaps you'd have luck filling out a FOIA request with CAP-USAF. Staff work isn't' generally published for wide consumption.
I do not have any objections in principal to wearing a flag on my uniform ( I have done so before, why not now?) and this is not the hill I want to die on. I have asked the best knowledge base out there ( you guys) for a justification of this seeming disparity, and the overall response has been generally defensive and un-informative. While researching a position paper, I started asking what CAP's legal authority was to arm aircraft, and met much the same: They just did it". Allrighty then. If it was the hill I wanted to die on, I would contact the USAF Counsel General, not the CAP legal people. In the absence of any proof to the contrary, I will assume that CAP is acting properly, and that they violated their own regulations, a paradox not unknown in CAP history.
Capt. Lord
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:45:06 AM
Okay, the old timers agree that "shut up and do what you are told" is the best policy. ( Thats what made CAP the organization it is today....) Lets see your regulatory justifcation. Based on the reponses I have seen, there is a tacit implication that CAP can change the military uniform on its own authority. I reject this presumption Ab initio. I am not whining and complaining. I am asking for a legal justification of an act that appears to be proscribed by public law and CAP regulations.
Capt. Lord
I
absolutely don't want to come off sounding like a wiseacre or someone trying to be nasty and/or arrogant, but after reading all these posts about the flag, and the U.S. Civil Air Patrol tapes, and all these chages, I have to add my two cents, for whatever they may be worth:
Get over it, already.
The changes have been approved by the National Board. Where AF approval was needed, it's been received; where it wasn't, they didn't bother asking, I suppose.
If the problem isn't the flag, or the tapes, but the way they were implemented, all I can suggest is ... see above. It's done. Maybe the next CAP CC will reverse it; maybe he (or, if we're lucky, she) won't. But it's done, and while all of us who have questions and comments about them may feel that our views have been ignored ... folks, we weren't even in the equation.
Someone very wise here said it's at the squadron level where the rubber meets the road. Is there a CAP member (or retired member, like me) who really feels he can't do his job because he is wearing a flag patch or a tape with the letters U.S. on it?
The Powers That Be have spoken. Salute and execute. Leadership 101.
Sorry if I sound out of line. I'm just weary of reading all the nonsense.
Jack
CaptLord, I think that if CAP hadn't received concurrence on the addition of the flag to the BDUs from the Air Force, then it wouldn't have happened.
This is no different than any other uniform change. The National Board votes on it and it does over to the AF and if they approve it, the change will happen. CAP has proposed many changes to the AF-style uniform over the years by voting on them at the NB but then they get vetoed by the AF. I suspect that most of the time they've already obtained the ok unofficially before they vote in order to reduce the potential embarassment of being rejected.
QuoteI'm just weary of reading all the nonsense.
Has one of the other board members handcuffed you to the computer and taped your eyes open? Blink twice and I'll call the cops for you.
Quote from: RiverAux on April 08, 2007, 03:35:47 AM
QuoteI'm just weary of reading all the nonsense.
Has one of the other board members handcuffed you to the computer and taped your eyes open? Blink twice and I'll call the cops for you.
Well, now that you mention it .................
Sorry about the tone.
Jack
Quote from: RiverAux on April 08, 2007, 03:35:47 AM
Has one of the other board members handcuffed you to the computer and taped your eyes open? Blink twice and I'll call the cops for you.
Wait...if ones eyes are taped open........ :D
Quote from: shorning on April 08, 2007, 03:39:40 AM
Wait...if ones eyes are taped open........ :D
Got any Visine?
Jack
River Aux,
I don't believe that the argument that if the Air Force does not become aware of our violations they must be approved. Uniform approvals to the 39-1 must be signed off by the USAF, and again, to the best of my knowledge, no such 39-1 revision has been approved by USAF. The regulations are not written in such a fashion as to lead anyone to believe that anything not prohibited is permitted.
Capt. Lord
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 03:45:58 AM
...to the best of my knowledge...
There's the rub! As a squadron member, you're not privy to the staffing done between the Air Force and NHQ. Like I said, file a FOIA request.
I have to wonder if you also extend this in to other areas of your life. Do you require every driver to show you their driver's license test every time you're on the road? Or do you just require them to show their license? Without one of those, how do you know those people are authorized to drive?
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 03:45:58 AM
Uniform approvals to the 39-1 must be signed off by the USAF,
Not all of them. Anything CAP-distinctive does not require AF approval; the Executive Director of CAP-USAF himself said so.
Still, I would have a hard time believing that changes such as the flag and the U.S. Civil Air Patrol tapes weren't approved by AF before being implemented by the National Board. We're just going to have to take National's word for it until the new 39-1 is published.
Again, sorry about my earlier tone.
Jack
You have to take their word for it then too, you still won't & never will get a letter from AF saying they've approved XYZ. You just have to assume they're doing thier job cause you can't micromanage your bosses any more than you should your subordinates.
Go ahead & file the FOIA request, and while you're at it, make it for all authorizations for changes to the AF-style CAP uniform or guidance memos on uniform related matters including corporate uniforms. Mine all that out & feel free to let us know if some I's weren't dotted or T's crossed.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:25:02 AM
Capt. Harris,
There was a policy letter in December of 2005 issued by Gen Pineda, authorizing flags, and stating that the 39-1 would be changed to require flag wear. (Or words to that effect) The last version of the 39-1 that I have only allows flags on certain corporate uniforms: uniforms which are within the regulatory authority of CAP to change on their own initiative (arguably) If there is a copy of the 39-1 allowing/requiring flags on AF style uniforms( which would of course have to be approved by the ACTUAL Air Force) I am not aware of, and do not have a copy of this document. Since a copy of the 39-1 requiring the wear of flags on the AF style uniform has not been published ( to the best of my knowledge) the wear of the U.S. flag has not in fact been authorized by USAF. If you would care to share your documentation to the contrary, I would be delighted to review it. Oral traditions not withstanding, I would very much like to know that facts of the matter.
Anyone?
Capt. Lord
The policy letter of December 2005.
IIRC 39-1 came out in march...the flag issue came out in the Aug NB and USAF approval came out in December when the Policy Letter was issued.
As far as review documentation....you don't need to review anything more than 39-1 or the policy letters.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:45:06 AMOkay, the old timers agree that "shut up and do what you are told" is the best policy.
No...actually it is us leaders and officers who say the best policy is to follow direction and not jump up and down and whine that some staffer at NHQ is not doing their job.
Wear the flag.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 02:45:06 AM( Thats what made CAP the organization it is today....) Lets see your regulatory justifcation. Based on the reponses I have seen, there is a tacit implication that CAP can change the military uniform on its own authority. I reject this presumption Ab initio. I am not whining and complaining. I am asking for a legal justification of an act that appears to be proscribed by public law and CAP regulations.
No....you misrepresent what was said. CAP cannot change the USAF style uniform by its own regulations. I have never implied that we have, will have or ever have (in recent memory) ever changed the USAF uniforms with out USAF approval.
It is you who are implying that the we should not wear the flag because no one on this board can show you USAF signature on some sort of paper saying they hacked off on the flag. We are saying.....the Policy Letter is published....wear the the flag.
I did not say I would not, and/or others should not wear the flag. The last 39-1 revision is several years old, and a new regulation has not been forthcoming. You keep saying it must have been approved...no problem, show me a publicized copy of an AF approved 39-1 and I will jump with joy. Otherwise, what you have to say on this is just conjecture.
Capt. Lord
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 03:03:56 AMIt does not appear that CAP has the legal authority to change the Uniform of the United States Air Force without their authority. I am asking for the written authority that must have been granted for CAP to do so.
I challenge your first assumption. As far as I can tell...there is NO AFI that says the USAF will approve any changes to the USAF-style uniforms. The USC says the SECAF can proscribe the wear of the USAF uniform and who can wear the uniform. But another USC allows organizations such as military schools and cadet program to wear the uniform with any authorizations so long as they wear a patch on their shoulder.
This is how ACA can wear any uniform they want and all those military schools can use U.S. military uniforms with out being endorsed by the military.
I only proposed...that CAP could by law do the same as the ACA....except that our own (and only our own) regulations prevent this. If you can find the law or Air Force regulation that says otherwise...I'd be glad to hear it.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 08, 2007, 05:28:22 AM
I challenge your first assumption. As far as I can tell...there is NO AFI that says the USAF will approve any changes to the USAF-style uniforms. The USC says the SECAF can proscribe the wear of the USAF uniform and who can wear the uniform. But another USC allows organizations such as military schools and cadet program to wear the uniform with any authorizations so long as they wear a patch on their shoulder.
Sir ... I cited the reg about 12 hours ago. But I'll recap for those who won't bother to go looking for it:
Quote from: AFI 10-2701
1.3.2. Uniform Wear and Personal Appearance. CAP members are authorized to wear CAP or Air Force-style uniforms in accordance with CAP regulations (civilian clothing may be worn when specific missions dictate). The Air Force controls the configuration of the Air Force-style uniform worn by CAP members.
[snip]
1.3.4. CAP Distinctive Uniforms and Insignia. The emblems, insignia, and badges of the CAP Air Force-style uniform will clearly identify an individual as a CAP member at a distance and in low-light conditions. The Air Force must approve changes to the CAP Air Force-style uniform. CAP distinctive uniforms must be sufficiently different from U.S. Armed Forces uniforms so that confusion will not occur.
Emphasis mine
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 03:45:58 AM
I don't believe that the argument that if the Air Force does not become aware of our violations they must be approved.
First...USAF-CAP is at the NB meetings. He has no say in anything because USAF-CAP can't vote....but you will see in all the NB meeting notes and agendas....USAF-CAP's comments on just about everything that is discussed. Even if they have no official say. USAF is NOT out of the loop on these things. No one is hiding anything....they work it the same building for gosh sakes. The USAF is/was well aware of the vote to wear the flag. They approved the change and the policy letter was sent out. That is the way it works. The same thing with the Gortex Jacket and rank on the hat. The NB approved it, sent it to USAF for approval...who sat on it for next to ever and then they approved it and the policy letter was sent out.
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 03:45:58 AM
Uniform approvals to the 39-1 must be signed off by the USAF, and again, to the best of my knowledge, no such 39-1 revision has been approved by USAF. The regulations are not written in such a fashion as to lead anyone to believe that anything not prohibited is permitted.
I'm sorry that NHQ forgot to keep you in the loop of their approval process. When NHQ sends out a policy letter....we are to assume that all the proper protocols are followed. While you and I cannot change the regulation...the NB (you know the guys who approve those things) are fully free to change what they want. Are they deficient in getting out the revisions in a timely manner...sure thing.....but so it the USAF...check when the last revision of AFI-36-2903 was (the Aug 06 revision replaced the Sept 02 pub...and there were a lot of changes documented only as policy letters or IMCs). But that is neither here nor there. The policy letter was sent. You can find it on the CAP publications web site. It is official and you are not in any position to question it's legality.
Quote from: mclarty on April 08, 2007, 05:35:43 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on April 08, 2007, 05:28:22 AM
I challenge your first assumption. As far as I can tell...there is NO AFI that says the USAF will approve any changes to the USAF-style uniforms. The USC says the SECAF can proscribe the wear of the USAF uniform and who can wear the uniform. But another USC allows organizations such as military schools and cadet program to wear the uniform with any authorizations so long as they wear a patch on their shoulder.
Sir ... I cited the reg about 12 hours ago. But I'll recap for those who won't bother to go looking for it:
Quote from: AFI 10-2701
1.3.2. Uniform Wear and Personal Appearance. CAP members are authorized to wear CAP or Air Force-style uniforms in accordance with CAP regulations (civilian clothing may be worn when specific missions dictate). The Air Force controls the configuration of the Air Force-style uniform worn by CAP members.
[snip]
1.3.4. CAP Distinctive Uniforms and Insignia. The emblems, insignia, and badges of the CAP Air Force-style uniform will clearly identify an individual as a CAP member at a distance and in low-light conditions. The Air Force must approve changes to the CAP Air Force-style uniform. CAP distinctive uniforms must be sufficiently different from U.S. Armed Forces uniforms so that confusion will not occur.
Emphasis mine
Okay...I stand correctled on that issue. I missed that last time I was perusing 10-2701.
Quote from: lordmonar on April 08, 2007, 05:47:38 AM
Okay...I stand correctled on that issue. I missed that last time I was perusing 10-2701.
No problem... in your defense, they practically completely rewrote 10-2701 in the past year or two.
If I could just clarify for a second. CAP-USAF doesn't approve or disapprove changes. They provide 1) oversight, and 2) advice based on their experience & knowledge. That's it. They are otherwise just th econduit thru which requests to the military pass. In this case to AU & then AETC/CCs for approval.
Also, I may be mistaken, but I don't think Af has been involved in witing or approving CAP regs since the CAP-USAF/CC quit being the executive director & became independent of CAP mgmt. I think I CAP can write pretty much what they want within some kind of reason.
Quote from: DNall on April 08, 2007, 06:07:19 AM
If I could just clarify for a second. CAP-USAF doesn't approve or disapprove changes. They provide 1) oversight, and 2) advice based on their experience & knowledge. That's it. They are otherwise just th econduit thru which requests to the military pass. In this case to AU & then AETC/CCs for approval.
Wait a second ...
Quote from: mclarty quoting AFI 10-2701
1.3.4. CAP Distinctive Uniforms and Insignia. The emblems, insignia, and badges of the CAP Air Force-style uniform will clearly identify an individual as a CAP member at a distance and in low-light conditions. The Air Force must approve changes to the CAP Air Force-style uniform.
So the AFI is lying?
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 05:26:02 AM
The last 39-1 revision is several years old, and a new regulation has not been forthcoming.
And that was in the works for
seven years! I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a new one.
You see, what some are trying to do is share their experience with you. Several individuals that have responded to you are quite knowledgeable about the overall process. You just can't see the forest for the trees.
But hey, if you feel like Don Quixote...charge!
Quote from: shorning on April 08, 2007, 07:55:57 AM
And that was in the works for seven years! I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a new one.
I think the neew 39-1 will be on Post-Its (c) and every wing CC will be issued a roll of White Out (c) correction tape and a red Bic (TM) pen when Nat HQ makes a change that doesn't require replacing the whole 3x3" paper.
-Ace
Quote from: alamrcn on April 08, 2007, 11:30:53 AM
Quote from: shorning on April 08, 2007, 07:55:57 AM
And that was in the works for seven years! I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a new one.
I think the neew 39-1 will be on Post-Its (c) and every wing CC will be issued a roll of White Out (c) correction tape and a red Bic (TM) pen when Nat HQ makes a change that doesn't require replacing the whole 3x3" paper.
-Ace
LOL. Great theory.
Quote from: shorning on April 08, 2007, 03:39:40 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on April 08, 2007, 03:35:47 AM
Has one of the other board members handcuffed you to the computer and taped your eyes open? Blink twice and I'll call the cops for you.
Wait...if ones eyes are taped open........ :D
Exactly!
Quote from: mclarty on April 08, 2007, 06:17:24 AM
Quote from: DNall on April 08, 2007, 06:07:19 AM
If I could just clarify for a second. CAP-USAF doesn't approve or disapprove changes. They provide 1) oversight, and 2) advice based on their experience & knowledge. That's it. They are otherwise just th econduit thru which requests to the military pass. In this case to AU & then AETC/CCs for approval.
Wait a second ...
Quote from: mclarty quoting AFI 10-2701
1.3.4. CAP Distinctive Uniforms and Insignia. The emblems, insignia, and badges of the CAP Air Force-style uniform will clearly identify an individual as a CAP member at a distance and in low-light conditions. The Air Force must approve changes to the CAP Air Force-style uniform.
So the AFI is lying?
No, the AFI says the "Air Force" will make such approvals. It doesn't specifically say that CAP-USAF is the part of the Air Force that makes such approvals.
Oh....reading these posts gives me the impression that I can no longer just pick and choose which sections of 39-1 and policy/interim change letters I wanted to follow! Wow.....that clears everything up. Guess I have to get rid of the pink buttons on my blues and start wearing boots instead of tennis shoes with my BDU's. Crazy how hard it was too follow 39-1 in the first place. There were sooo many words in the booklet. I relied heavily on the principal of "I am going to do it my way or I will leave". That gets most members in CAP promoted to COLONEL or beyond, so I thought I could use it too!
Sorry but I digressed.
Quote from: mikeylikey on April 08, 2007, 05:53:34 PM
Oh....reading these posts gives me the impression that I can no longer just pick and choose which sections of 39-1 and policy/interim change letters I wanted to follow! Wow.....that clears everything up. Guess I have to get rid of the pink buttons on my blues and start wearing boots instead of tennis shoes with my BDU's. Crazy how hard it was too follow 39-1 in the first place. There were sooo many words in the booklet. I relied heavily on the principal of "I am going to do it my way or I will leave". That gets most members in CAP promoted to COLONEL or beyond, so I thought I could use it too!
Sorry but I digressed.
Mikey, I don't think anyone here is publicly advocating breaking or ignoring the uniform, or any other regulations. I have merely asked for clarification on a seeming disarity, and have not received a clear answer. It is clear that members do not seem to have as encyclopaedic knowledge of CAP and AF regs as I thought ( McClarty, you are the exception!) To believe that any level of command is right because they "have always done it that way" is imprudent. Remember CAWG's extra-legal use of "Discretionary Grade" at encampments? Trust, but verify!
Capt. Lord
Quote from: CaptLord on April 08, 2007, 06:26:30 PM
It is clear that members do not seem to have as encyclopaedic knowledge of CAP and AF regs as I thought ( McClarty, you are the exception!)
Eh, I've always been a reg geek, but it's very handy so I can throw up BS flags while doing unit SAVs.
Quote from: mclarty on April 08, 2007, 06:17:24 AM
Quote from: mclarty quoting AFI 10-2701
1.3.4. CAP Distinctive Uniforms and Insignia. The emblems, insignia, and badges of the CAP Air Force-style uniform will clearly identify an individual as a CAP member at a distance and in low-light conditions. The Air Force must approve changes to the CAP Air Force-style uniform.
So the AFI is lying?
Not at all. It says the AF. That means the SAF & whomever he delegates authority to, which goes first to the executive officer, then A3/SHA, then AETC, AU, then finally CAP-USAF who at the end of that is task as an oversight, advisory, & liaison agency. The uniform approvals have never to my knowledge been passed below the MAJCOM level. Which I'd guess is mainly cause they deal w/ uniform issues/have a uniform board there & not at any point above or below in that particular chain (that I know of).
I believe CAP-USAF
advises CAP leadership on what has a good chance of being approved or shot down, and then passes such requests on with their recommendations. I'm not saying the CAP-USAF/CC doesn't have a lot of influence over the process, but someone north of there is the approving authority.
Quote from: DNall on April 08, 2007, 06:42:02 PM
I believe CAP-USAF advises CAP leadership on what has a good chance of being approved or shot down, and then passes such requests on with their recommendations. I'm not saying the CAP-USAF/CC doesn't have a lot of influence over the process, but someone north of there is the approving authority.
Okay, I could buy that. I am very curious about who actually does approve CAP uniform changes -- in a perfect world, the AFUB would approve
all uniforms -- but I seriously doubt the AFUB is sitting there reviewing and approving the CAP cadet uniform. :)
I would think that it would be USAF-CAP that does the approving. At the most AU. But SECAF? The AFUB only meets once a year (if that much) so it's not them.
I think it was stupid for the Army to start wearing a bright US Flag on BDU's and I think its stupid for CAP> But doesn't really matter what I think. I do it cause it is what it is
QuoteBut SECAF?
Many such authorities are granted by Congress to such high ranking officials, but which are delegated far down the chain of command for implementation.
Quote from: RiverAux on April 08, 2007, 09:33:08 PM
QuoteBut SECAF?
Many such authorities are granted by Congress to such high ranking officials, but which are delegated far down the chain of command for implementation.
Yes...that is what I am saying. I thing our uniform approval just goes to USAF-CAP. I can't see anyone above that level wasting their time on it.
It's AETC/CC, I couldn't quote you a source, but I know for a fact that's right. There may be some delegation of minor stuff (like repositioning cadet grade insignia or approving a new ribbon), but unless something significant has changed & I missed it, that is the right answer.
As I understand it... The way it is SUPPOSED to work is CAP changes go in a stack & are held for approval by the AETC uniform board (all MAJCOMs have one that set internal policy & recommend changes to the AFUB). I believe that board meets for a week once every other year, but I'm not positive on that. Then if an emergency change needs to be made it can go thru AU to the AETC/CC for approval. Obviously that's a busy person that shouldn't be bothered with stupid crap, and it's unfortuante that CAP doesn't work better within the system. I think we'd all be happier if uniforms stabilized for at least two years at a time.
Maybe they should just hold onto them for two years and tell CAP that they're just going to have to wait.
Be nice! Dang that accomodating AF for wanting to help us out so much. I don't think it's actually gone thru their uniform board in a long time, and there may be some reason for that, but I sure would try to limit harrassing busy important AF cmdrs about stupid crap.
And thats actually the surprising part -- that they put up with CAP coming to them AT LEAST once or twice a year with uniform change proposals.
That aren't an emergency.
See if they would have a set period once every two or three years to consider changes (I don't care if they actually use the AETC board or not), and you can still get stuff approved betwee, but you have to demonstrate it's critical to be done NOW versus waiting. I'd be a lot happier with that process.
Anyway, like I said, I hadn't seen any of this in writing, but that's how I understand it from what I've seen ove rth eyears & how it was explained to me by some former CAP-USAF folks. Nick would be in a better position than me or probably anyone else to find out how it really works these days, but it isn't that big a deal to me.
Well...it's not like it takes up all that much of his time. USAF-CAP does the staff summary sheet with their recommendations, AU hacks off on it and sends it up to AETC. The longest part is actually sending it from Alabama to Texas. And 99% of the time AETC is going to do what AU suggests.
But the question still remains: why has CAP mandated wear of the American flag patch on the BDU?
I've heard over at CS that the rumor is general Pineda was mistaken for a Guatemalan Air Force officer while he was in the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina. He was so offended by this that he ordered the American flag patch be worn on the BDU so everyone knows that CAP is an American organization.
Can anyone verify this? It certainly sounds plausible, but may not be the reason why CAP members are now required to wear an American flag patch on the BDU.
No need to invent stories for it. Seems plausible to me that it was just a patriotic move. Personally, I don't think its necessary, but its not a big deal.
Quote from: RiverAux on April 09, 2007, 03:09:43 AM
No need to invent stories for it. Seems plausible to me that it was just a patriotic move. Personally, I don't think its necessary, but its not a big deal.
I have a gut feeling that there's some reason for the American flag patch other than just being the result of a patriotic decision. I mean, the uniform is patriotic enough without the flag.
I understand general Pineda gave a reason for the "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" branch tapes. Did he ever give a reason for the American flag on the BDU?
Quote from: lordmonar on April 09, 2007, 02:54:49 AM
Well...it's not like it takes up all that much of his time.
Certainly.
But you're a SNCO, let me give you a scenerio... What would your commander do if you continually sent trivial unneccessary distractions to his desk? You're standing there in service dress before this LtCol (or whatever) & what's he going to say to you? Where's that bar going to be on the definition of trivial & how much harder would that talk go if he were a 4-star?
Now granted, it goes up with I'm sure recommendations by CAP-USAF, gets legal review & staffed at AU, signed & up to AETC, more legal review & staff analysis, then Gen Looney looks at the bold print for 30secs before signing or making notes on things he needs more info on. Some poor Lt there got stuck with this cause he's low man, and now he's standing there knees knocking together hoping this Gen doesn't think he's a moron over this memo he wrote. I don't know, I'm just guessing about the process, but sounds about right to me. All I know is I'd waste as little of their time on things like this as I could. Uniforms do need to be addressed in CAP just like the AF from time to time, but we need to be smart about it, not just what we're doing & why, but the process too. Just be smart is all I'm saying.
Far as the flag, why do we wear Army outerwear with corp combinations? Why have our tapes stayed blue for 30 years after the AF changed them? Why gray slides instead of black, & why do they need "CAP" on them if they're gray & it says so on the nametag. If the nametag isn't good enough cause it's not readable, then why do we have all that extra crap on it? Why are our ribbons all screwed up? Why is there a badge for most spec tracks but not for others, and why badges for three dif tracks that could have fit under one career field badge like the AF does? Why a "V" on the disaster ribbon, and why is it on that ribbon rather than the national cmdr commendation or unit citation? Why do some ribbons (SaR, CN, etc) have clasps but similiar ones don't (disaster relief or lifesaving)? Why in the world are we taking so long to get on board with NIMS?
You'll kill yourself trying to figure all this out. Fact is someone on NB saw the Army doing something, thought it was patriotic but didn't think things thru, and bingo uniform change is made.
That Katrina thing is a joke by the way, and one that's been picked up in a couple places as true. The way I understand the joke to have gone is why he didn't spend more time in the disaster zone was so he wouldn't be confused as that. Don't believe too much RUM-INT all at once, you'll find yourself watching for martians with a shotgun that way.
Quote from: DNall on April 09, 2007, 03:39:59 AMBut you're a SNCO, let me give you a scenerio... What would your commander do if you continually sent trivial unnecessary distractions to his desk? You're standing there in service dress before this LtCol (or whatever) & what's he going to say to you? Where's that bar going to be on the definition of trivial & how much harder would that talk go if he were a 4-star?
Well that the key of delegation. You certainly can't say to your subordinate units...."I got to see everything dealing with CAP Uniforms"...and then complain "they are sending me all this trivial stuff."
The Lt with the staff summery sheet certainly is not worried about the 4-star....he does not even see the 4-star. Some Lt Col takes it from the Lt, checks it for grammar and formating and then put's in in the 4-star's "sigh here" pile. No one is knocked knee in fear because for them it is just a piece of paper.
Maybe, I've seen Lts in front of generals like that though, not that I care one way or another, just adding some color to the story while emphasizing the point that they got better things to do.
The key to staffing is keeping stupid crap off your bosses desk so they can deal with the important things. The problem in this case is CAP doesn't take direction well when it comes to delayed gratification.
I am going to find out why the American Flag patch is worn on the CAP BDU. Right now, I am inclined to believe it's so general Pineda doesn't get mistaken for a Guatemalan Air Force general again. That seems like the most logical reason to me.
Does anyone know why the American Flag patch is worn on the CAP BDU?
YOu have 6 pages here you can read and find out
Quote from: 12211985 on July 02, 2007, 07:35:13 PM
I am going to find out why the American Flag patch is worn on the CAP BDU.
No you're not. You're just going to keep picking the scab here in these forums until it bleeds some more.
Because that's what you do.
I'd suggest a girlfriend - that might be a better use of your free time.
Or better yet, perhaps JOIN CAP and actually help out!
Nahh...your way, I'm sure, is much more fun.
It's I pity I can't find that webpage that explained how the reverse flag patch was a tool of Satan to start the "preversion" of our institutions by twisting our symbols. I guess the whole "OMG the Army is wearing reverse patches thing has been buried under more recent piles of wingnuttery.
Anyhow, that's the reason for the flag patch, Charlie Brown.
Quote from: LtCol White on July 02, 2007, 07:39:48 PM
YOu have 6 pages here you can read and find out
I don't recall ever finding the answer, sir.
Quote from: 12211985 on July 02, 2007, 07:45:30 PM
Quote from: LtCol White on July 02, 2007, 07:39:48 PM
YOu have 6 pages here you can read and find out
I don't recall ever finding the answer, sir.
That's because TP's unit of l33t haX0r5 has removed the truth, you know...
Jeez, kid - just put another layer of aluminum foil under the boonie and just drive on, for crying out loud.
Aside from NHQ requiring it, all other explanations are supposition as to why. Patriotic? Show of support? All are possible. The BEST place to get your answer would be to email Susie Parker at NHQ and ask her if you want the "Real" answer.
Quote from: 12211985 on July 02, 2007, 07:45:30 PM
Quote from: LtCol White on July 02, 2007, 07:39:48 PM
YOu have 6 pages here you can read and find out
I don't recall ever finding the answer, sir.
Oy Gevalt!!! You are SPAMMING the FORUM with this moot point!!!
I remember a similar debate in the Army before the flag patch was required. Some people would take up the point that the uniform itself is like a flag.......others noted the "U S" in the branch tape........while others said that the SECARMY said to do it so we did it. I agreed with the last reason. We all may not agree as to why things are done, but we do as we are told on these issues.
If something is going to fail, let it fail on its OWN. You can later say you supported it but it just was not meant to be. Do everything you can to make it work, until there is nothing left to do!
^ That is something I fully support. I will not sabotage, nor will I refuse to accept what I legally have to accept. If it works....great, if not at least I was a good boy and tried". People may say "he never liked the idea, but he at least supported it".
OK............Please whoever.......stop bringing up these old posts! Geez! When there are already 6 pages......and there has not been a post in 3 months, lets consider that "old news".......unless something causical brings it up again!
Quote from: Major Carrales link=topic=1846.msg41347#msg41347
Oy Gevalt!!! You are SPAMMING the FORUM with this moot point!!!
I didn't know Carrales was a Jewish Surname...
Shlemiel... ::)
Quote from: mlcurtis69 on July 02, 2007, 08:12:10 PM
Quote from: Major Carrales link=topic=1846.msg41347#msg41347
Oy Gevalt!!! You are SPAMMING the FORUM with this moot point!!!
I didn't know Carrales was a Jewish Surname...
Shlemiel... ::)
The frustration of this SPAMMING and the stupidity of this recurring topic had exhaused all words in English, Spanish and Italian...it fit the best.
Consider it a
mitzvah to keep this
Kvetch to a minimum.
By the way I am as Roman Catholic as they come, I just have lots (three actually) of Jewish friends who regularly use words like that. You know, to them I'm just one of the
goys...er, I mean guys!
PAX VOBISCUM!!!
The definitive reason we wear the reversed US flag patch on the BDU:
The General told us to.
End of story.
Who cares why, just wear the dad gum thing or don't wear the BDU's, your choice. If you try to understand all the silly uniform changes you'll go insane.
Quote from: ELTHunter on July 03, 2007, 12:22:59 AM
Who cares why, just wear the dad gum thing or don't wear the BDU's, your choice. If you try to understand all the silly uniform changes you'll go insane.
Sure, but he'd have to be a member first. Meh.
I think he needs a new stick...he's done wore out the one he's got stirring the pot. :P
Quote from: mlcurtis69 on July 03, 2007, 12:34:16 AM
Quote from: ELTHunter on July 03, 2007, 12:22:59 AM
Who cares why, just wear the dad gum thing or don't wear the BDU's, your choice. If you try to understand all the silly uniform changes you'll go insane.
Sure, but he'd have to be a member first. Meh.
I think he needs a new stick...he's done wore out the one he's got stirring the pot. :P
Its just absolutely amazing the amount of time he spends here, and at least two other forums writing these detailed, manifesto-esque replies and posts regarding an organization he doesn't even belong to, claiming he doesn't have time for membership because of his studies, yet he has time for this nonsense.
And then gets all defensive when we constantly asks why he cares.
Even more amusing is the dead-horse topic he keeps hammering on. To me they are like car-wrecks, you just have to look, despite yourself.
::yaaaaaaawn::
Quote from: JC004 on July 03, 2007, 01:16:10 AM
::yaaaaaaawn::
Can we go back to talking about using Nevada brothels for fundraisers? It was way cooler!
Only one way to describe this thread, not only a car crash....
(http://www.thedailyblitz.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/devine.jpg)
oH YEAH FUND RAISER... nEVADA sTYLE!!!
(http://www.elmiracap.com/images/stories//news%20items/BROTHEL.jpg)
Quote from: Eclipse on July 03, 2007, 01:12:10 AMIts just absolutely amazing the amount of time he spends here, and at least two other forums writing these detailed, manifesto-esque replies and posts regarding an organization he doesn't even belong to, claiming he doesn't have time for membership because of his studies, yet he has time for this nonsense.
And then gets all defensive when we constantly asks why he cares.
Even more amusing is the dead-horse topic he keeps hammering on. To me they are like car-wrecks, you just have to look, despite yourself.
Hey Captain Williams!
<a href="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fwww.smileycentral.com%252F%253Fpartner%253DZSzeb008%255FZNxdm824YYUS%2526i%253D36%252F36%255F12%255F2%2526feat%253Dprof/page.html" target="_blank">(http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_12_2.gif)
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 03, 2007, 01:21:33 AM
Quote from: JC004 on July 03, 2007, 01:16:10 AM
::yaaaaaaawn::
Can we go back to talking about using Nevada brothels for fundraisers? It was way cooler!
PLEASE!
We can call it
Operation: CAP-SACC -
Civil
Air
Patrol -
Sleep
Around for a
Charitable
Cause
>:D
Quote from: 12211985 on July 03, 2007, 01:41:35 AM
Hey Captain Williams!
...like a cat when you open the refrigerator...
Quote from: 2d Lt <NOT SO> Fat but FUZZY on July 03, 2007, 01:24:58 AM
(http://www.elmiracap.com/images/stories//news%20items/BROTHEL.jpg)
WAIT A MINUTE! NOT COOL! I trademarked the strike styling on "US" when combined with CAP! NOT COOL! :'(
Quote from: Major Carrales on July 02, 2007, 08:17:00 PM
Quote from: mlcurtis69 on July 02, 2007, 08:12:10 PM
Quote from: Major Carrales link=topic=1846.msg41347#msg41347
Oy Gevalt!!! You are SPAMMING the FORUM with this moot point!!!
I didn't know Carrales was a Jewish Surname...
Shlemiel... ::)
The frustration of this SPAMMING and the stupidity of this recurring topic had exhaused all words in English, Spanish and Italian...it fit the best.
Consider it a mitzvah to keep this Kvetch to a minimum.
By the way I am as Roman Catholic as they come, I just have lots (three actually) of Jewish friends who regularly use words like that. You know, to them I'm just one of the goys...er, I mean guys!
PAX VOBISCUM!!!
The plural in Yiddish and Hebrew is to add "im" as a suffix.
One "goy" many "goyim".
Quote from: PhotogPilot on July 03, 2007, 02:09:33 AM
One "goy" many "goyim".
You are, of course, correct; however it doesn't make the "pun" work. ;)
Pulls back slide, chambers round... Lock.