He was, I was there with Auntie Lizzy and the mad hatter at their tea party, and veritas very clearly walked in. In fact, the Cheshire cat introduced him at the door.
Oh wait, no, that was a dream and a load of old bollards. Carry on.
I have Yer. For 9 years. Just not in raf so wouldn’t know how you spell that rank
Corrected that for you:
‘I served for 9 years but not in the RAF. It is due to my service in another branch of the Armed Forces that I am not aware of how to spell the rank I was referring to’
However, I’m not in the Army or RN but know that ‘Brigadier’ (the Army equivalent of Air Commodore) is spelled exactly that way and ‘Commodore’ is the Royal Naval equivalent, again, spelled correctly.
In short, ignorance is no excuse.
And yes, I have served.
To be fair though, commodore’s pretty easy - just take away ‘air’ and you’re there! 
Sorry I have problems with my spelling, i was more interested about a Sqn being closed. The reasons behind that, getting to the bottom of it, asking the likes of ‘varitas’ to back his opinion up with hard fact. Not standing behind ACP, pams and books. I mean the FRIENDSHIP between a staff team and a civ com. If that is broken and one or the other side is wrong then fix it by either replacing the staff or telling the civ com their services are no longer required. It seems to me the civ com have not welcomed new members for some time now and have formed a ‘click’ and if you don’t agree with them, then your wrong.
Welcome to the Civ Comm world … even new members of the CWC join and take a dislike to staff you’re on a hiding to nothing.
I have, for several years, had to tolerate some on our CWC and smile sweetly. If they were staff I’d be looking at them continuing, as they are ineffective and not competent in the roles they assume. But because they are on the CWC they and their little band of mates, faff around and as CO there is nothing you can do. Even as shown in this debacle, CAC or their boss can’t do anything.
I sincerely hope that the new ACP addresses this sort of thing.
Wow, this is interesting. Having been a cadet at the squadron for a very long time and being someone who knows what is going on at the moment I find it absolutely astounding that people are so blind and look at this situation from only one side. Your way of blaming Veritas for speaking from the opposite side of the story as opposed to the one sided view that most of you have is disgusting. I hope that when this is all sorted out that you’ll all feel very stupid… I know I would in your position.
All that aside, I hope to god that it’s all sorted soon, in amongst this political battle it appears that, with regards to the ATC, some of you seem to have forgotten that this needs to be fixed for the cadets who right now are loosing out on some of the best times of their life, speaking from experience. This is damaging the cadets, causing issues to the people involved and to the organisation. It is in the process of being fixed and all this uproar over who’s right and who’s wrong on a forum like this doesn’t help, it just stirs it all up.
Welcome Neetari.
Your quite right Neetari, some people have entered this with a closed mind, however don’t forget that the members in this forum are not from your squadron. They are working on what has been read in the FOI or the paper. From the information in this forum it is hard to believe why all the staff left due to a rift with the Civcom, it is very uncommon for a squadron to loose so many of its uniform staff so fast. The forum has responded to Veritas in this way because he joined a constructive debate with information that when asked Veritas could not provide any evidence, an argument cannot be won on ‘just you wait and see’.
You mention you are in the know! If you can provide information to enlighten the fine people of this forum, then please do share. We would love to hear and understand so lessons can be learnt for our own squadrons.
Last question Neetari, a quick Google search (other search engines are available), first result http://www.last.fm/user/neetari . E Levey profile, No relation to the chairman Mr Levey is there?
[quote=“Neetari” post=8095]Wow, this is interesting. Having been a cadet at the squadron for a very long time and being someone who knows what is going on at the moment I find it absolutely astounding that people are so blind and look at this situation from only one side. Your way of blaming Veritas for speaking from the opposite side of the story as opposed to the one sided view that most of you have is disgusting. I hope that when this is all sorted out that you’ll all feel very stupid… I know I would in your position.
All that aside, I hope to god that it’s all sorted soon, in amongst this political battle it appears that, with regards to the ATC, some of you seem to have forgotten that this needs to be fixed for the cadets who right now are loosing out on some of the best times of their life, speaking from experience. This is damaging the cadets, causing issues to the people involved and to the organisation. It is in the process of being fixed and all this uproar over who’s right and who’s wrong on a forum like this doesn’t help, it just stirs it all up.[/quote]
You don’t have to come on here and read the responses, you know…
How strange. An (apparent) cadet who is seemingly siding with the Civ Comm.
How strange. An (apparent) cadet who seems to know the insides/out of the situation. Do they join in with the civ comm meetings?
Very odd
A cadet who has a different set of information to us, possibly through overhearing stuff locally, rumour, or someone who is/was on the committee - should not be regarded as strange.
‘A cadet who thinks they know the inside/out of the situation’ is also not unusual.
Some of us are looking at this from one side - let’s face it: we are mostly affiliated with the uniformed side and have all our information from a selection of our internal emails of the ACO/RAF. This means we are forming any conclusion from what is the electronic equivalent of overheard conversations.
[quote=“Operation Nimrod” post=8100]How strange. An (apparent) cadet who is seemingly siding with the Civ Comm.
How strange. An (apparent) cadet who seems to know the insides/out of the situation. Do they join in with the civ comm meetings? [/quote]
This comes across as someone related to a CWC or staff member.
In my darker CWC days 3 cadets had parents on the CWC and there were things that were discussed, became policy/common knowledge/going to happen according to everyone on the sqn. I even had requests for financial assistance become common knowledge, one of which meant I had to deal with an upset parent. I made the Chairman write a letter of apology to this mum and ensured he read it out at the next meeting. I had to reiterate several times that what is discussed is by and large confidential and at times a work in progress.
I have to do this with staff where they have cadets on the squadron, when we have spoken about things as ideas, that somehow become what will happen.
So having a cadet supposedly “in the know” is not unusual.
I find it very depressing that this issue appears to have become one of winning or loosing. The key issue, which I assume is one of improving the cadet experience, seems to have been lost.
My view - the current cadets are the losers. They are stuck in the middle of an adult to adult dispute - and what an example it sets!!
When the dust settles the Air Cadets will be stronger as the procedures concerning relationships with Civ Com and independent charities will be clarified and brought up to date with current legislation. If when this process is completed the parents of current and potential future cadets are not comfortable with what the premier youth development organisation in the UK has to offer(and the rules within which it operates) they have the option to either:
(1)establish their own youth group as I understand that the Woodcraft Folk did when the Scouts modernised their approach.
(2)sign up to the new structures
Everything else is just letting off steam - to the detriment of the very people this organisation exists to develop.
[quote=“celticmentor” post=8120]I find it very depressing that this issue appears to have become one of winning or loosing. The key issue, which I assume is one of improving the cadet experience, seems to have been lost.
My view - the current cadets are the losers. They are stuck in the middle of an adult to adult dispute - and what an example it sets!!
When the dust settles the Air Cadets will be stronger as the procedures concerning relationships with Civ Com and independent charities will be clarified and brought up to date with current legislation. If when this process is completed the parents of current and potential future cadets are not comfortable with what the premier youth development organisation in the UK has to offer(and the rules within which it operates) they have the option to either:
(1)establish their own youth group as I understand that the Woodcraft Folk did when the Scouts modernised their approach.
(2)sign up to the new structures
Everything else is just letting off steam - to the detriment of the very people this organisation exists to develop.[/quote]
Actually ‘The Woodcraft Folk’ split from ‘Kibbo Kift’, and the ‘Boy Scouts’ split after the Advance Party Report in about 1968 to become ‘Scouts’ and ‘BP Scouts’. OK, slight drift off topic, back to the challenge in hand now.
PN - thanks for the factual correction
:idea: [color=#ff0000]After the Upsetting decision of last month the only way I can see that 863 (Thurston) can re-open, is if the CivCom were to resign. If they want the Sqn. Back open for the Cadets then it should not be hard for them to see this. [/color]
Has anyone seen the update to the local news paper about the squadron:
The new committee called Sub comm are trying to help resolve these issues and are just being totally blocked by Civ comm!
Chairman of Civ comm was seen Playing football last week during the time of the meeting with Wing and Sub comm also others. Out of 11 members 0 turned up, that really helps cadets!
I wonder if the ACO could officially disband the squadron and start a brand new one in the same location with a new civilian committee and some experienced local staff and cadets.
I was thinking just the same thing - I really can’t see how Mr Levey is still the committee chairman!
Even if the civ com is officially an independent charity, it is at most a franchise. The ACO might not be able to unilaterally disband the committee, but surely it can banish it from the ACO.
And then start fresh, in the same place - with the same staff, cadets and squadron number!