Cadpat and Personal Info in the Surplus

[rw4th]

If anything classified under ITAR that is supposed to be destroyed is sold off, in theory, a big stick should reach out and whack you.

RV, you're not getting my point. If someone deemed that that stuff should NOT be sold, then how did it make its way to a surplus store in the first place? The problem here isn't the store; it's the CF. The people who should be punished and whacked with the big stick are the supply fucks who didn't keep track of the stuff in the first place.

CEL Surplus didn't steal the stuff from the CF, nor did they defraud the CF to obtain the equipment: it was freely purchased from the CF supply system. To then turn around and want to punish CEL Surplus is asinine.

Your safety here is not being compromised by the private entrepreneur doing what a private entrepreneur does to stay alive, it's being compromised by the incompetent supply people who didn't keep track of the equipment. They are the ones you need to direct your anger at.

You are manning an OP in some crappy out of the way hole and some one shows up in a complete set of CADPAT, that he bought 42nd hand in some geopolitical hotspot that started out at the store of the 'nice guy trying to earn a living by selling surplus CADPAT and other military equipment', speaking fluent english and French looking for all the world like he just had his truck shot out from under him and is on his last legs.   You are concerned for his welfare as he drags himself towards you and you dispatch your subordinate to go outside the wire and help a fellow Canadian soldier.   You subordinate arrives just in time to help this stranger before he succumbs to his wounds and brings him back to the OP.   Then the ungrateful swine blows your OP up because he is a terrorist and you did not recognize him because of his clothing..... could happen, especially at night.   Think about it, how often do you see people go through an OP without being challenged just because they were 'dressed right'.

The argument doesn't quite stand up. CADPAT "like" uniforms are widelly available anyways, and what if it was a US Woodland of British DPM uniform? Or a even a civilian for that matter ...

 

[Infanteer]

I'm still trying to figure out why the CF hides the CADPAT design in Area 51....

 

[RV]

Hey there rw4th,

  Unfortunately mistakes like this do indeed happen.   I recall quite a few years ago a destroyer (can't remember which but I believe it was a Mackenzie or a Restigouche class boat - Navy guys help me out here..) was paid off and sold while it still contained apparently 'sensitive' parts on it.   The guy who bought was in the States I believe and would not give the stuff back.   I can't remember how it turned out but the mistake was a bit embarrassing for the West coast fleet.

  I do agree with the point you are making in that it is not the store operator that made the initial mistake and in no way do I infer that he stole the equipment.   Were I in the COC of the person who authorized the shipment I would certainly root out who it was since everything is signed off by someone,   and have a quiet off to the side 'chat' with them about not embarrassing the CF through incompetance.

  I stand by my point that the guy (who by the sounds of it knew what he had and knew he should not have had it) should have returned the stuff or at least asked questions as to why they got rid of what they did before trying to flog it.   If he had returned it to the military asking only in return what he purchased it for rather than trying to get 'fair market value' for it, he would not be in trouble.   By the sounds of the article he was being offered compensation for it quite generously by receiving way more than he started with only in older material rather than the shiny high tech stuff that 'everyone' wants.

  I believe he is a victim of his own greed more than a government conspiracy to put him out of business.   Lastly, while I don't blame him for trying, there comes a time to take your feet out of the sand and take the offer given to you before you hold out too long and get nothing or less in return.


My question to you is, what argument I am trying to make "doesn't stand up"?   You allude that is doesn't but you offer no rebuttal that convinces me because I beleive that private citizens have a stake in national defence, most of them just don't see it.   If the person that owns this surplus store is ex-military, as someone previously stated, then he knows better.

While I certainly believe that anyone who approaches your OP is potentially dangerous, even your own troops, it is hard not to get caught up in the moment seeing someone is apparent distress and not wanting to help them, it is human nature.   If that someone is dressed in our uniform it can lower a persons guard just enough to not notice critical things that can get you killed.

In closing I add, trust me when I say, you won't offend me with your opinions, you are entitled to them just I am to mine, and I am certainly NOT angry no matter how passionately I feel about this subject.     ;D

Cheers,

R-V

RV, you're not getting my point. If someone deemed that that stuff should NOT be sold, then how did it make its way to a surplus store in the first place? The problem here isn't the store; it's the CF. The people who should be punished and whacked with the big stick are the supply fucks who didn't keep track of the stuff in the first place.

CEL Surplus didn't steal the stuff from the CF, nor did they defraud the CF to obtain the equipment: it was freely purchased from the CF supply system. To then turn around and want to punish CEL Surplus is asinine.

Your safety here is not being compromised by the private entrepreneur doing what a private entrepreneur does to stay alive, it's being compromised by the incompetent supply people who didn't keep track of the equipment. They are the ones you need to direct your anger at.

The argument doesn't quite stand up. CADPAT "like" uniforms are widelly available anyways, and what if it was a US Woodland of British DPM uniform? Or a even a civilian for that matter ...

 

[RV]

I think it is in Area 41...we don't have enough budget left to afford 51.    ;D

I'm still trying to figure out why the CF hides the CADPAT design in Area 51....

 

[Ghost]

You are manning an OP in some crappy out of the way hole and some one shows up in a complete set of CADPAT, that he bought 42nd hand in some geopolitical hotspot that started out at the store of the 'nice guy trying to earn a living by selling surplus CADPAT and other military equipment', speaking fluent english and French looking for all the world like he just had his truck shot out from under him and is on his last legs.  You are concerned for his welfare as he drags himself towards you and you dispatch your subordinate to go outside the wire and help a fellow Canadian soldier.  You subordinate arrives just in time to help this stranger before he succumbs to his wounds and brings him back to the OP.  Then the ungrateful swine blows your OP up because he is a terrorist and you did not recognize him because of his clothing..... could happen, especially at night.  Think about it, how often do you see people go through an OP without being challenged just because they were 'dressed right'.

I think the beard and turban would give them away.

 

[Big Foot]

Ghost, there are Sikhs and Muslims serving in the CF. Remember that before the next time you post about something being wrong with wear combats with a turban and a beard.

 

[Ghost]

Fine dude you can go attend to him while I get out of the blast radius.

 

[RV]

Hey Ghost,

Not all terrorists come with beards and turbans.   i.e. FLQ, IRA, Shining Path, etc etc ...

That is a pretty narrow viewpoint, hopefully, (and I am presuming), you were just trying to be funny.  

and remember, 'one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter'.   It is all a matter of perspective.

Cheers,

R-V.

I think the beard and turban would give them away.

 

[Pte. Bloggins]

Yeah and I'm not even going to say anything about the General rank in his avatar. Oh wait, I just did...

 

[rw4th]

Here's a comment on the CADPAT stuff by the guy himself in a similar thread in the equipment forum

My name is Scott Collacutt owner of CEL Surplus. I retired in May 2000, and have been running a military shop since. Over the past few years I have had the misfortune of receiving some sensitive items disposed of by the CF. Every time something was received in error it was returned without any harm to the CF or my business. For the past 2 years I have been receiving CADPAT clothing, the first time I came across it I contacted supply (R&D) and was told that it was a clothing article and that it was part of the surplus contract like the rest of the surplus I receive. CADPAT clothing is not a controlled item like so many believe, the Government of Canada agencies CTAT and the Controlled Goods Registration Program do not recognize CADPAT as an controlled item and have stated that it is a military policy only. LCol. J. MacKay of Edmonton Supply personally stated this in a letter dated November 24, 2004 written to CEL Surplus in retraction of previous comments mistakenly made by the CF to CEL Surplus. According to the CGCM (supply catalogue) CADPAT clothing does not have to be destroyed (Demil classification "A") and is classified non CTAT or Controlled (classification "N") only the CF's own CANFORGEN dated August, 2002 stated that all CADPAT clothing was to be shredded. Thank you for the chance to explain part of my side of this story. Once the smoke clears I will be glad to share more .....

According to him, and the information he has been given, CADPAT clothing are NOT controlled items.

 

[George Wallace]

Here's a comment on the CADPAT stuff by the guy himself in a similar thread in the equipment forum

According to him, and the information he has been given, CADPAT clothing are NOT controlled items.

You've provided a "quote" that may be taken as 'fabricated' if you don't provide a credible link to back it up.

 

[rw4th]

You've provided a "quote" that may be taken as 'fabricated' if you don't provide a credible link to back it up.

Agreed, but since no one responded to it in the other thread and this one seems to have more activity, I though I would transpose it here. I don't know whether the claims made by CEL are true or false and I'm actually hoping someone here (maybe a supply type) who has access to the relevant information can actually get to the bottom of this.

From CEL's information it would seem the CF itself has conflicting directives as to what to do with CADPAT clothing upon it's decommissioning.

Were I in the COC of the person who authorized the shipment I would certainly root out who it was since everything is signed off by someone,   and have a quiet off to the side 'chat' with them about not embarrassing the CF through incompetance.

So the guy who actually released the â Å“protectedâ ? materials should get a lesser punishment then you'd want to impose on the private entrepreneur for selling what the CF released to him? If we go after CEL with a big stick, then at the very least the CF member(s) responsible for releasing the uniforms should be looking at a court martial/club ed/discharge. If this is truly as big an offense as some here are making it out to be, then the punishment should be proportional.

 

[RV]

If I have nothing to do tomorrow I will check out the CGCS on CADPAT stuff and confirm the classifications but I think they are probably legit.

CANFORGENs have the power to direct the system and the people in it to do things in a certain manner and while CGCS (CGCM is outdated) may say one thing, a CANFORGEN has power in it's own right.   If the CANFORGEN states CADPAT will be shredded, then it must be so.

For rw4th:

I do not recall, and could not find in my posts, where I made any statements as to punishing the store owner, i.e. hitting him with the big stick; I believe I said this is what the person who improperly disposed of the item should receive.   I think the store owner should stop being greedy, give the stuff back and take the deal he was offered, before he loses more than he started out with.   If he has the resources to fight this then that is his call.   It is only my opinion that he should just return the stuff at cost and be done with it.   For you to assume I would punish the messenger greater than the root is absurd.

It is a bold statement that you make assuming my quiet chat off to the side would be a simple 'slap on the wrist'.   Considering you don't know me at all you have no real idea how I would deal with this situation and you seem assume a quiet chat off to the side is automatically a 'non-punishment' (this is how I view a slap on the wrist which should be used as a motivator not as a disciplinary action).  

First I would investigate what happened and then decide from there what needed to be done.   It may have been a procedural error, or it may have been incompetance.   I would address the problems I found depending on my investigation.   If charges were warranted, rest assured, they would happen, if not, then procedures would be amended as required.  

Any number of possibilities that may have created this situation, which I can only speculate about, will create an equal or greater number of outcomes.

I would like you to show me the quote(s) from my posts that leads you to believe I would punish the shop owner greater than the person or procedure that started this foul up.   I ask that you send it privately so no one else has to follow this sidebar from the real topic.   I am curious as to what I said that led you to believe this.   I try to be clear about what I say so my curiousity is peaked.




Cheers,

R-V

Agreed, but since no one responded to it in the other thread and this one seems to have more activity, I though I would transpose it here. I don't know whether the claims made by CEL are true or false and I'm actually hoping someone here (maybe a supply type) who has access to the relevant information can actually get to the bottom of this.

From CEL's information it would seem the CF itself has conflicting directives as to what to do with CADPAT clothing upon it's decommissioning.

So the guy who actually released the â Å“protectedâ ? materials should get a lesser punishment then you'd want to impose on the private entrepreneur for selling what the CF released to him? If we go after CEL with a big stick, then at the very least the CF member(s) responsible for releasing the uniforms should be looking at a court martial/club ed/discharge. If this is truly as big an offense as some here are making it out to be, then the punishment should be proportional.

 

[rw4th]

RV: Fair enought. My comments were not all directed at you, but at the tone of some other posts in the thread.  Anyway, I guess we more or less agree so it's all good.

If the classification of the CADPAT goods pans out as described, then does a CANFORGEN ordering their destruction have any legal bearing over a civilian?

 

[RV]

My apologies to you rw4th I must have misunderstood what direction your argument was heading.  You did use some of what
I said as a quote and I reacted to it. 

The CANFORGEN does exist and is explicit in regards to CADPAT:

CANFORGEN 120/02 DSSPM 0089 300845Z OCT 02

"SERVICEABLE CADPAT RPT CADPAT ITEMS WILL BE RETAINED AND RE-ISSUED WHILE ITEMS BEYOND ECONOMICAL REPAIR SHALL BE DESTROYED LOCALLY IAW REF B." 

This excerpt is part of the CANFORGEN.  Ref B is referring to the Canadian Forces Supply Manual, specifically the disposal of unserviceable items.

If you search on the DIN you will find this in the CANFORGEN website.

If you go onto the DMMD website you can find a reference to the disposal of CADPAT which states that:

DMMD 048 - DISPOSAL OF CANADIAN DISRUPTIVE PATTERN(CADPAT) UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT:

Excerpt:
"AS PER REF B SUPPLY OFFICERS MUST DIRECT THEIR DISPOSAL SECTIONS AND ALL RESERVE UNITS UNDER THEIR CHAIN OF COMMAND THAT CADPAT UNIFORMS MUST BE REDUCED TO RAGS PRIOR TO BEING DECLARED TO CROWN ASSETS. REDUCING TO RAGS MEANS TEARING OR SHREDDING THE UNIFORM TO ENSURE IT CAN NEVER BE RETURNED TO ITS WHOLE STATE."
"SHOULD YOU REQUIRE FURTHER INFORMATION YOU MAY CONTACT DMMD 3-2-2"

It is quite clear that CADPAT is not for sale to the public.  The CANFORGEN is dated from Oct 02 and the DMMD webiste is Sep 04.

As per anything in the military the latest instruction is the one that carries the most weight.

I am not sure how CANFORGENs affect the civilian public directly but I would imagine that if the Canadian government wants these items back they will get them back legally in some fashion or another.  Whether or not buddies business survives the battle remains to be seen.  Like I said, perhaps it will be seen eventually as a case where he should have cut his losses and not succumbed to his greed.

Hope this clears at least some of the fog.


R-V


P.S. These items are security rated as  - UNCLASSIFIED

Link to CANFORGEN site: http://vcds.mil.ca/vcds-exec/pubs/canforgen/intro_e.asp

RV: Fair enought. My comments were not all directed at you, but at the tone of some other posts in the thread.   Anyway, I guess we more or less agree so it's all good.

If the classification of the CADPAT goods pans out as described, then does a CANFORGEN ordering their destruction have any legal bearing over a civilian?

 

[LF(CMO)]

Here's a comment on the CADPAT stuff by the guy himself in a similar thread in the equipment forum


Quote from: CEL on March 01, 2005, 00:14:53
My name is Scott Collacutt owner of CEL Surplus. I retired in May 2000, and have been running a military shop since. Over the past few years I have had the misfortune of receiving some sensitive items disposed of by the CF. Every time something was received in error it was returned without any harm to the CF or my business. For the past 2 years I have been receiving CADPAT clothing, the first time I came across it I contacted supply (R&D) and was told that it was a clothing article and that it was part of the surplus contract like the rest of the surplus I receive. CADPAT clothing is not a controlled item like so many believe, the Government of Canada agencies CTAT and the Controlled Goods Registration Program do not recognize CADPAT as an controlled item and have stated that it is a military policy only. LCol. J. MacKay of Edmonton Supply personally stated this in a letter dated November 24, 2004 written to CEL Surplus in retraction of previous comments mistakenly made by the CF to CEL Surplus. According to the CGCM (supply catalogue) CADPAT clothing does not have to be destroyed (Demil classification "A") and is classified non CTAT or Controlled (classification "N") only the CF's own CANFORGEN dated August, 2002 stated that all CADPAT clothing was to be shredded. Thank you for the chance to explain part of my side of this story. Once the smoke clears I will be glad to share more

As I'm well acquainted with Scotty, the above is genuine.  He is now embroiled in a struggle to survive as they are attempting to ruin him and put him out of business.  The last four shipments that he has received have all been deliberately destroyed by slicing.  Plainclothes RCMP were called in to witness and document.  He has retained legal counsel.

I will provide more info as it becomes available.  His odds, in my opinion, are about 50/50 at best!

 

[fsdamo]

firstly, - you all may have to excuse my ignorance on the subject and im definately not trying to insult anyone here, just trying to get a little information.

just writing in reply to the person that commented on how he sees how plgrs should not be sold as surplus, - how do you justify this? they are not all that accurate anyway. what is your reasoning for this? have they previously been sold as surplus? could someone please expand on this a bit.

any comments would be much appreciated.

cheers,
damo