| Home | Bookmark | Tell | Active petitions in over 75 countries | Follow GoPetition |
Petition Tag - air force
1. Tests For Persian Gulf Illness Veterans 
Do you care about veterans and would like to help many in some small way?
Signing this petition is that WAY you can do just that!
New tests PROVE injury to Persian Gulf Illness Veterans.
A brain scan reported Sep 15 2011 to show brain injury in PGI Vets. A SKY blood test shows chromosome damage in PGI Vets. Yet the CDC which VA follows, has now limited how many symptoms PGI Vets are actually related to PG Illness.
You can go to the website link and see many articles or videos about this subject. Please do! You can show some support and encouragement for PGI Vets that visit that page also! Please do! It is visited by PGI Vets globally.
So with the new tests available, PGI Vets can have their injury rated for compensation and move for treatment research for such injury. Any money now given for research to PGI is only going to be on what symptoms are being recognized as related to PGI.
This is why PGI Vets should have the new tests done. Please sign this petition and share with others to tell the legislature to pass a law for PGI Vets to be tested with the new tests. Thank you for your support! PLEASE share this petition with others!
PLEASE HELP ME AND SHOW YOUR SUPPORT!!!!!
Go to: STOP Veteran Benefit CUTS and like the page please!!! Everyone atleast knows 1 Veteran, some way or some how. They are your Fathers, Mothers, Brothers, Sisters, Cousins, Best Friends, Neighbors, Classmates, or Co-Workers!
PLEASE SUPPORT US IN OUR FIGHT FOR WHAT WE HAVE EARNED BY DEFENDING OUR COUNTRY AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE GIVEN THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE!
PLEASE HELP US FIGHT THIS BATTLE!!!
THANK YOU
SEMPER FI
3. Request for Combined Service Medal
Soldiers receive a good conduct and long service medal after 22 years of service, the police, fire service all have their equivalent, however what happens to someone who serves 22 years or more in a combination of these services ? They are awarded nothing.
Should there not be a combined service medal available to those that carry out their duties with a good record for 22 years are more ? I think they should be rewarded like all the others....
4. Lift the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Ban
As a proud gay veteran, I was discharged from the United States Army based on the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy for openly admitting that I was indeed a homosexual. People say that they believe in equal rights for everyone. But why is it that a homosexual man or woman has the most unequal rights.
If a homosexual male or female were to apply for the same business position as a heterosexual male or female 9 out of 10 times, the heterosexual will get the position applied for just becasue the heterosexual population in this country wants nothing to do with us. Why is it that a homosexual male or female must fight for their rights for everything we do, when you don't see heterosexuals fighting for their rights to live equally or be equally treated. As goes the same for open, homosexual, men and women of this so called "great nation", to openly serve in our armed forces both here wuthin the states as well ad overseas. Did you know that less than 1% of the American population ever joins the military.
We need to quit stereotyping the homosexual males and females, that are so willingly ready to lay down their lives for this country at a moments notice, and support them as they openly serve the United States of America. If you won't stand behind them, then feel free to stand in front of them. It says in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, and I quote verbatim,
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness..."
It says "...that all men are created equal...". It doesn't say "that all STRAIGHT / HETEROSEXUAL men are created equal.". It says "... that ALL men...". What part of "...ALL men..." didn't they understand? My biggest question is who says my choice of lifestyle is wrong? Who says that a man can only be with a woman and not another man and vice versa? This is America and I will pursue my "unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." That's they way we do it! HOOAH!
5. Make JROTC/ROTC signatures on militarysignatures.com
I have sent a request to the owner of militarysignatures.com to begin to make signatures for ROTC/JROTC. Here is my original request as well as the next two emails.
From Me "If you don't mind, I would really appreciate it if you were to make a ROTC/JROTC section. That would really make me happy!"
"Gabe,
That's not a bad idea. Aren't the rank different or something for ROTC? I'm not real sure..
Respectfully,
Jay Guardia
Owner/Webmaster
militarysignatures.com"
From me: "The Ranks vary once you reach the officer ranks. And the Awards very a lot.
View full size
those are the ranks and the awards can be found on
View full size
These are for Air force which can also be found at http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/afjrotcribs.php
View full size
these are for navy which can also be found at http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/njrotcribs.php
The Army JROTC awards can be found at http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/ajrotc.shtml
Most of the Marine JROTC awards can be found at http://www.vanguardmil.com/store/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=7_481_485&zenid=110a2c08b84b3de116c0682b2289d7d5
This is all I know as far as awards outside of Army JROTC.
Thanks for listening,
Gabe
http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r1/seifer93/PFCParadela.jpg?t=1209099096"
(This post does not include the pictures I sent with the email.)
It is obvious that he is considering my request, however I would like to show him that I am not the only one who wants this.
6. Restore the Royal designation to the Canadian navy and Canadian air force
We, the undersigned veterans, citizens and residents of Canada, and loyal subjects of Her Majesty the Queen of Canada, draw the attention of the Minister of National Defence to the following:
WHEREAS the Senate of Canada passed a motion on December 14, 2010, encouraging "the Minister of National Defence to change the official structural name of ‘Maritime Command’ to a new name that includes the word ‘Navy’.";
WHEREAS the Naval Service Act received Royal Assent on May 4, 1910, and the Canadian navy commemorated its centennial in 2010;
AND WHEREAS the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) was the navy of Canada until 1968 when the three Canadian armed services were unified to form the Canadian Forces, and the modern Canadian navy has been known as Canadian Forces Maritime Command since unification, but still refers to itself unofficially as the "navy" and maintains many RCN traditions;
AND WHEREAS Command-in-Chief of the Canadian Forces is vested in the Canadian Monarch and ships of the Canadian Forces continue to be called "Her/His Majesty's Canadian Ship";
AND WHEREAS it is currently improper to use the expression "Royal Canadian Navy" and its abbreviation "RCN" in references to the Canadian navy after February 1, 1968;
AND WHEREAS the Royal designation of the Canadian Navy was executed by a Royal Proclamation which has never been revoked, and that the Canadian Government and the Canadian Forces are required to resume usage of the expression “Royal Canadian Navy”, if the expression “Canadian Navy” is used in any official capacity;
AND WHEREAS the above also pertains to the "Royal Canadian Air Force" and its abbreviation "RCAF" in references to the Canadian air force after unification, which has been known as Canadian Forces Air Command since September 2, 1975, but still refers to itself unofficially as the "air force" and maintains many RCAF traditions;
AND WHEREAS notwithstanding the National Defence Act, which states that "The Canadian Forces are the armed forces of Her Majesty raised by Canada and consist of one Service called the Canadian Armed Forces", separate service uniforms were reintroduced in 1986, separate service chiefs were reinstated and returned to National Defence Headquarters in 1997, separate service websites were officially established and references to the separate services are now commonplace throughout the increasingly tri-service Canadian Forces, all of which have been accommodated without in any way compromising the unified command structure, integrated nature or corporate unity of the Canadian Forces;
AND WHEREAS resuming usage of the Royal designation as it pertains to the "Canadian Navy" and "Canadian Air Force" could be facilitated without in any way undermining the unity of the Canadian Forces acting as a single organization under a unified command structure, and without in any way compromising the integration of military operations, logistics support, personnel and administration of the separate services acting together under the current functional command system, which was the intent of Bill C-243, The Canadian Forces Reorganization Act, which we the petitioners strongly support;
AND WHEREAS resuming usage of such Royal designations could be facilitated without in any way replacing Canadian Forces Maritime Command and Canadian Forces Air Command, whose Chiefs of Staff would continue to exercise nominal command over the navy and air force respectively;
AND WHEREAS resuming usage of such Royal designations could be efficiently accomplished and executed without material cost to Canadian taxpayers;
AND WHEREAS resuming usage of such Royal designations would restore the traditional esprit de corps of the navy and air force, just as continued usage of the Royal designation of longstanding regular force and reserve regiments has preserved the traditional esprit de corps of the army, and just as continued usage of the Royal designation of the longstanding Royal Canadian Mounted Police has preserved the traditional esprit de corps of Canada's federal constabulary force;
En français:
Nous soussignés(es), les vétérans, citoyens et résidants du Canada ainsi que les loyaux sujets de Sa Majesté la Reine du Canada, désirons attirer l'attention de la Chambre sur ce qui suit :
ATTENDU:
que le Sénat du Canada a adopté une motion sur Décembre 14, 2010, encourageant "le ministre de la Défense nationale pour changer le nom officiel de construction» du Commandement maritime à un nouveau nom qui inclut le mot «Marine» . ";
que la Loi du Service Naval a reçu la Sanction royale le 4 mai 1910, et la marine canadienne a célébré son centenaire en 2010;
que la Marine Royale Canadienne (MRC) était la marine du Canada jusqu'en 1968 où les trois Forces armées canadiennes ont été unifiées pour former les Forces canadiennes;
que la Marine canadienne moderne a été nommée « Forces canadienne Commandement maritime » depuis l'unification, mais se rapporte toujours officieusement à elle-même en tant que « Marine canadienne » et qu’elle maintient beaucoup de traditions de la MRC ;
que le commandement des Forces canadiennes est investi dans le monarque et les navires des Forces canadiennes continuent à s'appeler « Navire Canadien de Sa Majesté »;
qu’il est actuellement inexact d'employer l'expression « Marine Royale Canadienne » et son abréviation « MRC » dans les références à la Marine canadienne depuis le 1er février 1968;
que la désignation « royale » de la Marine canadienne a été instaurée par une proclamation royale qui n'a jamais été révoquée et que le gouvernement du Canada et les Forces canadiennes sont obligées de reprendre l'utilisation de l'expression « Marine Royale Canadienne » si l'expression « Marine canadienne » est employée dans sa qualité officielle;
que ce qui précède concerne également l’ « Aviation Royale du Canada » et son abréviation « ARC », qui s’appelle « Forces canadienne Commandement aérien » depuis le 2ieme septembre 1975;
que malgré la Loi sur la Défense Nationale , qui déclare que « les Forces canadiennes sont les forces armées de Sa Majesté levées par le Canada [et] constituent un service intégré appelé ‘‘Forces armées canadiennes’’ », des uniformes séparés ont été réintroduits en 1986 et que des chefs de services séparés ont été rétablis et sont retournés au siège social de la Défense Nationale en 1997. De plus des sites Web séparés des services ont été officiellement mis en ligne et les références aux services séparés sont maintenant une banalité dans toutes les Forces canadiennes de plus en plus tri-service ayant été ainsi adaptées sans compromettre a structure unifiée de commandement, la nature intégrée ou l'unité de corporation des Forces canadiennes;
que réinstaurer la désignation royale appartenant à la « Marine canadienne » et la « Force aérienne canadienne » pourrait être fait sans miner l'unité des Forces canadiennes en tant qu'organisation simple sous une structure unifiée de commande et sans compromettre l'intégration des opérations, de l'appui de logistique, du personnel militaire et de l'administration des services séparés tels que voulus par le Bill C-243, Loi sur la Réorganisation des Forces canadiennes que nous, pétitionnaires soutenons fortement;
que la réinstauration de l'utilisation de telles désignations royales pourrait être effectuée sans remplacer les Force canadiennes Commandement Maritime et les Forces canadiennes Commandement Aérien, dont les chefs du personnel continueraient à exercer le commandement nominal;
que la réinstauration de l'utilisation de telles désignations royales pourrait être efficacement accomplie et exécutée sans coût pour les contribuables canadiens;
et que la réinstauration de l'utilisation de telles désignations royales reconstituerait l’esprit de corps traditionnel de la Marine et de la Force aérienne, tout comme son usage continu l’a préservé pour les régiments réguliers et de réserve de l'armée et tout comme c’est le cas pour la Gendarmerie royale du Canada, la police fédérale du Canada;
7. Amend Lautenberg Act Amendment
April 24, 2007
This petition is electronically signed and submitted to Congress by the people of the United States Of America.
Later Started in December 2005 but failed and petition was closed due to lack of signatures.
Rewritten By Eric R. Clark of Fort Worth Texas, to include not a Repeal of Act
The Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban (1996) was an amendment to the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 which was passed by the 104th US Congress in the Fall of 1996. Officially known as 'Gun Ban for Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence' -- 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)'[1], 'Public Law 104-208'[2] and is often referred to as the Lautenberg Amendment after its sponsor, Frank Lautenberg.
The Lautenberg Act conflicts with State Laws that are in effect that do not impose a statute under federal law, and or state laws preventing persons from owning a firearm, ammunition, or possessing of such items.
In Example: A person convicted of Domestic Violene in Texas is charged with and convicted of a Misdemeanor Charge Class A. A person convicted of Domestic Violence in very few other states Domestic Violence is charged as a felony.
In all states a violation of a protective order, as well as any other act of Domestic Violence while a protective order is in place is Considered a Felony and the Charges that were initially filed will automatically become a felony charge of Domestic Violence.
The Lautenberg Amendment and or Act does not specify to whether or not a Felony Conviction of Domestic Violence whether by plea, or by Deferred Adjudication or a Misdemeanor Charge of Domestic Violence should fall under the act.
The Lautenberg Amendment excludes all persons convicted of any type of Domestic Violence, or the Subject of a Magistrates Protective order from owning or possessing any type of Firearm, Ammunition, and or other types of weapons that involve a projectile device.
8. Elimination from the selection for the United States Air Force
The reason for my elimination is that I have minor disability due to being blind in one eye. But, no record has been issued stating that I am disabled. However I am physically fit and able to perform the tasks demanded by the Armed Forces during and after basic training.
I am willing to provide the proper documentation from my physicians stating that I am able to execute the necessary duties. this matter infringes on the statutes set forth in anti-discrimination laws.
Discrimination is treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice. As an American Citizen I am entitled to the same opportunities that all other citizens are entitled. My dream is to be a part of the United States Air Force so that I may take part in a legacy of excellence and contribute to my fellow man.
I hope to be considered for training as an Air Craft Mechanic, Medic, Weather Officer or anything that deals with computers and aircraft navigation systems. I know there are many jobs I am not qualified to do, but I want to perform any job that i can.
I am certainly qualified for any of the aforementioned positions.
I am asking for the opportunity to join the Air Force and make my family proud by protecting this nation. This has been my dream since I was a young child. I want to put my life on the line to protect this country, which has done so much for me.
Please help me fulfill my potential and serve the United States. With Your help, my dream of doing this could happen.
