ClearedHot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIUAGomCzK0

I get the high wing, but engines on the bottom? Not an A-10 Groupie (obviously we all know the AC-130 is the worlds best CAS platform), but a lot of survivability thought went into the Hawg, engines located high on the tail, exhaust partially obstructed by the tail. This thing looks fragile.

What could possibly go wrong? US, Chinese warships nearly collide in S. China Sea

Hella of a guy... 7. On the U.S. war with Iraq: “If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America. They don’t care for human beings.” Via cbsnews.com 6. On Israel: “Israel should withdraw from all the areas which it won from the Arabs in 1967, and in particular Israel should withdraw completely from the Golan Heights, from south Lebanon and from the West Bank.” Via jweekly.com 5. On the U.S. war with Iraq: “All that (Mr. Bush) wants is Iraqi oil.” Via cbsnews.com 4. Mandela on Castro and the Cuban revolution: “From its earliest days, the Cuban Revolution has also been a source of inspiration to all freedom-loving people. We admire the sacrifices of the Cuban people in maintaining their independence and sovereignty in the face of the vicious imperialist-orquestrated campaign to destroy the impressive gain made in the Cuban Revolution. … Long live the Cuban Revolution. Long live comrade Fidel Castro.” Via lanic.utexas.edu 3. Mandela on Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, his longtime supporter: “It is our duty to give support to the brother leader … especially in regards to the sanctions which are not hitting just him, they are hitting the ordinary masses of the people … our African brothers and sisters.” Via finalcall.com 2. On the U.S. preparing to invade Iraq in a 2002 interview with Newsweek: “If you look at those matters, you will come to the conclusion that the attitude of the United States of America is a threat to world peace.” Via newsweek.com 1. On a Palestinian state: “The UN took a strong stand against apartheid; and over the years, an international consensus was built, which helped to bring an end to this iniquitous system. But we know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.” Via cbsnews.com

It was very odd, I got a note saying the Daily Pic thread was gone, I did not see it listed but when I did a search it came right up. I double checked the settings, it was not locked, not hidden, so I posted a test and it seemed to work just fine after that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2gCFOtaZPo

So the insurance companies will LOWER their rates, truly, one of the funniest posts this year on BO.net.

While attending the funeral for someone who was on the U.S. Terror Watch List until 2008, POTUS found time to shake hands with Raul Castro and take some Selfie's during the service.

The Baby Jesus has been kicked off Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina

FWIW Of interest from Eric Thomas' lawyer... Fellow graduates and distinguished colleagues, Looking at this address list leaves me in awe and does me honor. If I could select a group of people whom I respect more I don’t think I could do better. I would like to add my thanks to John in speaking up on this matter. I have been largely silent to date other than what Eric has released, and I want to do nothing that could possibly prejudice him. But I do want to set the record straight. People who know me know that my love for the Air Force and for USAFA is genuine and enduring. I’ve no wish to trash either. I am a graduate myself (1972), as is my second oldest son, (2005) who is on active duty at this writing. By the same token, I have an obligation to my client and to the truth. What follows is my best recollection of events prompted by a rather large stack of documents. If there are failings or inaccuracies, they are mine and mine alone. My memory is not merely imperfect, but probably doesn’t even make the curve. For the last several years our Academy has faced a near herculean task of trying to do something about sexual assault, illegal drug use (especially Spice), and underage drinking. In doing that, they must face the reality that abuses such as this can and often do occur inside closed, tight-knit, sub-communities within the Academy—intercollegiate teams (recall the Wrestling team honor scandal in 1972), and yes, ethnic communities, and sometimes both. They also have to take on what may well be an appreciable number of cadets to whom loyalty to class and classmate trumps all. Shortly before I retired in 2002 I overheard a first class cadet who had sat on an Honor Board that had convicted a fellow firstie ream out her classmates, with words like, “how can you convict a classmate, ever!” (The evidence of cheating in this case was overwhelming. It was not that particular cadet’s first time before an honor board, either.) She was furious and didn’t care who knew it. What I found so disheartening was not merely what the firstie said, but that she was apparently so certain that hers was the prevailing ethic within her class that she felt at liberty to express it openly. The toleration clause has always been a matter of some controversy, (recall that Annapolis does not have it) and this is nothing new. I don’t know how many of us ever confronted the wrenching situation where you had to choose between tolerating and thus yourself becoming an honor violator, or turning in a classmate or a teammate. I am thankful always that while a cadet I never had to make that awful choice. But the reality is that the Honor Code states that a cadet is required to “snitch” on a fellow cadet who, after confrontation, is still suspected of having committed an honor violation. So having cadets tell on other cadets is also nothing new, at least when it comes to honor. In fact, it remains a requirement of our Code. Nobody doubts that it runs squarely athwart the predominant culture of young people today. Recall the West Point cadets from Texas who had committed murder and actually confided that to their classmates, so certain were they that it would not get out. As a general rule under the UCMJ there is not a collateral requirement to tell on a classmate, even if you suspect him of having committed a UCMJ offense. This has particular relevance to things like underage drinking, where USAFA routinely will punish the ranking cadets present where underage drinking took place, even if they did not directly contribute to it, simply for not intervening and allowing it to occur. Zero tolerance sounds so appealing, but has built into it a paradox. Because USAFA makes it clear that certain things are presumptively cause for disenrollment, tremendous pressure not to snitch builds into the algorithm, because to do so means that a classmate is nearly certain to be disenrolled. Thus, systematically, the zero tolerance policy can have the opposite of the intended effect because a code of silence virtually descends. Since there is a “death penalty” for any sort of involvement, or even knowing about it, cadets figure they have little or nothing to lose by keeping quiet, since if they’re caught either way they’re out. I know we’d all like to believe that cadets are above human nature and moral cost-benefit-analysis, but the reality is we are all fallen. Finally, there is the reality that getting an outsider into a tightly-knit USAFA sub-culture, association or IC team borders on impossible. If it is rumored that members of the football team were doing Spice, or that a given squadron has a sexual predator in it, trying to investigate it without having somebody with access borders on Sisyphean. Again, we must contend with the law of unintended consequences. BCT has changed dramatically from when we were there and much of it focuses on building class unity. Entire squadrons or flights can be punished for the derelictions of one. This can have the unintended effect of teaching basics and doolies that class loyalty comes first, and one fails all fail. Neither contributes to the idea of individual responsibility or accountability. With respect to sexual assault, USAFA has a policy where the victim could decide if she wanted to pursue the UCMJ route or not. Again, a female underclass cadet who might have been victimized by another cadet who happens to be a member of, say, an intercollegiate team, might be seriously intimidated by the prospect of being the one to wreck the future of a popular and implicitly powerful cadet athlete and possibly even the team itself. Once again, by trying to encourage victims to come forward, an unavoidable paradox was built into the system. Eric Thomas is an African-American who was a football recruit. He was “inside” a lot of the communities that OSI agents could not expect to penetrate so long as the code of silence within those communities stood fast. But he had witnessed a sexual assault, was friends with the victim, who chose not to go along the UCMJ path because she was scared not merely of the perpetrator, but his friends. He viewed that as a terrible injustice. He was also present at a major cadet Spice party. When he was interviewed, he ultimately agreed to become a confidential informant for the OSI, focusing on sexual assault. Ultimately, he became instrumental in the general court-martial and conviction of two different cadets for various sexual assaults. Both had multiple cadet victims. One had five cadet victims. The OSI lauded him as one of their “most valuable” confidential informants, responsible for over 25 proactive AFOSI cases. Yet all of this was underground. Eric’s AOC knew nothing of his activities for OSI; in fact at the time only the commandant, Brig Gen Clark, and a deputy knew about it. Eric would tell you straight up he was far from a model cadet. There were things he did (chiefly breaking restrictions) that had nothing to do with the OSI. But it is equally true that some of his OTF’s that went towards his demerits and the MRC decision were related to times he was working for OSI. So, when his AOC recommended him for disenrollment, something entirely defensible given he knew nothing about Eric’s role, Eric’s handling agent arranged with the commandant to take the case to an investigating officer so that OSI could be more forthcoming to the investigating officer about tradecraft and what Eric had done for them. They knew that in the broader venue of a MRC, they could not discuss tradecraft. Then misfortune stepped in. General Clark pcs’d and a new commandant took over. At about the same time the leadership at the OSI also changed. The disenrollment procedure was changed back to a MRC. Just fifteen minutes before the OSI handler was going to go before the MRC and tell them what Eric had done, he was ordered by the new OSI squadron commander not to go. Eric was understandably frantic; his handler, his wingman, had abandoned him. So on his own he tried to tell the MRC what he had done, but they were dubious. I do not think it violates any confidence to say that I too was skeptical of all Eric told me, but I have since received confirmation to such an extent that I know the above to be true. After the MRC disenrollment recommendation Eric tried again and again to contact his OSI handlers through text, cell phones, and everything else, but received no response. Finally, he got hold of his handling officer in November of 2012. During all of this time his disenrollment package was being processed. I do not know the reason for the delay. It was not until November of last year that his handler finally contacted Eric, and told him that he would meet with him. Instead, when Eric showed up he was met by the OSI commander and another agent who figuratively worked him over for an hour or two, telling him he was a disgrace, had violated his non-disclosure oath and was unfit to be an officer, or words to that effect. At this point I attempted to call the OSI commander, but did not receive a return call the first time. The second time, I left a message and he did subsequently return the call, but for whatever reason we were never able to speak one-on-one. It was at about this point that Eric’s disenrollment package left the commandant’s shop and went to the superintendent, Lt Gen Gould. I was in contact with JA, and told them of my concerns that Eric’s role with OSI had not been fully and completely understood by his chain of command. Meantime, we sent in the first Privacy/FOIA request to OSI. It was returned “no records.” I know this to be categorically false. I sent a letter to Lt Gen Gould, a portion of which the Gazette published. It was provided at the behest of my client. The thrust of my letter was that I thought the AFOSI had treated Eric badly, yes, even “despicably.” They had deceived him and left him in the lurch at the MRC. Very important to understand is that I did not know and do not know to this day what the OSI had told the superintendent or the commandant, if anything, about Eric. He had no way of knowing that either. But the disenrollment recommendation flowed inevitably from the fact that the MRC plainly did not believe Eric’s claims. I was told through JA that it would be helpful to General Gould’s consideration if we could provide some corroboration to show he was on an OSI op at the time of any of his OTFs. Recalling that OSI had declined to provide any records, in fact had claimed that there were no records, the only thing we had was a few texts that show that on at least one or two of his OTFs he was actively working for OSI. Ultimately, General Gould decided on the disenrollment, but also did not recommend he be made to pay the cost of his education—something that I know from many other cases can approach $190,000 for a second-semester firstie. I had earlier spoken to General Gould on another case about the devastating effect of that payback, which is brutal. The alternative, enlisted service, was formerly the presumptive outcome, but manpower and budget crunches along with a change in the law have reversed the default to be reimbursement. I gave Eric to appreciate that the decision to forgive repayment was a major concession, and I believe it was probably made with Eric’s OSI work in mind. He also received a fully honorable discharge. In the meantime, a second FOIA request to AFOSI resulted in a “no records” reply. It was not until Eric got his congressman involved that OSI records came forward. In deciding who is being honest and who is not in all of this, I think it’s important to recognize that twice the OSI denied that they had any records on Eric. The result was that I cannot know for sure if USAFA leadership had the benefit of records that are now available at the time they were making their decision. If they did have them, then I’m hopeful that they were not aware that OSI was claiming that none existed. Because I was once SJA for OSI, I know a little bit about the process and procedures of recruiting, deploying, and handling confidential informants. From what I know, this was not followed. AFOSI cannot promise to get a confidential informant “off” or promise immunity, and Eric does not claim that they did. What it is obligated to do is to come forward and state truthfully what a confidential informant has done in the appropriate forum. Leaving Eric to dangle in the wind at his MRC then berating him for disclosing his activities does not comport with my recollection of OSI confidential informant protocols. Lying to a confidential informant and telling him that there is no record of his assistance is, if anything, more clear cut. Apropos to the culture. It took raw guts to do what Eric did. He was targeted against what at least one of the victims thought to be a group of cadets who were bulletproof. He bucked the powerful current of umerta within his generation and his culture, at genuine physical risk. Once he was outed, he became a pariah in every sense of the word. He may never be able to shake that off. Physical courage at USAFA is still plentiful, but what we need is the moral courage that Eric had and has. I don’t know that I would have had the strength of character and the resolution to do what he did. As I told my classmates, “if we had more like him, we wouldn’t need so many of them.” So this long jeremiad ends as it began. This is not about trashing USAFA, or the OSI corporately, or even the concept of using cadets as confidential informants. This is about honoring your commitments and telling the truth. From everything I know Eric’s handling agents behaved with integrity—they may have erred in not preventing him from working on ops while he was on restriction, which can be chalked up to inexperience. But I can think of no excuse for telling a cadet you’re going to bat for him at a MRC, then not showing up, refusing to answer his repeated requests for meetings afterwards, then tricking him into a “special inspection” (some of us know well what that is) with OSI command when he thought he was finally meeting with his handling agent, and finally twice lying about his OSI records. Despite all else, Eric emerged with his honor intact. I hope this to be the opportunity for USAFA and the Air Force at large to take a serious look at things like Zero Tolerance, the building of class loyalty at the expense of individual responsibility, and the a priori decision that even knowing about a non-honor offense and not reporting it is as serious as the offense itself. All of them have the effect of reinforcing the kind of groupthink that we cannot afford in our Air Force or in our Academy. Whether or not to continue using cadets as CI needs to be looked at, of course. But it should be done with the understanding that sexual assault cases in particular will prove difficult to investigate, still more difficult to result in conviction. That will remain the case unless and until we can reshape the culture of these young men and women to accept individual responsibility and acknowledge a higher morality than protecting your classmates. My understanding is that the finalization of Eric’s case awaits disposition in the Secretary’s Review Boards Agency, or its modern equivalent. The point at this stage is that Eric was deprived of due process when the OSI failed to support him at the MRC, and when they failed to provide discoverable records in time for him to use them in his disenrollment package. We cannot know if either or both would have been persuasive, but that’s why a due process violation is so serious. If Eric fails to persuade the Secretary, he has recourse to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records—a process that in my experience can take a year or more. Eric is not out to hurt USAFA or the Air Force, both of which he still loves. On the other hand, if it is found that people within the OSI or elsewhere were complicit in some of the deceptions here, then accountability should be demanded. The institution does not suffer, but is strengthened when it admits error and holds those responsible accountable. But here as in politics, a cover up can be more damaging by far. John said it best, USAFA is a national treasure. The one thing I know about this address list is that all of us believe that and will do what is in our power to protect and preserve it. Very respectfully, Skip Morgan

10% is hardly a concerning gap especially when you consider how the other services approach enlistment. In the Marines it is common and somewhat expected that a large portion of the enlisted force will only complete one tour. And those who do serve under those circumstance do get the benefit of, compensation, a lot of valuable training and the GI Bill in return for their service.

Huh? In almost every category the number of retired E-7's alone exceeds the combined total of ALL retired officers by a factor of two.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp5gdUHFGIQ

The Plot thickens...S. Korea declares expanded air defence zone in disputed area

The old girl is completing her final combat deployment...sad to see her go, but she is tired and it is time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRsYDYnv1rg

Keep telling yourself that...

He is trying to write a novel... "are soon bobbing and weaving all over the sky to avoid getting shot down..." Far from fact, but I hope he and the other side keep thinking this way.

Why is everyone so upset, this type of system worked really well in the past. The Secret Political Department (SPO), in addition to running the general system of informants, operated special informants to infiltrate suspected counterrevolutionary groups. Finally, the Transportation Department (TO), and the Operational Department (Operotdel), also ran their own special informants networks. In addition to these networks a separate network of special informants operated under the GULAG administration in labor camps, colonies, and special settlements.

It will be, it has to be now that Congress is digging and sadly, it will be yet another distraction that keeps Welsh from taking a major league swing at some of the real shit we want him to fix.

There are no words...simply unreal.

Really...

China sends jets into air zone as Japan, South Korea defy it The Chinese planes had conducted normal air patrols on Thursday as "a defensive measure and in line with international common practices," Shen said China's air force would remain on high alert and take measures to protect the security of the country's airspace, Xinhua reported.

Yeah you guys are right, China does not want a conflict. This should be interesting...

Chinese reaction to the bomber flights was predictably angry, with some recalling the 2001 collision between a Chinese fighter and a U.S. surveillance plane in international airspace off China's southeastern coast — the kind of accident some fear China's new policy could make more likely. The Chinese pilot, Wang Wei, was killed in the crash and the U.S. crew forced to make a landing on China's Hainan island, where they were held for 10 days and repeatedly interrogated before being released. "Let's not repeat the humiliation of Wang Wei. Make good preparations to counterattack," wrote Zheng Daojin, a reporter with the official Xinhua News Agency on his Twitter-like Weibo microblog.