Steve Davies

Return to F/A-22 designation?

Nice.

What the hell's soccer?

And there are plenty more where she came from, no doubt. This place is a haven for intolerance and racism, but only if you belong to an ethnic minority. If that's the case, no one will say a bad word about you. And, if you do, you're the one labelled 'racist'.

To commemorate it, you should order a batch of Defensive Egg tee shirts with Beaver's diagram printed on them. And then offer them to BO users at cost price.

If there was ever a valid 'pictures or it didn't happen' response, this is it.

Any Lakenheath guys interested in three boxes (around 75 books). This batch was never collected by the previous LN PoC. As before, there's no charge for the, but you'd have to collect from Milton, Cambridge within the next week or so.

Fair play.

That image is ass-about-face: the thing is burning money (intake), not creating it (exhaust).

My last post on this topic. Here are the main takeaways for you: don't put something into the public domain that you don't want, er, in the public domain. And when you do, don't cry like a little girl and blame everybody but yourself for the fact that that information is no longer protected. Your safety world and your colleagues may have been compromised as a result of the inadequacies of your rules, as written and enforced by your employer, but it's all someone else's fault? Fuck me. You're comparing apples (FOIA requests) and oranges (interviews). 1. When an editor receives a FOIA package that features some names redacted but others not, it is perfectly reasonable for him or her to conclude that the Air Force has approved the release of those names. Indeed, the very fact that some names have been released and others not would tell me that the Air Force has conducted a risk assessment of some kind to determine that those names can be published. That is exactly the logical thought process I would have, and I have a conservative approach to this stuff - as some people here with first hand experience of my work could tell you, I don't fuck around with people's privacy or their safety. 2. In contrast to receiving a FOIA package, when interviewing members of the military, it is perfectly acceptable to offer them anonymity. So, yes, you will have seen that in cases where anonymity has been offered or requested, names are redacted by the media. This is, as I started the paragraph by saying, a completely different situation to receiving a package of material that the Air Force is, by releasing it, approving for dissemination into the public domain 3. I have already explained to you that putting a name to a quote gives it credibility, and new outlets are all about credibility. If you don't understand that, there's nothing I can do for you, but please stop saying that naming some of the speakers did not enhance the article. I for one would not have believed a couple of the quotes had there not been names in the article.

a) You cannot expect the mainstream media to understand that. From their perspective, putting a name to the quote lends it credibility, and that's a powerful metric. So... if the Air Force (implicitly) says it's OK to do that, then why should they be expected to know any better? b) You should expect your employers to ensure that a) is irrelevant (by not releasing names). It's a pretty simple situation. I fully accept that the media can be very, very bad news for serving and former members of the armed forces. But sometimes there needs to be greater introspection and less propensity to blame the convenient scapegoat that is 'the media'.

Copy. It's the media's fault that your employer has released names into the public domain in direct contravention of its own rules.

Since when did Spey become a co-designer of the F-16?

So, Obama invites the father to say a few words at the White House. Nice.

Totally going to buy it.

The British Army is now running border patrol? And, by the looks of that picture, that's the WHOLE of the British Army, too.

Your sarcasm detector appears to be inop.

His profile talks about his time with the Georgia ANG in the past tense. The writer perhaps missed that little detail.

Everyone knows that the there's only one book worth buying about TWGASF: Eagle Engaged But on a serious note, going to buy the Byrnes book. Could be a great insight.

But, yeah, you're right. Totally the media's fault.

Seems as good a place to post this as any. Not sure whether you can get this abroad, but this is a fairly interesting monologue about the psychology of UAS operations. Interesting that they called it the box. I am guessing that his community doesn't use STS. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-24522150

A word of warning: Lockheed Martin and now threatening publishers with legal action for even using MDS designations (even though they I am pretty sure it's the customer's designation, not theirs). So, if I write a book about the F-16, LockMart want me to pay to write 'F-16'. True story. Anyway, the point is that you really need to think more broadly about the intellectual property that you may or may not be using. If LockMart are consistent with their money grabbing approach, you're not going to be able to use C-130J on your product, for example...

Any time you eat in a pub, you're going to get 'pub grub', regardless of what they tell you. If you want good food, eat in a good restaurant.

Also: "PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS TO ASK FOR EAGLE SCOUT COMMENDATION LETTERS. Gen. Yeager believes that a Scout's sense of accomplishment that comes from within is more important than a letter from a stranger"