17D_guy

When can I have my patches back? Also... crew neck under-shirts in blues. It's 2017... how is this still not a thing?

Man, good think Pakistan's on that list. Got a whole section of the country the gov't just gave to terrorists... Oh wait... This isn't even that big a smackdown despite what CNN, Fox, whomever says. They didn't say the EO was bad/good. The standard wasn't that we haven't been attacked by those countries. The Fed could have presented evidence of a credible threat, but nope. Hence the pic I posted above. Fed went Wookie defense on it. 9th Court said the gov't couldn't prove that allowing the injunction of the EO could be proved to cause harm to the nation, while also not causing irreparable harm to the states while the lower courts figured out the case. They also discussed standing and judicial review. The plaintiff (WA, etc) just has to show that they've got a good chance of winning and the order causes harm. Apparently they did, I thought WA's oral (STS) argument was weak. The gov't had to prove danger to the nation. Unless you're arguing the courts shouldn't review anything the Executive says in "National Security," which they addressed directly since that was also part of the Fed's argument. It's a well written ruling without any court overreach or legislating from the bench that I can tell. It's not terribly long, give it a read. So now, it either goes back to the lower court while restrained, or the Executive appeals to SCOTUS. 9th Court is most overturned in history, but the case law in their review seemed pretty pedantic. Do people think terrorists are just flooding in here differently now than they have the past 8 years? The rules for entry haven't changed. EDITED to add that the twitter, campaign and advisers (ex. Rudy G.) statements CAN be used in this case is hilarious. Also, when it goes back to lower court discovery is going to be allowed...wonder if they're going to attempt executive privilege on any/all communications on this? That would be an interesting SCOTUS case.

My favorite part - Didn't think they'd be a fan of the "We know something you don't know" argument.

Well, Obama was pushed to fire ADM Rodgers and he's received much criticism for issues within that org. Overall, it's the same issue we're facing and our forefathers faced with air. Old people that don't want to change and realize the capabilities this new domain brings. Army's NETCOM just offered a bunch of gray-hairs VSP style packages to get them to retire and are hiring like mad. Don't know if we need to do the same thing. Also, direct commission of IT/Cyber Pro's isn't the worst idea. But they're not going to be able to do ANYTHING until the juggernaut that is AFLCMC, DISA and other "centers of innovation" are brought to heel.

It's impressive how important physical controls are, and how even when presented with clear evidence of their necessity our gov't still won't do the right thing - https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/02/08/how-hal-martin-stole-75-of-nsas-hacking-tools-nsa-failed-to-implement-required-security-fixes-for-three-years-after-snowden/

Probably wouldn't be so much outrage if he could just act presidential and not use official twitter account to retweet and push his kid's business - And/or get a press secretary who could make even a modicum of sense of what he's doing - https://www.snappytv.com/tc/3889840

I miss the days when I my party stood for the American Exceptionalism. Now we're just like every other nation state according to the Command-in-Chief.

So here's the Fox News Interview video. The comments w/ the President saying "You think our country's so innocent?" start around 2:20. https://video.foxnews.com/v/5311416183001/?#sp=show-clips edit: watched it about 3 times now trying to get context. Think he's trying to imply Dubya as a killer on par with Putin?

You mean like North Korea and the GDR?

If that's really what you took from my statement suggest reading glasses to go with the beers and firearms.

What? Cite your source. It was quiet on here until I pointed out the silence, then everyone got back on track with the political discussions on the Internet. Prior Admin got lambasted on here on the regular. For example - inept international diplomacy, to firing CC's for their staff's leaks, to overuse of drones, "gun control" was always a big one. Too much zipper-suited-sun-god up in here to go with the "racism" charge and not get demolished with facts and "go for quals." The lack of self-critical political evaluation you're advocating for because you allege the other admin didn't get it is stupendous. But then, ceding 70 years of American leadership abroad doesn't seem like a big deal to you, so I'm not surprised. We'll all see how it goes. I found your latest portrait:

oooh... so close;

Well, this just dropped - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/01/air-force-busts-retired-four-star-general-down-two-ranks-coerced-sex/97356020/

https://www.thecyberwire.com/events/afaasc2016/technical-workflorce-development-the-cyber-challenge.html "Officer personnel: 88% of the positions are currently filled. The biggest challenge is to retain the when their active duty commitment is up at the four-to-five year point in a junior officer's career. Retention is currently running at about 75%, and the Air Force needs around 90%. She said retention is currently under study—the Air Force doesn't yet fully understand why. Enlisted personnel: 66% of cyber specialty positions are currently filled. Retention here is generally solid, and there's a good bit of cross-training with communications fields. Civilian personnel: Here, the Air Force suffers from a Government-wide problem: "We lack a common definition of what a cyber position is." Grosso estimates the Air Force has about a 10% occupancy rate, "but we don't really know because of kabuki around what's a cyber job." In building the civilian workforce, she would like to have some of the authorities other agencies have that make it easier and faster to hire qualified people." For O's they need 90% retention to maintain ops... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Of note, no one I know has been asked about retention in an official way. It's all been bro network. And on the E side to get to a Ops position you have to cross-train, and you used to have to be at least SrA. So.. that makes sense and doesn't speak to morale or anything like that. Civilians...who cares?

Every time a Republican excuses something Trump does with "but Obama did it too/first/last/etc." Reagan loses another memory cell.

Saturday I had studying to do. Sunday's the Sabbath, so that's a no-protest zone. Plus...not too much protesting going on in the Lone Star State. I keep seeing ads for the House Plan on Youtube when I turn my ad-blocker off. No actual plan, just that there is a plan... No one had any thoughts on removing the JCS and DNI from the NSC meetings? I found that the most disturbing thing from this past weekend. Well, that and Spicer's statement of Bannon having "extensive military experience." Well, that and blocking green card holders and Iraqi translators.

Got real quiet in here.

There's a "Send to Kindle" app you can get for Chrome (prob firefox too) that'll send the pages as PDF's automatically. You might have to do each page solo though.

AF's paid for the test of one. Rest I'm self funding as I've never been in a Sq that's given me anything official.

Interesting change to the NSC, good basic write up comparing back to Dubya - https://lawfareblog.com/national-security-presidential-memorandum-2—president-trumps-nsc-and-hsc

Another note that I had mentioned before: CGO's are started to get pinged for reasons they're leaving. Not exit survey's, but emails from former CC's. Word on the street is CGO retention is abysmal, particularly in our Ops Sq's. Since I'm not in one of the anointed Sq's and can't get my hands on retention numbers (wouldn't post those anyway) I've no way to confirm. I do have bros that are Ops and not too many are super happy with what their AF future looks like. This includes the patch-wearers and CNODP grads. I've provided feedback about how soon our CGO's are taken off technical/skilled work, lack of "cyber-pay," lack of recognition pertinent to the type of ops (a la Air Medals), the split between what 24 AF is doing, and the rest of the big AF. One idea floated to me by a Col was to not give CGO's certifications (GIAC, CISSP, etc.) since they're worth so much on the outside and allows us to realize our dollar value. I like the dude who suggested this, so I'm going to assume legit panic/worry and not a character flaw. He got a dig more at the numbers this past week, so we'll see what happens. Also of note are the number of Lt Col and Col retirements over the past 5 years. I generally hate the trope of "best and brightest" leave, but there's so much more freedom, money and ability to make a difference and lead on the outside--both commercially and politically, that I'm kinda concerned. While this improves my chances of making rank, because we have to wait so long to promote and I've had no Ops stink, the reality of me getting promoted is getting drastically reduced. Which I think my Big AF bro's are also seeing, and just bouncing. Plus the easy to find certification dollars.

Sorry no AR info, but now they're part of Global Strike. So, not sure if that's changed the awesome culture the bros had over there. I hope not, seeing them hang/chat is the only time I wished I was a flier.

So, This seems like a well balanced article on something that's going on in Russia. Of course, we can't know what's really occurring; we can only speculate. But it is interesting 2 of the arrested have come from the FSB. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/wow-it-gets-bigger Of course the secret trials should help put everything to bed. another one - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/26/report-arrested-russian-intel-officer-allegedly-spied-us/97094696/

Wow.. that's interesting. Also interesting is the reasons given. NY Times (ugh) has a good write up.

They only care about leaking classified data if it's against them political ends. Since Manning leaked against Dubya, and a war they didn't start (but sure carried on) - no harm, no foul. They also care about classified only as long as they can strip headers from documents/emails for a personal, insecure server. I really hope he's not considering a Snowden pardon...