HeloDude

I agree with both you and Pawnman, but I don't agree that 'no one' is talking about the horrible reason as to why Garner was stopped. Link below (yes, it's from the horrible racist FoxNews) has Hannity and Rand Paul talking about this exact issue. I'm not a big fan of Sean Hannity, but I think he gets it with this issue. Unless by 'no one' you mean clowns like Sharpton, de Blasio, and other progressives on the left, then I agree. And of course they will never address this issue for three reasons: They love taxes, they love government control, and they want to make this a victim issue not an issue of Liberty (see Saul Alinksky and his rules). https://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/transcript/2014/12/05/sen-rand-paul-eric-garner-didnt-need-die I don't support the protests because it is not a pro-Liberty protest. It is by and large a big group of people, fueled by race hustlers like Sharpton and Jackson, who want to feel like they're victims, regardless of the circumstances. This should not be a race issue, but a pro-Liberty issue that involves people from every race. I blame the politicians the 'second' most for these LEO's stopping, arresting, and harassing people for victimless crimes. I blame the people the most for putting these politicians into office election after election. The police, by and large, are just doing what they are hired to do. They don't make the laws, but just enforce them. The vast majority also don't get to decide on the policy by which they operate. Saying this a 'police vs black people' problem is like saying or problems in Iraq were from a 'Iraqi civilian vs American soldier' problem, which it was not. When the 'hands up don't shoot' narrative/cheer is still being supported then I refuse to listen to the nonsense. One of the few things I support coming from this whole ordeal will hopefully be States/local cities making their LEO wear body cameras whenever dealing with non-LEO when acting in a official capacity.

...I had to actually look up what the 'cis' was referring to. I think it means 'male assigned male at birth'? Yes, if we're going to say 'male' we now have to be specific as to whether or not the said male was born a male. (for all the the younger kids out there who understand the Internet slang better than I do, please let me know if I'm using incorrect terminology or definitions)

I'm sure if people say negative things about Law Enforcement (based off of recent events) that not much will be done...

He should just issue an executive order for it not be enforced...problem solved!

Ironically, in Texas, it's also illegal to open carry an AK-47 pistol, but it's legal to open carry an AK-47 rifle.

It's Christmas time--people buy me crap all the time that I don't want. Maybe we can re-gift these tanks to someone else. I'm sure ISIS would gladly take some more of our equipment.

Oooohh--I hope so! ...but it's 'Marilyn'

It was a swing and a miss because you said Barber was a 'lock'...and this was even after election night in which it razor close. So yeah, far from Barber being a 'lock' after election night. Poor analysis and/or poor choice of words--your call.

https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/fmr/archive/07aarch/07a_35_Jun10.pdf Reference page 44 in the PDF, rule 3. It says if he 'immediately enters on active duty with the other Military Service, then separation pay is not payable. Surfing around the PDF looks like 'immediate' refers to less than a break of 30 days. It mentions something for AD officers in reserve commission status, but we all have regular commissions (at least after being in for 6 years). So it could just be what he told them and they have him info on what he said he plans to do? Hope this helps!

You said he was going AD in the Army...so not really separating from the military. Separation pay has to do with the entire military, not just the AF. Besides, you will all have pay back your separation pay if and when you retire from the guard, reserves.

Well since I'm not a Republican, their party's candidate has to convince me that they stand for more Liberty than not. Jeb is not that guy, neither is Christie. If things are going to get a lot worse then they might as well be under the party who openly states that buisnesses do not create jobs. Also, did you see the crap that got passed by the GOP a few days ago? If the party nominates Rand Paul, then I'll vote GOP. You of course can vote for whoever you want.

Since you're the smartest guy in the room, care to make a prediction on continuation vs non-continuation rates/outlook on next year's O-5 board results?

Well, before it was masters/no masters (or Bachelors +) vs what kind of masters degree...so perhaps it's a pass/fail annotation on the spreadsheet? Who am I kidding--you out of shape/fat guys are screwed! But in all seriousness, agree, UFB.

^^Sorry man--that should have been an 'up' vote! Thanks for the advice to him and the rest of us!

Swing and a miss. If it makes you feel any better, I actually thought Romney had a chance the last few weeks before the 2012 election. And no, I did not vote for Romney. It looks like 2016 is already starting--Jeb Bush has more/less thrown his name in the ring. I look forward to voting Libertarian again if he is the GOP's nominee.

Why would he receive military separation pay if he's not separating from the military? And tell him good luck at Rucker! He'll love it! As for being in the Army, YMMV.

Just for the record, I have never said anything bad about the communists in North Korea. ...hopefully that posted statement now keeps my bank account from getting hacked into. It's like when people copy and paste those privacy statements or whatever on their FB pages, thinking it will stop FB doing whatever they want with your information (which I'm sure they agreed to when they clicked 'I agree' before signing up).

Rog--good luck. To be honest, I'm fairly ignorant on how the green door world works in terms of assignments afterwards/out of there, so when it corms to that realm, I definitely could be wrong. If you crossflowed to AFSOC and got Hurlburt, then you could potentially PCA to the staff a year or two out from your primary IPZ to O-5. Try talking to some older Navs you knew from a few years ago and ask them.

Of course we are. Look at gun control legislation (both legislation that has passed and attempted to be passed) by progressives.

Did you graduate from TPS? If not, your functional (whoever sits at that desk) hasn't changed if you're still on active flying status. You could do a tour with AETC, AFMC, AFOTEC, USAFA, etc and your functional remains the same. Besides, if you were a TPS grad, I bet they would be even less likely to release you to ROTC. And you could always do your instructional tour while instructing with your airframe (or UNT) in AETC. Though if you're at the 11 year point when moving, I would avoid an AETC line job when you move if you want your best chance to get promoted and instead try to get a staff/staff equivalent type job at a NAF/MAJCOM somewhere (or even higher). Not saying the AETC line job is the kiss of death, just not the preferred place to meet the board, unless you were a school select on your O-4 board in which case you're fine anyway. Then again, if you're not worried about being as competitive as you can for O-5, then definitely go where you'll be happiest. Not to be a dick, but do you have someone you know who can explain this all to you face to face (or via phone) vs a bunch of random dudes on BO? Don't get me wrong, I and the others are happy to help out in any way we can, but it sounds like someone has left you hanging during this entire process. I'm not big into the 'mentor' thing just because big blue talks about it, but rather because having someone who can provide you with sound career advice allows you to not get screwed by the system. Just curious... ETA: On second thought, are you a 05' YG guy? With the O-4 board being pushed back a year, does this mean these guys will meet the IPZ PRF Accounting Date for O-5 not at the 13 year mark but a year later? (I'm guessing so?). I don't have the matrix with all the dates in front of me. Either way, I still would avoid your PRF Accounting Date for IPZ to O-5 being as a line guy with AETC if you can find a staff type job. Guys get promoted out of Wing Safety and Wing Exec jobs, for sure, but there's only a few of those jobs, and it gets a little tougher at the Wing to show progression. For all the older grey beards on here, correct me if I'm giving out bad info. Cleared Hot and Learjetter??

As a rated guy, you can't go to ROTC unless you get released to compete as an O-5 ROTC CC (O-6 assignments in the AF are not handled by the regular functional). I'm sure there are waivers (there are for everything), but unless it's for humanitarian reasons, it probably isn't going to happen. BL: Research what rated staff jobs are available for your AFSC and compete for one of those.

I was referring to the more current issue that this report is referring to. If people broke the law since 2001, then why haven't there been any prosecutions?

ClearedHot gives me a thought... So the government is against torture (the kind that doesn't cause any long term physical harm), but has a massive stockpile of nuclear weopans ready to be launched at a moment's notice...weopans which would kill millions of innocent people. I am we'll aware of the concept of deterrence and mutually assured destruction, but if you're not willing to strike fear into your captive in order to attempt to retrieve valuable information on a potential terrorist attack (ie something on order of another 9-11), then I don't honestly believe our leaders would ever pull the nuke trigger even if we were actually attacked with nukes. Bottom Line--we're wasting money on all of our nuclear weapons and support if we're against keeping people up with loud music and pouring water on them in an attempt to retrieve information to prevent a large scale attack. And if water boarding doesn't work, why did they do it? And if it was illegal, why haven't there been any prosecutions?

If you have surfed around the Huffington Post the last several days you'll have your answer--this was red meat from the progressives in the Senate to their progressive base, simple as that, since like you said, the basic information wasn't new. The Bush administration (where this was happening) has been out of office for 6 years, but when your party just took a beating in the Senate, you're losing your control in a few weeks, and obamacare is still front and center (especially now with Gruber)--all means you have to take your wins where you can get them. It's a way to still look somewhat relevant to your bread and butter who put you in office. What's funny is that the majority of the country disagrees with Senate report on whether or not we should have done what we did/should do it again. My question is why isn't the Attorney General and his DOJ filing any prosecutions against these horrible CIA people? It's either this bad or it's not.

Can you put the job on a 1206 for community involvement?