one1

I asked my DO this and he said that they would see my decorations and my TAFMS but nothing else related to being a prior E.

The Air Force has teal ropes at training bases to stop sexual assaults. http://www.dodlive.mil/index.php/2012/10/teal-ropes-to-spotlight-sexual-assault-response/

Thanks. I was confused by... "Officers are ineligible if they have an Entered Active Duty (EAD) after 15 Jul 12." I thought that meant if your EAD was before 15JUL12, then you are eligible for the FSB. I am an OTS graduate and we all have an EAD that is the same as our commission date. I didn't consider the fact that this isn't true for ROTC and USAFA graduates.

Can someone help clear this up for me. I was told by my squadron that I was ineligible for the FSB but 13-131 seems to say different. My TAFMSD is 13NOV06 My Commission date is 24MAY12 My EAD is 24MAY12 Will I meet the FSB or am I misunderstanding 13-131? I was told that since I will not have 3 commissioned years by 31DEC14 I am safe until FY15.

I don't have any additional comments on Lt Col Wilkerson. My comments were just aimed at how the SF86 certainly does ask about your children. I was just addressing this. As obvious as this should be...You are asked if you have kids during your investigation and if you knowingly lie about it, you are committing a felony.

You don't remember the part of the SF86 that asks you the names of your children? It is also one of the first things the investigator asks you about. On the first page of your SF86, it says if you have agreements involving child custody or support, be prepared to show documentation at your investigation. If you don’t believe me here is the link to a SF86.. http://www.opm.gov/f...f_fill/sf86.pdf This is standard stuff. Depending on if you have a lifestyle/full scope investigation, the questions would have been much more personal. None of us have any clue on the additional types of investigations which may have taken place, but everyone does the SF86. Just because you don’t agree with a law doesn’t mean you can disregard it. Knowingly breaking laws speaks of someone’s character. Lying on a SF86 is a felony whether you agree with it or not.

It is easy to relate to a rated officer that is a Lt Col. It is easy to see things through his eyes and how messed up it would be to be falsely accused. It is not easy to see things through the eyes of someone who is potentially the victim. No matter our opinions on the matter, it is a fact that this makes the Air Force look very bad. Overturning the conviction looks really negative, especially after the allegations he had a secret child he doesn’t support and has a history of cheating on his wife. It just looks bad. If you don’t think him cheating on his wife, having a secret child he doesn’t support, and not telling the truth during security clearance investigations is not grounds to question his credibility, then I believe you are the one using your emotions instead of common sense. To say that the Air Force would be "singleing" him out because so many people cheat on their wives is a stupid argument. Everyone knows it is against the UCMJ to cheat on your spouse. The woman Wilkerson knocked up must be another liar trying to setup him up. He must have the worst luck. Most of you will be happy to know that I won’t comment on this topic again. I was just wondering if the new information changed anyone’s mind.

I really don't understand this. Let me start by saying, I am not trolling. I am sincerely trying to understand the logic of some of you….especially after a woman came out of the woodwork saying that she had a child with the Lt Col Wilkerson. I am just interested in the topic and not trying to offend or argue with anyone. After reading the FOIA information, some of you came to the conclusion the woman was a liar even though there was absolutely nothing specific to suggest a reason for her to lie. She may have plenty of reasons to lie but nothing was discussed specifically in court and a jury of O-5/O-6 believed her. After reading the news article, you can’t see any reason why this would have any impact on the credibility of Lt Col Wilkerson or his wife? Cheating on your wife and lying on security clearance paperwork is against the law. So if this allegation is true and Lt Col Wilkerson even secretly signed away rights to a child, it is established that he has a history of lying in very serious circumstances. Does this not weaken his credibility? The other woman said that Beth Wilkerson was aware of his other relationship. Does this not weaken her credibility? How many of you have changed your mind about this case after this allegation has come to light? He was found guilty by a jury of officers before this information was known. Do you really think that he wouldn’t be found guilty after this came to light…or do you think there is some big conspiracy to find this guy guilty?