Billboards telling troops to obey only lawful orders go up near Florida military base

Oh, I'll be looking forward to reading this....Oughta be good....:popcorn:

By all means, take your time and make it good.

Please start with "once upon a time," and I'll save it for bedtime.

OK, since you guys asked.

Mid-90's I was the NX Maintenance Chief for a reconnaissance Navy Squadron. Most of our birds were deployed and we had 3 left at home base: the Hangar Queen (down for corrossion control cyle), one down for parts awaiting supply, and the last being the one we kept flight ready. "Flight ready" didn't mean 100% availability, it means that was the training bird for remaining pilots/crew.

There was a night flight scheduled and the MO (Maintenance Officer, the Lt. CDR in charge of the maintenance department) was the pilot in command. While the airplane was "safe for flight" for local VFR training to get hours during the day, it was down for nigh operation due to 3 systems that needed maintenance. This according to the NATOPS and NAVAIR maintenance matrix. Remember we're talking homebase training night flight, not carrier operations in a shooting war when rules get stretched.

So I'd reviewed the ADB (Aircraft Discrepancy Book) and determined the aircraft was a no go for the scheduled time. Likely with a 4 hour delay (around midnight) we could have the aircraft repaired and the problems signed off. About an hour proir to flight the pilot (who was also the MO) arrived for his maintenance brief and his review of the ADB. I informed him the aircraft was down, but could be ready later that night.

He went through the book, then turn it around and lid it back to me and said "It's OK Chief, go ahead and sign it off and I'll take it.". I turned the book back around, slid it back across the counter and told him "WIth all due respect sir, If that plan flies as it sits, it won't be with my sign off. You are the MO and can sign it safe for flight on your own authority."

He was pissed, but knew he was wrong, and there where: (a) witnesses as to the excange, (B) the down descrepancies were documented in the system.

WW
(ATC AW/NAC)
USN, Ret.
 
OK, since you guys asked.

Mid-90's I was the NX Maintenance Chief for a reconnaissance Navy Squadron. Most of our birds were deployed and we had 3 left at home base: the Hangar Queen (down for corrossion control cyle), one down for parts awaiting supply, and the last being the one we kept flight ready. "Flight ready" didn't mean 100% availability, it means that was the training bird for remaining pilots/crew.

There was a night flight scheduled and the MO (Maintenance Officer, the Lt. CDR in charge of the maintenance department) was the pilot in command. While the airplane was "safe for flight" for local VFR training to get hours during the day, it was down for nigh operation due to 3 systems that needed maintenance. This according to the NATOPS and NAVAIR maintenance matrix. Remember we're talking homebase training night flight, not carrier operations in a shooting war when rules get stretched.

So I'd reviewed the ADB (Aircraft Discrepancy Book) and determined the aircraft was a no go for the scheduled time. Likely with a 4 hour delay (around midnight) we could have the aircraft repaired and the problems signed off. About an hour proir to flight the pilot (who was also the MO) arrived for his maintenance brief and his review of the ADB. I informed him the aircraft was down, but could be ready later that night.

He went through the book, then turn it around and lid it back to me and said "It's OK Chief, go ahead and sign it off and I'll take it.". I turned the book back around, slid it back across the counter and told him "WIth all due respect sir, If that plan flies as it sits, it won't be with my sign off. You are the MO and can sign it safe for flight on your own authority."

He was pissed, but knew he was wrong, and there where: (a) witnesses as to the excange, (B) the down descrepancies were documented in the system.

WW
(ATC AW/NAC)
USN, Ret.
Hmm.

Bit of a dramatic buildup for a story like that. It is believable I will say. I was in supply, and if I had a nickel for every time I had to say no to an officer or a senior NCO, I guess I could afford to pay to replace all the s*** that got lost.

I never thought of it as disobeying an unlawful order.Just helping my bosses keep straight like I was supposed to.
 
Again, where or what part of an annotated code has been broken where it is a clear delineation for troops to make that call? Hell, one of your guys bombed US Citizens and killed them and you are worried about tankers?
I am just remarking that you are behind the curve. We have graduated to blowing things up with cruise missiles.
 
.

I knew someone in Desert Storm who refused to obey an order he thought was unlawful.

He was dishonorably discharged and spent plenty of time in Leavenworth.

He was unable to find any decent job and ended up spending a lot of time in inpatient mental health care, homeless and suicidal. Several attempts later, I lost track of him.

So, yeah. Go ahead and just try to refuse that unlawful order.

Go ahead.

.
I know someone too. My wife is a US Army Desert Storm Veteran.
 
'A billboard campaign telling troops to obey only lawful orders in defiance of the Trump administration has launched in Florida near a military base.

Nonprofits Defiance.org and WhistleblowerAid.org launched the campaign at the MacDill Air Force base in Tampa, urging serving troops to “Obey Only Lawful Orders” amid the Trump administration’s lethal strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific, which have so far killed more than 100 people.

“We’re making sure troops know their rights and that they’re not alone if they’re told to cross the line,” Miles Taylor, a former Department of Homeland Security official in President Donald Trump’s first administration, said in a statement to 10 Tampa Bay.

“The president may be the commander-in-chief, but even he is bound by the law,” Taylor added. “This campaign is a constitutional alarm bell to remind our servicemembers of that.” The organizations are offering troops legal advice and providing whistleblower hotlines.'


Unfortunately, those serving in the Eastern Pacific and Caribbean haven’t gotten the message.

They’re obeying unlawful orders every time they attack civilian boats absent evidence of wrongdoing.

The criminal Trump regime has nothing but contempt for the law.
Just think of all the food the money for those billboards could of gotten poor people

Typical selfish dembots
 
OK, since you guys asked.

Mid-90's I was the NX Maintenance Chief for a reconnaissance Navy Squadron. Most of our birds were deployed and we had 3 left at home base: the Hangar Queen (down for corrossion control cyle), one down for parts awaiting supply, and the last being the one we kept flight ready. "Flight ready" didn't mean 100% availability, it means that was the training bird for remaining pilots/crew.

There was a night flight scheduled and the MO (Maintenance Officer, the Lt. CDR in charge of the maintenance department) was the pilot in command. While the airplane was "safe for flight" for local VFR training to get hours during the day, it was down for nigh operation due to 3 systems that needed maintenance. This according to the NATOPS and NAVAIR maintenance matrix. Remember we're talking homebase training night flight, not carrier operations in a shooting war when rules get stretched.

So I'd reviewed the ADB (Aircraft Discrepancy Book) and determined the aircraft was a no go for the scheduled time. Likely with a 4 hour delay (around midnight) we could have the aircraft repaired and the problems signed off. About an hour proir to flight the pilot (who was also the MO) arrived for his maintenance brief and his review of the ADB. I informed him the aircraft was down, but could be ready later that night.

He went through the book, then turn it around and lid it back to me and said "It's OK Chief, go ahead and sign it off and I'll take it.". I turned the book back around, slid it back across the counter and told him "WIth all due respect sir, If that plan flies as it sits, it won't be with my sign off. You are the MO and can sign it safe for flight on your own authority."

He was pissed, but knew he was wrong, and there where: (a) witnesses as to the excange, (B) the down descrepancies were documented in the system.

WW
(ATC AW/NAC)
USN, Ret.
Fun story. But, that has NOTHING to do with leftists telling troops to refuse orders without the knowledge needed to determine if orders are legal or not.

You were a step in the flight of that plane, and were talking about mechanical issues. That's a far cry from refusing mission orders, run through the chain, and passed to you. It's just not the same.

But, nice try.
 
It's only a matter of time until soldiers start refusing Trumps illegal deployments.

And the country will see exactly what Trump thinks of the military.
 
15th post
I am just remarking that you are behind the curve. We have graduated to blowing things up with cruise missiles.
So where is the violation? You still can’t point to law that has been violated but you are clearly determined to have Armed Forces disobey orders, regardless.
 
So where is the violation? You still can’t point to law that has been violated but you are clearly determined to have Armed Forces disobey orders, regardless.
Thats your nonsense. I am just waiting for the invasion of Venezuela, Columbia, Canada, Greenland or whatever is in his dementia brain tomorrow.
 
Thats your nonsense. I am just waiting for the invasion of Venezuela, Columbia, Canada, Greenland or whatever is in his dementia brain tomorrow.
When there is an invasion occupation without justification, you will begin to get beyond your no sense whatsoever
 
.

tick-tick-tick-tick-tick

It will be fun to watch. Soiboi puppies who grew up afraid to go outside vs. good old boys who have survived on dinner on the hoof for five or six decades.

Those boys can shoot, and they taught me to shoot as well as, if not better than, some of them!

.
It will not be fun at all.

Best thing is to prevent it from happening by exposing the operations behind it.
 
Back
Top Bottom