Bush where was he?

[CaptainGoodnight]

If you check the 111th FIS records of 1970-72 and any other ANG squadron, you will find other pilots excused for career obligations and conflicts. The Bush excusal in 1972 was further facilitated by a change in the unit's mission, from an operational fighter squadron to a training squadron with a new airplane, the F-101, which required that more pilots be available for full-time instructor duty rather than part-time traditional reservists with outside employment.

The winding down of the Vietnam War in 1971 provided a flood of exiting active-duty pilots for these instructor jobs, making part-timers like Lt. Bush and me somewhat superfluous. There was a huge glut of pilots in the Air Force in 1972, and with no cockpits available to put them in, many were shoved into nonflying desk jobs.

Bush has nothing to be ashamed of in his military service.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: conjur
Ben Barnes to break silence on "60 Minutes"

Looks like the Barnes interview was last week.

60 Minutes -- August 28, 2004

Aug. 28 was a Saturday. That's just an article discussing it. I've read this interview will air on Sept. 12.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
If you check the 111th FIS records of 1970-72 and any other ANG squadron, you will find other pilots excused for career obligations and conflicts. The Bush excusal in 1972 was further facilitated by a change in the unit's mission, from an operational fighter squadron to a training squadron with a new airplane, the F-101, which required that more pilots be available for full-time instructor duty rather than part-time traditional reservists with outside employment.

The winding down of the Vietnam War in 1971 provided a flood of exiting active-duty pilots for these instructor jobs, making part-timers like Lt. Bush and me somewhat superfluous. There was a huge glut of pilots in the Air Force in 1972, and with no cockpits available to put them in, many were shoved into nonflying desk jobs.

Bush has nothing to be ashamed of in his military service.

I guess not having to show up for any duty whatsoever was the standard procedure? That was nothing more then sheirking his duties. He should be ashamed of that. Anybody else would be.

 

[maluckey]

Arsebanned,

Which immoral war are you referring to? The one that John Kerry stated he supports and would have started anyways, despite what he knows now?

1EZduzit,

Nice try, but you have to use the same standards for Kerry, and all the rest (to include former candidates and Presidents) Kerry served.....what......four months of service.

Bush's record is one of sticking to his guns. He did not believe in the war in Viet-Nam, found the best way out of going, and that's what he did. He didn't disgrace and dishonor his uniform or country, slander soldiers, or hurt the war effort in any way. He still has the overwhelming support of combat soldiers in the United States Military. Go figure......... "Anybody smart enough to come in out of the rain can figure this one out". Why haven't you figured it out yet
:Q

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: maluckey
Arsebanned,

Which immoral war are you referring to? The one that John Kerry stated he supports and would have started anyways, despite what he knows now?

Which war is that? Care to post a link showing a quote of Kerry saying that?

You have completely distorted Kerry's statement and you must now prove your claim or retract your rhetoric.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

October 2002: Kerry Voted For Iraq War Resolution. (H.J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237: Passed 77-23: R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry stands by 'yes' vote on Iraq war

Another: In Hindsight, Kerry Says He'd Still Vote for War

On Friday, Bush challenged Kerry to answer whether he would support the war "knowing what we know now" about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction that U.S. and British officials were certain were there.

In response, Kerry said: "Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have."

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: maluckey
Arsebanned,

Which immoral war are you referring to? The one that John Kerry stated he supports and would have started anyways, despite what he knows now?

1EZduzit,

Nice try, but you have to use the same standards for Kerry, and all the rest (to include former candidates and Presidents) Kerry served.....what......four months of service.

Bush's record is one of sticking to his guns. He did not believe in the war in Viet-Nam, found the best way out of going, and that's what he did. He didn't disgrace and dishonor his uniform or country, slander soldiers, or hurt the war effort in any way. He still has the overwhelming support of combat soldiers in the United States Military. Go figure......... "Anybody smart enough to come in out of the rain can figure this one out". Why haven't you figured it out yet
:Q

LOL, sticking to his guns? They don't have any guns in office duty, LOL!! Even if they did he didn't show up there when ordered to. You can't get any more preferential treatment then that unless they would have just ordered him to go home and not worry about it.

How many people who didn't believe in the war in Vietnam were KILLED there?? That is no excuse for not fullfilling his obligations to the military. It's not GWB who got shot at or wounded. It wasn't GWB protesting against the Vietnam war that "he did not believe in".

How do you think he is entitled to have his cake and eat it too?? I can only say you logic is very faulty at best.

 

[1EZduzit]

c

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: maluckey
Arsebanned,

Which immoral war are you referring to? The one that John Kerry stated he supports and would have started anyways, despite what he knows now?

1EZduzit,

Nice try, but you have to use the same standards for Kerry, and all the rest (to include former candidates and Presidents) Kerry served.....what......four months of service.

Bush's record is one of sticking to his guns. He did not believe in the war in Viet-Nam, found the best way out of going, and that's what he did. He didn't disgrace and dishonor his uniform or country, slander soldiers, or hurt the war effort in any way. He still has the overwhelming support of combat soldiers in the United States Military. Go figure......... "Anybody smart enough to come in out of the rain can figure this one out". Why haven't you figured it out yet
:Q

LOL, sticking to his guns? They don't have any guns in office duty, LOL!! Even if they did he didn't show up there when ordered to. You can't get any more preferential treatment then that unless they would have just ordered him to go home and not worry about it.

How many people who didn't believe in the war in Vietnam were KILLED there?? That is no excuse for not fullfilling his obligations to the military. It's not GWB who got shot at or wounded. It wasn't GWB protesting against the Vietnam war that "he did not believe in".

How do you think he is entitled to have his cake and eat it too?? I can only say you logic is very faulty at best.

You have still yet to prove that he "never showed" up.

 

[1EZduzit]

He hasn't proved he showed up either. I can believe what I want until he can prove he isn't lying.

Did you hear that Mr. Bush, prove your not lying please.

Cash in on the reward that is being offered for anyone who can prove he was there. Why don't you prove he was there, it's worth at least $10,000 and nobody has claimed it yet.

Imagine that

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
He hasn't proved he showed up either. I can believe what I want until he can prove he isn't lying.

Did you hear that Mr. Bush, prove your not lying please.

Cash in on the reward that is being offered for anyone who can prove he was there. Why don't you prove he was there, it's worth at least $10,000 and nobody has claimed it yet.

Imagine that

You're the one making the claim the burden of proof is on you.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
He hasn't proved he showed up either. I can believe what I want until he can prove he isn't lying.

Did you hear that Mr. Bush, prove your not lying please.

Cash in on the reward that is being offered for anyone who can prove he was there. Why don't you prove he was there, it's worth at least $10,000 and nobody has claimed it yet.

Imagine that

You're the one making the claim the burden of proof is on you.

Hardly. I don't have to prove anything to anyone. You go document his attendance if you can. You go find someone who can place him there. I have better things to do. I have looked at the all the documents that I can find and that is all the proof I need for me. If you disagree with me then you prove me wrong. Just thoink you can cash in on that reward no one else has been able to get.

Good Luck, your going to need it.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
He hasn't proved he showed up either. I can believe what I want until he can prove he isn't lying.

Did you hear that Mr. Bush, prove your not lying please.

Cash in on the reward that is being offered for anyone who can prove he was there. Why don't you prove he was there, it's worth at least $10,000 and nobody has claimed it yet.

Imagine that

You're the one making the claim the burden of proof is on you.

Hardly. I don't have to prove anything to anyone. You go document his attendance if you can. You go find someone who can place him there. I have better things to do. I have looked at the all the documents that I can find and that is all the proof I need for me. If you disagree with me then you prove me wrong. Just thoink you can cash in on that reward no one else has been able to get.

Good Luck, your going to need it.

The problem is the pay records no longer exist for Bush during that time. The best proof is a
dental examination he had while there.

If was AWOL as you claim he would have not gotten a Honorable Discharge.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
October 2002: Kerry Voted For Iraq War Resolution. (H.J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237: Passed 77-23: R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry stands by 'yes' vote on Iraq war

Another: In Hindsight, Kerry Says He'd Still Vote for War

On Friday, Bush challenged Kerry to answer whether he would support the war "knowing what we know now" about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction that U.S. and British officials were certain were there.

In response, Kerry said: "Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have."

Nice distortion by saying Kerry would vote for war. Kerry NEVER said that. He said he would cast yes on that vote for giving the President authorization to use force ONLY after diplomatic measures and inspections failed. Both of which Bush failed to follow through with. It was the authorization to use force that gave the Bush administration some bite to its bark in forcing Saddam to open the doors for inspections.

Go read Kerry's statements in the Congressional Record on that vote. I've posted it up here a few times before, I know you can find them.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

But he still says he would'nt have changed his vote knowning what we know now.

 

[1EZduzit]

You are going to believe what you want. The fact that a dental record is on the file there doesn't prove he was showing up for his drills, it doesn't expalin why he didn't report back for duty in Texas when he should have. There are too many holes in his story. the only plausible explanation in my mind is that he received preferential treatment. From Day One until he was out of there. That doesn't surprise me, but once he enters the political arena, then he's fair game.

http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/3671

This article lays it out pretty well IMO.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

That link shows who ever wrote that has no military experience at all.

For example:
In his annual evaluation report, Bush's two supervising officers, Lieutenant Colonel William D. Harris Jr. and Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian, made it clear that Bush had "not been observed at" his Texas unit "during the period of report" -- the twelve month period from May 1972 through the end of April 1973

In military lingo that does not mean he did not show up. "not been observed at" is the same writing N/A on a form. Say I have a record on you for your job and I have to evaluate you. Say I never showed up too observe how you do your job, and don't have that infomation, I would just write: "not been observed at"

As for abandoning his assignment, this is untrue. Bush was excused for a period to take employment in Florida for a congressman and later in Alabama for a Senate campaign.

Excusals for employment were common then and are now in the Air Guard, as pilots frequently are in career transitions, and most commanders are flexible in letting their charges take care of career affairs until they return or transfer to another unit near their new employment. Sometimes they will transfer temporarily to another unit to keep them on the active list until they can return home. The receiving unit often has little use for a transitory member, especially in a high-skills category like a pilot, because those slots usually are filled and, if not filled, would require extensive conversion training of up to six months, an unlikely option for a temporary hire.

As a commander, I would put such "visitors" in some minor administrative post until they went back home. There even were a few instances when I was unaware that they were on my roster because the paperwork often lagged. Today, I can't even recall their names. If a Lt. Bush came into my unit to "pull drills" for a couple of months, I wouldn't be too involved with him because I would have a lot more important things on my table keeping the unit combat ready.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
But he still says he would'nt have changed his vote knowning what we know now.

He also wouldn't have attacked prematurely. That's a big differnce there.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
But he still says he would'nt have changed his vote knowning what we know now.

He also wouldn't have attacked prematurely. That's a big differnce there.

Thats right. He is quoted as saying, "I would have done things differently". Whatever those "things" are he would have done them better.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
That link shows who ever wrote that has no military experience at all.

For example:
In his annual evaluation report, Bush's two supervising officers, Lieutenant Colonel William D. Harris Jr. and Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian, made it clear that Bush had "not been observed at" his Texas unit "during the period of report" -- the twelve month period from May 1972 through the end of April 1973

In military lingo that does not mean he did not show up. "not been observed at" is the same writing N/A on a form. Say I have a record on you for your job and I have to evaluate you. Say I never showed up too observe how you do your job, and don't have that infomation, I would just write: "not been observed at"

As for abandoning his assignment, this is untrue. Bush was excused for a period to take employment in Florida for a congressman and later in Alabama for a Senate campaign.

Excusals for employment were common then and are now in the Air Guard, as pilots frequently are in career transitions, and most commanders are flexible in letting their charges take care of career affairs until they return or transfer to another unit near their new employment. Sometimes they will transfer temporarily to another unit to keep them on the active list until they can return home. The receiving unit often has little use for a transitory member, especially in a high-skills category like a pilot, because those slots usually are filled and, if not filled, would require extensive conversion training of up to six months, an unlikely option for a temporary hire.

As a commander, I would put such "visitors" in some minor administrative post until they went back home. There even were a few instances when I was unaware that they were on my roster because the paperwork often lagged. Today, I can't even recall their names. If a Lt. Bush came into my unit to "pull drills" for a couple of months, I wouldn't be too involved with him because I would have a lot more important things on my table keeping the unit combat ready.

LOL, I know the whole story. I have been through it all. I have read it all. I have so many links on this it isn't even funny. I have no intenion of bantieing point by point with you. I see you take one small quote out of a large article and want to male an arguement out of it. Good luck convincing somebody else, but I can read between the lines. It's not rocket science. I think you should go read this whole post and quit trying to play footsie footsie with me, OK. Of course you won't, you just want to argue,lol. Have fun arguing with yourself, maybe you will convince him?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
But he still says he would'nt have changed his vote knowning what we know now.

He also wouldn't have attacked prematurely. That's a big differnce there.

Thats right. He is quoted as saying, "I would have done things differently". Whatever those "things" are he would have done them better.

LOL, just like I said

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
That link shows who ever wrote that has no military experience at all.

For example:
In his annual evaluation report, Bush's two supervising officers, Lieutenant Colonel William D. Harris Jr. and Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian, made it clear that Bush had "not been observed at" his Texas unit "during the period of report" -- the twelve month period from May 1972 through the end of April 1973

In military lingo that does not mean he did not show up. "not been observed at" is the same writing N/A on a form. Say I have a record on you for your job and I have to evaluate you. Say I never showed up too observe how you do your job, and don't have that infomation, I would just write: "not been observed at"

As for abandoning his assignment, this is untrue. Bush was excused for a period to take employment in Florida for a congressman and later in Alabama for a Senate campaign.

Excusals for employment were common then and are now in the Air Guard, as pilots frequently are in career transitions, and most commanders are flexible in letting their charges take care of career affairs until they return or transfer to another unit near their new employment. Sometimes they will transfer temporarily to another unit to keep them on the active list until they can return home. The receiving unit often has little use for a transitory member, especially in a high-skills category like a pilot, because those slots usually are filled and, if not filled, would require extensive conversion training of up to six months, an unlikely option for a temporary hire.

As a commander, I would put such "visitors" in some minor administrative post until they went back home. There even were a few instances when I was unaware that they were on my roster because the paperwork often lagged. Today, I can't even recall their names. If a Lt. Bush came into my unit to "pull drills" for a couple of months, I wouldn't be too involved with him because I would have a lot more important things on my table keeping the unit combat ready.

LOL, I know the whole story. I have been through it all. I have read it all. I have so many links on this it isn't even funny. I have no intenion of bantieing point by point with you. I see you take one small quote out of a large article and want to male an arguement out of it. Good luck convincing somebody else, but I can read between the lines. It's not rocket science. I think you should go read this whole post and quit trying to play footsie footsie with me, OK. Of course you won't, you just want to argue,lol. Have fun arguing with yourself, maybe you will convince him?

I could go on if you want. Anyone with military experience could refute at least half those claims laid out in the article.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
But he still says he would'nt have changed his vote knowning what we know now.

He also wouldn't have attacked prematurely. That's a big differnce there.

Thats right. He is quoted as saying, "I would have done things differently". Whatever those "things" are he would have done them better.

Those "things" are modified sanctions (as proposed by Colin Powell) and continued inspections (which were working).

Also, Kerry would have worked harder to cull a greater world coalition, much like Bush, Sr. and James Baker did in 1990.

Bush was absent from the Guard and he was absent from doing the right thing last year.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

I found Bush's pay records. Appearently they were not destoryed like I thought. These are microfilm payroll records summarizing the days for which Bush was paid in 1972 and 1973. Though blurry and hard to read, they reflect payments for 82 days of services in 1972 and 1973. Guardsmen were required to get a minimum of 50 points annually and they received 15 just for being members of the guard. Bush accumlated 56 points from May 1972 to 1973 and he accumalted another 56 points in June & July of 1973 meeting the minimum requirement of 50 points for the May 73 to May 74 period.

Edit: Here is a better copy.

I guess the argument next is "he was paid but never showed up" :roll:

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
I found Bush's pay records. Appearently they were not destoryed like I thought. These are microfilm payroll records summarizing the days for which Bush was paid in 1972 and 1973. Though blurry and hard to read, they reflect payments for 82 days of services in 1972 and 1973. Guardsmen were required to get a minimum of 50 points annually and they received 15 just for being members of the guard. Bush accumlated 56 points from May 1972 to 1973 and he accumalted another 56 points in June & July of 1973 meeting the minimum requirement of 50 points for the May 73 to May 74 period.

Edit: Here is a better copy.

I guess the argument next is "he was paid but never showed up" :roll:

Guess that makes things worse for Bush. He managed to get paid and credit for times he wasn't there.

Hmmm....


BTW,

Still Unreported: The Pay-off in Bush Air Guard Fix
http://www.gregpalast.com/printerfriendly.cfm?artid=365

Ben Barnes to break silence on "60 Minutes"
http://www.salon.com/news/feat...es60minutes/index.html

George W. Bush's missing year
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/09/02/allison/

The widow of a Bush family confidant says her husband gave the future president an Alabama Senate campaign job as a favor to his worried father. Did they see him do any National Guard service? "Good lord, no."

Bush's National Guard File Missing Records
http://story.news.yahoo.com/ne...pr/bush_national_guard