Lee1776

Not getting the physical which is required by Regulation is the same as not following an order. In fact the Air Force requires an investigation when a pilot does not take a physical and is grounded. That report is missing. In addition, he did not attend a national homeland defense exercise in Oct 1972. There is also no evidence that he was granted permission to attend drills outside Texas.

There is also no evidence that he was granted permission to attend drills outside Texas.

There also none to the contrary is there?
And as Lee1776 has said if he had disobyed a lawful order don't you think he would have been at the very least written up? And if he was why have we not seen it. Give it up you ain't winning this one.

he is a Liar and never takes blames for his blunders which are many, especially Iraq. bush not capitalized due to "no respect for him".

Is that all you can do? Quote left-leaning liberal talking points?

In fact the Air Force requires an investigation when a pilot does not take a physical and is grounded. That report is missing.

Most likely the report was never done. Why go through all the trouble when they already know that man is leaving service for school by that time. If one was done, it would be in his 201 file on microfish at Guard Bureau. That would be a Microfish made years ago before Bush entered public life. Bush has releasted those Microfish Guard records (something Kerry refuses to do).

he did not attend a national homeland defense exercise in Oct 1972.

Do you have anything from the Commander requiring him to drill with the unit? All evidence shows that he drilled off line i.e. January and March. If that off line drill was not authorized then why was he paid?

There is also no evidence that he was granted permission to attend drills outside Texas.

Do you have evidence that the request was denied? His Texas Commander had never made a statement that he didn't grant permission. After being attacked on the subject for the last 15 years, you would think he would speak up if that was true. Anyway, Bush was still paid. If permission was not granted, they would not have paid him and would not even have coordinated with Alabama to learn of what dates he did drill.

Again your digging. After so many years no one has shown proof of this. Those looking are professional reporters and Democratic operatives.

If the opinion of a foreigner is accepted, here it goes: Christian fundamentalism leading the most powerful nation of the world is more dangerous for everyone than muslim fundamentalism leading the most powerful terrorist gang.

Hence why Americans rarely take the opinons of such "foreigners" seriously.

Throughout American history, most American Presidents were deeply religious. Jimmy Carter was arguably even more religious than Bush.

Moreover, modern mainstream Christianity is non-violent. (I'm an atheist, I don't really care about who's religion is better btw).  I'm nto hearing many Christians arguing that we should go out and exterminate the Muslims.  By contrast, prominent Muslim clerics are issuing Fatwas for the extermination of Americans.

leftwinger do not like bush because............... why???? he is not a democrat..

That's bullshit! But, coming from you...........

Throughout American history, most American Presidents were deeply religious. Jimmy Carter was arguably even more religious than Bush.

Throughout Universal History:
a) "Deeply Religous" does not equal fundamentalism.
It is fundamentalism of any kind that makes people incite their own to kill whoever is or thinks differently, not christianity or any other religion. I am a Christian btw.

I'm nto hearing many Christians arguing that we should go out and exterminate the Muslims. By contrast, prominent Muslim clerics are issuing Fatwas for the extermination of Americans.

Americans have earned hate from other peoples around the world, because those people don't know that it's not the American people who are causing the slaughtery. They do not see that it is the American leaders (not the people,) who send the armies to kill their families in their own land.

Finally, Mr B. is much more dangerous to the whole world (including the American people) because he has the media to convince his own that his crimes are a divine mission. In the end, it doesn't matter how prominent may any clerics be, they do not have the money nor the weapons, media, markets or even shoes to reach their own frontiers. Most of their followers are struggling to have something to eat, not trying to increase their wealth on the oil they do not have in their countries.

If those people knew that the big bucks will only reach a few Americans, they wouldn't hate Americans. But Mr. B is no fool to let them know that, is he?

Lee 1776 and Drmiler

I was able to locate my files I'm afraid you incorrectly stated what happened concerning Mr. Bush. As reported in the Globe on 2/11/04 Lt. Colonel Albert Lloyd retired National Guard personnel specialist is quoted as saying there is a difference between meeting the minimum for retirement points which is what George Bush did and meeting the minimum requirements required for an interceptor pilot. Interceptor pilot cannot maintain flight proficiency by simply attending the minimum number of drills required for good retirement year.

Lt. Bush did not attend the June July August September October drills, he did not get the flying time necessary to maintain flight proficiency. In addition because he failed to take the physical in August 1972, he was grounded.

Paragraph 2 - 29, Air Force manual 35-13 further requires that when ever a pilot fails to take their physical is a mandatory flight evaluation Board investigate and send to the Air Force. As you have noted 1776, that report is missing and was probably never completed. It was not optional but mandatory. why was this report not produced?

What we have in Mr. Bush is an individual who did not want to serve in Vietnam but make it look as he did. So we used his family influence step ahead of 150 other people ahead of him to secure a position in Guard. When in the spring and summer of 1972 his Guard requirements interfered with his plan to conduct a political campaign in Alabama he simply didn't attend drills and did not complete his physical exam resulting in him being grounded. The taxpayers that hundreds of thousands of dollars to train George Bush as a pilot and he in accepting the commission pledged to serve for a specific period of time. He did not fulfill those requirements and was allowed to get away with it and have no punishment or consequences.

President Clinton the vice president were much more straightforward they did want to serve and used deferremnts to avoid service. Mr. Bush on the other hand used the National Guard to avoid service in Vietnam. In fact on his application for the 147th fighter group he specifically said he did not serve overseas. If you believe the example set by our commander-in-chief is one you like to see emulated by the military of our country, you have very different set of standards that I do.

Lee 1776 and Drmiler I was able to locate my files I'm afraid you incorrectly stated what happened concerning Mr. Bush. As reported in the Globe on 2/11/04 Lt. Colonel Albert Lloyd retired National Guard personnel specialist is quoted as saying there is a difference between meeting the minimum for retirement points which is what George Bush did and meeting the minimum requirements required for an interceptor pilot. Interceptor pilot cannot maintain flight proficiency by simply attending the minimum number of drills required for good retirement year. Lt. Bush did not attend the June July August September October drills, he did not get the flying time necessary to maintain flight proficiency. In addition because he failed to take the physical in August 1972, he was grounded. Paragraph 2 - 29, Air Force manual 35-13 further requires that when ever a pilot fails to take their physical is a mandatory flight evaluation Board investigate and send to the Air Force. As you have noted 1776, that report is missing and was probably never completed. It was not optional but mandatory. why was this report not produced? What we have in Mr. Bush is an individual who did not want to serve in Vietnam but make it look as he did. So we used his family influence step ahead of 150 other people ahead of him to secure a position in Guard. When in the spring and summer of 1972 his Guard requirements interfered with his plan to conduct a political campaign in Alabama he simply didn't attend drills and did not complete his physical exam resulting in him being grounded. The taxpayers that hundreds of thousands of dollars to train George Bush as a pilot and he in accepting the commission pledged to serve for a specific period of time. He did not fulfill those requirements and was allowed to get away with it and have no punishment or consequences. President Clinton the vice president were much more straightforward they did want to serve and used deferremnts to avoid service. Mr. Bush on the other hand used the National Guard to avoid service in Vietnam. In fact on his application for the 147th fighter group he specifically said he did not serve overseas. If you believe the example set by our commander-in-chief is one you like to see emulated by the military of our country, you have very different set of standards that I do.

"If" all this is true then why has no one pressed charges. And don't try the dodge of because he's the president. Also, why are we just hearing it now? Again if it was true Kerry AND his cronies would have made DAMN sure to shout this from the rooftops. All this does is lead me to believe that the Lt Col in question was making a false accusation. And BTW Clinton did basically the SAME thing your accusiing Bush of.

Eighteen-year old Bill enters Georgetown University and registers for Selective Service, as required by law. His status as a full-time student earns him a deferrment. In his senior year, Bill receives a Rhodes Scholarship to study at Oxford University. In February of 1968, the Federal Government eliminates draft deferments for graduate students and Bill once again becomes eligible in March of that year. Clinton subsequently, though family and political connections, obtains a Navy Billet from the local naval reserve unit and temporary draft protection from the Garland County Draft Board, allowing him to start at Oxford - special treatment that was not uncommon for Rhode's Scholars of the day. Clinton completes his first term at Oxford in December, 1969, and is ordered to report for a physical in January, which he did. In April 1969, Bill was ordered to report for induction. However, delays in International mail delivery resulted in Clinton receiving his orders after the induction date had passed. By this time, he had begun his second term at Oxford. Regulations allowed him to complete the term, but he must report for induction by July 28, 1969. Once again utilizing extensive political connections, Clinton gets accepted into the University of Arkansas ROTC program on July 17, nullifying his draft notice. Clinton would not have to enroll until he completed basic training the following year. In the fall of '69, Clinton opts to return to Oxford, rather than enroll in the University of Arkansas Law School. While at Oxford, Clinton contacts the draft board to drop his ROTC deferment and return to active status. By this time, regulations had changed, allowing graduate students to complete their schooling before reporting for military duty. Clinton had a high enough draft number to virtually ensure he would not be called. While his conduct may have been immoral and was undoubtedly unethical, it was not illegal under the laws at that time and, thus, the conclusion drawn that he was the first pardoned criminal to serve as President is fallacious. He craftily manipulated the system, but he had the proper and legal right to do everything he did. He was never AWOL, never guilty of failing to report, was never a criminal under public law and, thus, was not among those pardoned by President Carter in 1977. The author of the chain letter above does not identify himself or his credentials, but I certainly hope he is not a lawyer, given the shoddy application of the law to the events on record. This chain has appeared to be the work of several different people, but every one of those credits has turned up to be a case of False Attribution Syndrome.

The answer (real answer not a silly insult) is it's getting harder every day to make excuses for the killing of innocent people.

---Then why excuse Hussein for killing masses of innocent iraqi's,i.e. genocide....are you against him being gone in a senseless war (i'm glad we went in their, we got rid of an evil man, and their were in a way WMD, the chemical weapons, mustard gas, ricin,etc.... found...[or something like that,forgive me if i am incorrect]


I don't believe that death is too high a cost to establish a government that believes in justice and rule of law for all individuals.

---Precisley

I don't believe that death is too high a cost to establish a government that believes in justice and rule of law for all individuals.

--Precisely

The answer (real answer not a silly insult) is it's getting harder every day to make excuses for the killing of innocent people.

--what about Hussein, should we[ or any democratic country] just sit around with our[pardon my #$##] thumbs up our asses while there are countries out there where innocent people are killed,etc...I'm glad we went in there,no matter what other people say the real reason is, we got rid of an evil man...

I don't believe that death is too high a cost to establish a government that believes in justice and rule of law for all individuals.

--Precisely

The answer (real answer not a silly insult) is it's getting harder every day to make excuses for the killing of innocent people.

--what about Hussein, should we[ or any democratic country] just sit around with our[pardon my #$##] thumbs up our asses while there are countries out there where innocent people are killed,etc...I'm glad we went in there,no matter what other people say the real reason is, we got rid of an evil man...

I don't believe that death is too high a cost to establish a government that believes in justice and rule of law for all individuals.

--Precisely

The answer (real answer not a silly insult) is it's getting harder every day to make excuses for the killing of innocent people.

--what about Hussein, should we[ or any democratic country] just sit around with our[pardon my #$##] thumbs up our asses while there are countries out there where innocent people are killed,etc...I'm glad we went in there,no matter what other people say the real reason is, we got rid of an evil man...



Yeah...my B-DAY is tommorow [21st] whatch out liqour store and hello Vegas.....

sorry for the triple post...my comp's keyboard is sticking...

Finally, Mr B. is much more dangerous to the whole world (including the American people) because he has the media to convince his own that his crimes are a divine mission.

Bush does not the media on his side. Quite the opposite really. The media in the U.S. is getting about as bad as al-jazeera is.

In the end, it doesn't matter how prominent may any clerics be, they do not have the money nor the weapons, media, markets or even shoes to reach their own frontiers. Most of their followers are struggling to have something to eat, not trying to increase their wealth on the oil they do not have in their countries.

But they have money to build bombs, obtain other weapons, and travel abroad to plan more attacks.