quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 I've posted this before, but Bill Clinton's "draft dodging" received 13,641 major news stories during his election campaign, while GW Bush's desertion merit only 49 during his 2000 campaign. Is that a liberal slant in any way?

Bush released his records and he did not desert so there isn't any proof for that claim, and that is why there were so few stories.

Fuzzy, this is the big boy's table.

Maybe you should go sit at the children's table.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen Bush released his records and he did not desert so there isn't any proof for that claim, and that is why there were so few stories.

This is getting off topic, but let's look at what was released in terms of Bush's records:


Jan. 6, 1973 USAF Dental Exam Record for 1st Lt. George W. Bush:
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/...b10673dent.html

Memorandum of Lt. Col. Albert C. Lloyd, Jr. (Ret.) (Analysis of Military Payroll Records for George W. Bush for service from 1972 to 1973) (undated memorandum):
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/...73lloydmem.html

USAF Reserve Personnel Record Card for 1st Lt. George W. Bush (Covers period from 27 May 1972 to 26 May 1973):
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/...3usaf-rprc.html

ARF 1st Statement of Points Earned by 1st Lt. George W. Bush (1972-1973):
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/...-73arfspe1.html

ARF 2nd Statement of Points Earned by 1st Lt. George W. Bush (1973):
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/...b73arfspe2.html

Military Payroll Records of 1st Lt. George W. Bush (1972-1973):
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/...3milpay-p1.html

These are SELECTIVE records that were released. We are still missing:

-Bush's DD-214
-Any pages from Bush's flight log
-Records from the Flight Inquiry Board convened after Bush was suspended as a pilot
-Any evidence of Bush's reclassification into another AFSC after suspension as a pilot
-Anything at all from any Alabama unit with Bush's name on it
-Anything proving service by Bush between May 1972 and May 1973

Plus, I personally want to know just how Bush got into the Texas Guard in the first place, considering he scored a 25% on his entrance exam. I also want to personally know why our patriotic wartime President asked to stay in the U.S., and not wish to serve his time over in the Vietnam War?

Bush has yet to answer the following events, despite the selected records he's given to the press:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004...ain615317.shtml

quote:

In 2000, Mr. Bush said he missed the physical because his family doctor was in Texas. But, as Time magazine reports, Air Force surgeons must perform the physicals and there was no surgeon shortage in Alabama. In March 2004, the White House said Mr. Bush did not need the physical because he was not flying. Regardless of these speculations, there is no record of any investigation in Mr. Bush's file. As Moore concludes, "A pilot simply did not walk away from all of that training with two years remaining on his tour of duty without a formal explanation as to what happened and why." Pay stubs released in February show that he was paid for enough days in Alabama to be judged "satisfactory," but that he did not do any duty between April 16 and October 28, 1972, and that he failed to show up for training in December 1972, February 1973 and March 1973. There is nothing in the records from that key period beyond those pay stubs – no evaluations from either Mr. Bush's Alabama supervisors or his Texas ones. In fact, Mr. Bush's Texas evaluators wrote on May 2, 1973 that, "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report. A civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non-flying status with the 187th Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama." But no Alabama records exist. And Mr. Bush's official discharge papers include no evidence of any duty between May 1972 and October 1973, when he left the Guard.

There's also the question on him moving to Alabama without permission:

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunher...ion/7932511.htm

And I've posted all this before, but it's pretty damn obvious that Bush and the Pentagon are stonewalling the hell out of this issue:

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/brea...te=200431401040

quote:

At the National Guard Bureau, now headed by a Bush appointee from Texas, officials last week said they were under orders not to answer questions. The bureau's chief historian said he couldn't discuss questions about Bush's military service on orders from the Pentagon. ‘‘If it has to do with George W. Bush, the Texas Air National Guard or the Vietnam War, I can't talk with you,” said Charles Gross, chief historian for the National Guard Bureau in Washington, D.C. Rose Bird, Freedom of Information Act officer for the bureau, said her office stopped taking records requests on Bush's military service in mid-February and is directing all inquiries to the Pentagon. She would not provide a reason. Air Force and Texas Air National Guard officials did not respond to written questions about the issue. James Hogan, a records coordinator at the Pentagon, said senior Defense Department officials had directed the National Guard Bureau not to respond to questions about Bush's military records.

Is that enough "proof" to the claim for you?

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

Jeez, Opus--you should be a trial lawyer!

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ Fuzzy, this is the big boy's table. Maybe you should go sit at the children's table.

Blow me.

Maybe you should shut the fuck up.

Wooohooo! I'm going to grab a beer and some doritos. This is going to be entertaining!

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Is that enough "proof" to the claim for you?

I supose.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen I supose.

Thank you for the acknowledgement. Now I'm willing to stear back to the main topic if are are. I hope that I showed that the torture pictures are worth examining and discussed, and I hoped the point about the media being not so much political but sensationalistic was fairly well made by me and Wicked Neo. Do you have anything further to add, or a refutation to make?

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

there is this one person on this board i cannot stand, his name is fuzzygreen...

hats of for opus who stand to argue against him

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen Opus, if you are an American you need to start sticking up for us, it's people like the ones on this web-board that are attacking us, not with bombs, but propoganda. You need to stand up and join me in defending our country because this anti-American propoganda is killing our fellow countryman.

First of all, i guess it's ignorant people like you who makes people hate america. If you where the only american i had met in my life, i sure would be anti america too. you don't give a blanty shit about anything that doesn't think like america. fortunaly, i know better, and is not anti american. but ffs i can critisize america, without beeing totally anti america. actually i would say there is rather few "anti americans" on this board, far more anti arabic (for example you).

and if you don't realise the awfulness in american "liberators" torturing iraqi people... i guess you would be pretty pissed of if someone came and invaded US to liberate you, and tortured your fellow countrymen. would you think the media would be biased if they reported about it?

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew you don't give a blanty shit about anything that doesn't think like america. and if you don't realise the awfulness in american "liberators" torturing iraqi people... i guess you would be pretty pissed of if someone came and invaded US to liberate you, and tortured your fellow countrymen. would you think the media would be biased if they reported about it?

I just learned a new adjective: Blanty. I like it, though I can't find it in the dictionary!

Secondly, and with the disclaimer that I do believe that what those soldiers did was terrible and wrong and certainly hurts America's image worldwide...

So far as we know (And I hear that there are worse pictures to come), there was no bodily harm done to these prisoners, rather they were made to do humiliating and embarassing acts that look more like fraternity hazing than torture to me. That doesn't make it right, but let's not overstate the situation. Again, they were not physically brutalized, they were merely put in humiliating and embarassing situations, so far as we know at this point.

And let's not also forget context. The prisoners are not innocents, rather these are the same people that were rioting in the streets, murdering contractors, smashing their bodies with sticks and hanging their remains from bridges in the streets, and then celebrating about it. Much worse things could've happened to them than to just be put in stupid, embarassing situations.

But, with that said, I certainly don't condone the actions of the few soldiers who are getting egg all over the face of the U.S., and I will reserve further judgement until more evidence comes out that will proove/disproove whether or not any serious harm was inflicted on the prisoners. Unfortunately, it sounds like it could get worse, but until it does, my stance is thus: The Americans were clearly wrong, however the prisoners were certainly not innocent--i.e. both groups are worthy of disdain.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka I just learned a new adjective: Blanty. I like it, though I can't find it in the dictionary! Secondly, and with the disclaimer that I do believe that what those soldiers did was terrible and wrong and certainly hurts America's image worldwide... So far as we know (And I hear that there are worse pictures to come), there was no bodily harm done to these prisoners, rather they were made to do humiliating and embarassing acts that look more like fraternity hazing than torture to me. That doesn't make it right, but let's not overstate the situation. Again, they were not physically brutalized, they were merely put in humiliating and embarassing situations, so far as we know at this point. And let's not also forget context. The prisoners are not innocents, rather these are the same people that were rioting in the streets, murdering contractors, smashing their bodies with sticks and hanging their remains from bridges in the streets, and then celebrating about it. Much worse things could've happened to them than to just be put in stupid, embarassing situations. But, with that said, I certainly don't condone the actions of the few soldiers who are getting egg all over the face of the U.S., and I will reserve further judgement until more evidence comes out that will proove/disproove whether or not any serious harm was inflicted on the prisoners. Unfortunately, it sounds like it could get worse, but until it does, my stance is thus: The Americans were clearly wrong, however the prisoners were certainly not innocent--i.e. both groups are worthy of disdain.

I dunno, this argument of defining "torture" is a little too Clintonesque for me (definition of "is"?)

In light of today's testimony, I do appreciate the fact that Rummy made a full apology and fessed up to being ultimatately responsible. It's truly the first time I heard anyone in this Admin. take responsibility for anything negative. Aside of the apology, however, Rummy went back to his old self of dodge and befuddle.

One other thing to note - Bush still has yet to read the 53-page report. Will he ever read anything, damnit?!?

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...