new Bush National Guard doc.......

[bfrank]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor.../bush_guard_10
WASHINGTON - The White House said seven months ago that it had released all the records on President Bush (news - web sites)'s stateside military service during the Vietnam War, yet new records are still dribbling out as Election Day approaches.


The White House on Wednesday night produced a November 1974 document bearing Bush's signature from Cambridge, Mass., where he was attending Harvard Business School, saying he had decided not to continue as a member of the military reserve.


The document, signed a year after Bush left the Texas Air National Guard, said he was leaving the military because of "inadequate time to fulfill possible future commitments."


White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the resignation was found in connection with a lawsuit brought by The Associated Press. The White House said the document had been in Bush's personnel file and that it had been found by the Pentagon (news - web sites).
[more]

Nothing new I can see.

[Jergen]

Yeah nothing new, just another lie about how all the documents had been released already.

[Pharoh]

Then why post it if it is nothing new? Seriously, how does this advance the discourse?

[General Zod]

Serious question .. Did the associated press sue to get Kerry's military documents as well? If not, why not?

[Myster X]

Originally posted by General Zod
Serious question .. Did the associated press sue to get Kerry's military documents as well? If not, why not?

must resist the urge to say "libe... medi"

[bhk]

On top of Zod's question I also want to ask:
Do you blame the WH for a document that was at the Pentagon and found by them?

"We've continually asked DOD to make the president's records available, and obviously it would've been preferable if this had been released at the same time as the others," said White House spokesman Jim Morrell.

"Lt. Col. Tom Deall, public affairs chief for the Air Reserve Personnel Center in Denver, said the resignation signed by Bush was typically done by reservists for personal reasons such as education."

End of story.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...435842,00.html

[dork]

More liberal propaganda. If you look at this so-called document, you will see that there are obvious signs of forgery. For example, here is the "document":

unadequate time to fullfill possible future comittments

According to document experts I've consulted, many of these words are either misspelled or simply MADE UP. Therefore they could not have been written by George W. Bush and the document is A FRAUD. Therefore George W. Bush is still in the Reserve, waiting for orders to ship off to Vietnam.

More info here: http://www.dorkblog.com/Sept30/Bushdoc.html

[bfrank]

Originally posted by Pharoh
how does this advance the discourse?

Not sure what you are asking here?

It was on Yahoo's front page. Some of the Whitehouse comments are actually interesing. It also states the facts that we do know so far that the hard right seem to discount here.

[Jergen]

Originally posted by dork
More liberal propaganda. If you look at this so-called document, you will see that there are obvious signs of forgery. For example, here is the "document":

According to document experts I've consulted, many of these words are either misspelled or simply MADE UP. Therefore they could not have been written by George W. Bush and the document is A FRAUD. Therefore George W. Bush is still in the Reserve, waiting for orders to ship off to Vietnam.

More info here: http://www.dorkblog.com/Sept30/Bushdoc.html

I agree, your blog clearly provides CONCLUSIVE evidence. This is DEVASTATING news for Bush.

[bfrank]

As reported previously by The Boston Globe, at that time in 1973, Bush was warned to find a unit in Massachusetts to complete the eight months remaining in his six-year commitment or face immediate call-up to active duty. Instead, while he was discharged honorably from the Texas Air National Guard in October 1973, he still had an obligation to complete Reserve service and was officially transferred by May 1974 to an inactive assignment as an executive support officer at Denver's Air Reserve Center, records show.

He then wrote the newly discovered "Tender of Resignation" in November 1974 in which he says he wants out of the Reserve because he has "inadequate time to fulfill possible future commitments." He was formally and honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve two weeks later, on Nov. 21, 1974.

Lt. Col. Tom Deall, public affairs chief for the Air Reserve Personnel Center in Denver, said the resignation signed by Bush was typically done by reservists for personal reasons such as education.

"The practice went on all the time. It was up to the commander. If it didn't degrade the mission and was in the best interests of the person, it was OK," Deall said, noting that the Reserve was still eligible to be mobilized.


From bhk's link

[CRM114]

The only interesting things are that they are still "finding" documents. I suppose after Bush gets reelected, the transcript of Bush's suspension hearing will be found as well.

[nemein]

The only interesting things are that they are still "finding" documents.

I would only put that in the midly interesting category though... I mean we are talking about records from the 70s that most likely were not well maintained. Even if this was Kerry's record I would suspect things would come out piecemeal... of course it seems we'll never know either way for him now will we

[natesfortune]

Originally posted by Jergen
Yeah nothing new, just another lie about how all the documents had been released already.

Wrong. Bush signed Form 180, giving up his right to privacy and allowing ALL military records to be released to the public.

It is not HIS responsibilty to find all of these paper records from the late sixties and early seventies - it is the responsibility of the Pentagon. The search takes time, and considering record-keeping of the day from different National Guard offices, it is not at all surprising that new records would keep turning up as further searches BY THE PENTAGON are conducted.

Bottom Line - Bush signed Form 180, giving unfettered access to all of his military records, proving he has nothing to hide.

John Kerry, on the other hand, refuses to sign Form 180 and release his military records. What is he hiding? And this is a man who, unlike Bush, has run on his service record.

Yet the press is hounding Bush for all the docs, and not asking Kerry to sign Form 180? More of that good old liberal bias...

[Contactsport1]

Originally posted by nemein
I would only put that in the midly interesting category though... I mean we are talking about records from the 70s that most likely were not well maintained. Even if this was Kerry's record I would suspect things would come out piecemeal... of course it seems we'll never know either way for him now will we

Didn't it say they found this in his personnel file? I woudn't have thought to look there either.

[natesfortune]

And again, not even sure what this is bringing up that the "hard right", as Bfrank says, refuses to acknowledge.

What exactly, is there in terms of proof or evidence that shows that Bush was treated differently than others in the National Guard?

Honestly - because I have seen nothing that would lead one to that conclusion, and I'm curious as to what I've missed, as others seem to regard that as "fact" without citing why they think so.

This letter, as has been said, is "no different" than what many others did at that time. Bush was trained on a fighter that was obselete at the time and was no longer in combat. And he only had a few months left - not enough time to train on a new jet and they had enough fliers anyway, so they let him go. Not a "strange" story at all.

My own father was called up to go to Vietnam while he was in the Marines, but his orders came when he only had a few months left in his service - so he went to the Commander and pointed out that by the time he got over there, they'd have to send him right back within two months and they said he was right and just decided he shouldn't be ordered to Vietnam after all(he didn't have to go even though he was a Marine because he was playing football for the Marines during most of his tenure).

This kind of thing happens all the time in the military, and Bush is no special case.

And why doesn't John Kerry get this kind of ultra-scrutiny? He won't even sign Form 180, yet there are no liberal calls for him to do so, and he's actually RUN ON HIS RECORD. Why is not what's good for the goose good for the gander?

There could be some questions, too, as Kerry came back and was part of the Reserves until 1978, but there are no records of him serving for a couple of years after he got back, as he was spending all his time protesting the war. Why aren't the press clamoring for those records?

Kerry was also meeting with the enemy while still a reservist. Why no media attention to that?

I mean if you're going to try and fault Bush for doing nothing particularly out of the ordinary, why leave Kerry alone when he won't release his records and CLEARLY did something out of the ordinary by going to Paris and meeting with the North Vietnamese?(and he's actually run a campaign on his military record)

The double standard is enormous.

[Jergen]

Originally posted by natesfortune
Wrong. Bush signed Form 180, giving up his right to privacy and allowing ALL military records to be released to the public.

It is not HIS responsibilty to find all of these paper records from the late sixties and early seventies - it is the responsibility of the Pentagon. The search takes time, and considering record-keeping of the day from different National Guard offices, it is not at all surprising that new records would keep turning up as further searches BY THE PENTAGON are conducted.

Bottom Line - Bush signed Form 180, giving unfettered access to all of his military records, proving he has nothing to hide.

John Kerry, on the other hand, refuses to sign Form 180 and release his military records. What is he hiding? And this is a man who, unlike Bush, has run on his service record.

Yet the press is hounding Bush for all the docs, and not asking Kerry to sign Form 180? More of that good old liberal bias...

Oh no, with that authoritative use of CAPITAL letters, I must be wrong. Another DEVASTATING twist! Another victory for BLOGS over the old LIBERAL media

[natesfortune]

Originally posted by Jergen
Oh no, with that authoritative use of CAPITAL letters, I must be wrong. Another DEVASTATING twist! Another victory for BLOGS over the old LIBERAL media

Attacking the presentation rather than the substance?

I must conclude that's "all you've got", in that case.

I accept your concession on the matter.

[Jergen]

Originally posted by natesfortune
Attacking the presentation rather than the substance?

I must conclude that's "all you've got", in that case.

I accept your concession on the matter.

There have been conflicting reports on whether or not Bush sign that specific Form 180. Where is a copy of that form with Bush's signature on it?

[weargle]

Rather will find it, by golly!

[bfrank]

Originally posted by Jergen
Oh no, with that authoritative use of CAPITAL letters, I must be wrong. Another DEVASTATING twist! Another victory for BLOGS over the old LIBERAL media

He is right. Stick to the topic and not the poster.


natesfortune - Bush has not signed the 180 Form. Just because many people repeat something does not make it true.

You may want to study this.

......................................

This story is interesting not because Bush said he released everything and he or they did not.

It is because the actual content is full of big open gaps and the facts are that he took advantage of the system and the right gives him a pass on this.

[nemein]

natesfortune - Bush has not signed the 180 Form. Just because many people repeat something does not make it true.

Do you have definitive proof of that? Quite frankly I can't find evidence either way. Those who support him says he has, those who don't says he hasn't. I seriously doubt the document itself is online anywhere for everyone to see.

[bfrank]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...v=rss_politics

Although both President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry have repeatedly said they have made public their complete military service records, neither presidential candidate has yet permitted independent access to original files held in a high-security vault

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...elections/2004

Although the St. Louis repository is under the control of the National Archives, officials at the Archives say that the records belong to the military unit that generated them. In practice, they can be released to outsiders only with the permission of the veteran concerned. Such access is usually granted through the signing of a release known as Standard Form 180, a step that neither candidate has so far taken.

[Jergen]

Originally posted by nemein
Do you have definitive proof of that? Quite frankly I can't find evidence either way. Those who support him says he has, those who don't says he hasn't. I seriously doubt the document itself is online anywhere for everyone to see.

If there is a Form 180 with Bush's actual signature on it, why wouldn't it be online? Wouldn't the Bush campaign release on it's website? If Bush signed it, then where is it?

[nevermind]

Originally posted by General Zod
Serious question .. Did the associated press sue to get Kerry's military documents as well? If not, why not?

Any ideas? Anyone?

[nemein]

The article is so good you had to post it twice uh?