Bush AWOL Story - New theory comes to light

"Republican Double Standard" wrote in message
.4...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in
:


"Republican Double Standard" wrote in
message . 1.4...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in
:


"Republican Double Standard" wrote in
message . 1.4...
Chad Irby wrote in news:AOM8c.344123$Po1.263958
@twister.tampabay.rr.com:

In article ,
Tempest wrote:

Let's be real here.

If we were being "real," this whole silly story would have died
about four years back.


Why is that Kerry's statements to congress in 1971 are of critical
importance

Becuase his statement, based upon what was proven to be horsecrap
(i.e, the "Winter Soldier Investigation") is a documented fact.

but Bush AWOL

Unsubstantiated (despite repeated efforts by many to prove it);
there is a fifference between a fact and an unsubstantiated claim.


Actually, the refutations are unsubstantiated.

Thank goodness you are not responsible for justice in this nation; I
presume your approach is "guilty until proven innocent"?

Signed progress report from his CO and a denial of transfer request from
personel headquarters. Nothing offered in refutation of these official
documents. Find me a court in this nation where that's not a closed case.

Any of them. The progress report from the CO you refer to is nullified by
his performance of ET, much of which is documented (amazingly enough,
giventhe intervening thirty year period). That transfer request you keep
trotting out is a big ol' red herring--meaningless. He has never claimed to
have received the transfer, and the reason he instead went the ET route is
because he was not approved for the transfer. There is NOTHING there for him
to be convicted *of*, by any courts martial board.

Interestingly enough, you snipped away Robert Reich's alleged "proof" that
the drug testing program kicked off in April 1972 this time--what's wrong,
you found out there is no reputable supporting evidence for that claim and
now just wish that particular topic went away? As I said befo "I went
through pages and pages on Google trying to find a date for the initiation
of military drug testing--one source indicated 1980, another alluded to
1974. Nothing else more concrete. No statistics for drug testing results in
the military until 1979. Odd, huh? Can you do better?" Apparently you can't.

And you must have missed:

"Now, I am guessing you are going to be much more antagonistic to the
application of "could have", "maybe", etc., to your little buddy JFKII.
Let's see... he "could have" pulled some quick ones to get those PH's for
non-lost-duty "wounds" so he could get his butt out of Vietnam early (real
early), "maybe" he pulled some strings to get his early release from active
duty, and "maybe" he did none of his *own* reserve committment (he did have
one, you may recall--where is the documentation showing he preformed *any*
reserve duty, even the obligatory annual appearance/update of files?)...
Hey, he's guilty until proven innocent, right? Good for the goose, good for
the gander?"

It sucks when your own rules are used against your man, huh?

Brooks