Bush AWOL Story - New theory comes to light

"Buzzer" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 10:24:30 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Buzzer" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 10:54:48 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:

None of which answers the question of when it became a standard
feature,
to
include being used in the ANG.

Seems to prove all the other articles that can easily be found by
searching google that give regs, dates and such aren't a bunch of
bull. The labs were in place by 1971 and testing increased
dramatically in 1972.

The early tests were easily passed by drinkers. Only non-drinkers ever
failed.

Personal experience?G

The tests were taken by a large population. In my 30 years of being subject
to drug testing I have never been tested.

It is strange nothinig is said about testing for drunks at the lab
site. Maybe it was an easier test and done locally.

In 1972 the USAF provided kegs for the troops. Even in the late 80s there
was usually a keg at the end of a FOD walk on Edwards.

Now that I have thought of it alcohol testing for everyone in 80 might
be the reason a SMS decided to bail at 22 years around that time. Only
guy I ever knew that had a beer keg in his refrigerator with a valve
on the door. I always figured if he was straight enough to attend the
commanders daily briefing I sure as heck wasn't going to say
anything...

"The drug panel had changed by the fall of 1981 to PCP, morphine,
amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine, and cannabinoid (THC)."

This is the one that amazes me. I thought they were testing for THC
long before this. Might be the reason though when they brought the
dogs through a squadron barracks at K.I. Sawyer on a weekend it almost
wiped out the squadron. At least that was the word that spread quickly
around base on Monday. Or maybe it was just a rumor designed to cause
a mass flush off to get rid of the evidence in other barracks.

The THC test was readily masked by alcohol. These days pot shows up for 30
days in the US DOT test requirement, while cocaine only shows for three
days. If you are a locomotive operator or a pilot and want to get high
these day US DOT has created an incintive to use the hard stuff.

On 28 Mar 2004 12:19:58 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

to have some members of the National
Guard pre-qualified for HRP.

???? If HRP was like PRP, either you're on it or you're not. I'm not sure what
an HRP "pre-qualification" would look like? What responsibilities would you
have? Would you be able to see a physician besides a USAF Flight Surgeon?

HRP/PRP pre-qual would be just like you are in it.

How about going to a magic show and getting hypnotized?

Not really sure in the 60s or early 70s. I don't remember hypnotism
coming up in the HRP/PRP program until the late 70s. Around the time
the civilian stop smoking and weight loss programs that used hypnotism
started appearing...

"Republican Double Standard" wrote in message
.4...

Climb back in your hole idiot and leave the military newsgroups.

On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 07:26:54 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:

Seems to prove all the other articles that can easily be found by
searching google that give regs, dates and such aren't a bunch of
bull. The labs were in place by 1971 and testing increased
dramatically in 1972.

The early tests were easily passed by drinkers. Only non-drinkers ever
failed.

Personal experience?G

The tests were taken by a large population. In my 30 years of being subject
to drug testing I have never been tested.

Not even for a job application?

It is strange nothinig is said about testing for drunks at the lab
site. Maybe it was an easier test and done locally.

In 1972 the USAF provided kegs for the troops. Even in the late 80s there
was usually a keg at the end of a FOD walk on Edwards.

USAF never provided a keg at any of the nine or so bases I was at from
63 to 82. I think it was after a couple B-52s made an around the world
flight at K.I. they brought a frig into maintenance debriefing with
beer for the returning crews. Sure as heck the enlisted debriefers
weren't allowed to sit there drinking beer with them. An EWO might
stop by with a couple cases of beer for the ECM shop after an ORI, but
it was pretty strict it was for off duty only. Even the major drinkers
like SSgt and above would wait at least 10 seconds after shift change.
Squadron or shop parties everyone chip in for a keg maybe. Really not
sure if they would buy a keg out of the coffee and donut shop money or
not. I remember AAFES started bitching about all the little squadron
coffee shop operations going on so they started a satellite operation
in the maintenance building..

Really a surprise they were still providing kegs in the late 80s.
Thought they had started the crackdown on drinking years before that.
I thought by that time membership in the clubs was falling and they
started merging the on base clubs and turning them into more of a
family atmosphere.

The THC test was readily masked by alcohol. These days pot shows up for 30
days in the US DOT test requirement, while cocaine only shows for three
days. If you are a locomotive operator or a pilot and want to get high
these day US DOT has created an incintive to use the hard stuff.

Doesn't cocaine show up in hair samples much longer than that? Maybe
have no notice haircuts?G

"Buzzer" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 07:26:54 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:

Seems to prove all the other articles that can easily be found by
searching google that give regs, dates and such aren't a bunch of
bull. The labs were in place by 1971 and testing increased
dramatically in 1972.

The early tests were easily passed by drinkers. Only non-drinkers
ever
failed.

Personal experience?G

The tests were taken by a large population. In my 30 years of being
subject
to drug testing I have never been tested.

Not even for a job application?

Not even when I worked as a systems engineer at Everett.

It is strange nothinig is said about testing for drunks at the lab
site. Maybe it was an easier test and done locally.

In 1972 the USAF provided kegs for the troops. Even in the late 80s
there
was usually a keg at the end of a FOD walk on Edwards.

USAF never provided a keg at any of the nine or so bases I was at from
63 to 82.

That is really sad for you. We had one crew chief at Edwards that had to
quit his job when he could not come to work drunk anymore. He had been one
of the best on the flightline for a decade, but he was worthless sober.

I think it was after a couple B-52s made an around the world
flight at K.I. they brought a frig into maintenance debriefing with
beer for the returning crews. Sure as heck the enlisted debriefers
weren't allowed to sit there drinking beer with them. An EWO might
stop by with a couple cases of beer for the ECM shop after an ORI, but
it was pretty strict it was for off duty only. Even the major drinkers
like SSgt and above would wait at least 10 seconds after shift change.
Squadron or shop parties everyone chip in for a keg maybe. Really not
sure if they would buy a keg out of the coffee and donut shop money or
not. I remember AAFES started bitching about all the little squadron
coffee shop operations going on so they started a satellite operation
in the maintenance building..

Really a surprise they were still providing kegs in the late 80s.
Thought they had started the crackdown on drinking years before that.
I thought by that time membership in the clubs was falling and they
started merging the on base clubs and turning them into more of a
family atmosphere.

In the early 80's there were multiple barbaques with kegs every Friday at
2:00. By 1987 there was only beer for FOD walks and no more kegs in the
hangar. I believe they shut down AMPEX's wet bars around 1984.

The THC test was readily masked by alcohol. These days pot shows up for
30
days in the US DOT test requirement, while cocaine only shows for three
days. If you are a locomotive operator or a pilot and want to get high
these day US DOT has created an incintive to use the hard stuff.

Doesn't cocaine show up in hair samples much longer than that? Maybe
have no notice haircuts?G

As long as the hair is there.

On 28 Mar 2004 15:15:40 GMT, Republican Double Standard
wrote:

He did show up one
day at Dannelly to have his teeth examined.

That was Jan. 6, 1973?

How about his shot records under polio it has a date of 73APR.
No base given though. If this date isn't in his guard pay records
maybe he is owed training time and back pay for 73APR?

At most bases I have been at the dental clinic and the hospital were
in separate buildings. You had to go to the hospital to get shots.
I could see Bush missing his physical because he got lost on base and
couldn't find the hospital, but he could find the dental clinic. Now
the shot records prove he could also find his way to the hospital!

which proves nothing because
the two Washington guardsmen who failed their HRP were both honorably
discharged

You are a clueless SOB aren't you? Removal from PRP (modern day equivelent of
HRP) is non-punitive. You may be removed (temporary or permanent) from PRP due
to illegal activity (drugs, DUI or generally any crime), but being removed in
and of itself doesn't constitute illegal behavior. We had a guy in my missile
squadron permenantly decertified for having a tremendous credit problem. It
bordered on illegality, but he was never charged. Bottom line, he was removed
from PRP, cross trained into communications (I think?) and was never worse the
wear for it. You need to get a clue before you open your mouth, you're looking
pretty foolish.

This is ludicrous. It's like saying a school child is more qualified to
tell you how a school district functions than a superintendant who
didn't attend that particular school district.

In your case, you are not nearly as knowledgeable as a school superintendant.
Keeping with your anology, I'd say you're a person who once read about school.

My dad was in the Army. I suspect that if he had asked for a transfer
from Fort Bragg to another base and had had that request denied but
still failed to show up at Fort Bragg for 12 months, he would have been
court martialled. But then, his daddy wasn't a congressman.

Your knowledge about how active duty works (although far from complicated)
seems complete, but you need to stick to that aspect since you've no idea how
the guard or reserves work. Don't feel bad. neither do I, the BUFF reserve guys
I've played golf with confuse the hell out of me. Had a guy activated after
9-11, do a stint over Afghanistan, return to CONUS and then finish his
activiation teaching ROTC at Colorado State Univ. Guard & reserve guys can do
some interesting stuff.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

HRP/PRP pre-qual would be just like you are in it.

This is extremely difficult for traditional reservists and guardsman. PRP means
you can only be seen by an Air Force Flight Surgeon or, in the case of
emergency, seen as soon as possible following care from a non USAF Flight
Surgeon. Most traditional reservist and guardsmen do not live around USAF bases
and are not seen by *any* military physians let alone USAF Flight Surgeons.
Then there is the monitoring aspect of PRP. According to the program, you are
to be monitored by your commander as well as by your peers. How is your
commander to know if you have been under any unusual stress that should
preclude you from working around nuclear weapons if he only sees you one
weekend a month? The answer is, he can't. I'm not sure how these guard units
operated in the 60's and 70's, but today very few (if any) non-active duty
personnel are PRP certified. The B-52 Reserve Squadron has no nuclear mission
simply because of the PRP issue and this includes their ART guys.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
HRP/PRP pre-qual would be just like you are in it.

This is extremely difficult for traditional reservists and guardsman. PRP
means
you can only be seen by an Air Force Flight Surgeon or, in the case of
emergency, seen as soon as possible following care from a non USAF Flight
Surgeon. Most traditional reservist and guardsmen do not live around USAF
bases
and are not seen by *any* military physians let alone USAF Flight
Surgeons.
Then there is the monitoring aspect of PRP. According to the program, you
are
to be monitored by your commander as well as by your peers. How is your
commander to know if you have been under any unusual stress that should
preclude you from working around nuclear weapons if he only sees you one
weekend a month? The answer is, he can't. I'm not sure how these guard
units
operated in the 60's and 70's, but today very few (if any) non-active duty
personnel are PRP certified. The B-52 Reserve Squadron has no nuclear
mission
simply because of the PRP issue and this includes their ART guys.

There are no nuclear capable Guard/Reserve units any longer (OK, the F-16's
and F/A-18's in the reserve components still are "nuclear capable", I
imagine, but not so tasked), so your assessment that PRP no longer applies
to the Guard is probably correct; AFAIK, the last such nuclear capable (and
tasked) units would likely have been maybe some of the corps-level artillery
outfits equipped with 155mm and 8 inch guns back in the days before the
1990-92 retirement of the Army's tactical nuclear rounds. But you bring up
an interesting question, as there 8were* nuclear armed Guard units around
not all that long ago--ANG F-101/106 interceptor units armed with AIR-2
Genie, and ARNG Nike Hercules units. The PRP program had to be handled
differently for those units, I'd think; knew a lot of guys who served in the
latter, and never heard of any overly taxing PRP requirements.

Brooks



BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

".impervious" wrote in message ...
In om,
Chad Irby attempted to impart some wisdom, instead sputtering:

: In article ,
: (Tammy) wrote:
:
:
:: So far there have been no outright discrepancies. The closest that
:: the GOPs could get is that as an aide to Bush, he only released
:: positive information to the press and saved the negative information
:: until after he left the White House.
::
:: There are three things to keep in mind.
::
:: 1. He was a Reagan appointee, and served 4 presidents. Not exactly a
:: poster child for anti-GOP views.
:
: He was a long-term bureaucrat who quit during the current
: administration after being denied the promotion he wanted (and being
: effectively demoted). The worst thing in the world to happene to a
: dedicated paper pusher. That's reason enough.


He quit in disgust. The Bush administration is on record of asking him
not to quit.

"they" didn't "get rid" of him, he resigned... and so did the NEXT guy
who had the job, for the same reason.

:: Huh? They try to prove that Bush took terrorism seriously by stating
:: that Bush deemphasised efforts to fight terrorism.
:
: No, they took it seriously by getting rid of someone who wouldn't
: understand the size of the problem, and who was directly in charge
: during the worst terror attacks in history.


They didn't just get rid of him, they downgraded the position of
anti-terrorism coordinator. According to testimony by White House
witnesses (those put in front of the panel by the White House) and
public statements from Cheney, Rice, and others, the position of
anti-terrorism coordinator was downgraded from a "Principle" (i.e.
high priority) position to "Deputy" (medium priority) position. Unless
you are going to claim that downgrading the priority from high to
medium is not a lowering the priority, or claim that Cheney and Rice
are lying, you have to take the position that Bush deemphasised (lower
the priority of) efforts to fight terrorism. Or you could take my
grandmother's attitude and say that the proof is in the pudding.

Or, I guess, you could be a GOP and accuse me of being a moron and a
lefty. That way you don't have to explain why you support the man who
brought us 9/11.

Bush has claimed that 9/11 is an example of the "successes" of his
administration. He has also made fun of 9/11 and the search for WMD.
His failed policies have brought us unemployment, war, death, and
fiscal ruin. It is my position that anyone who supports Bush is a
traitor. You cannot be both a patriot and support the destruction of
this country.