A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

1972 **** test . . . so where was dubya ??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 22nd 04, 06:06 PM
Transition Zone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 1972 **** test . . . so where was dubya ??

"Jonathan" wrote in message .. .
I am coming late to this discussion (having ignored it for the tedium of the
Bush/Kerry attacks on this group)...

Just a quick question.

Without probable cause, why are we so quick to support a random violation of
the most basic private matters? The constitution clearly states that are
'persons' are not to be subject to unreasonable searches, and I think the
concept of being forced to urinate in a cup under the supervision of another
is pretty damned unreasonable.

This has nothing to do with Bush, I don't care if he snorted coke back in
the early 1970s (just as I didn't care that Clinton and Gore and Kerry and
so many others smoked weed or whatever).


Since you were a ground-pounder instead of an airdale, of course you wouldn't
give a hell what condition our pilots are like flying overhead

It has to do with basic privacy.


Privacy to do cocaine, not get caught and drive and then A-6 Intruder where it
shouldn't go. Right ??

So, if George W. Bush blew off a **** test because he thought it was an
unreasonable breach of his privacy, I applaud that.


Just like you would officers that you would command, right ??

If, OTOH, he supported the drug testing others, later, then he is a total
schmuck..


What's his military doing now ??
  #2  
Old September 22nd 04, 07:31 PM
Yeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 22 Sep 2004 10:06:27 -0700, Transition Zone wrote:

Privacy to do cocaine, not get caught and drive and then A-6 Intruder where it
shouldn't go. Right ??


The Air Force A-6s were the original stealth aircraft...

--

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com
  #6  
Old September 23rd 04, 02:05 AM
Steve Hix
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Yeff wrote:

On 22 Sep 2004 10:06:27 -0700, Transition Zone wrote:

Privacy to do cocaine, not get caught and drive and then A-6 Intruder where
it shouldn't go. Right ??


The Air Force A-6s were the original stealth aircraft...


Nobody even has pictures of them parked.
  #9  
Old September 23rd 04, 04:48 AM
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Transition Zone" wrote in message
om...
"Jonathan" wrote in message
.. .
I am coming late to this discussion (having ignored it for the tedium of
the
Bush/Kerry attacks on this group)...

Just a quick question.

Without probable cause, why are we so quick to support a random violation
of
the most basic private matters? The constitution clearly states that are
'persons' are not to be subject to unreasonable searches, and I think the
concept of being forced to urinate in a cup under the supervision of
another
is pretty damned unreasonable.

This has nothing to do with Bush, I don't care if he snorted coke back in
the early 1970s (just as I didn't care that Clinton and Gore and Kerry
and
so many others smoked weed or whatever).


Since you were a ground-pounder instead of an airdale, of course you
wouldn't
give a hell what condition our pilots are like flying overhead


While they are flying, I would expect them to be stone cold sober.

What they do in their off-time is entirely none of anyone's business.

It has to do with basic privacy.


Privacy to do cocaine, not get caught and drive and then A-6 Intruder
where it
shouldn't go. Right ??

So, if George W. Bush blew off a **** test because he thought it was an
unreasonable breach of his privacy, I applaud that.


Just like you would officers that you would command, right ??


I was an E-5, the officers are held to such a low standard, that I expect
that they must be high most of the time.

If, OTOH, he supported the drug testing others, later, then he is a total
schmuck..


What's his military doing now ??


Dying at far too great a number.



Jonathan


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN ChuckSlusarczyk Home Built 105 October 8th 04 12:38 AM
Propeller for aircraft engine ground test Guy Deraspe Home Built 0 July 21st 04 04:41 AM
bush rules! Be Kind Military Aviation 53 February 14th 04 05:26 PM
Air Force conducts live test of MOAB Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 November 21st 03 11:45 PM
FAA Knowledge Test Results Richard Moore Instrument Flight Rules 4 October 12th 03 07:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.