• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Dan Rather SUES!

Random said:
How tough would it be for Bush to show he had been there? One person who remembered him being there? Where did he live while he was serving there? Did he have any friends? One official document saying that he showed up? How hard could it be?

Silence can speak volumes.
Click to expand...

Can you show me a document proving where you were on march 3 1972 (better yet make it an official document)? How about a friend that can vouch for you? It was a long time ago! If there was real evidence of this it would have been used instead of having to forge documents.
 
Billdave2 said:
Can you show me a document proving where you were on march 3 1972 (better yet make it an official document)? How about a friend that can vouch for you? It was a long time ago! If there was real evidence of this it would have been used instead of having to forge documents.
Click to expand...

I was born May 2nd, 1976, so the March date is not an issue. One of the first things I learned as a child was to memorize my home address in case I ever got lost. I can recite by heart every address I have ever lived at except one I only stayed at for a few months several years ago. Even that is not much of a problem, as I can figure it out with a minute of looking on Google. One moment...

...Found it. Of course, I could have gotten up and looked through my tax records, but why stand up when I can search the web?

This is not an issue of where he was on any one particular day. We are talking about several months of TANG service. He can't even give us his old mailing address during that time with seven years and the combined resources of the executive branch at his disposal?

Spare me.
 
jsfisher said:
This statement troubles me. Let's ignore, for a moment, any controversy over the "factually accurate" part; that still leaves the whole end justifies the means sentiment.
Click to expand...

If the ends don't justify the means, what do?
 
Thanks for the walk down memory lane. I'd almost forgotten about the "fake but accurate" silliness.
 
JoeEllison said:
The fact is that the document, forged or not, contained information that was factually accurate.
Click to expand...

Do you know the importance of the memos, if they were real? It doesn't appear that you do. The memos said that Bush was ordered to attend a physical which he missed. If true, that would mean that Bush violated an order, and that's a very bad thing to do. If not true, then there are no consequences to missing the physical beyond having his flight status suspended. But those fraudulent memos are really the only source for that information. The entire significance rests on whether or not he was ordered to attend the physical, and since we know those documents were fraudulent, there's no reason to think he was. While the documents may contain some information which was factually accurate (such as the correct spelling for Bush's name), the significant information they contain has no support whatsoever, and cannot be said to be accurate at all.
 
Ziggurat said:
Do you know the importance of the memos, if they were real? It doesn't appear that you do. The memos said that Bush was ordered to attend a physical which he missed. If true, that would mean that Bush violated an order, and that's a very bad thing to do. If not true, then there are no consequences to missing the physical beyond having his flight status suspended. But those fraudulent memos are really the only source for that information. The entire significance rests on whether or not he was ordered to attend the physical, and since we know those documents were fraudulent, there's no reason to think he was. While the documents may contain some information which was factually accurate (such as the correct spelling for Bush's name), the significant information they contain has no support whatsoever, and cannot be said to be accurate at all.
Click to expand...
Do YOU understand the significance of what you are saying? Bush missed his physical, no one denies that, not even Bush. Do you deny something that even Bush admits to?
 
JoeEllison said:
Do YOU understand the significance of what you are saying? Bush missed his physical, no one denies that, not even Bush. Do you deny something that even Bush admits to?
Click to expand...

I know Bush missed the physical, but that's not what's significant about the documents. What are the consequences for missing that physical? Only that he can't fly until he takes it, and he didn't fly after missing it, so there's no story there, and nothing that wasn't already covered before CBS put the fake documents on the air. What are the consequences of violating a direct order? They can be quite significant. Was Bush ordered to take the physical? We have no evidence that he was beyond the fraudulent documents.
 
Ziggurat said:
I know Bush missed the physical, but that's not what's significant about the documents. What are the consequences for missing that physical? Only that he can't fly until he takes it, and he didn't fly after missing it, so there's no story there, and nothing that wasn't already covered before CBS put the fake documents on the air. What are the consequences of violating a direct order? They can be quite significant. Was Bush ordered to take the physical? We have no evidence that he was beyond the fraudulent documents.
Click to expand...

Of course he was ordered... unless you think that the Air National Guard asks people pretty please? It seems that the aversion to military service extends from Bush to his supporters, because it is pretty damned obvious to anyone with military service that people get orders to do things, not polite invitations. He'd have received a written order to report on or about a certain date. Since he didn't show up, and never took the physical, it is clear that he was AWOL. In this case, since he admits that he didn't show up, the logical assumption is that he was AWOL unless given specific permission by his commanding officer to reschedule his flight physical. Where's the paperwork for that?
 
I'm speaking from experience, BTW... I received orders to attend a physical and a day of classes when I was on Ready Reserve, I couldn't make it, so I was sent a new set of orders with a new date to attend. No one asked me if I wanted to go, I didn't have to option of not showing up.

I swear to Satan, some of you people seem to think that the ANG is the goddamned Cub Scouts.
 
JoeEllison said:
Of course he was ordered...
Click to expand...

That is an assumption on your part without any evidence. TANG had regulations that required periodic physicals in order to maintain flight status, but those regulations do not constitute orders, and as already stated, the only consequence of not taking the periodic physical, according to the regulations, was that you couldn't fly.
 
Ziggurat said:
That is an assumption on your part without any evidence. TANG had regulations that required periodic physicals in order to maintain flight status, but those regulations do not constitute orders, and as already stated, the only consequence of not taking the periodic physical, according to the regulations, was that you couldn't fly.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what you're talking about, so continuing to bang my head on your ignorance is useless. Those "regulations" are ORDERS.
 
JoeEllison said:
You have no idea what you're talking about, so continuing to bang my head on your ignorance is useless. Those "regulations" are ORDERS.
Click to expand...

But Bush didn't violate the regulations. The regulations say that he couldn't fly unless he took the physical. And he didn't fly. So there was no violation of the regulations. That's why an explicit order to attend the physical would be important, if it were true. Nothing else about those memos has anything to do with Bush's behavior that wasn't already known. That is the only reason they were put on the air, and why the fact that the memos were fraudulent blows that whole particular story out of the water.

But keep hanging onto "fake but accurate" if you want to.
 
Ziggurat said:
But Bush didn't violate the regulations. The regulations say that he couldn't fly unless he took the physical. And he didn't fly. So there was no violation of the regulations. That's why an explicit order to attend the physical would be important, if it were true. Nothing else about those memos has anything to do with Bush's behavior that wasn't already known. That is the only reason they were put on the air, and why the fact that the memos were fraudulent blows that whole particular story out of the water.

But keep hanging onto "fake but accurate" if you want to.
Click to expand...
Do you believe that people in the military get invitations to show up for things? Do you think someone asked Bush if he could please come take his physical, but only if he felt like it?

No. If he had to take a physical, the need for the physical would have been conveyed to him as an order, because that it the way the military works. The regulation that required him to take the physical is also an order, unless the ANG is organized very differently than the Army and Marine Corps. Regulations are orders. His scheduled physical was an order to report for duty, not a request or a suggestion or some sort of vague hint.

Do you have any evidence that his need for a physical was something other than an order based on regulations? If not, the default position is that he violated orders and regulations(really the same thing) by not attending his physical.
 
JoeEllison said:
Do you believe that people in the military get invitations to show up for things?
Click to expand...

That's precisely what happened when Bush was in Alabama. He had permission from his TANG commander to go to Alabama. He was given the opportunity to attend drills there to get credits, but was not reassigned to any Alabama unit, and was therefore not obligated to show up.

If he had to take a physical, the need for the physical would have been conveyed to him as an order, because that it the way the military works.
Click to expand...

Once again: he didn't have to. The ONLY consequence for not taking the physical was that he couldn't fly. He could still perform other duties.

The regulation that required him to take the physical is also an order
Click to expand...

But the regulations didn't require that he take the physical. It only required that he not fly if he hadn't taken it, which he didn't.
 
You DO think that the ANG is the Cub Scouts. Thanks for wasting my time.
 
JoeEllison said:
You have no idea what you're talking about, so continuing to bang my head on your ignorance is useless. Those "regulations" are ORDERS.
Click to expand...


Do you have a link to the text of the regulation in question? That might clear up a few things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom