Has everyone seen this? It's great....and scary.

http://flash.bushrecall.org/

MBR

Be careful and don't remove those training wheels for a while yet, Marybeth. They're using you and you don't even realize it...

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

Good one... that is so rich.

Hey, I wonder if after Kerry wins Bush will relinquish power, or will he declare a state of emergency and refuse to leave the Whitehouse?

If he does refuse to leave, what will we do?

Kind of makes you wonder.

thats when they turn to personal swipes. It's always a good sign the "other side" feels threatened.

As far as the video-I was thinking that Bush might try to let another terrorist attack hit us just prior to the elections. It would be the perfect excuse to call for martial law and a little "temporary" postponement to the election.

MB

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

I think this link is a little more truth and a little less cartoon, though not as funny.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/topgun.html


PS if your a brainwashed neo-con don't bother using the link you'll only get mad and turn on your hate machine like a good little soldier. Enjoy.

I had a good laugh. It starts off with a quote from the great Senator Robert Byrd... a champion of the Democratic party... and the KKK. LOL

So here's a link you should try out. I admit it's not biased like the last one, but it's true.

http://www.ngaus.org/ngmagazine/main101.asp

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

Here's what I don't understand. Why wouldn't a National Guardsman (-woman) find Bush's special treatment deplorable? He's draggin down their good name. basically saying, eh the National Guard is not that big of a deal-take off whenever you want.

[quote="SenaxFlatulus";p="3177"]I had a good laugh. It starts off with a quote from the great Senator Robert Byrd... a champion of the Democratic party... and the KKK. LOL

So here's a link you should try out. I admit it's not biased like the last one, but it's true.


Or better yet a nice article here as well



I get it sort of but I followed the link and it has very little to do with anything factual about Bush. I mean I am not disputing that he was in the guard. I don't care what Senator Robert Byrd beliefs were either since that has nothing to do with Bush either. I don't see how in anyway shape or form the following links contents have really any revealing or enlightening information within it, unless I have my decoder ring on the wrong settings. Can you expand on this? Or is this it an article that says Bush was in the guard and he was in there till he left?. I mean the article was written in January 2001, since all the evidence presented in that short but accurate film was compiled over years and lets face it in that same time the Bush administration has been able to come up with a photo copy of a pay-stub and a fellow champagne squadron member to say "Yeah he was great". Find me something factual from now and I'll take your point a little more seriously. Come on now...I'll gladly send you all sort of information that discredit your 2001 publication of George Magazine which folded in in January 2001 the same month your article link was taken from. But I think the point here is that if it wasn't true the company that made the film link I sent you would be sued for liable since you think it's all lies. Oh and if you like read the following article which is posted below, everything is bias so I can't say it isn't but hey it discredits the article you have linked directly and factually they have all the archived information for you to look at as well.


http://democrats.com/smokingjet/smokingjet.html

this link has most of the core data used for the following report and is written by a pilot of the Air National Guard since you like their writing.

Now here is an article written this year

[Note 1/24/04: George Magazine folded in in January 2001. Many of the links were removed from their original locations, so we have retrieved them from the Wayback Machine.]

George Magazine ran a feature story on October 13, 2000 disputing the claims made in our investigative report, The Smoking Jet. After careful review of the arguments and the underlying documents, we stand by our claim that George W. Bush did not legitimately fulfill his military obligation to the Air National Guard, as Bush has insisted on numerous occasions.

Both of our core claims remain intact:

There is no credible evidence that Bush ever reported for duty for the last two years of his military obligation, contrary to repeated claims by Bush and his campaign.
The real reason for Bush's suspension from flight with two years left to serve remains a mystery, since there is no credible excuse for his failure to report for his annual physical. This leaves the circumstantial evidence pointing to substance abuse as the most likely explanation.
We call on George W. Bush to request the immediate disclosure of his full military record, including the missing Flight Inquiry Board,which would explain the reasons for his mysterious suspension from flight. The full military record – which only Bush can request – would prove whether he is telling the truth on May 23 when he said ''I did the duty necessary ... That's why I was honorably discharged."

To rebut the arguments presented in George Magazine, we quote extensively from the article with indents.

At the Republican convention in Philadelphia, George W. Bush declared: "Our military is low on parts, pay and morale. If called on by the commander-in-chief today, two entire divisions of the Army would have to report, 'Not ready for duty, sir.'" Bush says he is the candidate who can "rebuild our military and prepare our armed forces for the future." On what direct military experience does he make such claims?

That's a great question!

George W. Bush applied to join the Texas Air National Guard on May 27, 1968, less than two weeks before he graduated from Yale University. The country was at war in Vietnam, and at that time, just months after the bloody Tet Offensive, an estimated 100,000 Americans were on waiting lists to join Guard units across the country. Bush was sworn in on the day he applied.

This is incorrect. Bush applied in New Haven, Connecticut on January 17, 1968. He was sworn in at Ellington Air Force Base in Houston, Texas on May 26, 1968.

For more than a year, controversy about George W. Bush's Air National Guard record has bubbled through the press. Interest in the topic has spiked in recent days, as at least two websites have launched stories essentially calling Bush AWOL in 1972 and 1973. For example, in "Finally, the Truth about Bush's Military Record" on TomPaine.com, Marty Heldt writes, "Bush's long absence from the records comes to an end one week after he failed to comply with an order to attend 'Annual Active Duty Training' starting at the end of May 1973... Nothing indicates in the records that he ever made up the time he missed." And in Bush's Military Record Reveals Grounding and Absence for Two Full Years" on Democrats.com, Robert A. Rogers states: "Bush never actually reported in person for the last two years of his service - in direct violation of two separate written orders."

Neither is correct.

The assertion by Rogers is absolutely correct. The official record of Bush's military service indicates that Bush did not report in person for the last two years of his service. In addition, superior officers in both Alabama and Texas say they never saw him during this period. And George Magazine offers no credible evidence to contradict this.

It's time to set the record straight.

We could not agree more! That's why we once again call upon George W. Bush to request the immediate release of his full military record.

The following analysis, which relies on National Guard documents, extensive interviews with military officials and previously unpublished evidence of Bush's whereabouts in the summer and fall of 1972, is the first full chronology of Bush's military record.

Virtually all of the evidence has been previously analyzed, including by Rogers, Heldt, and other reporters. The one piece of new evidence - which George calls "torn but undated" - is not credible, as detailed below.

Its basic conclusions: Bush may have received favorable treatment to get into the Guard,

We agree completely! But Bush has flatly denied this conclusion, so the press should continue to ask him to tell the truth.

served irregularly after the spring of 1972

There is still no credible evidence that Bush served AT ALL after the Spring of 1972, and substantial evidence that he did not - both the official record and the testimony of superior officers in both Alabama and Houston.

and got an expedited discharge, but he did accumulate the days of service required of him for his ultimate honorable discharge.

Bush did accumulate the days of service required for an honorable discharge, but these appear to be no-show days that were credited to him as part of the extraordinary favoritism that characterized his service from the beginning to the end of his service.

Ben Barnes, former speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, stated in September 1999 that in late 1967 or early 1968, he asked a senior official in the Texas Air National Guard to help Bush get into the Guard as a pilot. Barnes said he did so at the behest of Sidney Adger, a Houston businessman and friend of former President George H. W. Bush, then a Texas congressman. Despite Barnes's admission, former President Bush has denied pulling strings for his son

Former President Bush has denied initiating the contact to the National Guard. He has not denied that some family member gave approval for an intermediary, Sidney Adger, to contact the guard on behalf of his son. Unfortunately, Adger is dead.

Still, both George Bush and George W. Bush should be asked whether any member of the family participated in discussions to secure a rare and coveted spot in the National Guard.

and retired Colonel Walter Staudt, George W. Bush's first commander, insists: "There was no special treatment."

Honestly, what would anyone expect him or other officials to say? "We routinely broke rules to get him and others like him – the children of the rich and the powerful – out of Vietnam?" That was unquestionably the case, but no one has yet had the honesty or integrity to admit it - including George W. Bush.

The younger Bush fulfilled two years of active duty and completed pilot training in June 1970.

Bush performed basic training from July 14 to August 20, 1968. But then he went on inactive duty until November 25, in order to work on the U.S. Senate campaign of Florida Congressman Edward Gurney, who militantly supported the Vietnam War. Gurney was elected, and subsequently worked as hard as he could to make sure hundreds of thousands of young men were sent to fight in Vietnam.

During that time and in the two years that followed, Bush flew the F-102, an interceptor jet equipped with heat-seeking missiles that could shoot down enemy planes.

These were radar-guided (not heat-seeking) FALCON-AIM supersonic missiles.

On or around his 27th birthday, July 6, 1972, Bush did not take his required annual medical exam at his Texas unit. As a consequence, he was suspended from flying military jets. Bush spokesperson Dan Bartlett told Georgemag.com: "You take that exam because you are flying, and he was not flying. The paperwork uses the phrase 'suspended from flying,' but he had no intention of flying at that time."

This point is critical. It is not up to an Air National Guard pilot to decide whether or not he "intends" to fly!

Bush swore an oath to serve for 6 years. After two years of expensive pilot training, he was assigned to Ellington Air Force base to fly the F-102 for four years. He flew for less than two years, and then mysteriously stopped flying in April 1972. He requested a transfer to an inactive unit in Alabama, but that request was turned down. He was subsequently assigned to temporary duty with a non-flying unit in Alabama for October and November. After that temporary duty, Bush was obligated to return to his home base at Ellington, where he would have been expected to continue flying.

The evidence for this appeared in the Boston Globe on July 28 2000: ''If [Bush] had come back to Houston, I would have kept him flying the 102 until he got out,'' said [Ellington's former commander, retired Major General Bobby W.] Hodges, a Bush admirer. ''But I don't recall him coming back at all.''

Some media reports have speculated that Bush took and failed his physical, or that he was grounded as a result of substance abuse. Bush's vagueness on the subject of his past drug use has only abetted such rumors. Bush's commanding officer in Texas, however, denies the charges. "His flying status was suspended because he didn't take the exam, not because he couldn't pass," says Hodges.

This point is also critical. It is not up to an Air National Guard pilot to decide whether or not to take his mandatory annual physical exam. If he fails to take his physical, he is automatically suspended from flying.

But this is not like taking away the car keys from a misbehaving teenager. It is a very serious action because it takes a fully trained pilot out of commission, and harms the nation's military readiness – the exact charge that Bush has leveled repeatedly against the Clinton-Gore administration. Imagine what the state of our military readiness would be if each pilot – or infantryman, for that matter – decided whether or not they felt like performing the mission for which they were trained!

Because it is so serious, the suspension of a pilot is routinely followed by the appointment of a Flight Inquiry Board to review the reason for the suspension and to determine the appropriate punishment. There may well have been a Flight Inquiry Board, and it would indicate whether substance abuse was the ultimate cause of the problem. However, the documents released under FOIA do not address this issue. The only way we will know the truth is for George W. Bush to request the release of his full military service records which are archived in Missouri, as Rogers wrote in his article.

Asked whether Bush was ever disciplined for using alcohol or illicit drugs, Hodges replied: "No."

This statement can be taken on blind faith, or one can search for hard evidence.

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence. First, Bush admits that he was a heavy drinker at the time, and only denies using drugs after 1974. Second, 1972 was the first year that officers were subject to random drug tests, which could certainly explain why Bush refused to show up for his annual physical.

The evidence we seek is the record of a Flight Inquiry Board, which might indicate whether substance abuse was involved. This is the "Smoking Jet" that we refer to.

On September 5, Bush wrote to then-Colonel Jerry Killian at his original unit in Texas, requesting permission to serve with the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group, another Alabama-based unit. "This duty would be for the months of September, October, and November," wrote Bush. This time his request was approved: 10 days later, the Alabama Guard ordered Bush to report to then-Lieutenant Colonel William Turnipseed at Dannelly Air Force Base in Montgomery on October 7th and 8th. The memo noted that "Lieutenant Bush will not be able to satisfy his flight requirements with our group," since the 187th did not fly F-102s.

This is true for the temporary assignment for October and November of 1972. After that, Bush was expected to return to Houston, where he would have been expected to resume flying, as discussed above.

The question of whether Bush ever actually served in Alabama has become an issue in the 2000 campaign-the Air Force Times recently reported that "the GOP is trying to locate people who served with Bush in late 1972 ... to see if they can confirm that Bush briefly served with the Alabama Air National Guard."

The fact that they have not found anyone speaks volumes.

Moreover, on October 14, the Birmingham News reported that ten Vietnam veterans from Jefferson County, AL, are "offering $1,000 to anyone with proof that Texas Gov. George W. Bush actually served in the Alabama National Guard."

Bush's records contain no evidence that he reported to Dannelly in October.

If this is true - as we believe - then Bush was absent contrary to orders, as Rogers describes in his article. This is also the case for November 4 and 5.

This is a serious offense - the civilian equivalent of AWOL. Normally, this would result in punishment. We do not know if Bush was punished because his full military record has not be released, and because no one has asked Bush whether he was ever disciplined during his military service.

And in telephone interviews with Georgemag.com, neither Turnipseed, Bush's commanding officer, nor Kenneth Lott, then chief personnel officer of the 187th, remembered Bush serving with their unit. "I don't think he showed up," Turnipseed said.

Turnipseed and Lott have made the same point to reporters in several interviews. In fact, Turnipseed has gone further, telling the Boston Globe: ''Had he reported in, I would have had some recall, and I do not,'' Turnipseed said. ''I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had had a first lieutenant from Texas, I would have remembered.''

Bush maintains he did serve in Alabama. "Governor Bush specifically remembers pulling duty in Montgomery and respectfully disagrees with the Colonel," says Bartlett. "There's no question it wasn't memorable, because he wasn't flying."

Bush and his campaign spokespeople have repeated this assertion on numerous occasions. If they are lying (see below), they should be held accountable by the press.

In July, the Decatur Daily reported that two former Blount campaign workers recall Bush serving in the Alabama Air National Guard in the fall of 1972. "I remember he actually came back to Alabama for about a week to 10 days several weeks after the campaign was over to complete his Guard duty in the state," stated Emily Martin, a former Alabama resident who said she dated Bush during the time he spent in that state.

Unfortunately, Emily Martin cannot testify as a witness to whether or not Bush actually reported for duty, only whether he said he did. She makes this clear further in the same interview: "Although I never actually drove him to Guard duty, he told me that he went and there is no reason for me to believe that he did not go." She may not question Bush's story, but we do because there is no official record of his reporting for duty, which is acknowledged by everyone involved. Moreover, there are two competent witnesses who say that he did not, namely Turnipseed and Lott.

Moreover, on Meet the Press on October 8, Paul Begala confronted Karl Rove, the chief strategist of the Bush campaign, with the evidence that Bush never reported for duty in Alabama. Rove alluded to Emily Martin, but Begala challenged Rove to "name one" person who actually served with Bush. Rove refused to answer.

Two documents obtained by Georgemag.com indicate that Bush did make up the time he missed during the summer and autumn of 1972. One is an April 23, 1973 order for Bush to report to annual active duty training the following month;

This record ordered Bush to report for six days in May 1973, but does not provide any evidence that he actually reported. The evidence shows that Bush ignored orders to report the previous October and November, so there is no reason to assume that he reported for this one.

the other is an Air National Guard statement of days served by Bush that is torn and undated

This "torn and undated" document is the only new evidence discovered by George Magazine, and is the cornerstone of their story. It therefore warrants close scrutiny.

On the face of it, there is nothing to connect this document with George W. Bush, because his name appears nowhere, and the place where his name should be is torn.

Secondly, there is nothing to suggest that this is an official document of any kind, because it is unsigned and undated, unlike any other document in the record.

Finally, the original record has been modified with handwritten notations, without indication of the author or the date of the alteration.

A document similar to this was received by Marty Heldt with his FOIA request. However, the document that was sent had no handwritten notations. Thus, the version exhibited by George - and the cornerstone of its story - must have been altered.

This "document" therefore raises more questions than it answers - in particular, WHO altered it, and WHY?

In the final analysis, this "document" is bizarre - and not credible evidence that George W. Bush reported for duty during this period.

but contains entries that correspond to the first. Taken together, they appear to establish that Bush reported for duty on nine occasions between November 29, 1972-when he could have been in Alabama-and May 24, 1973.

As explained above, we dispute the authenticity of this "document." However, even if it is accepted at face value, it raises a whole new set of questions.

If Bush reported for duty in Alabama on November 29, 1972, then according to this "document" he also reported for duty on eight other occasions between December 14, 1972 and May 24, 1973. But where?

The Bush campaign has never claimed that Bush returned to Alabama after November 1972. Everyone agrees that Bush returned to Houston, where he worked in a community service project.

But Bush was last seen at Ellington Air Force Base in Houston in May 1972. As cited above, Bush's friend Maj. Gen. Hodges didn't even know he was in Houston. And in Bush's annual report, Lt. Col. William Harris and Lt. Col. William Killian affirmed that "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report," which covered the period from May 1, 1972 to April 30, 1973.

So if George Magazine wants to use this "document" as the conclusive proof that Bush was in Alabama, then it must explain the rest of the document as well, and disprove Bush's official military record and the testimony of witnesses in Houston.

If George Magazine cannot explain this "document" in full, then there is not a shred (literally!) of hard evidence that Bush reported for duty in Alabama, contrary to repeated statements during the campaign by Bush. In other words, it proves that Bush has been specifically lying about his Alabama service throughout this Presidential campaign. In a campaign where truthfulness has become the single most important issue, this flat-out lie should be headline news for every major news outlet!

Bush still wasn't flying, but over this span, he did earn nine points of National Guard service from days of active duty and 32 from inactive duty. When added to the 15 so-called "gratuitous" points that every member of the Guard got per year, Bush accumulated 56 points, more than the 50 that he needed by the end of May 1973 to maintain his standing as a Guardsman.

George Magazine is relying upon handwritten annotations that are not part of the original "document", without identifying the source of these annotations. The original document does not identify active or inactive duty, and provides no evidence at all of gratuitous points.

And once again, none of this service appear on his official record.

On May 1, Bush was ordered to report for further active duty training, and documents show that he proceeded to cram in another 10 sessions over the next two months. Ultimately, he racked up 19 active duty points of service and 16 inactive duty points by July 30-which, added to his 15 gratuitous points, achieved the requisite total of 50 for the year ending in May 1974.

This "document" lists Bush's name and 10 sessions. Still, this is unsigned and undated, so its authenticity is nearly as doubtful as the "torn and undated" document above.

If one accepts this document at face value, George Magazine still makes several important errors.

First, Bush was awarded only 5 gratuitous points, presumably because he served only one-third of the year before going off to Harvard Business School. That means he accumulated only 40 points for the document year, which corresponds to the number at the bottom under item "D". This leaves him 10 short of the required 50 points.

Second, even the Bush campaign only claims a single day of service - November 29, 1972 - in the previous year. That means Bush's 40 points from May to July of 1973 were needed to fulfill his unmet obligation for the previous year.

But once again, there are no witnesses who saw Bush performing his National Guard service during this period, and no entries in Bush's official record.

So given the lack of credibility of this document, we therefore stand behind our conclusion that these were no-show days, and that Bush never reported for duty for his last two years of service.

On October 1, 1973, First Lieutenant George W. Bush received an early honorable discharge so that he could attend Harvard Business School. He was credited with five years, four months and five days of service toward his six-year service obligation.

As Marty Heldt points out in TomPaine.com, a document entitled "Military Biography of George Walker Bush" shows that Bush was subsequently assigned to headquarters in Denver from October 2, 1973 to November 21, 1974. He concludes that Bush was "punished" with 6 months of additional inactive duty beyond his original scheduled termination on May 26, 1974.

This would be the most lenient possible way to punish an officer for all of the missed time cited above – instead of forced enlistment for 2 years in the regular Army, or a less-than-honorable discharge.

This evidence suggests that Bush left the service just as he entered – the beneficiary of extraordinary favoritism, which was available only to the sons of the rich and the powerful.

In conclusion, our careful analysis of the evidence offered by George Magazine does nothing to undermine our previous conclusions. If anything, this evidence proves beyond a doubt that Bush never reported for duty in Alabama, and has repeatedly lied during this campaign when he claimed that he did.

We call upon the press to ask George W. Bush directly about his military service. In particular, the press should ask:

Why did Bush stop flying with two years left of his obligation? Apart from being suspended from flying, was he punished?
Did Bush avoid taking his annual physical because he feared he would fail a substance abuse test?
Did Bush ever report for duty during his last two years? If so, where? Does he have any credible proof or witnesses?
As we have done before, we call upon George W. Bush to request the immediate release of his full military record from the archives in Missouri, so the American people can judge for themselves whether Bush fulfilled his first sworn oath to the United States of America, before giving him the opportunity to break another.