Red Hat Topics - CBS Goes To Far!

Author

CBS Goes To Far!

libs stink

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

I don't know how many of you know that Dan Rather and 60 Minutes (CBS News)
ran a story attacking George Bush and his time in the National Guard. One
of the basis points of this attack garbage where documents which have now
been determined to be forgeries! Rather than admit to their biased
reporting and lack of professionalism, Dan Rather has attempted to stand
behind thier report! This has been done in spite of the Colonels wife and
son specifically stating that they did not believe that the documents were
real, that the Colonel did not keep typed notes of any sort, and that they
did not provide the information from the files! They both have specifically
stated that they do not know where the files came from because they did not
have them nor did anyone they know! On top of this over a dozen
cryptologists have come out and voiced their feelings that the documents are
fakes.

Because of this we are calling for a National boycott of CBS and all of its
advertisers!

Please email these people voicing your displeasure. To email go to their
web site http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml and click on
"Contact Us" and tell them that you are disgusted with their lack of
professionalism and bias in covering this Presidential race!

Thank you,

A Concerned Citizen

An email sent to CBS News Follows:

Dan Rather sucks!

Even I spotted the "th" of the "111th" as a problem and knew that the
documents were not created in the time frame reported by you people!

I am calling a boycott of all CBS shows and all CBS advertisers. You will
see this note posted all over the internet. I hope you lose millions of
dollars because you deserve it for your incredibly biased and
unprofessional coverage of the presidential race.

Where is your show featuring the Swift Boat Vets? Where?

Your new detractor,
XX XXXXX

charles hill

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:51:25 +0000, libs stink wrote:

George Bush is a coward just like his daddy. Bush 43 froze like a deer
in headlights when they told him America was under attack. The 7 minutes
he sat in the class room failing to act and the time wasted giving an
impromptu press conference meant the Air Force had 27 minutes less time to
catch flight 77 before it slammed into the Pentagon. Those Langley Air
Force pilots were 12 minutes away from flight 77 when

911 happened on his watch and everyone told him it was coming before it
happened. The 911 commission blamed him for 911 because it happened on
his watch, he was responsible for national security since inauguration,
and he was the person in the White House to whom the heads of the DOD,
DIA, FBI and CIA report.

Starting with Bush 41 the only nation to invade more than 2 countries in
the last 15 yrs is the US. Panama, Grenada, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq. The
US retaliated with missles strikes against Libya and Afghanistan. The US
possesses WMDs and is still the only nation it the world to use a nuclear
weapon against another nation. And the US is constantly trying to over
throw and directly influence internal politics of other nations. Is it
any wonder other nations hate our government.

It is clear to everyone except assholes for Bush, that Bush 43 skipped out
the last year of his Air National Guard duty. He failed to take his
physical because at that time the US was activating Air Guard pilots for
military service, and apparently disobeyed a direct order to take the
physical.

Do you really think Bush 43 is bringing troops home from Korea, Germany,
etc to save money or be with their families? NO he has a 10yr war and he
has run out of fresh volunteer Army units to fight in Iraq.

Bush 43 is a XXXXing, fascist, coward who will send you, sons and
daughters to war but not himself or members of his family. His politics
will morally and finacially bankrupt the US. None of his policies will
even remotely make America safer. If you think you are safe then take
your next vacation in Morroco, Eygpt or Indonesia.

> I don't know how many of you know that Dan Rather and 60 Minutes (CBS
> News) ran a story attacking George Bush and his time in the National
> Guard. One of the basis points of this attack garbage where documents
> which have now been determined to be forgeries! Rather than admit to
> their biased reporting and lack of professionalism, Dan Rather has
> attempted to stand behind thier report! This has been done in spite of
> the Colonels wife and son specifically stating that they did not believe
> that the documents were real, that the Colonel did not keep typed notes
> of any sort, and that they did not provide the information from the
> files! They both have specifically stated that they do not know where
> the files came from because they did not have them nor did anyone they
> know! On top of this over a dozen cryptologists have come out and
> voiced their feelings that the documents are fakes.
>
> Because of this we are calling for a National boycott of CBS and all of
> its advertisers!
>
> Please email these people voicing your displeasure. To email go to
> their web site http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml and
> click on "Contact Us" and tell them that you are disgusted with their
> lack of professionalism and bias in covering this Presidential race!
>
> Thank you,
>
> A Concerned Citizen
>
> An email sent to CBS News Follows:
>
> Dan Rather sucks!
>
> Even I spotted the "th" of the "111th" as a problem and knew that the
> documents were not created in the time frame reported by you people!
>
> I am calling a boycott of all CBS shows and all CBS advertisers. You
> will see this note posted all over the internet. I hope you lose
> millions of dollars because you deserve it for your incredibly biased
> and unprofessional coverage of the presidential race.
>
> Where is your show featuring the Swift Boat Vets? Where?
>
> Your new detractor,
> XX XXXXX

187

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

charles hill wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:51:25 +0000, libs stink wrote:
>
>
> George Bush is a coward just like his daddy. Bush 43 froze like a
> deer in headlights when they told him America was under attack. The
> 7 minutes he sat in the class room failing to act and the time wasted
> giving an impromptu press conference meant the Air Force had 27
> minutes less time to catch flight 77 before it slammed into the
> Pentagon. Those Langley Air Force pilots were 12 minutes away from
> flight 77 when

[... other mindless ignorant drival snipped ...]

I ususally stay away from plitical sparrings, but this is jsut getting
too much. Ther seem to be so many eithr mininformed or jsut plain
ignorant folks out there (and in many cases, both apply.) The media out
there deserves a lot of blamefor this (dis)information, twisting around
facts, doign everything possible jsut to make Bush bad. Granted not lal
news outlets are that bad, but a great many are.

What we don't need is more brain washed fanitis preaching utter garbage
like this post I'm replying to. People like Mr Hill who know next ot
NOTHING of what they are talking about, peaching what amounts to nothing
but sheer proganda, are whats hurting society most.

In fact, this sort of propaganda is what's turning more and more people
off from politics (and at the same time infuriating others.

And worst of all, people engage in this sort of thing while we are at a
*time of War*. One would think that this sort of behavior would be
outrageous given our war-time status. Sigh...

"Dam lemmings!"

Mike

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

In article <2qn0leF11ul32U1@uni-berlin.de>, 187 wrote:
> charles hill wrote:
>
> [... other mindless ignorant drival snipped ...]
>
> I ususally stay away from plitical sparrings, but this is jsut getting
> too much. Ther seem to be so many eithr mininformed or jsut plain
> ignorant folks out there (and in many cases, both apply.) The media out
> there deserves a lot of blamefor this (dis)information, twisting around
> facts, doign everything possible jsut to make Bush bad. Granted not lal
> news outlets are that bad, but a great many are.
>
> What we don't need is more brain washed fanitis preaching utter garbage
> like this post I'm replying to. People like Mr Hill who know next ot
> NOTHING of what they are talking about, peaching what amounts to nothing
> but sheer proganda, are whats hurting society most.
>
> In fact, this sort of propaganda is what's turning more and more people
> off from politics (and at the same time infuriating others.
>
> And worst of all, people engage in this sort of thing while we are at a
> *time of War*. One would think that this sort of behavior would be
> outrageous given our war-time status. Sigh...
>
> "Dam lemmings!"
>
>

What you fail to understand is that the current situation is not
'a time of war'. It is one society laboring against another society.
War is for nations... terrorism is for individuals.

Mike

187

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

Mike wrote:
> In article <2qn0leF11ul32U1@uni-berlin.de>, 187 wrote:
>
> What you fail to understand is that the current situation is not
> 'a time of war'. It is one society laboring against another society.
> War is for nations... terrorism is for individuals.

I undertand what you are trying to say, but this IS a time of war. We
*WERE* attacked, and we've bee nresponding to this attack. Why is this
so difficult to grasp for some? They used planes to damage, or in the
case of the WTC, completely destroy a few buildings (not jsut the twin
towers but surrounding buildings too were demolished as a result.)

We've been at war since that time. It may not be a war with a single
contry, but that alone does not nullify the fact that this IS a war,
which is still being fought, foguht by our people in uniform over seas.
Just becuase the enemy is too much of a coward does not mena this isn't
a war.

Mike

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

In article <2qoh5cF11hv93U1@uni-berlin.de>, 187 wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
> I undertand what you are trying to say, but this IS a time of war. We
> *WERE* attacked, and we've bee nresponding to this attack. Why is this
> so difficult to grasp for some? They used planes to damage, or in the
> case of the WTC, completely destroy a few buildings (not jsut the twin
> towers but surrounding buildings too were demolished as a result.)
>
> We've been at war since that time. It may not be a war with a single
> contry, but that alone does not nullify the fact that this IS a war,
> which is still being fought, foguht by our people in uniform over seas.
> Just becuase the enemy is too much of a coward does not mena this isn't
> a war.

Using that definition we have been at war since the first founding
of the Weathermen and related groups. The 'enemy' is not a coward. The
enemy simply has different values from you. It is not possible to
conduct combat against terrorism using armies and troops. You fight
against terrorism using society and changing society. Examine the
page on the 'Prisoner's Delimma' at wikipedia.org.

Actually this event is nothing new. What is new and suprising is that
the American public had a severe slap-in-the-face. Other countries
have been dealing with this problem for centuries. Planes or
carts full of burning hay, the concept is the same, the magnitude
is different.

Mike

Mike

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

In article <10ke4q3dgv1uld5@corp.supernews.com>, Mike wrote:
> In article <2qoh5cF11hv93U1@uni-berlin.de>, 187 wrote:
>
> Using that definition we have been at war since the first founding
> of the Weathermen and related groups. The 'enemy' is not a coward. The
> enemy simply has different values from you. It is not possible to
> conduct combat against terrorism using armies and troops. You fight
> against terrorism using society and changing society. Examine the
> page on the 'Prisoner's Delimma' at wikipedia.org.
>
> Actually this event is nothing new. What is new and suprising is that
> the American public had a severe slap-in-the-face. Other countries
> have been dealing with this problem for centuries. Planes or
> carts full of burning hay, the concept is the same, the magnitude
> is different.
>
> Mike

I just read the group this thread is in. Move the discussion to another
group... it doesn't belong in this group.

Mike

John Thompson

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

On 2004-09-14, 187 <bigal187@invalid.rx.eastcoasttfc.com> wrote:

> I undertand what you are trying to say, but this IS a time of war. We
> *WERE* attacked, and we've bee nresponding to this attack. Why is this
> so difficult to grasp for some? They used planes to damage, or in the
> case of the WTC, completely destroy a few buildings (not jsut the twin
> towers but surrounding buildings too were demolished as a result.)
>
> We've been at war since that time. It may not be a war with a single
> contry, but that alone does not nullify the fact that this IS a war,
> which is still being fought, foguht by our people in uniform over seas.
> Just becuase the enemy is too much of a coward does not mena this isn't
> a war.

So why exactly are we so deeply involved in Iraq, which had absolutely
nothing to do with these attacks, while basically ignoring everything
else?

--

-John (john@os2.dhs.org)

A Nengineer

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

187 wrote:
> charles hill wrote:
>
>
>
> [... other mindless ignorant drival snipped ...]
>

> In fact, this sort of propaganda is what's turning more and more people
> off from politics (and at the same time infuriating others.
>
> And worst of all, people engage in this sort of thing while we are at a
> *time of War*. One would think that this sort of behavior would be
> outrageous given our war-time status. Sigh...

While I agree that the poster was spewing "mindless garbage" (most of
which has been debunked in the blogosphere, but nothing is as
closed-minded as a closed-mind), the thing is that politics in the
U.S.A. (at least) has ALWAYS been a very nasty game.

If you have the time and the interest, pick up a copy of David
McCollough's interesting biography of John Adams. Read some of the
contemporary dialog during the elections of 1796 and 1800. The partisan
mud-slinging and outrageous claims against the candidate of each party
by partisans of the other (the "Federalists" and the
"Republicans"--ironically the original name of the Democrat party).

So I don't think it is the vituperative nature of politics that turns
them off--if that were true, where would Ricki Lake get her audience?
Rather, it is that we have a less-educated populace today than ever
before, and our Republic is founded on the notion that the electorate
will be informed.

Only the informed really care, and only those who care, vote.

Personally I have no problem with a lower voter turnout, if it means
that those who don't give a d*mn, or don't bother to become informed,
aren't participating. I don't want their ignorance reflected in the
election returns.

charles hill

2004-09-15, 11:11 am

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 15:53:26 +0000, Mike wrote:

> In article <10ke4q3dgv1uld5@corp.supernews.com>, Mike wrote:
>
> I just read the group this thread is in. Move the discussion to another
> group... it doesn't belong in this group.
>
> Mike

That's what made me reply in the first place. His drivel was posted to
this NG instead of say lemmingsforBush or stickwitha50smentality
NGs.

187

2004-09-23, 9:31 am

John Thompson wrote:
> On 2004-09-14, 187 <bigal187@invalid.rx.eastcoasttfc.com> wrote:
>
>
> So why exactly are we so deeply involved in Iraq, which had absolutely
> nothing to do with these attacks, while basically ignoring everything
> else?

Do some research, and you'll see Iraq had very much to do with the
attacks. They fund(ed) terrorists, they harbored them, and had other
ties. It's people like you that misinform others like this and why we
have some much media-political bs.

John Thompson

2004-09-23, 9:31 am

On 2004-09-19, 187 <bigal187@invalid.rx.eastcoasttfc.com> wrote:

> John Thompson wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Do some research, and you'll see Iraq had very much to do with the
> attacks. They fund(ed) terrorists, they harbored them, and had other
> ties. It's people like you that misinform others like this and why we
> have some much media-political bs.

Do some research yourself. Not even George Bush makes any of those claims
anymore; they've all been debunked!

--

-John (john@os2.dhs.org)

charles hill

2004-09-23, 9:31 am

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:41:50 -0700, 187 wrote:

> John Thompson wrote:
>
> Do some research, and you'll see Iraq had very much to do with the
> attacks. They fund(ed) terrorists, they harbored them, and had other
> ties. It's people like you that misinform others like this and why we
> have some much media-political bs.

Another stupid fascist zombie.

The 9-11 terrorists planned in Europe and the far east, trained to fly in
the US and hijacked American airliners. Where is Saddam in that picture?
There were more terrorist being harbored in any one country of
Afghanistan, Sudan, the US, France, Germany, Pakistan, Indonesia,
Australia, Britain, Egypt, Morocco, or Israel than there were in Iran. The
Hussein family gave money to the Palestine families whose members were
terrorists against Israel. Most funding and 9-11 terrorist came from
Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Algeria.

So why did the US do Desert Storm, after the US gave Saddam bio-chemical
weapons and money to support Saddam's invasion and war against Iran? Who
gave a rats XXX what Middle Eastern countries Saddam invaded or that
100,000 Kurds where gassed by Iran or Saddam? If the US (Bush 41,
Rumsfeld, Chenney) had minded their own business and left Saddam fight his
own war against Iran, Iran would have wiped him out, there wouldn't have
been any US troops in Saudi Arabi to upset Osama.

Do you know who bought weapons for the Iraqi insurgents? Bush 43 ( aka
"not my fault 1"), Tenet and Rumsfeld funneled $43 million dollars to Iraq
informants during the build up for Iraq part 2. They didn't bother to ask
the informants about WMDs for this money just questions about military
strengths and positions. $43 million buys a lot ammo and rocket
launchers.

Even if America is safer with the war in Iraq, which it is not, the
question is "Are Americans safer?" If you believe you are then take your
family on a vacation to middle east, africa or the far east and spend
some money in the local markets. Stupid fascists are afraid of a woman's
breast.

A Nengineer

2004-09-25, 2:45 am

charles hill wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:51:25 +0000, libs stink wrote:
>
>
> George Bush is a coward just like his daddy.

Man who swore Bush into Air Guard speaks out
The Daily Times ^ | Sep 24, 2004 | Lance Coleman

Ed Morrisey Jr. has his opinion about rumors President Bush received
preferential treatment when he was allowed into the Texas Air National
Guard in the late 1960s.

The Blount Countian also has firsthand knowledge.

The 75-year-old Jackson Hills resident is a retired colonel with Texas
Air National Guard. He swore Lt. George W. Bush into the service in May
1968.

On Thursday, Morrisey said the argument that Bush got off easy by being
in the National Guard doesn't take into consideration the context of the
1960s.

``Bush and the others were flying several flights day or night over the
Gulf of Mexico to identify the unknown,'' he said. ``The Cold War was a
nervous time. You never knew. There were other things going on equally
important to the country, and the Air National Guard had a primary role
in it.''

Morrisey said the commander he worked for at the unit in Texas was sent
there to rebuild the image of the unit. There were only two to four
pilot training slots given to them per year, he said. Individuals
questioned by an evaluation board and then chosen by the commander had
to be the best.

``Bush was selected and he turned out just fine,'' he said.

According to Morrisey, after Bush began working as a fighter pilot, he
became regarded as one of the best pilots there. Unit commander Col.
Maurice Udell considered Bush to be one of his top five pilots, Morrisey
said.

``The kid did good,'' he said.

Each pilot had to perform alert duty where they patrolled for
unidentified aircraft during the threat of the Cold War, Morrisey said.

``Bush Jr. did good for us,'' Morrisey said. ``He pulled alert and he
did it all.''

Morrisey said that while Bush didn't get preferential treatment, not
everyone was allowed into the National Guard.

``We wanted the best we could get. We never knowingly took an unworthy
individual in the units I belonged to,'' he said. ``You're only as good
your worst individual.''

This isn't the first time a reporter called Morrisey asking whether or
not Bush received preferential treatment. Shortly after Republicans
nominated Bush for president in 2000, a reporter from Texas called Morrisey.

``That floored me. The only people that got preferential treatment was
when Jimmy Carter pardoned those guys that went to Canada,'' he said of
individuals who fled to Canada to avoid the draft during the war in Vietnam.

Speaking of the controversy surrounding Bush's Guard service during the
Vietnam era, Morrisey said: ``I think it's tragic. I think real people
can filter through this. At least I hope so.''

Morrisey said he agreed with Bush's work as president and supported the
administration's aggressive stance toward fighting terrorism and the war
in Afghanistan and Iraq.

``We've got to eliminate terrorists,'' he said. ``Let's get them where
they're living instead of them getting my grandkids and great-grandkids
here.''

Morrisey worked as the executive officer of the 147th Fighter Group from
February of 1967 to July of 1968. From Texas he came to Alcoa where he
was the first commandant of the Noncommissioned Officer Academy at
McGhee Tyson Air National Guard Base. He also was ``dedicated to the
development'' of the Air National Guard Leadership School and the
Officer Preparatory Academy to commission Air Guard officers.

He was commandant for all three schools and became the first commander
of the I.G. Brown Professional Military Education Center.

Morrisey has been involved in the community, including being a former
member of the Blount Chamber of Commerce, president of the Maryville
Kiwanis Club, Blount County Boys Club board member and on the ALCOA
Scholarship Selection Committee.

A Nengineer

2004-09-25, 2:45 am

charles hill wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:51:25 +0000, libs stink wrote:
>
>
> George Bush is a coward just like his daddy.

Lieutenant Junior Grade George Bush, USNR

Related resources:

* LTJG George Bush's citation for the Distinguished Flying Cross
* Christman, Timothy J. "Vice President Bush Calls WW II Experience
'Sobering.'; Naval Aviation News 67 (Mar-Apr 1985): 12-15.
* George Bush in World War II: A Short Bibliography.

Upon hearing of the Pearl Harbor attack, while a student at Phillips
Academy in Andover, Mass., George Bush decided he wanted to join the
Navy to become an aviator. Six months later, after graduation, he
enlisted in the Navy on his 18th birthday and began preflight training
at the university of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. After completing the
10-month course, he was commissioned as an ensign in the U.S. Naval
Reserve on 9 June 1943, several days before his 19th birthday; making
him the youngest naval aviator then.

After finishing flight training, he was assigned to Torpedo Squadron
(VT-51) as photographic officer in September 1943. As part of Air Group
51, his squadron was based on USS San Jacinto in the spring of 1944. San
Jacinto was part of Task Force 58 that participated in operations
against Marcus and Wake Islands in May, and then in the Marianas during
June. On 19 June, the task force triumphed in one of the largest air
battles of the war. During the return of his aircraft from the mission,
Ensign Bush's aircraft made a forced water landing. The destroyer, USS
Clarence K. Bronson, rescued the crew, but the plane was lost. On 25
July, Ensign Bush and another pilot received credit for sinking a small
cargo ship.

After Bush was promoted to Lieutenant Junior Grade on 1 August, San
Jacinto commenced operations against the Japanese in the Bonin Islands.
On 2 September 1944, Bush piloted one of four aircraft from VT-51 that
attacked the Japanese installations on Chi Chi Jima. For this mission
his crew included Radioman Second Class John Delaney, and Lieutenant
Junior Grade William White, USNR, who substituted for Bush's regular
gunner. During their attack, four TBM Avengers from VT-51 encountered
intense antiaircraft fire. While starting the attack, Bush's aircraft
was hit and his engine caught on fire. He completed his attack and
released the bombs over his target scoring several damaging hits. With
his engine on fire, Bush flew several miles from the island, where he
and one other crew member on the TBM Avenger bailed out of the aircraft.
However, the other man's chute did not open and he fell to his death. It
was never determined which man bailed out with Bush. Both Delaney and
White were killed in action. While Bush anxiously waited four hours in
his inflated raft, several fighters circled protectively overhead until
he was rescued by the lifeguard submarine, USS Finback. For this action,
Bush received the Distinguished Flying Cross. During the month he
remained on Finback, Bush participated in the rescue of other pilots.

Subsequently, Bush returned to San Jacinto in November 1944 and
participated in operations in the Philippines. When San Jacinto returned
to Guam, the squadron, which had suffered 50 percent casualties of its
pilots, was replaced and sent to the United States. Throughout 1944, he
had flown 58 combat missions for which he received the Distinguished
Flying Cross, three Air Medals, and the Presidential Unit Citation
awarded San Jacinto.

Because of his valuable combat experience, Bush was reassigned to
Norfolk and put in a training wing for new torpedo pilots. Later, he was
assigned as a naval aviator in a new torpedo squadron, VT-153. With the
surrender of Japan, he was honorably discharged in September 1945 and
then entered Yale University.

Former Lieutenant George Herbert Walker Bush, U.S. Naval Reserve
Transcript Of Naval Service

12 JUN 1924 Born in Milton, Massachusetts
13 JUN 1942 Enlisted in U.S. Naval Reserve
5 AUG 1942 Reported for Active Duty
8 JUN 1943 Honorably Discharged
9 JUN 1943 Ensign, U.S. Naval Reserve and continued on Active Duty
1 AUG 1944 Lieutenant (junior grade)
18 SEP 1945 Released from Active Duty under honorable conditions
16 NOV 1948 Lieutenant
24 OCT 1955 Resignation accepted under honorable conditions

SHIPS AND STATIONS

U.S. Naval Air Station, June 1943-Aug. 1943
Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. (Instrn)

Naval Air Operational Aug. 1943-Aug. 1943
Training Command
Carrier Qualification Training Unit
U.S. Naval Air Station, Glenview, Ill. (Instrn)

Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet, Aug. 1943-Sept. 1943
U.S. Naval Air Station, Norfolk, Va. (Instrn)

Carrier Aircraft Service 21 Sept. 1943-Sept. 1943
(Instrn)

Torpedo Squadron 51 (Naval Aviator) Sept. 1943-Dec. 1943

Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet, Dec. 1944-Feb. 1945
U.S.Naval
Air Station, Norfolk, Va.

Torpedo Squadron 97 Feb. 1945-March 1945

Torpedo Squadron 153(Naval Aviator) March 1945-Sept. 1945

Headquarters, FIFTH Naval District Sept. 1945-Sept. 1945

PERSONAL DECORATIONS
Distinguished Flying Cross.
Air Medal with two gold stars in lieu of subsequent awards
Presidential Unit Citation awarded USS San Jacinto (CVL-30)

RESERVE AFFILIATION
NONE (Resigned 24 Oct 1955)

Other documents related to LTJG Bush at the Naval Historical Center:

* Torpedo Squadron FIFTY-ONE's Aircraft Action Report of 2 September
1944,World War II Reports, Operational Archives Branch, Naval Historical
Center
* Extracts from USS Finback's Tenth War Patrol Report on rescue of LTJG
Bush, Operational Archives Branch, Naval Historical Center
* Carrier Air Group TWENTY's Aircraft Action Report of 2 September 1944,
World War II Reports, Operational Archives Branch, Naval Historical Center

[FEEL FREE TO STFU WHENEVER YOU FINALLY REALIZE YOU'RE IN WAY OVER YOUR
HEAD]

charles hill

2004-09-25, 5:45 pm

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 04:09:48 +0000, A Nengineer wrote:

> charles hill wrote:
>
> Man who swore Bush into Air Guard speaks out The Daily Times ^ | Sep 24,
> 2004 | Lance Coleman
>
> Ed Morrisey Jr. has his opinion about rumors President Bush received
> preferential treatment when he was allowed into the Texas Air National
> Guard in the late 1960s.
>
> The Blount Countian also has firsthand knowledge.
>
> The 75-year-old Jackson Hills resident is a retired colonel with Texas Air
> National Guard. He swore Lt. George W. Bush into the service in May 1968.
>
> On Thursday, Morrisey said the argument that Bush got off easy by being in
> the National Guard doesn't take into consideration the context of the
> 1960s.
>
> ``Bush and the others were flying several flights day or night over the
> Gulf of Mexico to identify the unknown,'' he said. ``The Cold War was a
> nervous time. You never knew. There were other things going on equally
> important to the country, and the Air National Guard had a primary role in
> it.''
>
> Morrisey said the commander he worked for at the unit in Texas was sent
> there to rebuild the image of the unit. There were only two to four pilot
> training slots given to them per year, he said. Individuals questioned by
> an evaluation board and then chosen by the commander had to be the best.
>
> ``Bush was selected and he turned out just fine,'' he said.
>
> According to Morrisey, after Bush began working as a fighter pilot, he
> became regarded as one of the best pilots there. Unit commander Col.
> Maurice Udell considered Bush to be one of his top five pilots, Morrisey
> said.
>
> ``The kid did good,'' he said.
>
> Each pilot had to perform alert duty where they patrolled for unidentified
> aircraft during the threat of the Cold War, Morrisey said.
>
> ``Bush Jr. did good for us,'' Morrisey said. ``He pulled alert and he did
> it all.''
>
> Morrisey said that while Bush didn't get preferential treatment, not
> everyone was allowed into the National Guard.
>
> ``We wanted the best we could get. We never knowingly took an unworthy
> individual in the units I belonged to,'' he said. ``You're only as good
> your worst individual.''
>
> This isn't the first time a reporter called Morrisey asking whether or not
> Bush received preferential treatment. Shortly after Republicans nominated
> Bush for president in 2000, a reporter from Texas called Morrisey.
>
> ``That floored me. The only people that got preferential treatment was
> when Jimmy Carter pardoned those guys that went to Canada,'' he said of
> individuals who fled to Canada to avoid the draft during the war in
> Vietnam.
>
> Speaking of the controversy surrounding Bush's Guard service during the
> Vietnam era, Morrisey said: ``I think it's tragic. I think real people can
> filter through this. At least I hope so.''
>
> Morrisey said he agreed with Bush's work as president and supported the
> administration's aggressive stance toward fighting terrorism and the war
> in Afghanistan and Iraq.
>
> ``We've got to eliminate terrorists,'' he said. ``Let's get them where
> they're living instead of them getting my grandkids and great-grandkids
> here.''
>
> Morrisey worked as the executive officer of the 147th Fighter Group from
> February of 1967 to July of 1968. From Texas he came to Alcoa where he was
> the first commandant of the Noncommissioned Officer Academy at McGhee
> Tyson Air National Guard Base. He also was ``dedicated to the
> development'' of the Air National Guard Leadership School and the Officer
> Preparatory Academy to commission Air Guard officers.
>
> He was commandant for all three schools and became the first commander of
> the I.G. Brown Professional Military Education Center.
>
> Morrisey has been involved in the community, including being a former
> member of the Blount Chamber of Commerce, president of the Maryville
> Kiwanis Club, Blount County Boys Club board member and on the ALCOA
> Scholarship Selection Committee.

Mr. Morrisey did not serve with Bush and got out in 1968 so like Bush he
was not around when Guard pilots were being activated and when Bush was
AWOL from the Alabama Air Guard.

charles hill

2004-09-25, 5:45 pm

charles hill

2004-09-25, 5:45 pm

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 04:12:36 +0000, A Nengineer wrote:

> charles hill wrote:
>

Not for his world war II service but for Iran-Contra, Panama, Grenada,
and Iraq.

If Bush 41 had not supported Iran and later Iraq against Iran
there wouldn't have been US troops in Saudi Arabia or an invasion to save
Kuwait oil.

[snip]

187

2004-10-07, 11:17 am

charles hill wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 04:09:48 +0000, A Nengineer wrote:
>
>
> Mr. Morrisey got out in 1968 when the draft was picking up and was not
> around in 1971-1972 when Bush went AWOL from the Alabama Air Guard.
> Lots of Alabama boys volunteered or were drafted in 1971 and 1972.
> Bush was neither an officer or gentleman.

Please take your complete ignorance and hatred, clad propaganda
elsewhere. This isn't a alt.politics.dmc.advocate/propaganda/i.hate.bush
nor any sort of politics group.

187

2004-10-07, 11:17 am

charles hill wrote:

> Mr. Morrisey did not serve with Bush and got out in 1968 so like Bush
> he was not around when Guard pilots were being activated and when
> Bush was AWOL from the Alabama Air Guard.

He was never AWOL. Maybe you didn't see the news, but CBS was proven to
be a lieing piece of sh|t.

Ether

2004-10-07, 11:17 am

charles hill <charleshill@verizon.net> wrote in
news:pan.2004.09.25.20.33.55.680214@verizon.net:

> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 04:12:36 +0000, A Nengineer wrote:
>
>
> Not for his world war II service but for Iran-Contra, Panama, Grenada,
> and Iraq.
>
> If Bush 41 had not supported Iran and later Iraq against Iran
> there wouldn't have been US troops in Saudi Arabia or an invasion to save
> Kuwait oil.

You, sir, are just as full of crap as your other Left Wing breathern. You
and your kind spount lies, only becuase you hate Bush, because you can't
stand the fact that Gore lost (and he DID loose, as well as EVERY recount -
get over it) and Bush became Pres. You can't stand the fact Ketty and even
more so Edwards are compelte jokes and have little chance.

You and your kind falsely slander in the name of hate, nothing more. So
substance in wht you say, no truth either. You twist truths around to serve
your purposes, but in essence you create utter lies, which amounts to a
giagantic load of propaganda.

187

2004-10-07, 11:17 am

charles hill wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 04:12:36 +0000, A Nengineer wrote:
>
>
> Not for his world war II service but for Iran-Contra, Panama, Grenada,
> and Iraq.
>
> If Bush 41 had not supported Iran and later Iraq against Iran
> there wouldn't have been US troops in Saudi Arabia or an invasion to
> save Kuwait oil.

More complete historical ignorant propaganda. It wasn't even Bush (41)
that started those relations, get your f~cking facts straight and stop
speading lies.

charles hill

2004-10-08, 7:45 am

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 16:54:44 +0000, Ether wrote:

> charles hill <charleshill@verizon.net> wrote in
> news:pan.2004.09.25.20.33.55.680214@verizon.net:
>
>
> You, sir, are just as full of crap as your other Left Wing breathern.
> You and your kind spount lies, only becuase you hate Bush, because you
> can't stand the fact that Gore lost (and he DID loose, as well as EVERY
> recount - get over it) and Bush became Pres. You can't stand the fact
> Ketty and even more so Edwards are compelte jokes and have little
> chance.
>
> You and your kind falsely slander in the name of hate, nothing more. So
> substance in wht you say, no truth either. You twist truths around to
> serve your purposes, but in essence you create utter lies, which amounts
> to a giagantic load of propaganda.

Jeez, they're still here.

You're right 1000%. I am a liberal and damn proud of it. If McCain were
running for Pres. I'd vote for him over Bush and Kerry. Nader would be a
better Pres. than anyone who has run for Pres. since 1999. There are
decent Republicans McCain and Warner come to mind easily.

Because elected officials are not responsive to the people who elected
them, I'm for any candidate running against any incumbent. I'm for
candidates who serve will of the majority of their constituents. I'm for
candidates with new ideas because the old ideas are not working. I'm for
candidates that put the US citizens of a united nation first above
corporate profits and party politics. I'm for a democracy where citizens
select and elect their leaders as opposed to deep pocket campaign
contributors, party bosses and corporations.

Hmm, I know the US installed and trained the Shah of Iran in the 60-70's,
then Iran kidnapped Americans in the 80's after kicking the Shah out, then
Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam in the 80's but I don't remember why
Pres. GH WBush thought it was important for the US and UN to prevent
Saddam from invading Kuwait or the US invasion of Grenada and Panama for
that matter.

GW Bush is a good front man for money grabbers and partisan politics.
GW Bush was the man in the White House in charge of the FBI, CIA and DOD
when Al-Quaeda hit the WTC. GW Bush was hiding (or vacationing) in
Crawford, TX during the height of terrorist alerts the summer of 2001 when
he should have been working on safeguarding the country from terrorist
attacks, especially after the Cole was attacked a month before his
inauguration.

GW Bush was the Commander-in-Chief who ordered US soldiers into Iraq.
His order to place US troops in harms way in Iraq is responsible for
the death of 1052 American soldiers, 7000 American amputees and over
20,000 Iranians killed and counting. That is 1/3 of the deaths from 9/11
and 6000x the cost. I hate all terrorists but the Iraqi insurgents are
fighting in their own country while GW has ordered US soldiers to die and
kill Iraqi's in Iraq to deflect terrorist attacks on US soil. From the
9/11 Commission reports, 15 of 19 9/11 terrorist were Saudis, had Saudi
and United Arab Emirate passports issued in those countries, they planned
their attack in the Phillippines and Germany, since the 1990s had entered
the US over 33 times before 9/11 and attended flight school in the US. So
America had stronger ties to the terrorists than Saddam and whatever
remains of Al Quaeda are probably not in Afghanistan or Iraq at this time.

If you want to relive the 50's again that's your problem. If you support
Bush that's your problem too.

Telling the truth in never too far. At least CBS admitted they can
neither prove or disprove the documents are legitimate but they have
provided witnesses to the statements made in the documents.

For you who are forced to read this thread this is my last reply on this
topic, but by now when you see an off topic thread that makes you puke
stop reading the thread.

187

2004-10-08, 5:45 pm

charles hill wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 16:54:44 +0000, Ether wrote:
>
>
> Jeez, they're still here.
>
> You're right 1000%. I am a liberal and damn proud of it. If McCain
> were running for Pres. I'd vote for him over Bush and Kerry. Nader
> would be a better Pres. than anyone who has run for Pres. since 1999.
> There are decent Republicans McCain and Warner come to mind easily.
>
> Because elected officials are not responsive to the people who elected
> them, I'm for any candidate running against any incumbent. I'm for
> candidates who serve will of the majority of their constituents.

and you think some one like Kerry who almost daily changs his position
on <insert issue> ? The man seriously says one thing and turns around as
another. Oh yeha, a guy like this will really be a better pres.... so
much better than one whose kept the US from being attackd again....

> I'm for candidates with new ideas because the old ideas are not
working.

Typical liberal rambling. "old ideas are not working" ??? How many tiems
have we been attacked after 911? Huh? It's people like you who truely
give others the wrong idea; this President *has* been working hard, he
*has* been doing whats *needed* to be done, no matter how much the main
stream media would like you to think otherwise.

<Note>
If you don't like our poresident, but if you are going to say he isn't
doing his job, then you need to conduct some REAL research and actualyl
read the fact for your self, and not just what the news media throws at
ya.

And this mis information is what is dividing people in this country, you
have so many misinformed people who are spewed what many tiems amount to
sheer lies. Ten you have people who bother to get the facts first before
casting judgement, something you have yet to do.
</Note>

Heres a news flash for ya: The bulk of the main stream media is still
owned and staffed by soem really uber hardcore Lefties. Like Dan Rather.
(sp?) And like Rather, more and more of them are being caught in their
lies, in varying degrees.

Needless to say you should not take everything you hear on the news as
ingaved i nstone, ESPECIALLY when it pertains to politics. and even more
ESPECIALLY when many news soruces are doing no more than trying to
futhur someone's agenda.

<Closing>
I'll say this. I know many well informed Democrats (even some hard
Liberal ones) who admit Bush *has* been doing a good job and that Iraq
asn't a mistake.

This should say something to Libs like yourself. I have nothing agaisnt
you folk, but it's when you get so misinformed like this you start
sounding so incredibly foolish; if you'd only bother to get the facts
*instead* of from the news and from big wigs in the DMC, you'd know a
whole lot better.

And given the realization of my Demo collegues, I'm sure there's hope
for you :-)
</Closing>