 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Misty
Lieutenant
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 223
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 1:40 pm Post subject: Former ANG People...Please help Answer this Question |
 |
|
Last night I was trying to look at the records available from President Bush's ANG record and was sickened to see the way the Liberals have distorted and spun the records.
I kept seeing a document referred to as "Penalty for bad attendance" meant to give the appearance that Bush was penalized, when in fact it was a standard form signed by all Guardsmen.
His enlistment documents consisted of one page which did not show the terms of that agreement other than the 6 yr commitment.
What were the terms of the agreement? Does anyone know exactly what was expected and how the necessary points were given to fulfil the contract?
_________________
Misty
----------
Dad was in the Navy Pacific Fleet
Brother was on the USS Regulus - Vietnam
Husband was AirForce 3rd (34th) Tactical Fighter Wing - Security Police Bien Hoa Vietnam |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
OsanFAC
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 34
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:08 pm Post subject: Requirements |
|
|
Here's a little help. As a Guardsman or a Reservist you are required to obtain 50 points to get a "good year" that would count toward retirement. Failure to obtain a good year without a valid excuse will receive the attention of the unit commander. Normally the 50 points are obtained by your two days a month, two weeks a year. plus you get a bonus of 15 points by being a active drilling member. If you are on flight status you gain additional points for days that you conducted flights (as shows up in Bush's records). The weekend drill requirement is usually the one time during the month that the entire unit gets together and is normally used to conduct annual training requirements. It is not abnormal for people to miss a "Drill weekend", but they have to make it up.
If Bush was going to be drilling in Alabama (as was approved) he would not be able to continue flying the F-102 because there were no F-102's in
Alablama. It's my understanding that the Alabama unit trained people to fly the F-4. Bush was not qualified to fly the F-4 and if he trained to qualify in the aircraft he would require a full time active duty tour to do so, and probably an additional requirement with the Guard to justify the training. Bush fulfilled his 1973 drill requirements with over 50 points (a good year). He fulfilled the requirement by doing ground training in Alabama. Also, since he would not be flying in Alabama and was due to be discharged from the Guard there would be no necessity to keep his flight physical current.
Hope this helps,
OsanFAC
Lt Col, USAFR
Pilot
_________________
OsanFAC
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Misty
Lieutenant
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, thank you. It is so frustrating to see his performance so distorted. Is there no way to shut people up who continue to spin and lie? Sheesh!
_________________
Misty
----------
Dad was in the Navy Pacific Fleet
Brother was on the USS Regulus - Vietnam
Husband was AirForce 3rd (34th) Tactical Fighter Wing - Security Police Bien Hoa Vietnam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hondo
LCDR
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 423
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Misty:
Regrettably, not really. Free speech includes the freedom to be an idiot or a liar. Unless under oath, about the worst that can happen is a civil suit.
Since Bush is a public figure, chances are virtually nil of a civil suit on his behalf succeeding. Killian's family would have a chance, but IMO would likely fail as well. I understand it, they'd have to prove intent to injure as well as reckless disregard. Against CBS, neither might be possible. Against the original source, maybe - if it can ever be located and forgery proved. (Libel lawyers out there, help please?)
All in all, freedom of speech is a good thing. I too get upset when I see it abused - until I consider the possibility of NOT having that freedom.
Last edited by Hondo on Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:34 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Misty
Lieutenant
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That is all well and good and certainly true enough, but the media should be held to a higher standard of truth, imo. They have a responsibility to the public and the public trust that needs to be considered. The same is true of our public officials. Without the lies from the media and our public officials, these lies would not have the life they have. I do not believe freedom of speech in the public arena gives them the right to be so damned irresponsible.
_________________
Misty
----------
Dad was in the Navy Pacific Fleet
Brother was on the USS Regulus - Vietnam
Husband was AirForce 3rd (34th) Tactical Fighter Wing - Security Police Bien Hoa Vietnam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hondo
LCDR
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 423
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A few details regarding Reserve performance OsanFAC didn't provide.
a. If assigned to a drilling unit, attendence is mandatory unless prior coordination is made or circumstances make it infeasible (e.g., sudden illness, family emergency). In practice, units are very flexible. Commanders have great latitude here to grant authorized absence.
b. Missing drills can be cause for disciplinary action. From what I can tell, this is generally rare - it takes quite a bit of action and is often seen as reflecting poorly on the unit leadership by their parent HQ.
c. There are also other means of earning points (correspondence courses, special work) for a "good" retirement year.
My take on the whole issue of Bush's peformance in the ANG is that he got somewhat lax towards the end, but at least tried to follow procedure. He may have missed a few drills, but appears to have tried to cover that through ground training. Don't know if he was fully successful - but at least he went through the process and, when he decided to cut ties with the ANG to go to Harvard BS, did so cleanly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hondo
LCDR
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 423
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not sure it's conscious irresponsibility. May be bias; may be ignorance.
It's been my experience that, whenever there's a choice between betting on ignorance or nefarious intent, you should choose the former. 90+% of the time you'll be right.
When it comes to military matters, in general the media is INCREDIBLY CLUELESS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dimsdale
Captain
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 527
Location: Massachusetts: the belly of the beast
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Byron York writes (http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200402101529.asp)
| Quote: | February 10, 2004, 3:29 p.m.
Bush Releases the Evidence
Newly released records show he did indeed serve in 1972.
Under pressure from Democrats who claimed he had been "AWOL" or a "deserter" during his time in the Texas Air National Guard, President Bush today released new documents detailing his service in 1972 and 1973.
In recent weeks, critics had suggested that the president did not meet Guard duty standards during the period from May 1972 until May 1973. Other than the president's recollection that he served during that time, there has, until now, been no evidence that he actually reported for duty. The new documents, which consist of pay records and attendance reports, show that the president missed some months of service during that period but met the yearly requirement for satisfactory service. (Click here for documents 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.)
The record "clearly shows that First Lt. George W. Bush has satisfactory years for both 72-73 and 73-74, which proves that he completed his military obligation in a satisfactory manner," wrote retired Colonel Albert Lloyd, a Guard officer who reviewed the records at the request of the White House, in a letter released at today's press briefing.
According to Lloyd, guardsmen were required to accumulate 50 points per retirement year in order to meet Guard standards. The records show that the president accumulated 56 points in the May 1972 to May 1973 time period. The president accumulated another 56 points in the months immediately after May 1973, shortly before he left the Guard to attend Harvard Business School.
The records do not address the question of where the president was when he served his Guard duty. A retired official of the Alabama Air National Guard has said he has no recollection of the president's reporting for duty in 1972.
Indeed, the records show that the president did not earn any points for service in May, June, July, August, or September 1972. He began to earn points again in October 1972, and by May 1973 had collected enough points to satisfy Guard requirements for the year.
The president's service was measured on a May-to-May basis because he first joined the Guard in May, 1968. There are no questions about his service for his first four years in the Guard; indeed, the Boston Globe reported in 2000 that during that time the president "logged numerous hours of duty, well above the minimum requirements for so-called 'weekend warriors.'"
When he left the Guard, in 1973, the president was honorably discharged. The White House has maintained that that fact alone proves the president completed the necessary Guard requirements. But Democrats, including presumptive presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry, have said that the simple fact of an honorable discharge does not prove that the president did his duty.
The White House hopes that the release of documents today will quell criticism over the president's service. However, if Tuesday's press briefing was any indication, the questions will persist. Reporters from the broadcast television networks grilled White House spokesman Scott McClellan about the months in which the records do not show any service points earned by the president. McClellan, beyond stating repeatedly that the records prove the president met his obligations, was otherwise not familiar with the details of the documents, and the White House did not provide an expert who could interpret them for reporters.
|
And earlier (http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200402180840.asp), from the first round of Bush/ANG attacks earlier this year. (how many times to we have to go over this, and still ignore the Kerry lies?)
| Quote: | February 18, 2004, 8:40 a.m.
Bush and the National Guard: Case Closed
byork@nationalreview.com
EDITOR'S NOTE: This article appears in the March 8, 2004, issue of National Review.
Ask retired Brig. Gen. William Turnipseed whether the press has accurately reported what he said about George W. Bush, and you'll get an earful. "No, I don't think they have," he begins. Turnipseed, the former head of the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group of the Alabama Air National Guard, was widely quoted as saying he never saw Bush in Alabama in 1972, and if the future president had been there, he would remember. In fact, Turnipseed says, he doesn't recall whether Bush was there or not; the young flier, then a complete unknown in Alabama, was never part of the 900-man 187th, so Turnipseed wouldn't have had much reason to notice him. But most reporters haven't been interested in Turnipseed's best recollection. "They don't understand the Guard, they don't want to understand the Guard, and they hate Bush," he says. "So when I say, There's a good possibility that Bush showed up,' why would they put that in their articles?"
In recent weeks, Turnipseed has found himself in the middle of a battle in which Democrats have called the president a "deserter" who went "AWOL" for an entire year during his time in the Air National Guard. When Democrats made those accusations amplified by extensive press coverage the White House was slow to fight back, insisting that the issue, which came up in the 2000 campaign, was closed and did not merit a response. It was only after NBC's Tim Russert brought the story up during a one-hour interview with the president on February 8 that the White House changed course and released records of the president's Guard service.
Those records have not quieted the most determined of the president's enemies no one who watches the Democratic opposition really believed they would but they do make a strong case that Bush fulfilled his duties and met the requirements for Air National Guard officers during his service from 1968 to 1973. A look at those records, along with interviews with people who knew Bush at the time, suggests that after all the shouting is over, and some of the basic facts become known, this latest line of attack on the president will come to nothing.
FOUR YEARS OF FLYING
The controversy over Bush's service centers on what his critics call "the period in question," that is, the time from May 1972 until May 1973. What is not mentioned as often is that that period was in fact Bush's fifth year in the Guard, one that followed four years of often intense service.
Bush joined in May 1968. He went through six weeks of basic training a full-time job at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Tex. Then he underwent 53 weeks of flight training again, full time at Moody Air Force Base in Valdosta, Ga. Then he underwent 21 weeks of fighter interceptor training full time at Ellington Air Force Base in Houston. Counting other, shorter, postings in between, by the end of his training period Bush had served two years on active duty.
Certified to fly the F-102 fighter plane, Bush then began a period of frequent usually weekly flying. The F-102 was designed to shoot down other fighter planes, and the missions Bush flew were training flights, mostly over the Gulf of Mexico and often at night, in which pilots took turns being the predator and the prey."If you're going to practice how to shoot down another airplane, then you have to have another airplane up there to work on," recalls retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971. "He'd be the target for the first half of the mission, and then we'd switch."
During that period Bush's superiors gave him consistently high ratings as a pilot. "Lt. Bush is an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer," wrote one in a 1972 evaluation. Another evaluation, in 1971, called Bush "an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot" who "continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his proficiency even further." And a third rating, in 1970, said Bush "clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot" and was also "a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership."
All that flying involved quite a bit of work. "Being a pilot is more than just a monthly appearance," says Bob Harmon, a former Guard pilot who was a member of Bush's group in 1971 and 1972. "You cannot maintain your currency by doing just one drill a month. He was flying once or twice a week during that time, from May of 1971 until May of 1972." While the work was certainly not as dangerous as fighting in the jungles of Vietnam, it wasn't exactly safe, either. Harmon remembers a half-dozen Texas Air National Guard fliers who died in accidents over the years, in cluding one during the time Bush was flying. "This was not an endeavor without risk," Harmon notes.
THE MOVE TO ALABAMA
The records show that Bush kept up his rigorous schedule of flying through the spring of 1972: He was credited for duty on ten days in March of that year, and seven days in April. Then, as Bush began his fifth year of service in the Guard, he appears to have stepped back dramatically. The records indicate that he received no credit in May, June, July, August, and September 1972. In October, he was credited with two days, and in November he was credited with four. There were no days in December, and then six in January 1973. Then there were no days in February and March.
The change was the result of Bush's decision to go to Alabama to work on the Senate campaign of Republican Winton Blount. With an obligation to the Guard, Bush asked to perform equivalent service in Alabama. That was not an unusual request, given that members of the Guard, like everyone else, often moved around the country. "It was a common thing," recalls Brigadier General Turnipseed. "If we had had a guy in Houston, he could have made equivalent training with Bush's unit. It was so common that the guy who wrote the letter telling Bush to come didn't even tell me about it."
The president's critics have charged that he did not show up for service was "AWOL" in Alabama. Bush says he did serve, and his case is supported by records showing that he was paid and given retirement credit for days of service while he was known to be in Alabama. The records also show that Bush received a dental examination on January 6, 1973, at Dannelly Air National Guard base, home of the 187th (January 6 was one of the days that pay records show Bush receiving credit for service). And while a number of Guard members at the base say they do not remember seeing Bush among the roughly 900 men who served there during that time, another member, a retired lieutenant named John Calhoun, says he remembers seeing Bush at the base several times.
What seems most likely is that Bush was indeed at Dannelly, but there was not very much for a non-flying pilot to do. Flying fighter jets involves constant practice and training; Bush had to know when he left Texas that he would no longer be able to engage in either one very often, which meant that he would essentially leave flying, at least for some substantial period of time. In addition, the 187th could not accommodate another pilot, at least regularly. "He was not going to fly," says Turnipseed. "We didn't have enough airplanes or sorties to handle our own pilots, so we wouldn't have done it for some guy passing through."
On the other hand, showing up for drills was still meeting one's responsibility to the Guard. And, as 1973 went along, the evidence suggests that Bush stepped up his work to make up for the time he had missed earlier. In April of that year, he received credit for two days; in May, he received credit for 14 days; in June, five days; and in July, 19 days. That was the last service Bush performed in the Guard. Later that year, he asked for and received permission to leave the Guard early so he could attend Harvard Business School. He was given an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months, and five days of his original six-year commitment.
The records indicate that, despite his move to Alabama, Bush met his obligation to the Guard in the 1972-73 year. At that time, Guardsmen were awarded points based on the days they reported for duty each year. They were given 15 points just for being in the Guard, and were then required to accumulate a total of 50 points to satisfy the annual requirement. In his first four years of service, Bush piled up lots of points; he earned 253 points in his first year, 340 in his second, 137 in his third, and 112 in his fourth. For the year from May 1972 to May 1973, records show Bush earned 56 points, a much smaller total, but more than the minimum requirement (his service was measured on a May-to-May basis because he first joined the Guard in that month in 1968).
Bush then racked up another 56 points in June and July of 1973, which met the minimum requirement for the 1973-74 year, which was Bush's last year of service. Together, the record "clearly shows that First Lieutenant George W. Bush has satisfactory years for both '72-'73 and '73-'74, which proves that he completed his military obligation in a satisfactory manner," says retired Lt. Col. Albert Lloyd, a Guard personnel officer who reviewed the records at the request of the White House.
All in all, the documents show that Bush served intensively for four years and then let up in his fifth and sixth years, although he still did enough to meet Guard requirements. The records also suggest that Bush's superiors were not only happy with his performance from 1968 to 1972, but also happy with his decision to go to Alabama. Indeed, Bush's evaluating officer wrote in May 1972 that "Lt. Bush is very active in civic affairs in the community and manifests a deep interest in the operation of our government. He has recently accepted the position as campaign manager for a candidate for United States Senate. He is a good representative of the military and Air National Guard in the business world."
Beyond their apparent hope that Bush would be a good ambassador for the Guard, Bush's superiors might have been happy with his decision to go into politics for another reason: They simply had more people than they needed. "In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots," says Campenni. "The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In '72 or '73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem."
THE UNENDING ATTACK
Despite the evidence, Democrats have continued to accuse the president of shirking his duty during his Guard career. "He went to Alabama for one year," Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe said on ABC on February 1. "He didn't show up. Call it whatever you want, AWOL, it doesn't matter." After Bush made his Guard records public, McAuliffe released a statement saying the documents "create more questions than answers." Other Democrats, as well as an energetic team of liberal columnists and bloggers, echoed McAuliffe's comments.
Perhaps the most impressive accomplishment of Bush's detractors is that they managed to sell the idea mostly unchallenged in the press that Bush's Air National Guard service consisted of one year during which he didn't show up for duty. Far fewer people asked the question: Just how did Bush become a fighter pilot in the first place? Didn't that involve, say, years of work? Bush's four years of service prior to May 1972 were simply airbrushed out of the picture because many reporters did not believe they were part of the story.
It also seems likely that some of Bush's adversaries used the Guard issue as a way to get at other questions about the president. The Guard record was said to have a bearing on Bush's credibility, on the war in Iraq, on his fitness to lead. In addition, some journalists were nearly obsessed with forcing the president to release medical records from his time in the Guard because they hoped those records might reveal some evidence of drug use. The White House did not release the full set of medical records but did allow reporters to view them; the documents were entirely unexcep tional and contained nothing about drug use.
While all that was going on, both the White House and the Bush reelection campaign seemed consistently to underestimate the ferocity and resolve of the president's adversaries. For weeks, as the controversy grew, the president did nothing to defend himself. Those who wanted to speak up in his defense, like William Campenni and Bob Harmon, were not contacted by the White House; instead, they decided to go public on their own. Even when John Calhoun, the man who remembers Bush in Alabama, sent the White House an e-mail saying he had useful information, he received a stock response, without any indication the White House was interested in what he had to say.
Now the evidence is public; anyone who is interested in learning about Bush's service can do so. In the end, the president had the facts on his side. But he also had the good fortune to have the allegiance of men who feel so intensely about the Guard and their service that they wanted to speak out even if the White House didn't seem to care. Men like Campenni and Harmon were deeply offended when Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry equated Guard service during the Vietnam War with fleeing the country or going to jail. That was simply too much. "I'm not a Bushie," says Harmon. "The thing that got a few of us crawling out from under a rock, at no instigation from the White House, was that Guard service was being portrayed as being like a draft dodger."
|
_________________
Everytime he had a choice, Kerry chose to side with communists rather than the United States. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Misty
Lieutenant
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, guys. You have been a great help. 
When I hear the dems get on the tube and flap about how Bush was AWOL, I wish...just one time....someone would pick up Kerry's request for release from active duty and the fact that he spent the subsequent two years of his so called Reserve Status working with the VVAW!
_________________
Misty
----------
Dad was in the Navy Pacific Fleet
Brother was on the USS Regulus - Vietnam
Husband was AirForce 3rd (34th) Tactical Fighter Wing - Security Police Bien Hoa Vietnam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
