Wash Times LTTR does not see Bush in AL NG - but claims no big deal

[papau]

http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cache:4IMy79h-ASQJ:washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040210-082910-8424r.htm+washington+times+Bush+guard.&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

'Bush and I were lieutenants'

George Bush and I were lieutenants and pilots in the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS), Texas Air National Guard (ANG) from 1970 to 1971. We had the same flight and squadron commanders (Maj. William Harris and Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, both now deceased). While we were not part of the same social circle outside the base, we were in the same fraternity of fighter pilots, and proudly wore the same squadron patch.<snip?

Another frequent charge is that, as a member of the Texas ANG, Lt. Bush twice ignored or disobeyed lawful orders, first by refusing to report for a required physical in the year when drug testing first became part of the exam, and second by failing to report for duty at the disciplinary unit in Colorado to which he had been ordered. Well, here are the facts: First, there is no instance of Lt. Bush disobeying lawful orders in reporting for a physical, as none would be given. Pilots are scheduled for their annual flight physicals in their birth month during that month's weekend drill assembly — the only time the clinic is open. In the Reserves, it is not uncommon to miss this deadline by a month or so for a variety of reasons: The clinic is closed that month for special training; the individual is out of town on civilian business; etc.

<snip>Second, there was no such thing as a "disciplinary unit in Colorado" to which Lt. Bush had been ordered. The Air Reserve Personnel Center in Denver is a repository of the paperwork for those no longer assigned to a specific unit, such as retirees and transferees. Mine is there now, so I guess I'm "being disciplined." These "disciplinary units" just don't exist. Any discipline, if required, is handled within the local squadron, group or wing, administratively or judicially. Had there been such an infraction or court-martial action, there would be a record and a reflection in Lt. Bush's performance review and personnel folder. None exists, as was confirmed in The Washington Post in 2000.

<snip> COL. WILLIAM CAMPENNI (retired)
U.S. Air Force/Air National Guard
Herndon, Va.5

[indepat]

1. Hopefully the Washington Times would be as "no big deally" should

someone today elect not be complete their national guard obligation and maybe thereby miss the privilege of serving with our armed forces in some pre-emptive war/occupation in the Middle East.

[Jack Rabbit]

2. Even the Devil deserves his advocate

Much of what Mr. Campenni says is true. For example, it is not unusual for reservists or guardsmen to miss a deadline for a variety of reasons. Bush, however, didn't merely miss a deadline to take a medical exam. After a certain date, he simply never took one as required.

Mr. Campenni nowhere addresses the central point of this issue: Where was Mr. Bush from May 1972 to October 1973? There is no proof that he reported for duty to the Alabama Air National Guard, although such proof would be relatively easy to provide.

Sadly, few of today's partisan pundits know anything about the environment of service in the Reserves in the 1970s. The image of a reservist at that time is of one who joined, went off for six months' basic training, then came back and drilled weekly or monthly at home, with two weeks of "summer camp." With the knowledge that Mr. Johnson and Mr. McNamara were not going to call out the Reserves, it did become a place of refuge for many wanting to avoid Vietnam.
There was one big exception to this abusive use of the Guard to avoid the draft, and that was for those who wanted to fly, as pilots or crew members. Because of the training required, signing up for this duty meant up to 2½ years of active duty for training alone, plus a high probability of mobilization. A fighter-pilot candidate selected by the Guard (such as Lt. Bush and me) would be spending the next two years on active duty going through basic training (six weeks), flight training (one year), survival training (two weeks) and combat crew training for his aircraft (six to nine months), followed by local checkout (up to three more months) before he was even deemed combat-ready.

As Mr. Campenni points out, the Guard was draft dodge. I wouldn't hold this against all Guardsmen. After all, I opposed the war and certainly didn't hold it against anyone who also opposed the war from doing what he could to avoid it. Mr. Clinton, for example, used student deferments to avoid the draft. He dissented from the war.

However, I do have a problem with the sons of congressmen voicing support for the war, voting to fund the selective service and the war effort itself using their influence to keep their sons out of the war. I do have a problem with wealthy newspaper publishers whose fish wrap told readers of the necessity for the war from using their wealth and influence to keep their sons out of the war. George W. Bush and Dan Quayle avoided service in Vietnam because they were wealthy and connected.

This hits at a fundamental principle of democracy. The message we get from the draft dodging of Bush and Quayle is that they were privileged, they were too good to fight and die in Vietnam. While Clinton avoided the draft because didn't think anybody should have to fight or die in Vietnam, Bush and Quayle avoided the draft because they thought only the sons of poor people should have to fight and die in Vietnam.

It is equally contemptible that Cheney and Gingrich used student deferments to avoid service while participating in and organizing campus events in support of the war.

Thus, it is perfectly defensible to pardon Clinton's draft dodge while holding Bush, Quayle, Cheney and Gingrich in contempt for theirs. There is no double standard here. The standard is simply that one have the courage of his convictions and show a commitment to democracy. Clinton passed this test. The others did not.

Of these, Bush is the most contemptible of all. Not only did he dodge the draft while his father voted to send others to die in a fruitless war, he did not fulfill the obligation he incurred in order to enjoy this privilege bought by his family's wealth and power. Not only that, but he still won't tell us the truth about it.

Such men as these are unfit to lead a democratic nation. Bush is the least fit of all.

[ma4t]

3. If we demand honesty from others, let's be honest ourselves

" Mr. Clinton, for example, used student deferments to avoid the draft. He dissented from the war."

Actually this is not correct. Mr. Clinton signed up for an ROTC training program that got him out of the draft and then failed to honor any part of his commitment. His actions were a deception from the start. He confessed as much in his much publicized letter to the colonel in charge of the program.

Does any of this excuse Mr. Bush for any of his actions? Not at all. However; if we condemn Mr. Bush for shirking his duty while excusing Mr. Clinton for shirking his we are nothing but hypocrites. This is no different from those who condemned Clinton and now excuse Bush.

[papau]

4. I agree - this letter - like the dental records - proved nothing about AL

Drills = 0 in AL

and now we know that with the arrest record, Bush must be denied entry into Guard - unless he gets waiver.

And it seems he does not have a waiver.

So did someone break a law - they certainly broke a regulation - in getting Bush into the guard.