On Sep 9, 2004, at 8:44 PM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
Maru wrote:Wouldn't the statute of limitations come into play for derelictionofduty during non-war time over thirty years ago? ~Maru
Viet-nam was not wartime?
Viet Nam was every bit as much "war" as the action against Iraq, yes. Bush's dereliction of duty occurred in 1968 through 1973. We were most certainly in a war at that time; that was the entire reason he got in Nat Guard service -- to cower over here so he could live long enough to attack by proxy the record of someone who actually *did* go to fight.
As for statute of limitations -- I don't know if that applies in a military setting. If not he would be subject to court martial. (In Arizona the limit appears to be 2 years.) This is why I suggested he needs to be deposed under oath. If he lies, it's perjury. That's impeachable and how the Repubs tried to get Clinton.
-- WthmO
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
