On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:16:02 -0700, Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 9, 2004, at 8:44 PM, Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > Maru wrote: > >> Wouldn't the statute of limitations come into play for dereliction > > of > >> duty 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
While I think it would be fitting if Bush was now required to serve out the term he skipped by being sent to Iraq it ain't going to happen and the most serious chargable crime now is the destruction of military documents. For that there is some, but probably not enough, evidence. I am now curious about the forgeries issue on the CBS memos. The White House didn't challenge the veracity of the memos which fit in with what is known about Bush's military career in 72-74. Instead their attacks were on the meaning of the memos. One of the sources or points of confirmation for the genuineness of the documents is Killian's then-superior, retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, who is mentioned in one of the documents and was involved in the back-and-forths described in the documents. Someone from CBS told the Washington Post that Hodges confirmed that the statements contained in the documents were concerns and thoughts that Killian expressed to him at the time. Killian's son believes some but not all of the memos are genuine. Killian's wife denies the memos and seems to only know the period when Bush was a good officer, "outstanding" in his reviews before 1972, and didn't know of the later shift in opinion as he quit attending. If the memos are fabricated who familar with the Air Force reserve at the time, and knew the story and knew Killian create the memos.in an attempt to either help Bush or Kerry? It supports kerry because it confirms the derelection of duty and disobeying orders of Bush, it helps Bush if it can be shown they are forgeries and the media has shown more than a tendancy to back away from stories where part of the evidence is tainted. Are they really fabricated? Some of these "experts" are talking out of their hats, superscript "th" were available on some of the IBM Selectric balls and many standard IBM machines in 72 had proportional spacing. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_09/004669.php The memos added nothing new except confirmation of the story the White House released documents showed. Gary Denton -- #2 on google for liberal news "I don't try harder" _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
