|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Register | Video Directory | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Games | Today's Posts | Search | Chat Room |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
‘Smoking Microfiche’ says, ‘AWOL’
That slimy little drunken weasel was indeed A.W.O.L. An excerpt from the article: The bulk of the comment lately swirls around the "pay records" the White House claims prove Bush completed his obligation. A few people sent copies of "The Smoking Microfiche," which questions whether the released documents are, in fact, pay records, and whether they prove anything. The verdict: They aren’t. They’re a record of "retirement points," a separate matter. The essay also claims the "new" document White House spokesman Scott McClellan "revealed" last week was published four years ago on the Web site www.democrats.com. A second document, torn and only partly legible, may be a pay record. Since part of it is missing and no one seems to know who issued it, that’s hard to determine. If it’s legitimate, though, Smoking Microfiche author Bob Fertik said, it has a serious flaw from the GOP perspective: Bush’s last date of pay was April 16, 1972. The only entries after that date are on April 31, June 31, Sept. 31 and Nov. 31. Since those are all 30-day months, and the entries all say 99 . . . these are ‘placeholder’ numbers, not pay dates for duty served. The bottom line is clear: Bush was never paid for service during the time he claims to have been on duty (White House records do indicate that he showed up early in 1973 for a government-paid dental exam). http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/html...sp3=Columnists |
Sponsored Links |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ‘Smoking Microfiche’ says, ‘AWOL’
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 03:58:59 -0800, James Monroe
wrote: > > > > >That slimy little drunken weasel was indeed A.W.O.L. > Name one date when Bush was required to report and failed to do so. Required is the operative here. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 'Smoking Microfiche' says, 'AWOL'
"James Monroe" news:adnu2050hd1c05k51idkqlv424bmuq6ird@4ax.com... > > > > > That slimy little drunken weasel was indeed A.W.O.L. > > > An excerpt from the article: > > The bulk of the comment lately swirls around the "pay records" the > White House claims prove Bush completed his obligation. A few people > sent copies of "The Smoking Microfiche," which questions whether the > released documents are, in fact, pay records, and whether they prove > anything. > > The verdict: They aren't. They're a record of "retirement points," a > separate matter. The essay also claims the "new" document White House > spokesman Scott McClellan "revealed" last week was published four > years ago on the Web site www.democrats.com. > > A second document, torn and only partly legible, may be a pay record. > Since part of it is missing and no one seems to know who issued it, > that's hard to determine. > > If it's legitimate, though, Smoking Microfiche author Bob Fertik said, > it has a serious flaw from the GOP perspective: Bush's last date of > pay was April 16, 1972. The only entries after that date are on April > 31, June 31, Sept. 31 and Nov. 31. Since those are all 30-day months, > and the entries all say 99 . . . these are 'placeholder' numbers, not > pay dates for duty served. > > The bottom line is clear: Bush was never paid for service during the > time he claims to have been on duty (White House records do indicate > that he showed up early in 1973 for a government-paid dental exam). > > http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/html...sp3=Columnists > > Now that President Bush has released his military records, lets see what the military records show for the other candidates. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ?Smoking Microfiche? says, ?AWOL?
Why do you hate America? Questionning the President's patriotism is
criminal sedition. I am forwarding your post to Homeland Security. James Monroe > That slimy little drunken weasel was indeed A.W.O.L. > > > An excerpt from the article: > > The bulk of the comment lately swirls around the "pay records" the > White House claims prove Bush completed his obligation. A few people > sent copies of "The Smoking Microfiche," which questions whether the > released documents are, in fact, pay records, and whether they prove > anything. > > The verdict: They aren?t. They?re a record of "retirement points," a > separate matter. The essay also claims the "new" document White House > spokesman Scott McClellan "revealed" last week was published four > years ago on the Web site www.democrats.com. > > A second document, torn and only partly legible, may be a pay record. > Since part of it is missing and no one seems to know who issued it, > that?s hard to determine. > > If it?s legitimate, though, Smoking Microfiche author Bob Fertik said, > it has a serious flaw from the GOP perspective: Bush?s last date of > pay was April 16, 1972. The only entries after that date are on April > 31, June 31, Sept. 31 and Nov. 31. Since those are all 30-day months, > and the entries all say 99 . . . these are ?placeholder? numbers, not > pay dates for duty served. > > The bottom line is clear: Bush was never paid for service during the > time he claims to have been on duty (White House records do indicate > that he showed up early in 1973 for a government-paid dental exam). > > http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/html...sp3=Columnists |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ?Smoking Microfiche? says, ?AWOL?
On 15 Feb 2004 0902 -0800, carla_lamp@hotmail.com (Carla Lamp)
wrote: >Why do you hate America? Questionning the President's patriotism is >criminal sedition. I am forwarding your post to Homeland Security. > "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -Theodore Roosevelt from 1918 Wartime Essay: Lincoln and Free Speech |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=91Smoking_Microfiche=92_says=2C_=91AWOL=92?=
James Monroe wrote:
> > > > > That slimy little drunken weasel was indeed A.W.O.L. > > > An excerpt from the article: > > The bulk of the comment lately swirls around the "pay records" the > White House claims prove Bush completed his obligation. A few people > sent copies of "The Smoking Microfiche," which questions whether the > released documents are, in fact, pay records, and whether they prove > anything. > > The verdict: They aren’t. They’re a record of "retirement points," a > separate matter. The essay also claims the "new" document White House > spokesman Scott McClellan "revealed" last week was published four > years ago on the Web site www.democrats.com. > > A second document, torn and only partly legible, may be a pay record. > Since part of it is missing and no one seems to know who issued it, > that’s hard to determine. Check out Calpundit.com He's been following the story and has gotten hold of a complete version of the torn document, which is NOT a pay stubb. > > If it’s legitimate, though, Smoking Microfiche author Bob Fertik said, > it has a serious flaw from the GOP perspective: Bush’s last date of > pay was April 16, 1972. The only entries after that date are on April > 31, June 31, Sept. 31 and Nov. 31. Since those are all 30-day months, > and the entries all say 99 . . . these are ‘placeholder’ numbers, not > pay dates for duty served. > > The bottom line is clear: Bush was never paid for service during the > time he claims to have been on duty (White House records do indicate > that he showed up early in 1973 for a government-paid dental exam). > > http://www.rgj.com/news/stories html/2004/02/14/63970.php?sp1=rgj&sp2=Opinion&sp3=Columnists |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ‘Smoking Microfiche’ says, ‘AWOL’
In article
nospam@lessspam.net says... > That slimy little drunken weasel was indeed A.W.O.L. What is AWOL is honesty from you anti-American terrorist lovers. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ‘Smoking Microfiche’ says, ‘AWOL’
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 03:58:59 -0800, James Monroe
wrote: > > > > >That slimy little drunken weasel was indeed A.W.O.L. No - he wasn't . But you are added to the list of lying little fucking liberal weasels... Regards, snipped... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ?Smoking Microfiche? says, ?AWOL?
In alt.war.vietnam, Lee says...
>On 15 Feb 2004 0902 -0800, carla_lamp@hotmail.com (Carla Lamp) >wrote: > >>Why do you hate America? Questionning the President's patriotism is >>criminal sedition. I am forwarding your post to Homeland Security. >> > > >"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that >we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only >unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American >public." > -Theodore Roosevelt from 1918 Wartime Essay: Lincoln and Free >Speech Teddy was right! How someone can be charged with "criminal sedition" by questioning ANYONE about ANYTHING is beyond me (OK, so there is a chance that by questioning someone about certain "prohibited acts", that you might be considered a criminal, but questioning whether the President is patriotic is NOT one of them.) -- Sharky - who believes George W Bush is far more patriotic than the Clinton scum (Bill and Hillary) and John "F'ing" Kerry. |
|