Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (27849)	6/2/2004 10:07:17 PM
From: zonkie	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 81568

<Your premise is incorrect so that invalidates your conclusions. GW Bush was never AWOL, no matter how many times your friends insist he was. Their opinion does not matter, only military policy. He was never AWOL no matter how much you wish it was so. > In one of McClellen's gaggles he held up part of the incomplete documents which he said proved when junior was present at his base during the years in question because there was records of pay in it and he had to be there in order to be paid. There was a gap of 5 months straight at one point in his record when he received no pay. The rules state that a person can be charged with being AWOL 24 hours after not showing up at his duty post. It goes on to say a person can be charged with desertion after 30 days under certain circumstances. If a poor person with junior's circumstances had of been charged with desertion he almost certainly would have been fond guilty. If junior had of been charged with desertion I think his dad could have gotten him out of it. If junior had of been charged with being AWOL I don't see any way he could have been found not guilty unless the hearing was rigged in some way. So what my position boils down to is this; even though junior was absent 5 times longer than what it takes to be charged with desertion, if he had been charged with both desertion and AWOL he would only have been found guilty of being AWOL.