OR POLITICS 31 RE THE UNITED NATIONS
From: Thomas (mauicop@no-spam)
Subject: Re: The United Nations
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 17:24:50 -1000


On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:08:04 -0700, "WinGuru" <anonymous> wrote:

>The "media", as you put it, did no investigation more than reporting (those >few who even noted the issue) the lies made by the Bush campaign. The >Boston Globe article (in contrast) was well researched and used direct >evidence and sworn testimony from direct participants. How can you dismiss >a directly quoted statement from a senior officer (Col. Turnipseed for >example) that Bush was AWOL?
>
>There really is no question that Bush was AWOL (actually desertion given the >war condition) - the only question is why hasn't the press reported this.

The answer is that the press knows what anyone of at least minimal intelligence does, notwithstanding some retarded Bush-bashing malcontents, that Bush wasn't AWOL, was NEVER AWOL and if they had printed that he was they would have looked as idiotic as you do.
For someone who claims to have considerable military experience, you are shockingly misinformed about the fact that AWOL and honorable discharge on your DD214 doesn't go together.
However, the height of foolishness is you and your ilk refusing to face facts and continuing to whip a dead horse ad nauseum.

ALOHA
Reply to group (Unsolicited e-mail is deleted unread)


From: "alohacyberian" (alohacyberian@no-spam)
Subject: Re: The United Nations
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 07:50:06 GMT

"Bill Shatzer" <bshatzer@no-spam> wrote in message news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307010014440.18661-100000@no-spam > On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Thomas wrote:

> Actually, there is nothing about being AWOL which -precludes-
> an honorable discharge. And, in the absense of an actual court > martial conviction or article 15 punishment for AWOL, there is > nothing which would authorize anything -other- than an honorable > discharge.
>

You are flatly mistaken. No one who has been AWOL can receive an honorable discharge. Period. KM -- (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all about Hawaii, Israel and more: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/


From: "WinGuru" (anonymous)
Subject: Re: The United Nations
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 12:22:36 -0700

"alohacyberian" <alohacyberian@no-spam> wrote in message news:O8wMa.32746$0v4.2399067@no-spam > "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzer@no-spam> wrote in message > news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307010014440.18661-100000@no-spam > > On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Thomas wrote:
>
> > Actually, there is nothing about being AWOL which -precludes-
> > an honorable discharge. And, in the absense of an actual court > > martial conviction or article 15 punishment for AWOL, there is > > nothing which would authorize anything -other- than an honorable > > discharge.
> >
>
> You are flatly mistaken. No one who has been AWOL can receive an honorable > discharge. Period. KM
Oh you are so wrong. I know that this isn't the case - since I've had to discharge soldiers who had an AWOL on their record at some point. (Note: I never had one of my soldiers go AWOL while under my command.) But, since you make this claim so definitively, why don't you cite the reference from the UCMJ that specifies this? Nah, didn't think you could. For your information, AWOL, as an offense, can be dealt with in a number of ways depending upon the court and the circumstances.


From: Bill Shatzer (bshatzer@no-spam)
Subject: Re: The United Nations
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:18:38 -0700

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, alohacyberian wrote:

> "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzer@no-spam> wrote in message
> > Actually, there is nothing about being AWOL which -precludes-
> > an honorable discharge. And, in the absense of an actual court > > martial conviction or article 15 punishment for AWOL, there is > > nothing which would authorize anything -other- than an honorable > > discharge.

> You are flatly mistaken. No one who has been AWOL can receive an honorable > discharge. Period. KM
Certainly you have a reference to the appropriate Armed Services regulations to this effect?

Didn't think so.

I soldiered for Uncle Samuel 'bout the same time the dubya was busy clearing the Texas skies of Viet Cong (and not after he disappeared) and I was personally acquainted with several folks who had been AWOL but who received an honorable discharge - and a Good Conduct Medal too boot.

In the absense of an actual court martial conviction or non-judical adjudication (Article 15), there is just nothing in the -fact- of being AWOL which precluded an honorable discharge.

As with any violation of the UCMJ, they've gotta -catch- you and they've gotta -convict- you - otherwise, it never happened so far as discharge status is concerned.

Peace and justice,