# The Case against Bush (national guard) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 14, 2004, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231 "2004-02-14T18:31:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2004, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/221 "2004-02-23T17:59:47Z")
“His teeth were there, where was he?” Droll, very droll. I don’t think he should have wimped out with the “donation to USO” thingee. Makes a better case if sheer greed won’t even do the job. And I also like how he unashamedly echoe’s James Carville with “hey, I’m stinkin’ rich, I don’t need a damn tax cut!” Thanks for the tip, **Hentor** ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/222 "2004-02-24T01:44:19Z")
> [@Mr. Svinlesha](#): > > I object to this statement because I do not believe that raising critical questions about the historical record – in this case, the discrepancies surrounding Bush’s military service – can reasonably be considered “_the worst form of irresponsible derogatory muckraking_.” Rather, I believe that raising such questions are essential to a well-functioning open society, and that in fact the Press Corps has something akin to a duty to ask them. Objection overruled. Read the statement. I said “accusations.” Not “Questions.” > [@](#): > > In addition, I see the OP as resorting to a snazzy rhetorical maneuver in the guise of reasoned debate, namely, “exclusion of the middle.” Apparently, from the OP’s point of view, the inability of critics to “define accusations” and “demonstrate guilt” means that they are muckrakers. Uh, yes. If you make an undefined accusation, for which you can demonstrate no evidence, than at the very least your are muckraker, and perhaps stronger language is in order for such irresponsibility. There is no fallacy of the excluded middle being committed. Unsupported accusations are irresponsible. Period. > [@](#): > > There is no middle ground here, in which critical questions can be posed and investigated. If, after 5 pages, the critics still have not successfully demonstrated this guilt (to an undefined degree of certainty), they themselves are simply accused of muckraking and dismissed. From that point forward, no critical dialogue is possible, since we will apparently be forever labeled as “muckrakers.” And yet the discrepancies in Bush’s record still stand, unanswered. Blah. blah blah. This is what I mean by whining. You’d think I’m violating your civil rights by starting a thread where I ask you to support your arguments. You’d think that after five pages, and endless repetitions on my part, that you would actually get it. This is a thread about supporting accusations. Accusations belong here, and I will ask they be supported. If, on the other hand, you have questions but no accusations, then perhaps you should ask those questions in another thread. You are free to have all the questions you want. I don’t care. I don’t think the worse of you. It just so happens though that in this thread I am dealing with accusations. That’s why I say “accusations” and not “questions.” Your confusion on this issue is truly and completely your own doing. Not too be redundant or anything. I’ve said this maybe fifty times in this thread. > [@](#): > > However, we do have the fact that, by your own admission, Bush has lied, at least once, on a serious matter of grave national consequence. That information goes to character. Even in a courtroom witnesses are judged as to their character and assigned credibility accordingly. Knowing this, most reasonable jurors would find Bush’s testimony to be probably not very credible; this is the natural consequence of being caught in a lie. At least for most of us. Standards not high enough for the noble **Scylla** , however, who wishes to consider every single instance of testimony in isolation, disconnected from the history of the testifier.Not true. It’s just that I inhabit that middle area you’ve so skillfully excluded; I am willing to consider it possible that Bush might be guilty of something, even though I don’t have all the facts. I’m happy to consider guilt as a possibility. It just needs positive support before it can be rationally asserted. > [@](#): > > You really like to accuse you debating opponents of whining, don’t you? No particularly. I’m saying it because I think you’re being a little whiny. You don’t like my Op which is dealing with accusations and the support thereof, and so your bitching about it and misconstruing accusations to mean any questions or criticism. Now, I suspect you know the difference, so it seems a little whiny. If all you have is questions, but no accusations than you are really not at issue here, are you? > [@](#): > > On page 3 of this thread, in post # 115, I wrote:You replied, in post # 118:Can I take your accusations of whining, above, as your way of letting me know that you “have a complaint?”Fair enough. Sure. My complaint is that your confabulating my use of the word “accusation” to mean any form of criticism or question, and complaining about my OP in a fashion that seems whiny. > [@](#): > > Perhaps we might therefore turn to our local expert, **Airman Doors** , and see what he has to say about the matter. All the following quotes are taken from this thread. He is indeed a fine fellow. However not having served with Bush, nor served during the time period, nor being a Historian of either, nor particularly informed in either, I don’t necessarily accept his words as gospel. I’ll give you a hint; Airman doesn’t really know if Bush was a crappy officer. He’s guessing. > [@](#): > > At the very least you must admit that **Airman’s** professional judgements regarding Bush’s military service stand in stark contrast to your defense of him vis-a-vis the Harken accusations. Yeah, Airman’s swell. I like the word of LTC. Lloyd better. That’s all. > [@](#): > > _Now_ you admit:In other words, your mind was made up before you even started the thread. > > Gotcha. I had a strong opinion. That opinion was formed based on observation, and noting that there didn’t appear to be any serious evidence to back up the accusations. I think five pages of patiently asking for the case over and over again, demonstrates a certain openness towards hearing one, and I was certainly prepared to have my beleifs contradicted and to adjust them. That hasn’t happened… yet. I am right… so far. However I can truly come to one conclusion: Those who have made such accusations in the absence of a case or reasonable evidence have behaved irresponsibly and their assertions are irrational. But there’s no “gotcha” here. I have an opinion based on evidence concerning the accusations others have made. I’ve opened this thread to see if I was wrong. I was in the specific of the accusation of nepotism in getting the guard post, and I modified my stance readily. > [@](#): > > This statement appears to contradict your OP, quoted above, in which you state that such question-asking is “_the worst form of irresponsible derogatory muckraking_.”As you wish. Oh shame on you. Shame. Shame. Shame. Shame. I state no such thing. My statement concerns accusations. Not questions. Accusations. I’d hate to think you were misstating my OP on purpose here, so I hope this is a genuing mistake. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/223 "2004-02-24T01:54:14Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > "Just when you start debating how much or whether the president’s military service record should be an issue in this campaign, you realize that the main reason it’s an issue is that the president and his surrogates just won’t stop lying about it. > > This morning Bush campaign chairman Marc Racicot was interviewed by Juan Williams on NPR. When asked about the president’s Air National Guard service he said, the president’s and John Kerry’s service “compare very favorably… He (i.e. the president) signed up for dangerous duty. He volunteered to go to Vietnam. He wasn’t selected to go, but nonetheless served his country very well…” > > He volunteered to go to Vietnam? > > Marc, no he didn’t…" > > "…When the president signed up for the National Guard there was a check box asking whether he wanted to volunteer for overseas service. And he checked off “do not volunteer…” > > "…Of late, they’ve brought forward friends or fellow Guardsmen who say – with no documentary evidence whatsoever – that Bush at one point or another asked about serving in Vietnam. > > But however that may be, it is awfully hard to turn the “do not volunteer” into “do volunteer…” This was covered in of your earlier cites, and rather excellently I thought. Bush did indeed check the box indicating he did not volunteer for overseas service. The reason explained for this is that he was not supposed to when signing up for duty since he was specifically applying for a Guard post in Texas. Later when he had the Guard post he supposedly (and I beleive there’s an eyewitness, but I’m not gonna go back and check) he verbally volunteered for a specific combat post in Vietnam, and was verbally turned down as not posessing enough experience. There really is no contradiction. At one point Bush specifically and inarguably did not volunteer. At another point, he supposedly did. The time when he did not volunteer was when he applied for his guard. The time he did was supposedly when he already had it. My personal opinion is that I have no reason to doubt the eyewitness. Maybe it happened. Why not? I just don’t give Bush very much credit for such a half-assed inquiry. Sure. He technically volunteered. Just not in a very serious context. I don’t consider it a lie. I just don’t grant any credit. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/224 "2004-02-24T03:43:18Z")
Sorry, **Scylla** , I was wary of overquoting, which is a big problem with Talking Points stuff because he’s so succinct, there’s no fat to cut. Pity you didn’t check the link… "Now, here’s what the president himself said just two weeks ago … RUSSERT: Were you favor of the war in Vietnam? BUSH: I supported my government. I did. And would have gone had my unit been called up, by the way. RUSSERT: But you didn’t volunteer or enlist to go. BUSH: No, I didn’t. You’re right. " _Meet The Press_ February 8th, 2004 And… “I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada. So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes.” George W. Bush, 1990 as quoted in _The Houston Chronicle_ May 8th, 1994. Note also that the first assertion that GeeDubya volunteered for Viet Nam comes not from GeeDubya himself, but from Racooncoat, apparently unawares that such an assertion had been pre-emptively rendered inoperative by GeeDubya himself. Now, GeeDubya being, as he is, the very paragon of candor, I’ll take him at his word: he never volunteered for Viet Nam. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/225 "2004-02-24T04:03:42Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Sorry, **Scylla** , I was wary of overquoting, which is a big problem with Talking Points stuff because he’s so succinct, there’s no fat to cut. Pity you didn’t check the link… Well no. I didn’t check. I guess I should have. The excellent citing and quoting you’ve done in this thread has made me lazy. So, it’s really your fault. > [@](#): > > Note also that the first assertion that GeeDubya volunteered for Viet Nam comes not from GeeDubya himself, but from Racooncoat, apparently unawares that such an assertion had been pre-emptively rendered inoperative by GeeDubya himself. > > Now, GeeDubya being, as he is, the very paragon of candor, I’ll take him at his word: he never volunteered for Viet Nam. So accepted and noted. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/226 "2004-02-24T06:16:46Z")
Well, this whole “volunteering for Viet Nam” stuff just got a bit thicker. You will recall this minor _scheissturm_ began when Marc Racooncoat, Pubbie honcho, tried to claim on an NPR interview the GeeDubya had volunteered to go to Viet Nam as a fighter pilot. Later, in a conference call to reporters, he said he had read this in a “national publication” but couldn’t recall which one. Back to _Talking Points Memo_ "At a few points over the last decade President Bush has claimed that he tried to sign up for something called the Palace Alert program, which would have taken him to Southeast Asia. Now, it seems odd on the face of it that the president’s family would pull all these strings to help him jump the queue for a safe spot in the Texas Air National Guard only to have him take the first chance to go to Vietnam. But, as this 1999 interview in The Washington Post makes clear, even the dates don’t add up … WP: Were you avoiding the draft? GWB: No, I was becoming a pilot. WP: You wanted to serve? GWB: Yes I did. WP: But when you were asked do you want to go overseas, you said no. GWB: I didn’t know that. But I actually tried to go on a Palace Alert program. WP: That was later. GWB: It was. After I became a pilot. WP: Palace Alert program was being phased out. GWB: Not really, a couple of my buddies got to go. … WP: … But they’d already graduated. GWB: That’s true. I couldn’t go until actually I’d gotten my – WP: I was curious about the sequence. You got out of combat school on June 23, 1970. Palace Alert programs were all closed down overseas as of June 30. So could you have gone even if you signed up for it? GWB: I guess not if that’s the case, but I remember going to see [the supervisor] to try to get signed up for it. You just ask the commander to put you in. He said you can’t go because you’re too low on the totem pole. I’m not trying to make this thing any grander than it is. … " From the _Washington Post_ “…asking a commander to put his name on the list for a “Palace Alert” program, which dispatched qualified F-102 pilots in the Guard to the Europe and the Far East, occasionally to Vietnam, on three- to six-month assignments.” [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm) Europe, the Far East and _occasionally_ to Viet Nam. Meaning, I assume, at least once. Now, pursuing “Palace Alert” through the wilds of Google, this: [http://www.danford.net/bushf102.htm\](http://www.danford.net/bushf102.htm%5C) “…Bush recalls that toward the end of his training, he volunteered for the “Palace Alert” program which sent F-102 pilots to Europe and Asia for six-month tours. He was turned down, no doubt because he didn’t have the flying time to qualify for the program. In any event, he couldn’t have been sent to Southeast Asia to take part in the Vietnam War, at least not to fly a Delta Dagger: the F-102 detachments in Vietnam and Thailand were shut down in December 1969, before Bush got his wings…” Now, if the first cites are accurate, there was a small but real chance that a volunteer for “Palace Alert” _might_ have been posted to Viet Nam, even though the program was due to shut down a week after Georgie got Jungle Fever. However, if the last cite is accurate, there was _no_ such chance, as the plane that GeeDubya flew had no detachments operational in Viet Nam or Thailand. (Disclaimer: your correspondent knows diddly squat about the [Danford.net](http://Danford.net) cite, save that it is dripping with military references and seems to be a warplane afficianados cite. My suspicion is, as an airwarfare “buff” board, they probably know some shit, but I sure wouldn’t be the one to say whether they do or not. Frankly, I get the feeling from sites like this that they are for men who are actually _sorry_ that they didn’t get into a war. A frame of reference I cannot relate to.) ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/227 "2004-02-24T06:24:37Z")
On a previous page in this thread I posted a quote from a squadron mate of Bush’s who corroborates his volunteering for Palace Alert. He says that four of them volunteered, and the two most senior were accepted. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/228 "2004-02-24T13:19:52Z")
By golly, you’re right, **Sam**. Just as you say, you did in fact post that. No getting around that, try as I will. Yeppers, you posted that. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/229 "2004-02-24T16:10:12Z")
I see that [Garry Trudeau](http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/uclickcomics/20040224/cx_db_uc/db20040224&e=1&ncid=) is offering a $10,000 reward for any witness who can come forward to confirm Bush showed up in Alabama. I’m sure this matter will be cleared up soon, once and for all. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![GMMars](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/0ea827/32.png) [@GMMars](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GMMars)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2004, 9:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/230 "2004-02-25T09:24:15Z")
I just have a few things to add to this: 1- I have been in the Guard and it is rare the person who goes to every drill, who even shows up when his unit is activated. The states usually don’t hold you accountable, and any way it isn’t like going AWOL on Active Duty. It is not a UCMJ offense as far as I know. Sometimes the Guard will work on putting you out of the Guard- but that is rare since that will hurt their numbers. 2- If you show up, many times the NCO in charge doesn’t mark you as being present. Sometimes you get paid, sometimes you don’t. You can make up your drill in other places and just call it in. It is a very broke system. I was in the Guard a few years ago and wouldn’t be able to tell you what drills I went to/ missed/ made up/ or the places I attended the ones I went to. 3- If Bush did not attend the last few drills of his “contract” then all I am saying is that he is not a rarity. If he even remembers doing so and is lying, then he is no worse than Clinton… unless you are a liberal, right? (just as Kerry is bad for coming back after only a few months in VN if you are a conservative…) 4- If Bush did attend the drills, but was not supposed to transfer from TX to AL then he is guilty of a technicality. I know plenty of Guardsmen who transferred for family or work related reasons and the paperwork took years to catch up with them. I went Active Duty and did so through the Guard’s office. Yet I was kept on the Guard’s books for 2 1/2 years! 5- If Bush can’t remember, attended a few but not all, or lost the pay slips and others cannot remember him (back then I don’t think he was a household name)- as is probably what most likely happened, then he is like most of the rest of America- focused on what we want to do, and not the little things that might one day bite us in the rear one day. How many people don’t have something in their past that they wish they could take back or just didn’t do perfectly? 6- I think it all boils down to politics. If you are liberal- Bush is a terrible “AWOL” soldier who shouldn’t expect others to go to Iraq and needs to step down and let VN vet Kerry take over. If you are conservative- Bush may be guilty of not keeping all of his records, but Kerry is worse because he came back and threw his medals on the ground with Jane Fonda. If you an independent then you see the similarities between all of the politicians and you hope that one day you don’t run for president and they find all of your mistakes from when you were a kid… ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2004, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/231 "2004-02-25T18:27:46Z")
> [@GMMars](#): > > 5- If Bush can’t remember, attended a few but not all, or lost the pay slips and others cannot remember him (back then I don’t think he was a household name)- as is probably what most likely happened, then he is like most of the rest of America- focused on what we want to do, and not the little things that might one day bite us in the rear one day. The problem is that (1) it looks like Bush didn’t show up for Guard Duty _at all,_ and (2) people _were_ watching for his arrival. He might not have been world-famous at the time, but he already had a bit of celebrity status about him, if only for being the son of a Congressman: > [@](#): > > Recalls Memphian Mintz, now 62: “I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas. And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence. I was a young bachelor then. I was looking for somebody to prowl around with.” But, says Mintz, that “somebody” – better known to the world now as the president of the United States – never showed up at Dannelly in 1972. Nor in 1973, nor at any time that Mintz, a FedEx pilot now and an Eastern Airlines pilot then, when he was a reserve first lieutenant at Dannelly, can remember. > > “And I was _looking_ for him,” repeated Mintz, who said that he assumed that Bush “changed his mind and went somewhere else” to do his substitute drill. It was not “somewhere else,” however, but the 187th Air National Guard Tactical squadron at Dannelly to which the young Texas flyer had requested transfer from his regular Texas unit – the reason being Bush’s wish to work in Alabama on the ultimately unsuccessful U.S. Senate campaign of family friend Winton “Red” Blount. Link [here.](http://www.memphisflyer.com/content.asp?ID=2837&onthefly=1) ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2004, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/232 "2004-02-25T22:47:59Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > Goodness, Scott McClellan has got to be the worse press secretary ever. Jesus, look what the poor bastard has to work with. Speaking of which, how unusual is it for a White House Press Secretary to pick up and leave, like Fleischer did? I really don’t know where to look on that one… -Joe ---
**Author:** ![litost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c4cdca/32.png) [@litost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/litost)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2004, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/233 "2004-02-27T07:25:18Z")
Is this where we are at now? Scylla: If you cannot prove your case, then you are muckraking. Svin: I know I cannot individually prove the case, but raising questions is not muckraking. Scylla: Asking questions is OK, but accusing someone without proof isn’t Svin: But, the proof or the absence thereof is exactly what raises these questions and Bush may control the ability to prove the case. Scylla: If you cannot prove your case, then you are muckraking… I think both of you are right. As much as we all are innocent until proven guilty, I think it behooves on Bush (as the president of this country) to take some effort to prove his innocence. Given that the press corps find the white house involvement unsatisfactory, I would side on their side. At the same time, one shouldn’t be throwing accusations as well. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2004, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/234 "2004-06-23T03:58:30Z")
Good Lord! It’s the story that **WILL NOT DIE** : [AP Sues for Access to Bush Guard Records](http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&e=5&u=/ap/20040623/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_national_guard) > [@](#): > > The Associated Press sued the Pentagon and the Air Force on Tuesday, seeking access to all records of George W. Bush’s military service during the Vietnam War. > > Filed in federal court in New York, where The AP is headquartered, the lawsuit seeks access to a copy of Bush’s microfilmed personnel file from the Texas State Library and Archives Commission in Austin. > > The White House says the government has already released all the records of Bush’s military service. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2004, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/235 "2004-07-09T12:52:20Z")
Oops, there’s no records to sue for: > [@](#): > > the payroll records of “numerous service members,” including former First Lt. Bush, had been ruined in 1996 and 1997 by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service during a project to salvage deteriorating microfilm. No back-up paper copies could be found, it added in notices dated June 25. > > **The destroyed records cover three months of a period in 1972 and 1973 when Mr. Bush’s claims of service in Alabama are in question.** Odd we hadn’t heard this story before now: > [@](#): > > There was no mention of the loss, for example, when White House officials released hundreds of pages of the President’s military records last February in an effort to stem Democratic accusations that he was “AWOL” for a time during his commitment to fly at home in the Air National Guard during the Vietnam War. [Pentagon Says Bush Records of Service Were Destroyed](http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/09/politics/campaign/09records.html) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2004, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/236 "2004-07-09T13:59:32Z")
I’ll bet Scotty’s gonna have a tough time in this morning’s press gaggle, when they start asking him when the White House found out about the missing microfilms - and if it was just yesterday, then why hadn’t they checked the microfilms back in the winter, to make sure their paper records were complete? ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2004, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/237 "2004-07-09T14:55:53Z")
They were apparently destroyed quite a while ago, however, which makes any conspiracy look a bit silly. Unless they were destroyed not for his presidential run but for past controversies. But it indeed is MAJOR egg on their face that they claimed to have released all the records (they haven’t, even with the microfilms excluded from consideration) and failed to mention that parts of the record had been destroyed. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2004, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/238 "2004-07-09T22:30:49Z")
[Church Lady] The records were destroyed? Well, isn’t that _CONVEEEEEEEEEEEEEENIENT._ [/Church Lady] > [@Apos](#): > > They were apparently destroyed quite a while ago No. They were **allegedly** destroyed quite a while ago. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2004, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/239 "2004-07-09T22:55:56Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > No. They were **allegedly** destroyed quite a while ago. From NYT article: > [@](#): > > “In 1996 and 1997, DFAS engaged with limited success in a project to salvage deteriorating microfilm. During this process the microfilm payroll records of numerous service members were damaged, including from the first quarter of 1969 (Jan. 1 to March 31) and the third quarter of 1972 (July 1 to Sept. 30). President Bush’s payroll records for these two quarters were among the records destroyed. Searches for backup paper copies of the missing records were unsuccessful.” 96/97 isn’t all _that_ long ago. When did Bush start thinking about maybe runnin for president? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2004, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231/240 "2004-07-09T23:13:19Z")
If you want an exhaustive, and I do mean _exhaustive_ examination of the records that do exist, I refer you to [http://www.glcq.com/bush\_at\_arpc1.htm](http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm) I have read through it, more or less. Its a mind-boggling effort, comparing records with relevent Air Force and National Guard regulations, leaving no stone unturned, as best I can tell. Barring information that isn’t included, this is a very strong _prima faciae_ case. And exculpatory evidence would almost have to be of the “evil twin” variety. Read for yourself, take your eye-glaze drops with you. I cannot point to a particular single “smoking gun”, the effect is cumulative, the research relentless. Check it out (not **Simon** or **Big Svin** …you will end up sobbing and gnashing your teeth in jealous dismay…) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-bush-national-guard/229231.md?page=13)