Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
I missed this too.
"The authenticity of the memos was challenged almost immediately, and many (probably most) people assume they were quickly shown to be fakes. But this is not the case: their authenticity was easily placed in doubt, but nothing more. The “independent” investigation CBS initiated (headed by former Attorney General Richard Thornburgh, who was appointed by Bush’s father — no ethical conflict there, right?) could not say if the memos were authentic or not. As NPR reported after Rather decided to sue CBS:"http://www.salon.com/2015/10/17/george_w_bushs_military_lies_the_real_story_about_ the_undeniable_service_gaps_he_got_away_with/
I never had much of an interest in these stories. I was too busy with work and family to bother at the time. But all of this was coming out when Kerry was being slammed with the Swift Boat campaign. So you had the President with a very soft duty and the contender who served in Vietnam looking like a traitor. I forgot all that. lucky you, i'm not busy now
|
And you slam Bush also. Bush submitted a request for WestPac orders and was turned down. In case you are not familiar with WestPac orders, those of us that served understand the term to mean a request to serve in Vietnam. I had orders to be in the Honor Guard at 8th and I st, Washington, D.C. out of boot camp. I immediately submitted my request for WestPac orders and received them. Also, in case you don't understand anything about being in the National Guard, they also serve overseas. 6,140 National Guard members died in Vietnam. "Soft duty?" He served, regardless of anyone's impression of what constitutes "soft duty." I was in the USMC and considered all the other services "soft duty" in comparison. Right or wrong, it was Marine pride that was instilled into us in boot camp. Bush served, which is more than most of our elected officials of today can claim.