George W. Bush Wore a Ribbon He Did Not Earn

[Walt Starr]

This is a photograph published on the Presidential Library site of George H.W. Bush. We can clearly see that in this photograph, George W. Bush is wearing an Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA) and a Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR) just below his pilot wings, however, on line 24 of his NGB22 National Guard discharge form dated October 1, 1973, George W. Bush has no awards listed:



The photograph above was also included in the information released by the Bush administration:



He is listed as a second lieutenant in this photograph, and we know for a fact he earned the wings as he graduated from Undergraduate Pilot Training according to the record. As far as the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon is concerned, he obviously earned that ribbon while he was an Airman prior to his commission as evidenced by line 24 of the NGB22 filed when he was discharged as an Airman:



The Bush administration has also provided a military biography:




The awards listed here are the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon and the National Defense Service Medal, but no mention is made of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award. It also lists his dates of service with units. Other than his time training, he was assigned to the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron and it’s parent organization, the 147th Fighter Intercept Group. His discharge date from the Texas National Guard was October 1, 1973.

The above photograph had to have been taken some time between his qualifying as a pilot in 1969 and his promotion to First Lieutenant on November 7, 1970.

So what about the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award? In the United States Army, unit awards can be worn on a temporary basis. If you are transferred into the unit that has received an award, you wear that award until you transfer out of that unit. I contacted the Air Force Personnel Center and asked whether the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award was ever authorized for temporary wear. This was their answer:

IAW AF Instruction 36-2803, THE AIR FORCE AWARDS AND DECORATIONS PROGRAM

All assigned or attached people who served with a unit during a period for which a unit award was awarded are authorized the appropriate ribbon if they directly contributed to the mission and accomplishments of the unit.

Additionally, there isn't a "temporary" wear of AF Outstanding Unit Awards for AF personnel.

So to finally solve the mystery of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, I contacted the Air Force History support Organization. I requested all dates of all awards of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award received by the 147th Fighter Intercept Group and the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron. The answer I received was shocking. This unit had received this award only once. The dates of the award are as follows quoting directly from the source at the AFHSO:

147th Fighter Interceptor Group AFOUA 1 Oct 73-30 Sep 75 DAFSO GB 164/77

111 Fighter Interceptor Squadron AFOUA 1 Oct 73-30 Sep 75 DAFSO GB 164/77

This states explicitly that the units received the Air force Outstanding Unit Award for the time period from October 1, 1973 to September 30, 1975. George W. Bush’s discharge date from the 111th FIS and the 147th FIG was October 1, 1973. Clearly, these units did not receive an award of the AFOUA until after George W. Bush had been discharged, and well after the date the photograph in question was taken.

This means, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that George W. Bush was photographed wearing a ribbon he clearly did not earn.

Webliography:

Source of the photograph: bushlibrary.tamu.edu/photos/photos.php?file=HS502.jpg
Air Force Personnel Center: http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/
Air force History Support Office: http://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/
USA Today source of documents used in this report: http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm
Source for ARG22: http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/2-Discharge.pdf
Source for NGB22: http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/11-2_2004_Personnel_File.pdf
Source for copy of photograph: http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/11-2_2004_Personnel_File.pdf
Source for "military biography": http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/11-1_2004_Personnel_File.pdf

[Walt Starr]

1. Original Air Force Personnel Center Email w/headers

X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via 206.190.38.180; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:50:30 -0700
X-Originating-IP: <131.44.121.170>
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from 131.44.121.170 (EHLO rnd-sf-03.randolph.af.mil) (131.44.121.170) by mta277.mail.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:50:30 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: "AFPC/DPSTC Call Center" <[email protected]> Add to Address Book
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject: AFPC Contact Center Ticket # 040824-000022 (CIVILIAN CALL CENTER ISSUES) has been closed
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:50:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C48A13.8E68C108"
Content-Length: 2561


Walter Starr, below is your initial request, and resolution. If the resolution is not sufficient please e-mail us at mailto:[email protected] or the POC below. Include your ticket number. You can also submit an update to your original request by logging into https://webcolab.afpc.randolph.af.mil/Scripts/rightnowdb.cfg/php.exe/enduser/home.php

Problem : A couple of questions about the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award
Problem Details : Hi, I have a couple of questions about the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award.

1) Has the AFOUA ever been authorized for temporary wear? The Army has many Unit Awards that, when you transfer into a unit, the award is worn temporarily, and then removed upon leaving said unit. Is this a practice of the Air Force or has it ever been a practice of the Air Force?


2) I have no access to the Air Force Pamphlet 900-2. I have found that the 147th FIG (now the 147th FIW) received a first award of the AFOUA in 1966 and a third, I believe, in 1982. Could you give me the dates of all AFOUA awards the 147th Fighter Intercept Wing has been awarded in its illustrious history?


Thank you so much!
Resolution : Mr. Starr,
IAW AF Instruction 36-2803, THE AIR FORCE AWARDS AND DECORATIONS PROGRAM

All assigned or attached people who served with a unit during a period for which a unit award was awarded are authorized the appropriate ribbon if they directly contributed to the mission and accomplishments of the unit.


Additionally, there isn't a "temporary" wear of AF Outstanding Unit Awards for AF personel. Unfortunately, we do not have access to 900-2 however, if you request verification of entitlement of award of the AFOUA while assigned to a specific unit from the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, they can research the data for you. Please send your request to the below address and include a copy of your DD Fm 214 showing proof of service. They'll be able to provide a one time issue of the award upon verification.



Resolution Details : The address:

NPRC
Military Personnel Records
9700 Page Ave
ST. Louis MO 63132-5100

PH#: Toll-free 1-866-272-6272
Fax number: 314-538-4175

Hours - Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 3:45 p.m. (Closed weekends and Federal holidays)

website address:
http://www.archives.gov/research_room/vetrecs/index.html on line request

Contact Center Agent: : Mr Aaron Murphy
Agents Email Address: : mailto:[email protected]
Agents Phone Number: : Toll Free 1-800-616-3775; or DSN 665-5000

[trumad]

2. first

on edit:
second

[Catherine Vincent]

18. Haha! Trumad, you sound like those yahoos on Yahoo that

race to the boards just to be first post on a breaking story.:-)

p.s. I'm not calling you a yahoo.

[gristy]

56. Well, they do it on atrios too...

and that is a really cool site: http://atrios.blogspot.com/

[trumad]

65. I learned it from Atrios...

except they say "Frist"...LOL

[Must_B_Free]

120. I think it came from slashdot

[Bluebear]

5. Kick kick kick!

What great work, Walt!

[mzmolly]

3. Who in the media has this been sent to?

:shrug:

[wurzel]

11. What network or cable do you believe will broadcast this?

n/t

[mzmolly]

84. Provided the documentation is legit, most.

:hi:

They love ratings more then Bush.

[wurzel]

101. They love money more than ratings. n/t

[mzmolly]

167. Ratings bring $$

:hi:

[wurzel]

208. Advertisements bring $$$

[Walt Starr]

213. Ratings = Advertising = $$$$$

:evilgrin:

[wurzel]

225. Sponsorship = Advertising = $$$$

It is clear from the many rightwing programs with continued sponsorship, that ratings are secondary to the message. Why does Carlson have program on NPR? That twit Buckley had sponsors by the dozen for a program very few watched. Hannity and O'Reily have lower ratings than Moyers. I only wish what you were saying is true.

[Pot Kettle Black]

214. Not to enable, but

ratings and projected ratings determine ad rates, ad rates determine if someone will place the ad, and ad placement becomes ad revenue.

You're both right. They love ratings because they are money, because they are better ad rates, caused by bigger audiences, which makes someone want to place an ad, and pay for it.

But, the media companies love Bush more than they love money, because the two are not all that different.

TV was a heavily regulated industry. It's a lot less regulated, but there are still some vestiges of media ownership regulation left in the world. Bush will remove those, allowing a company to own and operate more than 33 stations.

A bump for an interesting story will get a company maybe a million extra in revenue, if it's a very large bump (Bush crossdresses, Kerry secretly in love with Cheney's Lesbian daughter, or something else similarly huge and shocking). Weigh that against the prospect of owning 100 TV stations, rather than just 33, each one earning ad revenue and diffusing production costs across a broader spectrum of business units.

No TV company in acting in its own interest (rather than the public's) will air this, because it's a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

If Kerry wants fair media coverage, he should support the elimination of regulation on the broadcast industry. That ain't gonna happen, and will drive some to Nader, so this story stays online, until it gets too big to ignore.

[wurzel]

227. Kerry should support the elimination of regulation of broadcasting?

Do you mean this?

[mzmolly]

233. Ratings bring in advertisements and $$$

[Karla in Ohio]

187. Print outlets are good choices

for disseminating this story. A big paper like the Houston Chronicle (right in Bush Country) might run with it, which would result in the story getting picked up by the national media.

I sent a link to the HC; we'll see if they bite. Bill Maher was an inspired choice, though. And it needs to go to Air America, which is where I'll be going after I send this message to y'all.

Thanks Walt...it IS a story. I hope it gets picked up.

[Walt Starr]

4. Original Air Force History Support Organization Email w/headers

X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via 206.190.38.188; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:48:53 -0700
X-Originating-IP: <140.185.74.19>
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from 140.185.74.19 (EHLO dfdc006.sam.pentagon.mil) (140.185.74.19) by mta112.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:48:52 -0700
Received: from hafml006.pentagon.ncr.ds.af.mil (<134.205.214.126>) by dfdc006.sam.pentagon.mil with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id QMBXV289; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:45:46 -0400
Received: from HAFMLVS002.pentagon.ncr.ds.af.mil (<134.205.214.125>) by hafml006.pentagon.ncr.ds.af.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:48:51 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: Looking for some information
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C48B5A.44FFE32E"
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:48:49 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Looking for some information
Thread-Index: AcSK4oPkbRKg5NI+RaeJqiPR/2xD+QAdwFvg
From: "AFHSO Research" <[email protected]> Add to Address Book
To: "Walter Starr" <[email protected]>
Return-Path: [email protected]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Aug 2004 10:48:51.0489 (UTC) FILETIME=<463C4910:01C48B5A>
Content-Length: 1297


Dear Mr Starr:

147th Fighter Interceptor Group AFOUA 1 Oct 73-30 Sep 75 DAFSO GB 164/77

111 Fighter Interceptor Squadron AFOUA 1 Oct 73-30 Sep 75 DAFSO GB 164/77




-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Starr
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 4:29 PM
To: AFHSO Research
Subject: Looking for some information


Hello,

I am trying to determine dates for all awards of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award to the 147th Fighter Intercept Wing (formerly the 147th Fighter Intercept Group) and the 111th fighter Intecept Squadron. These organizations are part of the Texas National Guard.

Is there any way I can get this informaiton from you?

Walter E. Starr
XXXXXXXXX, XX

[Ducks In A Row]

8. great work

sent to drudge, not that he'll report it. ha ha ha ha ha

[gardenista]

6. Great work, Walt!

Do you think he stole it from Poppy's dresser drawer? We all know how he likes to play dress-up.

[stellanoir]

7. go for it Walt,

I think you're on to something here.

Fight back we must.

You have the temerity for details that many of us so severely lack.

Will pass this on.

[Walt Starr]

9. This was a 100% Internet based Story

The story behind this story is quite interesting. It all started on Saturday, August 21 when I began trying to compare Kerry's military awards to Bush's. When looking into Bush's I quickly found that something didn't add up.

Over the course of less than a week, it developed into a scandalous report of a president (famous for smearing Vietnam Veterans) who while serving in the Texas Natinal Guard wore an award he did not earn.

Every last bit of information came via the internet. I found using the telephone was simply not quick enough.

This is the new media, folks. The means of quickly researching this sort of story exists and is open to everybody. Participatory journalism will be the wave of the future.

Pat yourselves on the back, DUers, you kept me honest with this and forced me to dot my "i's" and cross my "t's".

[PDittie]

121. No, Walt, you and you alone

are the man.

:headbang:

[EST]

190. Walt---been lurking mostly along with you guys since your first

post on this. You are the hero of a lot of us. Yeah, we thought about and critiqued, but you did it. I think we should nominate Mr. Starr for internet investigting news god of 2004, or some such. Congrats and heartfelt thanks!

[merh]

10. Walt Starr - shining brightly!

thank you for all of your hard work and determination. :thumbsup:

[Ducks In A Row]

12. sent to hardball and countdown

the more of us who email them, the more likely they'll air it.

[Rosco T.]

13. What would be the PENALTY for doing this??? n/m

[SotarrTheWizard]

119. Not meaning to be a wet sponge here. . .

. . . but I served in a unit that got the Outstanding Unit Award. . . and it did NOT show up on MY DD-214. . . I think it only lists INDIVIDUAL decorations, not unit ones, but I've been out of the USAF for 15 years. . . personally, I think linkage between Bush and the not-so-swifties is far more damning. . .

[Walt Starr]

124. Then you could provide documentation you served in that unit

and the Air Force History Support Organization could verify your unit received the award while you were assigned to the unit.

Unfortunately for Bush, his unit didn't.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

135. It doesn't matter

the picture is taken at the wrong time for him to have it and that unit didn't even EARN that award until 1973. In other words, there's no way he could have been wearing it legit in that picture.

[Catherine Vincent]

14. Which cable news network will break this story?

[Chichiri]

15. One tiny thing, and please prove me wrong here . . .

Bush was discharged on 1 October 1973, the same date that the time period of the AFOUA began. Does that mean that Bush's service and the AFOUA time period overlapped by one day? If so, couldn't Bush have received the AFOUA for that one day of service?

[Walt Starr]

20. The award would not have been given out until after September 30, 1975

So he could never have legitimately worn the award while in uniform.

[Chichiri]

21. Thank you.

I will contact my local media immediately.

[Tansy_Gold]

52. The picture itself predates the legitimate award anyway

Even if boosh had been authorized to wear it for the one day overlap in 1973, the photo was taken 1969-1970.

The unit hadn't won the award then.

[Renew Deal]

98. How do you know that?

[Willy Mugobeer]

53. GW was nowhere near his unit on 1 October 1973...

here it is: http://www.awolbush.com/deserter.html

Bush asked for discharge from the TANG on 9/5/73 and then headed for Harvard Biz school. He didn't hang around long enough to receive word that his request had been accepted, in other words ... "after tender of his resignation and before notice of its acceptance, his post or proper duties without leave and with intent to remain away permanently..."

which makes him GUILTY of desertion according to the Texas Code of Military Justice, Section 432.130. (Yeah, I know the links are broken...I'll fix them ASAP...)

[Walt Starr]

16. The Chicago Tribune is aware of this

It's been sent to Salon as well.

Get the word out. Blast the media. The people need to know that a president who sinks to the low of questioning documented awards of our veterans did not conduct himself as an officer and a gentleman while he served in the Texas Air National Guard.

[City Lights]

24. Great work, Walt.

What do you think the Tribune is going to do with it?

[Walt Starr]

27. They are vetting it

It could be published this weekend.

[City Lights]

30. Keeping fingers crossed.

Thanks for the info.

[Ducks In A Row]

40. oh yeah, NOW they're being ethical and vetting a story

I so hope they get scooped.

[senseandsensibility]

47. Woo-hoo!

I'm proud of you!:toast:

[Feanorcurufinwe]

17. GO WALT!

[cally]

19. I don't understand part of this

Aren't these pictures both of W. You mention George HW Bush and then W. :shrug:

[Walt Starr]

22. The picture is posted on his father's presidential library website.

:evilgrin:

[cally]

72. Thanks, I understand now

:dunce:

Thanks all for the explanations.

[nyhuskyfan]

23. HW was mentioned just because his library has the picture

He has only a bit role in this story.

[Fleshdancer]

26. Picture of W that was in Daddy's Presidential library...

Citing the location of where the photo came from helps to shut up the naysayers who think the photo must be doctored because their perfect leader would never do such a dishonest thing.

[sub.theory]

25. Kicked

Nice work Walt!

Kicked

[imax2268]

33. Hey walt...

I heard on Mike Malloy's show that when BushCo was running for congress that he had a section that stated he was "in the Air Force"...did you hear about that one...?

anyway...great work...great work...I'm sending it out to a few places here in AZ...

[hexola]

28. I think you really need to know the exact date of the photo...

The above photograph had to have been taken some time between his qualifying as a pilot in 1969 and his promotion to First Lieutenant on November 7, 1970.

What is this based on...?

Here's what they will say...

"The picture was taken Oct 1, 1973. Bush was discharged that same day the unit received the award..."

But that still stinks because it looks like the award was given to the Unit just so Bush - who was about to leave - could look good in a photo op...(and presumably on down the line) And have something to make it look like he did something in TANG...

Now - who - just who - might have that kind of influence...???

[nyhuskyfan]

29. He is a second lieutenant in that picture

And the award wouldn't have been issued until 1975.

[Walt Starr]

31. The award came after September 30, 1975

There is absolutely no way he could have legitimately worn the award while in uniform. The award is never given until after the last date of the time period covered by the award, usually several months later.

This is part of the reason why John Kerry was issued a DD215. It added several unit awards and corrected another.

[hexola]

45. I maintain that the lack of a clear date is a weakness...

...not trying to cut up your fine work...but I think we really need to know...

[hexola]

66. Does the haircut tell anyting about the photo date?

[Tansy_Gold]

70. He is identified as a 2nd Lt in the photo

He was promoted to 1st Lt. in Nov 1970.

Why would someone have a photo taken of himself at a lower rank than he was at the time and wear a ribbon he couldn't have earned until after he was at the higher rank?

Ergo, he fucking lied.


TG

[hexola]

83. What identifies him as 2nd L?

I need more than that scribble on the corner of the one pic...

[Tansy_Gold]

145. Um, I'm not clear here

You want to know if anything about the HAIRCUT can definitively date the photograph, but the date written on it as posted by the Bush administration in their document dump isn't good enough?

:eyes:

[hexola]

206. You trust Bush ehhh?

Yes - the HAIRCUT - their are probably regulations about haircuts...

Sorry - something scribbled in the corner of a FAX doesn't cut it...that could have been scribbled on there in the past year.

What is the conclusive proof of the photo date?

[TacticalPeek]

209. The date of the photo is mostly irrelevant.

If I'm following this right, at NO TIME during aWol's term of service was he authorized to wear this ribbon.

Never ever.

[Spazito]

211. At NO time during bush's time of service was he eligible to....

wear that second ribbon. bush was discharged in 73, BEFORE the ribbon was given to the unit which would have been in 75. Here is the reason, taken from Walt's initial post:

IAW AF Instruction 36-2803, THE AIR FORCE AWARDS AND DECORATIONS PROGRAM

All assigned or attached people who served with a unit during a period for which a unit award was awarded are authorized the appropriate ribbon ****if they directly contributed to the mission and accomplishments of the unit.****

Additionally, there isn't a "temporary" wear of AF Outstanding Unit Awards for AF personnel.

So to finally solve the mystery of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, I contacted the Air Force History support Organization. I requested all dates of all awards of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award received by the 147th Fighter Intercept Group and the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron. The answer I received was shocking. This unit had received this award only once. The dates of the award are as follows quoting directly from the source at the AFHSO:

147th Fighter Interceptor Group AFOUA 1 Oct 73-30 Sep 75 DAFSO GB 164/77

111 Fighter Interceptor Squadron AFOUA 1 Oct 73-30 Sep 75 DAFSO GB 164/77

This states explicitly that the units received the Air force Outstanding Unit Award for the time period from October 1, 1973 to September 30, 1975. George W. Bush’s discharge date from the 111th FIS and the 147th FIG was October 1, 1973. Clearly, these units did not receive an award of the AFOUA until after George W. Bush had been discharged, and well after the date the photograph in question was taken.

(**** added by me for emphasis)

[Renew Deal]

102. Thanks for the help.

I have been wondering the same exact thing. The 1st Lt. is a higher rank than the 2nd right?

[Walt Starr]

108. Yes, 1LT is a higher rank than 2LT n/t

[Catherine Vincent]

32. I nominated this thread, Walt.

Love ya!

[Fleshdancer]

35. good idea. Me too n/t

[Fleshdancer]

34. My hope is that this will spur the media to pressure Bush into releasing

all his military records. :evilgrin:

[Walt Starr]

37. Mine too!

Believe me, mine too!

[Fleshdancer]

41. Media question for you....

Are we just all sending this out to random media sources or is there some sort of method to the madness?

[Walt Starr]

43. Send it to media people you know

Send it to media people you don't know.

It needs to get out there. The more that read it the more likely it'll get picked up.

The facts are all there. Heck, if you look at the headers on the Air Force History Support Organization, you'll notice that email flowed to me through Pentagon servers!

[Fleshdancer]

49. sounds great...I'll do what I can!

I'm very happy you did all this Walt. :hug:

[Doohickie]

114. When the media doesn't pick this up...

...don't blame it on a right-wing conspiracy or censorship enforced by the administration. The reason it won't get picked up is this: it's really not that impressive.

Walt, I've been nay-saying this story since I found it. I'm not saying that your research is in any way incorrect or inaccurate. Rather, I just don't think it is that big of a deal.

I live in Texas, in Bush territory. Now, if I felt I could show someone this thread to my Bush-backer coworkers and make them swallow real hard and mutter, "Uh-oh...." then I think you would have something. But I really don't think this discovery of yours is going to turn anyone away from Bush.

The Bush-backers will stick with their man, and the undecideds are more worried about issues than past military records (which is why the Swift Boat thing isn't very damaging either).

If I had to sum up my reaction to this discovery in two words, it would be:

So what?


It reconfirms our opinion of him: Bush is a dweeb and a loser. But to be important, it has to be strong enough to turn people away from Bush, and it just plain isn't.

Sorry to burst your bubble, Walt, but this isn't earth shattering stuff.

[Fleshdancer]

115. And if the media DOES pick it up, will you retract your statement?

On a new thread?

[Doohickie]

128. If the media picks it up,

I will gladly eat crow on a new thread.

I will even admit that Walt is right.

But for the record, I'm thinking major daily or network, not a minor web news service. Is that fair?

[Walt Starr]

118. You could be right. You could be wrong. Only time will tell

The facts have been laid out. We'll see.

:shrug:

[TacticalPeek]

127. Why does the Air Force hate America?

:)

I pity the misunderestimators. Super congratulations!

[Doohickie]

134. Fair enough.

We'll see.

Even if I doubt how much it will impact the race, it is a good piece of work.

[unfrigginreal]

122. Well, there you go Walt. Paul_H says "So what"?

Obviously you're wasting your time and should stop this nonsense immediately. :eyes:

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

142. Here's why it's important

if the smearies weren't telling lies about Kerry and his medals, you would probably be right, bush supporters would just shrug and say "well, you know, he was young, but he's found JESUS now!"

Etc etc.

BUT. In light of the BIG deal that has been made out of KERRY'S service, this is now a germane topic, is it not?

AND the biggest audience this will hit with is veterans. My husband is a veteran and I asked him what it means to a veteran to know of a fellow service member wearing a ribbon they didn't earn.

He told me of a buddy of his who "decided" to wear Ranger tabs on his uniform (Army). He narrowly escaped a court martial over it and lost all his buddies. He was shunned, so to speak.

[Doohickie]

147. Yeah, but 30 years and many regulation changes later,

there can be enough of a doubt as to whether Bush thought he was doing the right thing that his backers will not be fazed.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

159. I don't think so

I mean, yes, of course, there are plenty of people out there who would vote for boosh if he were standing on the White House lawn wearing only dress socks and a pink tutu, eating toddler fingers and singing "How Dry I Am". Of course.

BUT....this case, as far as I can see, is airtight. I've even been checking out all the links in his webliography, etc. I've been talking to vets about it, double-checking. And now I'm trying to find out what the repurcussions are for doing something like this so we can get an idea of how major it is/was.

Do you know any veterans? They take this stuff VERY seriously and this isn't just some guys saying they were kinda sorta in the same country at the same time and heard some things, this is hard evidence.

Not only that, this could very well make SOME journalists get nosey about the rest of his records....being punked by a guy who isn't even a journalist and all.....

[Doohickie]

169. And I've talked to a few vets here in Texas,

....one of which claimed he saw the AF reg on temporary wearing of ribbons back in the 70's. Condidering the AF is an off-shoot of the Army, could it be possible that they were still adhering, officially, to Army regs in the 70's?

Then it just becomes a case of whether the unit won the award prior to Bush's time there. According to Walt, it didn't, but there was anectdotal evidence from a unit web page or something like that that said they won it in '66. Are the records kept well enough, and are all the units (and their histories) documented well enough to establish for sure that there is no rational explanation for Bush's wearing of the medal?

I know Walt has done a lot of digging, but the significance of his findings could be debunked if others in his unit during the same time frame were also wearing the ribbon.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

173. I'm in Texas, as well

[Carni]

48. Great work Walt!

I am sending to Helen Thomas!

(I don't know her but have her email addy)

[sub.theory]

39. That's what I hope as well

There are more than a few unanswered questions about Bush's time in the National Guard. There is no way they can hope to ignore or bury this after the smear they just tried on John Kerry. Where's your records George?! Prove you earned that medal!

[Connie_Corleone]

36. Kick!

:kick:

[Joanne98]

38. Congrats Walt......

Now to get it out there. It's too bad our national media blaster isn't ready yet. I forgot how to do google prison.....

[AmerDem]

42. You have done our country Proud Walt Star!

I wish there were an award we could put you in for! Long live Democracy!

:toast: :yourock:

[Mad As Hell]

51. Walt Starr rocks.

:yourock: Guess who I saw crossing the street in DC today? MAX CLELAND! We gave each other the thumbs up and then I got to shake his hand and thank him for what he was doing for our country. He looks ready for anything. Healthy as could be. Max Cleland rocks too.

[AmerDem]

69. Go Max!

:toast:

[Cha]

71. You must be Jazzed! Max is such a

Hero.. who got tarnished and is coming back Stronger!

I can't wait to see what Kerry has in mind for him in his Admin.

[DURHAM D]

44. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Will take the cable stations a

little while to run this - they will have to get their lying talking heads in-studio and all "liared up".

[tandot]

46. This is great.

:yourock:

[EarlG]

50. Sounds like a job for the new Media Blaster!

Excellent work Walt :thumbsup:

Media Blaster:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cu/cu.php?az=blaster

[Joanne98]

87. I just tried to use it and my e-mail got stuck in send

I didn't have bcc so I put it in to:

[RetroLounge]

54. Great job Walt!

I can see your own web site. The Starr Report! :D

Hope the media picks up on this.

We should send it to TDS also...

RL

[Walt Starr]

55. Folks, my wife has put up with me doing research every night all week

I'm now leaving the house and taking her out to dinner. We'll make sure we eat something with Heinz Ketchup on it.

I'll catch up on this thread later tonight.

[Willy Mugobeer]

61. Get used to it, Walt...

...once you sink your teeth in this story, there's no letting go...:yourock:

[Catherine Vincent]

86. Oh great! You had to be married! The good ones are always taken.

:-)

[Junkdrawer]

57. Has anyone toyed with this idea: Bush's discharge paperwork is phoney...

and backdated.

I've always thought the Alabama story was a ruse. My bet is Dubya's discharge was repaired in good ole Texas. Alabama is just to throw us off the real trail.

[Carni]

75. Yes

I personally think someone else's old papers were used and altered later before he ran for Gov of Texas (which would explain the weird boxes like marital staus that were censored on his discharge papers)

[Junkdrawer]

82. He went AWOL as a First Lt. in 1972.

He's photographed as a Second Lt. wearing an award that was issued in 1975.

And the certain conclusion is that he was photographed in 1969-1970 wearing a phony ribbon to inflate his importance?

That's the most charitable way of looking at it.

[Junkdrawer]

109. Walt: I posted a fuller version of the theory here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x676114

[Carni]

76. Yes

I personally think someone else's old papers were used and altered later before he ran for Gov of Texas (which would explain the weird boxes like marital staus that were censored on his discharge papers)

[ezekiel333]

90. Yep

Lots of weird stuff in his military paperwork that just doesn't add up, of course the same could be said for his DMV record, and indeed his life in general. Lots of fuzzy areas with simplistic explanations, again like the man himself.

[Leilani]

58. Congragulations on a wonderful job!!

{Don t get mad, get even} is a great saying!

And you put your energy to work in a terrific way!!

[snippy]

59. Awesome work. The White House probably will warn the media

not to go with this story, but the documentation is persuasive. I hope it at least generates another series of Bush lies. It would be hilarious to hear Bush himself try to explain this.

This reminds me of the question of Bush wearing Naval Aviator's wings when he attended the Carrier Costume Party. Does anyone know whether that was determined to be appropriate?

[tishaLA]

60. Great work, Walt!

[Tansy_Gold]

62. Walt, you rock with the best of 'em!

:yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock:




This is just so kewl!

The best part is that I am reading this thread and writing this reply while listening to John Kerry's 1971 Foreign Relations Committee testimony on C-SPAN.




Tansy Gold, proud to "know" Walt Starr

[Paradise]

63. Great investigative work, Walt!

Glad you're with 'Democratic Underground Citizens For Truth'!

[Fleshdancer]

64. Is Pitt in the house??? Certainly he could write up a good article

:)

[Tansy_Gold]

73. I think Walt can write his own

and do a damn fine job of it.

:D

[WilliamPitt]

184. Indeed

and I'll be thrilled to publish it.

[PA Democrat]

67. Great job Walt

Shame that our "liberal" media has forgotten how to do investigative reporting.

[Beetwasher]

68. Great Job Walt!

n/t

[Zhade]

74. Awesome work. Nommed for the homepage.

Enjoy your evening out, you've more than earned it.

Downright inspirational, you are!

[eleny]

77. Just used the dU Media Blaster

Thanks for all your work, Walt. And to DUers who worked on the Blaster.

[Renew Deal]

172. Me too

I hit all 50 states for TV and Daily News

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

78. i wonder why he's not wearing national defense ribbon?

that's a strange photo. when one gets a picture taken in uniform, the rank is usually clearly visible. in this picture, his rank is vague.

[Joanne98]

81. i wonder why he's not wearing the Chimperer's Gawd Ribbon?

[Tansy_Gold]

85. According to the discussion in Walt's original thread

boosh was never eligible for the National Defense Service Medal.

Regs require a certain amount of time OTHER THAN LIMITED TRAINING PERIODS to be served on active duty. boosh never served sufficient active duty time for NDSM.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

89. i got mine in boot camp in 1969

his records say he received one. makes one wonder if he's wearing his own uniform.

[Tansy_Gold]

93. According to the docs Walt posted at the beginning of this thread

the NDSM is only mentioned in the "military biography," not in any of the official military documents.

In the original thread, he explores this issue further -- that boosh did not have sufficient active duty time to qualify for NDSM, that it does not appear on his official records, and he is not wearing it in this photograph.

My hubby also received NDSM in boot camp. I suspect -- but have no official confirmation for this -- that based on the regs Walt posted yesterday, those who enlisted in active service would have received NDSM more or less as a matter of course; those who enlisted in reserves or NG would not have received NDSM until completion of appropriate active duty. But I could be wrong.

[PegDAC]

247. National Defense Service Medal

:dem: Minimum service time for the medal was three years. It's not given any more.

[Joanne98]

79. I did MSNBC shows and Margaret Cho

[yellowdawg]

80. Why should this surprise us?

. . . for 3½ years he has worn a presidency that he didn't earn.

YD

[Junkdrawer]

88. BTW: Great job Walt...

Even if I do think you're being charitable... ;)

[cynatnite]

91. Thank You, Walt!

This was great to come home to today!

Keep up the great work and enjoy the fame! My hat's off to you, pal!

:yourock:

Cyn:)

[Spazito]

92. Kick

:kick: for an AWESOME investigative job!

[TacticalPeek]

94. 2

cool

[in_cog_ni_to]

95. Excellent work, Walt!

I cannot wait to read this in the Chicago Trib! They BETTER run with it! Great Job!

:toast:

[HuskerDem]

96. SEND IT TO OBERMAN

This kind of thing seems right up his alley.

[michigandem2]

97. what about NYT???

[rob-ok-vin]

99. Great Job Walt

Youve worked long and hard on this and it has paid off very well.
Very good work.

[PurityOfEssence]

100. Tonight's Cowboy Movie: "HE WORE A YELLOW RIBBON"

Brock-brock, buck-uk, braaaak!

Miles Glorioso: the braggart warrior, a staple of ancient comedy. Commander Codpiece and the Chickenhawk squadron fly again!

[wicket]

103. kick!

[Doosh]

104. what happened to that unibrow?

[imax2268]

105. Hey Walt...

I posted it on Mike Malloy's forum...hope that's ok...

[jefferson_dem]

106. Kudos and Salutations from a DU Newbie...

Thanks for standing up for what's right! :thumbsup:

[Bozita]

107. Bill Maher? -- show's on Friday night

Terrific piece of investigative journalism, Walt.

Sincere thanks.

[Fleshdancer]

111. Bill Maher....great idea n/t

[Fleshdancer]

110. So when will all the one hit wonders show up in this thread???

I feel like laughing at them so I hope they show up soon and say something stupid like the photo was doctored or it's some sort of conspiracy. lol

[Doosh]

112. clearly we are all communists who hate America

:)

[Renew Deal]

113. I saw some earlier in the day.

They have been playing it very cool. This has made them nervous. They don't say enough to get banned. They just ask questions.

[Fleshdancer]

116. I saw them too! Pretty funny stuff.

It might take them a few days to get here though. They're probably trying to find the other thread. Poor things. :)

[Doohickie]

117. Okay, I'm a one-hit wonder (a newbie, anyway)...

...and I'll chip in my two cents:

This is not an impressive enough find to turn people away from Bush. People who like Bush will stick with him, and undecideds are not going to decide over a ribbon that maybe was incorrectly worn 30 years ago.

It's a nice little tidbit, but it isn't going to change the outcome of the election.

[Spazito]

123. This does two things....

points out bush's hypocrisy in supporting the Swifties attacks on Kerry's medals and it opens up the question, again, of his service, or rather, his lack of service. I think the media will check out Walt's research and, if accurate as I believe it is, will start doing something with it.

[Doohickie]

132. Is it in Kerry's best interest....

...to keep harping on the Swifties?

If this comes out it will look like Kerry is just trying to play catch-up. And besides, Bush is "officially" backing away from the Swifties (although he is doing so by criticizing all 527's). The Swifties got their shot in, but they are about done. They cannot buy advertising time during the last 60 days of the campaign. So in about a week, they go silent.

And when they do, it will look like it happened under Bush's influence to the common person. He condemned the 527's this week, and they disappear next week. People will say, "Ooh, he really changed that quick!" In the meantime, he got their use out of them.

I vote Democratic, but living among the enemy here in Texas, I've started to learn how the other side perceives things.

[Spazito]

137. Ahh, but this is not Kerry, this is a private citizen that has done an...

awesome investigative job on bush and HIS service. Re bush backing away, until he condemns the ads and wants them taken off the air, he has done NO backing away.

Those who HAVE earned their ribbons and medals will NOT take this lightly at all.

[Doohickie]

151. Ahhhh....

But Bush had "nothing" (wink, wink) to do with the Swifties. They are, of course, not related to the Bush campaign (wink, wink).

[Spazito]

160. LOL but you and I and 56% of the American public know different...

according to the latest poll and that's what counts re the Swifties. Walt had done great work and I suspect it has made some right wing people very nervous and that is good, so it should.

[Catherine Vincent]

146. This isn't about the swifties. It's about Bush's sorry ass.

[rocktivity]

148. As long as the Smear Boaters commercials run

Kerry has every reason to raise questions about Bush's military past. Aside from his AWOL/deserter issues, he's stated that he served in the Air Force when he was actually in the Air National Guard, and that he joined the Guard to avoid ducking bullets in Viet Nam. And let's not forget his smears against the military records of McCain and Cleland. This medal business is the ribbon that ties up a very unattractive package, because it speaks to his lack of character and his unfitness to serve as commander-in-chief. Besides, it will be a fun way to amuse ourselves during RNC Convention week!

:headbang:
rocknation

[cynatnite]

125. It's a matter of honor and honesty

Any member of the military should never wear anything they didn't rightfully earn.

It's completely dishonorable and dispicable for any person to do.

Others may not care, but I can guarantee you the military will. In fact, I promise you, it will matter to them.

Cyn:)

[Doohickie]

143. When has Bush ever been about Honor and Integrity (TM)?

He claims the high moral ground and gets away with it cuz he doesn't get blowjobs in the Oval Office, but if you look at the way he has handled himself all along*, he is despicable. But he keeps his manhood in his pants (or maybe Laura keeps it in a drawer in the nightstand), and that's all the God-fearin' Bible thumpers seem to care about.


*The Honor And Integrity of George Bush:

- Largest contributor to his campaign for Texas governor was Enron, a company he showed no oversight of during his tenure as governor, resulting in one of the biggest corporate collapses in history.

- Selected a VP candidate from the same state he is from (according to Cheney's Homestead Exemption on his Dallas home), which means that electoral voters from Texas should not have been able to vote for both (See Amendment XII of the Constitution).

- Did not ask his Florida Campaign Director (Katherine Hughes) to recuse herself during the Florida recount despite the blatant conflict of interest.

- Abused the 9/11 tragedy to direct the country into a war with Iraq, a war that was planned long before 9/11/01. In the process, squandered the good will of the international community, bringing our nation to near-outcast status.

- Need I even mention Halliburton contracts? Prisoner abuse?


The point being that after Clinton (whose Oval Office affair had no direct impact on the governance of the nation), the standard of Honor and Integrity for many people is whether a guy can keep his zipper up.

[JHB]

215. But his image to his faithful is "Mr. Honor and Integrity"

Sure, WE recognize he's a lying dirtbag, but how many people have you met who don't pay close attention to politics believed (or just absorbed) his "restore honor and integrity to the White House" line just because he said so and the media was too busy with Al Gore's "earth tones" to air the facts that would show otherwise.

This is no magic arrow to slay the dragon, but it's ammo. There are still too many people out there who will still give Bush the benefit of the doubt unless there's an in-your-face personal example, like Clinton's finger-wagging denial about Lewinsky. All those other things are filtered through other people and lets them deny it about Bush, but here he's just sitting there, plain as day, wearing a ribbon he didn't earn -- and you might be surprised by how many people get ticked off when someone tries to puff up their bio by claiming some unearned honors (it's part of what the Not-so-SwiftBoat Liars for Bush are trying to claim Kerry did).

One drip is not a flood, but a steady stream of them can wear down the highest mountain.

[Texas_Dem]

126. It is all in the timing

and how Bush handles the revelation. (which is almost guaranteed to be handled poorly). Also, once that door opens who knows what else falls out of the closet.

THAT will affect voters.

[sub.theory]

129. Fine, that's your take...

You've had your say and you're on the record thinking that this is all no big deal. I would totally disagree. This is bad news for the Bush camp. They've been screaming for the last two weeks that John Kerry didn't deserve medals that were fully documented AND supported by several eye witnesses. Now Bush is caught wearing a ribbon for which no documentation exists. You don't think that's a little, I dunno, hypocritical? The only way Bush can prove he deserves this award is if he releases his full military records, which might prove highly embarrassing if it turns out he never bothered to finish his term of service in the TANG. Nope, this is bad, bad news for Bush. It opens up plenty of questions and once again brings his character into question - not to mention his fitness to be the man who orders other servicemen and women into combat.

Walt's already contacted serveral high profile news organizations and they all seem interested in his work. Why don't you just wait and see what happens before shooting your mouth off anymore?

[Doohickie]

175. Yes, I've had my say....

"It opens up plenty of questions and once again brings his character into question"

His character has always been in question; see my Post 143 above. For some reason, none of that matters as long as there's no White House Nookie.

"Why don't you just wait and see what happens before shooting your mouth off anymore?"

Because, frankly, what fun would a discussion group be without a villain???

:evilgrin:

Besides, I think there's been a whole lot of shooting off of mouths from Walt's supporters. I think their glee is overexuberant at this point, even if this does hit the presses later. I'm saving my glee for Election Day when Bush goes down in flames!

[sub.theory]

197. I think you're missing the point

"His character has always been in question; see my Post 143 above. For some reason, none of that matters as long as there's no White House Nookie."

Look, I don't think anyone here believes this is some sort of silver bullet, but make no mistake, it *is* ammo. This just shines the spotlight back on Bush's undeniable character flaws. It reinforces everything that's been said about him: he's a liar, he's a cheater, and he can't be trusted. Voters know this. You're kidding yourself if you don't think Bush has been taking a beating on credibility and trust (without a sex scandal in sight). Reference here. The American voter is alot smarter than you given him and her credit for. Who's really to blame here is the media, but as Walt Starr has already made known that doesn't seem to be an issue this time, as several organizations have expressed interest. But, you're right - time will tell.

"Besides, I think there's been a whole lot of shooting off of mouths from Walt's supporters. I think their glee is overexuberant at this point, even if this does hit the presses later. I'm saving my glee for Election Day when Bush goes down in flames!"

Well, can you blame them? It's been a miserable past two weeks and John Kerry and the whole Democratic Party have just survived a furious smear campaign. Walt Starr took it upon himself to look into something that no one else has, and he came up with some great findings. He deserves to be proud of himself and DU deserves a little celebration.

"Because, frankly, what fun would a discussion group be without a villain???"

Taking an unpopular stance is all fine and good, but I do hope you aren't just being a contrarian.

[Doohickie]

251. No, I don't think I'm just being a contrarian.

It's just that the tone of some people sounds like they are treating this like the "silver bullet". You're right, it is ammunition, but it's not enough to sink Bush. There have been many worse revelations that he has rode out.

As for how smart the American voter is, I hope you're right. But living deep ina heart Texas, I can only go by what I see around me.

I have a different perspective on the Swift Boat thing; you mention a "miserable two weeks" and I see Kerry gaining ground in battleground states, even as measured on right-wing sites.

The critical thing is whether Bush will get any bounce from the convention. If he comes out flat, stick a fork in 'im cuz he's done.

[Walt Starr]

130. You could always test the theory that this is no big deal

Get ahold of a POW medal, put it on, and walk into a room full of uniformed servicemen. When they ask you about it (and they will) tell them you didn't earn it, but you thought it was pretty so you decided you would wear it.

The Air Force Outstanding Unit Award is always placed higher than the POW Medal in the Pyramid of Honor. There is more prestige associated with the AFOUA than the POW Medal.

Think about it.

[npincus]

157. Issue your own press release(?)

Walt, I've got an idea... don't know if it's screwy, BUT, if it looks like the media is not picking up your story (ideally it should come out before or during the GOP convention) then how about issuing your own press release? Write it up yourself (it's cheaper), then use a press release service- I used a good one several years ago when I launched a (now defunct) e-business; their URL is http://www.ereleases.com. It's not so cheap, unfortunately. Maybe if they hate Bush, they'll donate their services.

[eleny]

131. You can get pecked to death by ducks, too

[molly]

136. Molehiles become mountains depending on the weather

Rome was not built in a day.

[moondust]

139. It's another piece of the character mosaic.

In the military I knew a couple of this type who would wear ribbons they were not authorized to wear. They were complete losers who habitually told preposterous lies trying to impress people. Caricatures at best.

He's gotta do something when all he's got is name recognition.

[gulliver]

141. Depends on whether Bush is asked about it.

If so, it will be big. People remember Admiral Boorda committing suicide over it. IIRC, Michael Isikoff of Newsweek is the one who hounded Boorda about wearing unearned awards until Boorda finally committed suicide in disgrace. If Bush is asked about it, it will be a story, whether he confirms it or denies it.

This is great work by Walt Starr!

Is Lloyd Bentsen III a Democrat? According to most stories on Bush's service, Bentsen was promoted to 1st Lt. at the same time as Bush. They were in the same champagne unit. They would have the same unit award I would think.

I googled on it for a while but couldn't find any pictures of Bentsen in uniform.

[TacticalPeek]

158. For those who may not be familiar with Admiral Boorda:

At the White House, President Clinton praised Boorda, the first enlisted sailor in the history of the Navy to rise to its top position, as a man of "extraordinary energy, dedication and good humor."

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/borda.htm

[Doohickie]

161. I actually thought about that too...

...it might be better for Kerry if this whole issue lies dormant until the debates, and when Bush questions Kerry's Purple Hearts, Kerry can have a copy of the picture handy and ask him whether or not he actually earned all of his medals.

It could still be contained by damage control, however, if it turns out the unit received the award prior to Bush being there and he can claim he was told to wear it by a superior officer.

Come on, with the stuff Bush has already dealt with and managed to spin to his advantage, do you really think he couldn't handler this? The slimeball is more slippery than we give him credit for.

[AVID]

152. I agreee

This - like Iraq, Florida, Plame, Haliburton, Jobs, MedicareRx lie, Florida, prison torture, proven smears, extreme judges, unemployment, lies, lies, lies - will be ignored by media, blinded by religous right ideology, and sink like Kerry in Oct. This Admin will do ANYTHING to win . . . and win they will. I'm sad, but I believe it.

[molly]

133. Good JOB!!

I am watching the reply of Hardball and it looks like they are going down-hard. Keep up the GREAT work!

[markses]

138. My Questions: If yer gonna wear a fake ribbon, why an AFOUA, and where'd

he get it?

I don't really follow this, prolly from lack of knowledge. Why would he put that particular ribbon on for that photo? And where do ya get the ribbons?

Could it be a case of "I hafta go take a picture: Gimme another ribbon so my uniform looks better!"

Call me ignant.

[Walt Starr]

140. You can get any ribbon or medal you want

Ever hear of Military Surplus stores?

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

149. I was jeeest about to say that

in fact, I'm sure my husband's Purple Heart has been snatched up in a surplus store somewhere, since a medic took it off his hospital gown while he was too drugged up on meds to be able to even find the buzzer when the guy took off with it.

[Beetwasher]

154. "I hafta go take a picture: Gimme another ribbon..."

Actually, yeah, why not? Makes sense to me. I wonder if poppy had one of these ribbons that he gave to his idiot son for the pic, just so it looked better and he had more ribbons. He's an entitled little shit, what the hell does he care if he wears a ribbon he didn't earn?

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

163. Hmmmm

did poppy ever get this ribbon???

[girl gone mad]

170. My thinking is..

since the 147th earned an AFOUA in 1967 (iirc), Bush may have "borrowed" one from someone else in his unit, someone who had actually been around when they earned it.

[juajen]

194. Perhaps to fool his father, who had gone to a lot of trouble

pulling strings and all, to get him in the tang. Where do most of these photos go? To mommy, daddy, girlfriends, etc. Maybe that's why it ended up in the GHWB's library.

[Catherine Vincent]

150. LOL! Get a load of this response from a bushie:

To: Old Sarge
Let's hope so although I am sure it was photo shopped.
I am really worried about this. The leftists media will have a field day with this.--167 posted on 08/26/2004 5:11:31 PM PDT by Limbaudda

-------------

Good!

[Renew Deal]

153. Where did you see this?

I didn't know the Bush Sr. Library was into photoshop.

[Catherine Vincent]

155. the freakrepublic website.

[Renew Deal]

162. Those losers have picked up on this?

lol

[Catherine Vincent]

166. Yes, they lurk here all the time and admit it.

Give me a second, I'll find the link that was posted on an earlier thread by Walt.

[Renew Deal]

168. Here is the freakrepublik thread

What's up losers? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1199970/posts

[Catherine Vincent]

171. Oh, you found it.

I'm going to bed now. Can't wait until tomorrow!

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

176. You know what's great about reading that thread?

I do need a shower now, but besides that, you can read what they say about things to check out then check them out. They are helping!

thanks guys!!!

Or whatever you are!

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

156. I'm wondering about

the repurcussions if one were caught wearing a medal one didn't earn.

All I know of are Army regs, and the one to tell me about this is

AR 672-5-1.

I've had a hell of a time finding that online, though. Anyone?

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

164. Also

could we dig further? Did poppy ever get this medal???

[grasswire]

174. the list of poppy's medals is easily found...

...through google. I was looking at them the other night. I don't have time to look right now, but you can easily find them. :-)

[Doohickie]

178. So what does it say?????

I'm guessing there is no penalty for someone being discovered to have worn a ribbon they didn't earn 30 years after they wore it....

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

181. No

I'm not thinking of a retroactive punishment, LOL!

But if you can find what the consequences were, you can point to how serious it was.

[Doohickie]

196. Oh, now I get your drift...

[City Lights]

188. Maybe no penatly, but definitely no honor.

Not then. Not now.

[Career Prole]

244. From the evidence I've seen

he should be brought up on a charge of "Impersonating an Officer".

[brainshrub]

165. Great job!

:yourock:

This will hit the mainstream like a bombshell. The SBVFT have forced the issue of medals into the public consciousness, and it's about to backfire badly for the BFEE.

[JonathanS]

177. AF Instruction 36-2803 NOT APPLICABLE

Air Force Instructions were not used until the 1990's when AF Instruction 36-2803 replaced AFR 35-10 (Air Force Regulation 35-10) which contained the governing rules when Bush served. AFR 35-10 was based upon AR 35-10 (the corresponding Army Regulation).

In the late 1970's in both the New York Air National Guard (105th Communications Flight) and the Texas Air National Guard (254th Combat Communications Flight), I was told to wear the unit's Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA).

So even if the regulation didn't specifically authorize it, the old Army custom was still in practice.

Guess what? I just checked my records and NONE of my unit awards are listed, only the individual ones!

Also, to see whether a unit award is authorized you have to check, not just the unit that someone was assigned to, but also its parent unit. For example, when I was in the 254th Combat Communications Flight, the 254th Combat Communications Group won the AFOUA. The award specified that it applied to the subordinate units also.

[Name removed]

179. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

182. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Doohickie]

180. So... you're saying

That wearing the unit award was commonly done during that time frame?

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

183. This unit award wasn't given until 1975, though

that picture could NOT have been taken of him in 1975, he was two years out of ANG at that point.

[Renew Deal]

185. That's the kicker

It doesn't matter what undocumented custom there is. The unit didn't even earn that ribbon until after the picture was taken.

[JonathanS]

189. Picture

His boss would see the picture every six months when reviewing his records for performance reviews. If it wasn't right he would have been told to get another picure taken.

[Renew Deal]

191. How do you know that?

So are you saying that the mistake was missed for the next 6 years of his military "career" and also no one else caught it because no one was following procedure? Please explain

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

192. Uh, no

First of all, I doubt he would have simply been told to get another picture taken. At the very LEAST he'd have a new asshole chewed for him.

Secondly you actually think those guys sit there and review the PICTURE?

It is to laugh.

[TacticalPeek]

193. Really?

I think any knowledgeable reviewer of aWol's available records would conclude that his service was checkered with the unroutine, and his bosses - his bosses, well, a couple are no longer with us, one does not recall ever seeing him, and, well, you get the drift. His bosses' performance was more shameful than Shrub's, if you think about it.

And that pic is not like any I ever saw in a 201 file, if that's the record reviewing you mean.

[Tansy_Gold]

199. How do we know this is a picture his "bosses" would even

see?

Is there anything that indicates it's an "official" TANG photograph for identification purposes that would be in his file? I'm asking, because I don't know. I was under the impression it was something less official, as it was what Poppy has on display.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

186. You live in Ft. Worth, huh?

I am in the Dallas area, but on the west side (burbs) so close to Ft. Worth. I enjoy FW far more than Dallas, even though I was born in Dallas.

[Doohickie]

195. Don't take it personally, but

I subscribe to what it says on the back of the staff t-shirts at Railhead BBQ in Fort Worth:

"LIFE'S TOO SHORT TO LIVE IN DALLAS"

:P

[girl gone mad]

198. Do you have any proof that..

AFI 36-2803 (The Air Force Awards and Decorations Program) replaced AFR 35-10?

I can only find referrences to AFI 36-2903 (Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel) replacing AFR 35-10 (Air Force Dress Code Regulation).

I'm having a hard time understanding why the Air Force would relplace a Dress Code Regulations manual with an Awards and Decorations manual.

[girl gone mad]

200. This Air Force Publication..

does not seem to support your claims.

It says 36-2903 replaced 35-10.

http://www.aetc.randolph.af.mil/im/pub/afpdl/publications/aetcpubs/aetcind/aetcind2.pdf

[Walt Starr]

217. When in doubt, ask the AFPC. Here's their answer

Walter Starr, below is your initial request, and resolution. If the resolution is not sufficient please e-mail us at mailto:[email protected] or the POC below. Include your ticket number. You can also submit an update to your original request by logging into https://webcolab.afpc.randolph.af.mil/Scripts/rightnowdb.cfg/php.exe/enduser/home.php

Problem : Was the AFOUA Authorized for temporary wear?
Problem Details : Was the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award ever authorized for temporary wear under AR 35-10 during the late 1960's to mid 1970's?

Resolution : The AFOUA is not a temporary award.
Resolution Details :
Contact Center Agent: : Ms. Jacqueline Holland
Agents Email Address: : mailto:[email protected]
Agents Phone Number: : Toll Free 1-800-616-3775; or DSN 665-5000

[Walt Starr]

218. And now, with headers

X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via 206.190.38.180; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 06:19:54 -0700
X-Originating-IP: <131.44.121.170>
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from 131.44.121.170 (EHLO rnd-sf-03.randolph.af.mil) (131.44.121.170) by mta157.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 06:19:53 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: "AFPC/DPSTC Call Center" <[email protected]> Add to Address Book
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject: AFPC Contact Center Ticket # 040827-000014 (CIVILIAN CALL CENTER ISSUES) has been closed
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:19:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C48C38.880CE79B"
Content-Length: 1208


Walter Starr, below is your initial request, and resolution. If the resolution is not sufficient please e-mail us at mailto:[email protected] or the POC below. Include your ticket number. You can also submit an update to your original request by logging into https://webcolab.afpc.randolph.af.mil/Scripts/rightnowdb.cfg/php.exe/enduser/home.php

Problem : Was the AFOUA Authorized for temporary wear?
Problem Details : Was the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award ever authorized for temporary wear under AR 35-10 during the late 1960's to mid 1970's?

Resolution : The AFOUA is not a temporary award.
Resolution Details :
Contact Center Agent: : Ms. Jacqueline Holland
Agents Email Address: : mailto:[email protected]
Agents Phone Number: : Toll Free 1-800-616-3775; or DSN 665-5000

[grasswire]

201. check your private mail, Walt (eom)

[fob]

202. First of all Walt, I'm glad you're on our side, what a tenacious

effort you have put forth here. I think I've read over 600 posts on your threads so far! I have one question for you when you get a chance to come back to this.

In earlier threads there were references to the 147th unit winning the AFOUA award 3 times with the first date given in 1966 and the 3rd in 1973 (I think), and now you have posted confirmation of only 1 instance of the award. A quick clean up of the details of this part of the work is the only gray area I see.

FOB

[Walt Starr]

204. Those were anecdotal from web sites

The authority on the matter is the Air Force History Support Organization.

[Must_B_Free]

203. I guess I'm the only one who thinks this is dumb?

I despise Bush as much as the next guy, but this notion is almost as dumb as the idea that Kerry "had a plan" that included self inflicted injuries so he could "get out early and run for president" 35 years later...

Bush was just a dumb young lad (actually he probably had less brain damage then) posing for a formal photo. My guess is he had on whatever little trinkets they gave you then to make you feel like your indoctrination was worth it.

If we're really desperate enough to be convinced that Bush went through the trouble to get some pins he didn't deserve to make himself look "war-ier" in this photo, then we really are in deep shit.

The notion of Bush as a poser is an attractive one, but he wouldn't have even had the plan to be a phony then. remember - all he cared about at that time was booze, coke and pussy, so much so to go AWOL to enjoy his self admitted hedonistic lifestyle.

Do you really think he was looking for a couple extra ribbons to bolster his presidential image 35 years later?

Sorry, does not compute.

[hexola]

205. Not the only one...

He doesn't really have a concrete date for the photo...

A lot of this conjecture is based on this statement...

The above photograph had to have been taken some time between his qualifying as a pilot in 1969 and his promotion to First Lieutenant on November 7, 1970.

Had to be - ? He needs to date this photo better.

I think the photo looks later - closer to Bush discharge date maybe even after. Maybe Bush left before the photos - then got one taken later...

Bush had short hair in another photo...



When is this on from...? Are there haircut regulations?

[Walt Starr]

212. That photograph would have been taken on September 4, 1968

That was the date of his commmission.

[hexola]

220. And you know this how?

Is this part of the induction process? Like an official photo...

Are there similar photos of other folks in Bush's Unit...?

[Walt Starr]

223. JEEZ! Look at what's going on in the damn thing!

George H.W. Bush is pinning lieutenant bars on him for criminies sake! He was commissioned on September 4, 1968. That photograph is far easier to date than the first.

In the first, he is wearing pilot's wings. George W. Bush became a qualified pilot effective on November 26, 1969 according to orders included in this document packet:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/11-2_2004_Personnel_File.pdf

Assuming Bush was at least legitimately wearing his pilot's wings, the photograph would have been taken after earning the wings. The photograph lists Mr. Bush as a Second Lieutenant (2LT). Assuming he didn't demote himself for the photograph, that means the photograph was taken prior to November 7, 1970.

So we have a narrow window where the photograph was taken. If we assume he would have no qualms about wearing pilot's wings when he had not earned them, then the window broadens back to September 4, 1968. Sine we see his hair was much shorter in the other picture where he had his lieutenant bars pinned on jhis should, we have to push it up a few weeks at least.

[inchhigh]

216. Could he have continued to wear his pilot wings even after

missing the flight physical?

[John_H]

219. What a shock...helola and Must-B-Free posting in the same thread

agreeing with eachother, and trying to cast doubt on a story that reflect poorly on the military in some way. Do a search on Abu Gharib and hexola for example, for example.

[hexola]

221. Here they come - the FreepU'ers

Sorry - it's like 200 "Atta Boy Walt..." comments - and no thought...shit like that worrys me.

It's clear in his original post that he had not established the date of the photo in question...

[hexola]

222. I'm trying to increase the varacity of Walt's claims...

The date and origin of the photo doesnt seem to much to ask...

[Spazito]

224. It seems to me that Walt has provided very good evidence of...

the time frame of the photo in question:



You will note the "Bush, George W., 2nd Lt" located at the bottom of the photo which was provided by the bush administration. I would assume that if they had had a problem with the tag on the bottom they would not have had that photo included in their release.

The above photograph had to have been taken some time between his qualifying as a pilot in 1969 and his promotion to First Lieutenant on November 7, 1970.

At no time from 1969 to Nov 7, 1970 was his unit awarded the ribbon in question that he is photographed wearing.

[hexola]

228. Is there anything on his uniform that identifies his rank?

And is this an official photo - or a personal one...????

[Walt Starr]

226. The photograph was taken between November 26, 1969 and November 7, 1970

Assuming he wore legitimate pilot's wings and he didn't demote himself to second lieutenant for the photograph.

[hexola]

229. Any clues to the origins of the photo...beyond the internet...?

Was this an official photo...or a personal one...???

[Walt Starr]

231. See post 230

n/t

[Walt Starr]

230. The origin of the photograph is the George H.W. Bush presidential library

web site.

[hexola]

232. Yes I know that -

But do you know anything beyond that?

Official photo - Does the TANG take "official photos"

Personal photo...?

If it's some photo taken for personal family reasons...then I don't think he has to be as accountable...He might have gotten it taken after he was discharged just so HW could have something for the mantle...?

[Spazito]

235. Given that bush reached the level of 1st lieutenant....

which is higher than 2nd lieutenant, why would he pose for a picture later and have the 2nd lt tag added, therefore demoting himself lower than when he was discharged? That makes no sense.

[hexola]

236. When was that "2nd Lt" put on the photo/fax - ?

People make mistakes all the time...

Are those markings part of a photo sorting/ID system? Or did some dope from W's team screw up...

[Spazito]

238. Seeing as the photo with tag came from a release by the bush...

admin, you might want to send them an e-mail to ask.

[Walt Starr]

241. Bush released it in a packet in April of this year

You might want to ask Bush.

[Walt Starr]

239. For the sake of argument, let's assume Bush was willing to do that

and to wear pilot's wings he had not yet earned. Hell, let's even assume he wouldn't be above posing as an officer and wearing a Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon he had not earned. That puts the date of this photograph somewhere between May 27, 1968 when he first joined the Air Guard as an airman and November 21, 1974 when he was released from ARPC.

Assuming the ribbon was awarded the first day possible that it could have been awarded, this still puts the photograph as being taken before the award because the very first day the award could have possibly been given is October 1, 1975.

[Tansy_Gold]

249. It's

V E R A C I T Y

fyi

[TacticalPeek]

207. It's not the plan, it's the man.

Do you really think he was looking for a couple extra ribbons to bolster his presidential image 35 years later?


No, of course not. Rather, this is a character issue, as they say.

And I can understand how this could seem like trivia over trinkets to some people, but be assured it ain't trivia. For current military and veterans, it is an easily understood case of a callow cheat. This is a group we need to lean more back our way, after perhaps losing some ground during the boat flap.

Computes fine to me, but we need to see the final output.

[Kadie]

234. Well, I think it is a great story, if only because

of all the hub-bub the republicans gave Kerry over his ribbons.

Great story Walt. Good job.

[Pot Kettle Black]

210. Perhaps this is the campaign commercial

This states explicitly that the units received the Air force Outstanding Unit Award for the time period from October 1, 1973 to September 30, 1975. George W. Bush’s discharge date from the 111th FIS and the 147th FIG was October 1, 1973. Clearly, these units did not receive an award of the AFOUA until after George W. Bush had been discharged, and well after the date the photograph in question was taken.

Here's how I see the ad:
<Fade in>
(Eerie sinister music)
On October 1, 1973, George W. Bush was discharged from the Texas Air National Guard's 111th FTS and 147th FIG.

Freed from second Lieutenant Bush, the unit would go on to win the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award. The Award was cited for the period October 1, 1973 to Sept 30th, 1975.

Clearly, the unit became outstanding through the subtraction of George W. Bush.

Can the nation expect a smaller bounce by bouncing George W. Bush?
(cue nice guy music)
Kerry Edwards, the Johns of Justice
<fade out>

Man, I just love that the day Bush leaves, the unit he was assigned to goes on to two years of distinction, starting that day. Clearly, the first step to improvement is getting rid of Bush.

[Spazito]

237. With all the questions and alternate theories put out....

not ONE has been able to counter Walt's research which shows, to me, that his research can withstand extensive scrutiny and still hold up! WTG, Walt!

[TheRovingGourmet]

240. Good pictures of medals here:

http://www.agd.state.tx.us/stateguard/air/state_awards.asp
http://www.agd.state.tx.us/stateguard/air/federal_awards.asp

[whalerider55]

242. good work and a little help

walt...

bravo. terrific work. let's push for crossover into the "mainstream" "media".

and a little help out nthere.

i've been working on a theory about "W- the Lost Guard Months". Although i haven't had time to google it, is there anyone out there who can link me to information about W. "volunteering" at a day care center in the Houston area, or Texas in the early 70's...

just a hunch; wanna see how the dates match up.

whalerider55

[Memekiller]

243. Keep it simple...

If you want to get this to fly in the media, you have to boil this story down to its sound bite: Bush poses for picture wearing medals his unit didn't earn until after he was discharged. Then let them get into the details.

[mccormack98]

245. Great work, Walt. How about a DU Press Release?

Why not release the story to the wires ourselves? Costs about $100.

Bill

[Julian English]

246. DoJ fighting release fo further Guard Records:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38452-2004Aug27.html>Justice Dept. Rebuffs Press Request for More Bush Guard Records

The Justice Department has told the Associated Press that the government does not possess any records that would shed further light on the mysteries of President Bush's Vietnam-era National Guard service, beyond those that have already been made public, a lawyer for the news agency said yesterday.

The Associated Press filed a lawsuit two months ago, demanding access to a microfilm copy of President Bush's entire Texas Air National Guard personnel record from an archive in Austin.

(SNIP)

In the meantime, amateur researchers are combing the public records as well, and their findings are burning up certain corners of the blogosphere. Philadelphia caterer Paul Lukasiak, for instance, believes he has unraveled the story of Bush's attempt to transfer himself to Alabama, and can prove that Bush never made up his missed training days.

[Walt Starr]

248. I've seen some questioning of what exactly the ribbons are on other sites

So, just to demonstrate I've accurately idenitfied the ribbons, here they are...

First, the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award:



Then the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon:



And finally for grins, the second award listed in his bio, the National Defense Service Medal:



Now, I'll convert to Black and White:



and, VOILA!

[TheRovingGourmet]

250. Did you check them against the site I posted?

[troubleinwinter]

252. ??? yer kiddin me... he claimes NDSM

Really??? He claims it in his bio, but has no right to it???? Where can I see this? Geez, can I claim to have a PHD and a Nobel Peace Prize?

[troubleinwinter]

254. I get the AFOUA, but don't get the Nat'l Defense Award?

Can somebody clue me on the Nat'l Defense? Claimed in bio, but not earned? What is the source of the bio?? Please, sorry, thanks!

[American liberal]

253. Hi Walt--First, congrats on your great research. I read the original...

thread, then this one, then the one about a high-profile journalist taling to you last night about your research. It's been quite interesting.

Excuse me for butting in, but, WHAT HAPPENED! Who interviewed you? Is the story going mainstream? Did I miss a thread or a post that answers these questions?

I am nosy by nature and always want to know what's going on. So, PLEASE clue me in. :bounce: please? :P

[JohnDoe1]

255. Daily Show

Contact them. Here's the internship hiring division fax number. Maybe something can get forwarded around the office.

212-468-1890

[PfcHammer]

256. ** BUSH MEDAL STORY FLYER **

Spread this story far & wide !

http://s93118771.onlinehome.us/DU/GWBAward.pdf

[American liberal]

257. I have to object to the flyer

I know your heart's in the right place, KleverKittie, and I have a lot of respect for the time Walt's spent researching what could prove to be VERY embarrassing to the shrub, BUT...

any journalist worth her (or his) salt knows that our code of ethics introduced by the Society of Professional Journalists calls for objectivity. What's missing from this potentially outstanding story is the other side's version. In the spirit of good journalism, somebody from Bush's camp has to be contacted. Even if it's only to add to the story "no comment" or "Bush representatives could not be reached for comment," or "repeated attempts to contact Bush went unanswered." Otherwise, spreading that flyer far and wide is no better than all the crap hurled at us from the other side.

Please don't misunderstand. I have a lot of respect for you, Walt, Skinner, and all the other DUers sniffing around to expose and report the truth. The potential of Internet communication among the left has barely scratched the surface. Don't ruin the medium or spoil Walt's good work by jumping the gun before all the facts have been collected.

We are smarter and all deserve better. Thanks for letting me share my 2 cents. :)

Peace,
AL

[troubleinwinter]

258. I agree with A L. A really good looking start, for sure...

And I appreciate having something concise to send around to folks.

To ME, the photo with the notation of 2 Lt. is more compelling, for those who have not read this whole thing. That clairfies some stuff right in the photo.

[Walt Starr]

259. UPDATE with additional information here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x681285