>Subject: Re: "has not been observed"
>From: "Bob Coe"
>Date: 9/6/2004 7:39 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <OE__c.18675$ni.10657@okepread01>
>
>"Transition Zone" > wrote
>> Fred J. McCall > wrote
>>> "Paul Ely" > wrote:
>>>
>>> :How will you fill when 60 Minutes runs the interview with the
>>> :officer who was intimidated by Bush41 to get Bush43 in the Texas ANG?
>>>
>>> I, for one, will "fill"[sic] pretty damned good, since pretty much
>>> everyone involved has said that this supposed event never happened.
>>>
>>> When are you people going to stop believing bull**** from Michael
>>> Moore and actually look at the facts yourselves?
>>
>> Really ?? Then why did Bush's commanders utter this statement about his
>> attendance ??
>>
>> "[He] has not been observed".
>
>Let's say you're right? What then? Kerry still can't get elected. He has
>no
>history of doing anything the last 40 years that count as productive.


Y'mean he never attacked a nation wthout cause and got men killed in the
process?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"ArtKramr" > wrote
>>
>>Let's say you're right? What then? Kerry still can't get elected. He has
>>no history of doing anything the last 40 years that count as productive.
>
> Y'mean he never attacked a nation wthout cause and got men killed in the
> process?

Right. He says he voted for it, but then he also says he voted against
it. He gets paid for being a Senator, and never shows up for work.

"ArtKramr" > wrote in message
...

>
> Y'mean he never attacked a nation wthout cause and got men killed in the
> process?
>

Hmm.

Who said the following on 8th October 2002

"I feel that this is a war that must be fought. We don't want to make the
same
mistake with Saddam that we made with Hitler in the early years. But it
gives
me a deep feeling of sadness knowing that war is coming. My heart is heavy."

Hint - it was YOU

Keith





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On 7 Sep 2004 15:43:13 -0000,
(Agamemnon) wrote:

>In article >
(Typhoon502) wrote:
>>
>> (Transition Zone) wrote in message
>...
>>
>> > Really ?? Then why did Bush's commanders utter this
>statement about his attendance ??
>> >
>> > "[He] has not been observed".
>>
>> That's not equivalent to "absent" or "AWOL", though. I know
>I've had days at work where my boss never sees me. That statement can't
>> qualify as proof of GWB not serving his duty.
>
>Spin 'til you're dizzy -- that's just exactly what it means.
>
>In the military, when a person's rating officer does not observe
>him, it means that that person never showed up.

Sorry, but lack of military experience is showing here. Performance
reports are generated for a number of reasons, usually periodic (at
least one per year) or a change of command. They are done if a minimum
time has elapsed and are required, even in unusual circumstances.

When an individual assigned to a supervisor is in a detached
operation--such as an extended temporary duty assignment or possibly a
school/training post--then the individual in the chain of command who
is responsible for completing the report simply enters, "not
observed."

Sometimes it is the ratee that isn't observed and sometimes it is the
rater that is not in a position to observe. Either way it is routine
and doesn't indicated any AWOL condition.
>
>Absent any orders authorizing such absence (orders which haven't
>been found), that means the person is Abdent WithOut Leave.

Here's a bit of militarese for you: "Exigencies of the service, having
been such as to preclude the issuance of competent written orders in
advance, the verbal orders of the commander are hereby confirmed."

What does that mean? It means that I went away for a weekend
cross-country in an AF airplane without orders (other than a flight
order), so when it comes time to pay me per diem for my expenses, an
official order is issued much later. Was I AWOL? Absolutely not.
>
>All of which would be of little importance if it weren't for the
>fact that the shirker in question is trying to denigrate the
>military service of a decorated combat veteran for political
>advantage.

No, no, no. What most of us are trying to do is point out the
inconsistencies of the war resister who know wants to wrap himself in
the flag of heroism. Either position can be respected, but both
simultaneously cannot be reconciled.
>
>
>He's done it to John McCain and Max Cleland, too.

Sorry, no. Both of those individuals were respected--McCain for his
heroism and Cleland for his physical loss (non-combat). Both were
highlighted for their political positions which were inconsistent with
their campaign platforms. It's called political campaigning.
>
>George 'WMD' Bush is a despicable piece of human excrement.

Your opinion is, of course, yours. But, you've not done much in terms
of supporting it with fact.
>
>And even that isn't as bad as the fact that he presided over the
>largest loss of life to terrorists on US soil because he 'wasn't
>interested in bin Laden and didn't want to hear about him',

(That would have been Clinton in '96)

>declared that bin Laden 'isn't my priority' even after he
>struck,

(That would have been the WTC attack in '92)

> alienated all of America's potential allies

(That would be France and Germany?)

>when he
>invaded a country in a fit of pique based on a series of clumsy
>lies,

(That would have been based on the same intelligence accepted by
Kerry, Blair, the UN, et. al.?)

> destroyed the US economy by turning a trillion dollar
>surplus into a trillion dollar deficit,

(That would be if 9/11 hadn't had a significant and presidentially
uncontrollable impact on the economy. Today, inflation is lower than
Clinton's best year, mortgage rates are lower than Clinton's best
year, unemployment is lower than during Clinton's "full employment"
best year, and the Dow is almost back to where it was before 9/11.)

>and generally screwing
>the pooch with everything he's ever tried.

Like tax cuts, Afghanistan, the economy, defeat of Sadaam....
>
>I cannot imagine that there's anyone stupid enough to actually
>vote for him.

Right now more than 11% points higher than your candidate--it seems
that an agenda is worth more to the American voter than a garbled and
arguably traitorous history.




Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
"Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights"
Both from Smithsonian Books
***www.thunderchief.org

>From: (Agamemnon)
>Date: 9/7/2004 10:43 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>In article >
(Typhoon502) wrote:
>>
>> (Transition Zone) wrote in message
>...
>>
>> > Really ?? Then why did Bush's commanders utter this
>statement about his
>> > attendance ??
>> >
>> > "[He] has not been observed".
>>
>> That's not equivalent to "absent" or "AWOL", though. I know
>I've had
>> days at work where my boss never sees me. That statement can't
>> qualify as proof of GWB not serving his duty.
>
>Spin 'til you're dizzy -- that's just exactly what it means.
>
>In the military, when a person's rating officer does not observe
>him, it means that that person never showed up.

Which proves you never spent a day in the military. "Not observed" is a
statement used in reports, it is not the same as AWOL. It simply means the
reporter/rater hadn't observed the ratee. If he had been AWOL the report would
have said so.

I'll simplify this for you: AWOL is a legal definition IAW the UCMJ. If he was
AWOL and such was documented in any official report there would also exist
documentation of charges. The MCM describes procedures for taking action.

The UCMJ is available online at many sites. The MCM may be too.

Since you have no military experience:
MCM = manual for courtsmartial,
UCMJ = uniform code of military justice.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Ian MacLure wrote:
> "Paolo Pizzi" > wrote in
> om:
>
>> Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>
>>> Not everyone on Usenet is American you know.
>>
>> George W. Bush (sadly) is.
>
> Pizza, fortunately isn't.

Wrong, asshole.

Ian MacLure wrote:

> Yeh, Bush isn't Superman you know.

No, he scored 25%, pretty much like a trained monkey.
Would you hire someone who scores 25% if your money
depended on him?

>From: "Paolo Pizzi"
>Date: 9/7/2004 11:57 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Ian MacLure wrote:
>
>> Yeh, Bush isn't Superman you know.
>
>No, he scored 25%, pretty much like a trained monkey.

Where are his AFOQT scores posted?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired