Skip to main content

View Diary: Was Bush KICKED OUT of Guard? (144 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yeah, I came to the same conclusion. (none)
    I can't seem to find an ANGR 36-5 anywhere. I found an ANGI 36-5, but it's an instruction on telecommuting. :)

    It seems I can hear God say to America, "You are too arrogant, and if you don't change your ways, I'll break the backbone of your power."

    --MLK

    by Melissa O on Sun Feb 15, 2004 at 04:16:18 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  There's only (none)
      ...part of ANGR 36-5 on this brief, and it's the part excerpted above (I would guess that's where it came from above).  I've been looking on all the publicly available places online for an electronic copy -- dodlink, the national guard publications website, the air force website, a couple of jag info sites -- no luck.

      This shouldn't be too hard to find, I would guess, for someone who knows where to find the national guard regs.  I've never done legal research to find military regs. so I wouldn't really know where to start and I'm nowhere near a law library right now so I wouldn't even be able to try.  But this is probably piece of cake for a Jag or someone who's done legal work for defense.  Anyone out there?  :-)  We just need the text of this reg.

      •  That looks like (none)
        TANGR 36-05. Is that the same as ANGR 36-05?

        It seems I can hear God say to America, "You are too arrogant, and if you don't change your ways, I'll break the backbone of your power."

        --MLK

        by Melissa O on Sun Feb 15, 2004 at 04:29:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm assuming... (none)
          that each state cribs a lot from the ANGR... but I could be wrong on that...  Even if we could see the reg. it almost certainly has changed in the last 30 years... so there are a lot of assumptions built in to searching google :c)

          I still think this isn't going to lead anywhere... especially once we get to take a look at the reg.  I wouldn't be surprised if it said something like "We can give someone an administrative discharge to send them to another post" or something innocuous like that.

    •  oh well (none)
      36-05 is...

      Administrative Separation/Discharge of Commissioned Officers of the Air National Guard of the USAF

      Not very exciting. Unless PTI 961 means something.

      It seems I can hear God say to America, "You are too arrogant, and if you don't change your ways, I'll break the backbone of your power."

      --MLK

      by Melissa O on Sun Feb 15, 2004 at 04:26:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In other words, (none)
        it's the regulation all discharges refer to. It's still weird that they'd redact it.

        It seems I can hear God say to America, "You are too arrogant, and if you don't change your ways, I'll break the backbone of your power."

        --MLK

        by Melissa O on Sun Feb 15, 2004 at 04:51:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That... (none)
          was my gut feeling to when I saw this... ANGR 36-05 is probably just a bunch of different authorizing an administrative discharge (look how long ANGR 36-01 is, after all) and gives all of their discharge procedures.  The quoted part we can find is probably only a small part of the whole thing...

          So all this probably tells us is that Bush was discharged to go to Alabama.  But we already knew that.  

          But who knows... maybe the reg. isn't what I think it is, we don't know until we can read it :c)

          •  Oh, BTW (none)
            This discharge is 1973, which means it was his final discharge before going to Harvard Business School, not his transfer to Alabama.

            It seems I can hear God say to America, "You are too arrogant, and if you don't change your ways, I'll break the backbone of your power."

            --MLK

            by Melissa O on Sun Feb 15, 2004 at 06:37:33 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Irving Washington (none)
          It's still weird that they'd redact it.

          Have you read Catch-22?

        •  Is it? (none)
          Why do you infer that?

          Just curious.

          I'm sure it is innocuous, but why did they redact it in the first place?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site