Posted on 10/13/2004 6:31:04 AM PDT by CatoRenasci
There may be nothing here. Or there may be a significant piece of business. 1978 was the middle of the Carter white House years. Carter pardoned the draft dodgers and elevated many DDs, BCDs, and OTHDs to HDs for military personnel of the Nam era. I believe that it is important, not vital just important, to examine the Senator's separation from service. If he correctly received an HD good for him, but if he was first separated from the Naval Service for reasons other than honorable than that info must be put before the American People for their consideration.
The real issue is Kerry has not a principled bone in his body and will say ANYTHING to get elected.
But...
It's widely discussed now in military circles among those in a position to know that Kerry did get a bad conduct discharge. This is why there are so many documents on his site attempting to show his discharge, but none of these docs make clear what happened. His record will be released before the election.
The 'board of officers' referred to could well be the promotion board that passed him over. I should have clarified that in the original post.
The bits and pieces Kerry has released show he was discharged in 1978, twelve years after he incurred his initail six year obligation. His page also claims that he was selected for LT (O-3) before 1972, which is likely since at that time it was one year of active duty from ENS to LTJG and two more years from LTJG to LT.
However... had he been passed-over twice for LT, regs require a discharge no later than the end of the fiscal year in which the second pass-over occurs. For LT, that would have been 1971 (four years after commissioning in 1967).
A discharge in 1978 makes sense only if he failed his second look for LCDR in 1976, assuming he had stayed in the IRR all that time. Having failed for LCDR twice, he would have been discharged no later than 1977.
I also remember seeing a second officers' discharge for him dated after 1978. The record he has presented makes no sense, as noted elsewhere.
I'm sorry, but I haven't been paying much attention to this story. Can someone please give me the Readers Digest condensed version? In small, simple words too?
Or even simpler why not just ask Kerry to sign the SF-180 and clear all this up.
Hush... now you've given them a modified limited hangout. :-P
...and his liberal voting (if you can call it that) record in the Senate is the "here and now" issue. We must tread lightly on the past issues, even though the liberals have tried to do their best to use smear tactics against President Bush and his National Guard service. Walk softly, but.....
Can an officer in the inactive reserve be granted a promotion? Kerry's status after his separation fromactive duty was as an inactive member of the USNR. He had to attend no drills or functions. It is hard for me to see how anymember serving in the inactive reserves could be considered for promotion. I know my cousins came home from Nam as buck sgts. They kept their uniforms in the closet for four years and received their HDs as buck sgts.It's hard to believe that a Navy promotion board would consider an inactive officer. On what would they base their decision? There may, and given Kerry's luck, probably is an explanation. I'd like to hear it.
Tom,
I read the subject article. Although I wholeheartedly agree that Kerry needs to sign an SF 180 authorizing the release of his military records, I don't think there is an issue concerning his Honorable Discharge. Based on my personal experience, Kerry received his Honorable Discharge under the standard process, which obtains for naval officers transitioning through the Reserve process.
On July 1, 1972 Kerry was transferred from the Inactive Reserves (subject to recall, but no drill obligation), to the Standby Reserves. Similarly, I was transferred into the Standby Reserves in November 1972 after resigning my commission and being released from active duty in November of that year. I did not receive my Honorable Discharge until Feb 16, 1978, the same date as Kerry. I received the same letter as Kerry.
The Navy has a board, which meets annually I believe, that decides what officers should be retained in the Standby Reserves or removed and given an Honorable Discharge. The decision is based on skills and Navy personnel requirements. Officers are involuntarily separated as a standard procedure. I think you are reading to much into the Clayton letter, which contains boilerplate language.
The story about Kerry's Reserve status should be about his activities in the antiwar movement, including meeting in Paris with the Vietnamese Communists while still being a member of the Naval Reserves subject to recall. Initially, Kerry's website listed his military service as 1966-1970 --Active Duty and 1972-1972--Navy Reserves. This was revised to the current timeline, John Kerry for President - John Kerry's Service Timeline, which contains some questionable entries and his meant to obscure his status during the period 1970-2.
Kerry's new timeline states that January 3 Kerry requested a discharge. This is incorrect. Kerry was released from active duty on Jan 3, 1972 and transferred into the Inactive Reserves. (See http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/jkerry/releaseactduty.pdf and
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/jkerry/rqsthistserv.pdf)
Kerry's new timeline also lists March 1, 1970 as his "date of separation from active duty." This is clearly incorrect. Finally, they use the date of April 29, 1970 to indicate that Kerry was a "Registrant who has completed service." This designation means that Kerry is no longer subject to the draft. Obviously, the Kerry campaign is deliberately trying to create the impression that Kerry was out of the Service entirely after April 1970. No mention is even made of his Reserve status or Honorable Discharge. This is being done because Kerry realizes he is vulnerable to criticism concerning his participation in the antiwar movement while still a member of the Naval Reserves subject to recall.
I hate to rain on your parade, but the timing of Kerry's honorable discharge tracks with my personal experience. The Internet has been filled with the speculation you mention in your article, i.e., the Carter connection. It just doesn't jibe with the facts and documents we already have.
Re Kerry's medals: As I have previously written to you, Kerry requested his new medals in 1985 as replacements for the ones he threw away in 1971. He admitted he threw them away at the time and then changed his story subsequently that the threw away his ribbons and someone else's medals. He was telling the truth in 1971 and is lying today. What we really need is a copy of his request in 1985 for replacement citations/certificates/medals. Kerry claims they just requested replacement citations and certificates because he knows that replacement medals would undermine his current story, which was most recently mentioned to Charles Gibson on GMA earlier this year.
I agree there are other inconsistencies, and persistent rumors of a less than full Honorable Discharge, but the Sherlock Holmes in me says we must eliminate all other possibilities, and this is a fairly plausible one.
That's the problem with the GOP IMHO: they bring knifes to gun fights! That's how a traitor like Kerry gets to this level. He wasn't destroyed in 1984 like he should have been.
Wrong. Kerry received his honorable discharge on Feb 16, 1978. He amended his DD214 using a DD215 in March 2001.
Yes, I believe it is/was possible. You could be taking correspondence courses for promotion (at least you could in the '80s, I did a couple of Army Artillery AOC correspondence courses while in the standby reserve).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.