Replies

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.