Posted on 09/19/2004 8:38:35 PM PDT by grace522
IF YOU ARE A KERRY FAN PLEASE READ THIS... YOU MAY NOT WANT TO BELIEVE IT, AND YOU WILL NOT LIKE IT, BUT YOU CAN CHECK THE RECORDS.. I know there's a lot of these going around, but this one is verrrrry interesting.... > [Original Message] Subject: Kerry's Military Record? Oh What a Tangled Web He Weaves...
Now that the Kerry team has again raised the issue of President Bush service in the Texas Air National Guard they should be held to answer the question below outlined by Mr. Steve Nash, US Navy, Retired. If Kerry would release all of his Military records, this issue could be put to bed.
"Steve" Nash, MAC Ret, UDT/SEAL Authentication Team -Director
Authentin SEAL Phone 707 438 0120 "The only service where all investigators are US Navy Seals" http://www.authentiseal.org
Military Record
Unlike McCain, Bush, and Gore,,,, Kerry has adamantly refused to authorize the release of his military records. Most think it'because of his phony battle medals. I think the real reason is below. He was not granted an Honorable Discharge until March 2001, almost 30 years after his ostensible service term had ended!
This is very much out of the ordinary, and highly suspect. There are 5 classes of Discharge: Honorable, General, Other Than Honorable, Bad Conduct,and Dishonorable.
My guess is that he was Discharged in the '70s, but not Honorably. He appealed this sometime while Clinton was in the Oval Office; Political pressure was applied, and the Honorable Discharge was then granted. His file is probably rife with reports of this, submissions and hearings on the appeal, reports of his "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy, along with protests that were filed with respect to his alleged valor under fire.
This will blow up in his face before October 15th. ================================================================
On 18 Feb. 1966 John Kerry signed a 6 year enlistment contract with the Navy (plus a 6-month extension during wartime). On 18 Feb. 1966 John Kerry also signed an Officer Candidate contract for 6 years -- 5 years of ACTIVE duty & ACTIVE Naval Reserves, and 1 year of inactive standby reserves (See items #4 & $5). Because John Kerry was discharged from TOTAL ACTIVE DUTY of only 3 years and 18 days on 3 Jan. 1970, he was then required to attend 48 drills per year,and not more than 17 days active duty for training. Kerry was also subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Additionally, Kerry, as a commissioned officer, was prohibited from making adverse statements against his chain of command or statements against his country,especially during time of war. It is also interesting to note that Kerry did not obtain an honorable discharge until Mar. 12, 2001 even though his service obligation should have ended July 1, 1972.
Lt. John Kerry's letter of 21 Nov. 1969 asking for an early release from active US Navy duty falsely states "My current regular period of obligated service would be completed in December of this year."
On Jan. 3, 1970 Lt. John Kerry was transferred to the Naval Reserve Manpower Center in Bainridge, Maryland.. Where are Kerry's Performance Records for 2 years of obligated Ready Reserve, the 48 drills per year required and his not more than 17 days of active duty per year training while Kerry was in the Ready Reserves? Have these records been released? Has anyone ever talked to Kerry's Commanding Officer at the Naval Reserve Center where Kerry drilled?
On 1 July 1972 Lt. John Kerry was transferred to Standby Reserve Inactive.
On 16 February 1978 Lt. John Kerry was discharged from US Naval Reserve.
Below are some of the crimes Lt. Kerry USNR committed as a Ready Reservist, while he was acting as a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War:
1. Lt. Kerry attended many rallies where the Vietcong flag was displayed while our flag was desecrated, defiled, and mocked, thereby giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
2. Lt. Kerry was involved in a meeting that voted on assassinating members of the US Senate.
3. Lt. Kerry lied under oath against fellow soldiers before the US Senate about crimes committed in Vietnam.
4. Lt. Kerry professed to being a war criminal on national television, and condemned the military and the USA.
5. Lt Kerry met with NVA and Vietcong communist leaders in Paris, in direct violation of the UCMJ and the U.S. Constitution.
Lt. Kerry by his own words & actions violated the UCMJ and the U.S.Code while serving as a Navy officer. Lt. Kerry stands in violation of Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part 904, and U.S Code 18 U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and Kerry's subsequent support of the communists while leading mass protests against our military in the year that followed, also place him in direct violation of our Constitution's Article 3, Section 3, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.
The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." ...........................................end..............
I think that is what I always understood. You can opt for a court martial if you are threatened with a less than honorable discharge, but it's like plea bargaining, and you don't know what the alternative might bring.
please remove me from you ping list. thanks
JOHN KERRY .............SIGN THE RELEASE FORM 180, as President Bush has done or EXPLAIN WHY YOU WILL NOT SIGN THE FORM!
You want to be our President!
And we will NEVER AGAIN allow the network press to LIE to the American public via refusing to BALANCE the information they dole out regarding candidates running for President.
We are going to STOP the propaganda like EDITING of INFORMATION done by CBS, ABC and NBC.
see my post #196 ...rto
see my post #196 ...rto
My only problem with this story is the fact it is such an incredible bombshell if true that someone in the Pentago would have leaked it by now. This information would have had to go through more than a couple of people. As a Senator a lot of people who saw it would have remembered it. It's worth continuing to pursue, but it just doesn't make sense he could cover something like this up considering the enemies he must have in the military.
Is this a multi-page document?
...
These kind of things tend to have,,, dates, revision letters, etc.
Inspect the letter from the Navy to Judicial Watch (answer to publically noted request for release of docs). Note Kerry has not released 31 pages. He has not released all his docs.
Mr. Kerry's parade of docs are ever so changing as the "sands of time" in a cBS soap opera.
Regards
fight_truth_decay
> I really think pursuing the status of M. Kerry's
> discharge is basically a dry hole.
I'm not the one you need to address that to. Although
I'm suspicious of Kerry's 1978 discharge (being years
late, and during the Carter Admin), I'm not seeing a
smoking M-79 that points to any other discharge issues.
And unless the 4 cartons of stuff the Swifties got
recently from the USN Archives contain any clues, I
suspect nothing will turn up before the election.
There's more than enough to sink Kerry swiftly, and
no need overreach speculation.
The effective date 03-01-70 in block 11d is the date of the document. There is no date as to when it was typed, so one must assume that it was typed at or about the same time. What's your point? I just checked my DD214. It does not contain a date typed, only the effective date. If you look at Kerry's DD214, you will note that it Block #11c refers to his BUPERS order NB 036419 of 8 Dec 69.
What bothers me is that the lower part contains mention of the Silver Star 'V' device, which I don't see on the two (of the three that exist) Silver Star citations on Kerry's website.
The combat "V" distinguishing device would not be on the Silver Star ctiations because it would be redundant. It is not necessary nor is the decoration worn that way. There have been plenty of discussions of why it is on Kerry's DD214 that way. It is clearly a mistake. That said, Kerry would derive no benefit from such a mistake, regardless of whoever did it. I suspect, as was the same in my case, that Kerry was asked to list his decorations to assist the preparer in the typing of the DD214. Kerry, in his ignorance, wanted to make sure that the record showed he earned his Silver Star in Combat similar to the Bronze Star. If so, Kerry and the officer authorized to sign the form were wrong.
It appears you are trying to prove that the DD214 provided is not an official copy even though it is stamped that way. Bit of a stretch if you ask me.
As I inidicated earlier.
Kerry received an honorable discharge. His progression through the Reserve system was normal. He was released into the inactive reserves on Jan 3, 1970 with no drill requirement, only the requirement to keep the Navy informed of his whereabouts. He was transferred on July 1, 1972 into the Standby Reserves, inactive and received his honorable discharge on Feb 16, 1978.
As a former naval officer who resigned his commission in 1972 and was released from active duty, I had a similar experience. I was transferred into the Standby Reserves and then received my honorable discharge on Feb 16, 1978. A Navy board convenes at least annually to decide who to drop from the Standby Reserves. Kerry and I happened to have been transferred into the Standby Reserves in the same year, hence the same date for our honorable discharges.
There are no appeals, you have a choice of either a court martial or Mast. If you go to court martial you have a federal criminal record, but you are allowed to appeal. If you go to Mast, you don't have a record but you can never appeal.
That is how it is.
A group of Vietnam Vets asked the Secretary of the Navy in 1976 to investigate Lt. Kerry's actions after he completed his active duty and while still a member of Fleet Reserve.
JAG (the Navy Judge Advocate General) opened a formal inquiry in July, 1976 as part of a general investigation of all Vietnam vets who were involved in antiwar activities after returning from active duty.
On January 21, 1977, the day after his inauguration, President Jimmy Carter signed an executive order granting amnesty to all Vietnam draft evaders.
JAG closed its investigation about 10 days later, ruling that found no reason to proceed to an Article 32 hearing (the first steps towards court martial) for any case involving activities of American military personnel (active duty or reserve) for their post-Vietnam actions.
I was a newspaper reporter for the Alton Telegraph in Alton, Illinois, in 1977 and wrote extensively about the investigation and also about President Carter's pardon, along with the public reaction. Those who want to look up my clips from that period can do so if they have access to a Nexis account. The Telegraph's online archives don't go back to 1977.
Although I suspected at the time that JAG's ruling was directly connected to Carter's pardons, I could not prove it or find anyone willing to confirm it.
Whatever the reason, the issue is legally dead.
Doug
Thanks, it makes sense now.
For anyone who doubts or for those who will cry 'FOUL' to these Kerry disclosures; the consistency of truth. . .and the proof of the fraud, named John Kerry is there.
Carter effectively shut the door on the topic. I am guessing this would explain the honorable discharge coming in 1978, after the case was closed [possibly] due to the Carter amnesty.
The UCMJ applies to reservists only while undergoing reserve training: UCMJ Applicability 802.2(a)(3) "Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training."
Read down a bit futher:
802.2(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.
The Fleet Reserve is the Navy’s ready reserve, the proper name is “Fleet Reserve”.
I'm saying that the PDFs that *are* available answer a lot of questions, if people would only take the time to read them.
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.