Posted on 09/03/2004 2:22:06 PM PDT by crushelits
Thanks--great to see it all in one place (or mostly all--there's still the matter of the medals).
Here is an interesting link re: Kerry and the FBI files.
"[redacted] that on April four, one nnie seven two, a representive of the North Vietanese Government at the Paris Peace talks telephoned the 'movement' in the United States to be ready to take action, presumably demostrations, to counter expected escalation of bombing by American air forces in South Vietnam as a result of the increased military action of North Vietnamese forces in Quang Tri Province, South Vietnam."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1201299/posts
The facts are that no matter what kind of deal you signed to enlist, once you got out of active duty back then nobody would force you into a reserve unit.
Think about it ~ here you have brave men who've volunteered to go into the armed forces, or they've been drafted and showed up at the induction station rather than Canada ~ now, they are finished with the hard part of being in the military and somebody wants them to go to a drill once a month (or so) where most of the people will have successfully evaded the draft or not enlisted.
And they have real guns and bullets handy!
It was a normal practice to excuse folks who'd completed their active duty (2 years or more) from any reserve duty.
End of story.
Rules be damned.
Kept the reserves pure and away from the real soldiers. Only a madman would have thought it useful to mix them up.
And did he get his medical checkups and how about dental exams? Do we have copies of those?
It really doesn't advance the cause to throw around treason charges. The man is just very, very, very wrong.
On the other hand, if the meetings with the North Vietnamese can be documented, Kerry would have violated a very specific statute against citizens negotiating with foreign powers.
Are there any photos of Kerry wearing his metals with a combat "V" on his silver star? I understand there is some question about his Silver Star period!
First, Kerry had no drilling obligation in the reserves. His only obligation was to report if recalled to active duty. As a member of the Ready Reserve he would have been top of the list of candididates for recall had the U.S. decided to recall folks to active duty - which we did not.
Second, a member of the naval reserve, not in an a duty status is not subject to the UCMJ. His civilian acts are subject to civil law only.
There are plenty of good reasons that Kerry is a bad choice for president. Don't try to invent some that will fly like a lead-balloon.
Kerry was, for better or for worse, on the right side of the rules in this instance.
Support for the Swiftees is crucial right now, so they can get these ads on the air on REGULAR TV in battleground states.
FReepers are key in getting the word out about the righteousness of the SBVFT by exposing Kerry's FRAUD.
Swiftee window sticker thread - get yours! Freep mail for details.
Kerry's delayed discharge of 1978 is a curiosity. Could one of these be the reason?
- In 1974, Gerald Ford proposed conditional amnesty for Vietnam War draft evaders and deserters with each case to be weighed individually.
- In 1977, Jimmy Carter issued blanket pardon to Vietnam War draft evaders, but not for military deserters.
the Dems would never notice it... 
bttt
On the Kerry website is a copy of a letter notifying him of his honorable discharge. It refers to Title 10, U.S.Code Section 1163 and says that a board of officers was convened pursuant to that statute to determine whether a reservist should be kept in the reserves. There is a DOD regulation that explains how this works. It is at 32 CFR section 100.5. At the beginning it states:
(a) Unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve.
...
(3) When a member of the Selected Reserve is identified as an unsatisfactory participant and considered a possible candidate for involuntary transfer to the IRR or for discharge, a board of officers shall be convened, as required by 10 U.S.C. 1063 to consider the circumstances and recommend appropriate action.
Since this statute (10 USC 1063) is referenced in the honorable discharge letter one must assume that this regulation as it existed in 1978 was the one under which the discharge was granted. In other words he was discharged for being an unsatisfactory participant in the reserve.
Here is a link to the regulation:
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2002/julqtr/pdf/32cfr100.5.pdf
One other point however: The Bainbridge manpower center at the time was the place that maintained the files on members of the INACTIVE ready reserve. If you were in the inactive ready reserve (as I was in the 60's at the end of my obligated service) your records were held there until your discharge date and there were no requirements to attend drills or to do anything.
Given that, I am hard pressed to understand the reason for the letter Kerry got referring to the board of officers.
However, it is clear that there is much missing from what we know about the early 70s. His total time was 12 years, all in the USNR (he never was regular navy). That is a long time and it isn't explained in any way.
My bet is that Traitor John was "recalled" in the early 70s and court martialed for consorting with the enemy (in Paris), maybe homosexual activity in Nam, or marrying (without the Navy's permission) a Vitnamese while in Cam Rahn Bay.
But, John has been successful in diverting the focus. We are talking about minuitae like a "combat V," when we should be focusing on Kerry's treason. Hi testimony gave comfort to the enemy, he consorted with the enemy in Paris and he co-founded and participated in the activities of a suspect organization. Treason is not a good qualification for CinC. What is in his file that he is hiding?
"....Lay off this because you are dangerously wrong on a number of issues....."
I'm not so sure he is 'dangerously' wrong, or even wrong at all.......
I'd be interested in your comments after you review Articles 3 and 43, UCMJ
I have reviewed said articles and he is still wrong. He is dangerously wrong because he is making reckless charges that have no factual basis and that will blow up in someone's face if they try pressing them. He was in the inactive reserves and not in a duty status when he did whatever you are accusing him of doing. Duty status in the reserves means in uniform under military orders being paid.
There was no drilling obligation. Period.
A Question you will not see on the MSM.
This is simply not true. If you read Kerry's release from active duty orders, you will see that Kerry was transferred into the inactive reservres. He had no drill requirement, just the obligation to keep the Navy informed of his whereabouts because he was subject to recall.
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.
