Posted on 09/07/2004 4:15:10 PM PDT by Cableguy
Crushkerry.com is re-posting this story from early-May. Now that some folks seem at least casually curious about Kerry's Vietnam cover-ups ... we thought we'd ask again: Sen. Kerry, did you go AWOL from the Naval Reserves? With little proof save for the conspiracy theories of an obese low-budget filmmaker and a professional hack at the Democrat National Committee, the left-leaning national press corps moved Heaven and earth to get to the bottom of the gaps in President Bush’s military service record.
The White House complied, releasing pay records and other peripheral evidence that Bush had indeed served in the Alabama National Guard during the time in question. The press was -- and remains – unsatisfied, though the gaps in the president’s service record can almost certainly be chalked up to bureaucratic paperwork screw-ups.
Not so with the record of President George W. Bush’s rival for the presidency, Senator John Forbes Kerry. An anonymous source has brought to our attention a yawning hole in the decorated veteran’s service record. It is time for Kerry to answer the questions President Bush was forced to answer. It is time for John Kerry to answer the big question:
Did you go AWOL from the Naval Reserves?
(Excerpt) Read more at crushkerry.com ...
Yes, as a matter of fact I did. Who cares? Look at the states I am currently winning in.
HOW THE HEL* is he ahead in these states,
MN,MI,NV,WI,PA,CA,
WE MUST GET FIRED UP!!
Oh, absolutely!! But, the question should be: Are mainstream journalists ignoring this? You know the answer to that one!
he's not ahead in wi.
..make that North Vietnamese Communist!
What polls are you looking at? The most recent polls have him dead even in Minnisota, behind in New Mexico and behind in Pennsylvania.
You don't actually expect Bush to win California do you? I mean, that would be nice, but please...
And actually, what's the big deal anyway? If he wins every state you mention, and Bush wins the rest of the 2000 states, he wins because of the census.
Oh, we're talking about his post-Vietnam record?
Hey, why are you questioning Kerry's patriotism? He did his time in Vietnam, unlike his opponents!
If, on the other hand, he was being paid as an active reservist, I think there would be an issue.
People need to understand active reservists are part-timers who can satisfy their obligations in many ways, such as traditional drill units, attending service schools, or going on active duty for brief periods. Bush's story is that he was basically given a leave of absence to work on the Alabama Senate campaign but was assigned to an Alabama unit if he wanted to get some drills in. He returned to his home unit in a points deficit, which he made up. End of story. The AWOL allegation is a joke.
People should also understand that by this time Vietnam was winding down and the services were beginning to dump people who wanted to stay on active duty. Many who wanted service careers were caught in what the Army called reductions in force or "RIF's". Letting Bush out of the Reserves early was no big deal.
I don't think it would get us anywhere to make the same silly AWOL allegation against Kerry, who appears to have had no drill obligation at all.
Anyone interested in viewing the Swift Boat Ads click the link.
http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=Ads
> Sen. Kerry, did you go AWOL from the Naval Reserves?
Or were you in fact discharged during the treasons?
If so, honorable, general, less than honorable?
Is the reason for that very late 1978 discharge
because it's a late effort to paper over something?
Perhaps not, but until we see all the documents from
the archives, we are left to guess.
The total service obligation was six years after commission.
Three years must be active duty. So from Dec. 16, 1966 to Dec 16 1969 Kerry was minially active duty.
According to the service agreement, Kerry was eliglble for Standby Reserve on December 16, 1969.
His two-year obligation to the Ready Reserve would therefore have been from December 16, 1969 to December 16, 1971. During that time the contract calls for 48 annual drills and 17 days of training; or 30 days of active duty training; or other undescribed service as may be needed.
After Dec. 16 1971 Kerry would have been obligated to a final year of Standby Reserve, which carries no evident service duties. Technically then, Kerry had served his obligation by Dec 16, 1972.
Which raises the question about his final discharge papers being effective in 1978.
johnkerry.com lists the following dates, and they appear to be hedging:
January 3, 1970 Kerry requests discharge
March 1, 1970 Kerry?s date of separation from Active Duty
April 29, 1970 Kerry listed as Registrant who has completed service
Kerry apparently requests discharge FROM ACTIVE DUTY two weeks after his active duty obligation is complete (johnkerry.com doesn't make that very clear). And apparently the request to leave ACTIVE DUTY is granted, (as IS properly noted above by johnkerry.com).
So who (if anyone) let Kerry out of his three remaining years of service obligation?
Kerry's formal discharge is not issued until 1978, under the one and only proper authority who can terminate a commissioned Naval Officer, the SecNav.
Oh yes he did: it's in his service obligation contract, and there is no competing language in his official Release From Active Duty.
I just captured this text from page 2 of that document:
"6. You are advised that your release from active service duty does not terminate your status as a member of the U.S. Naval Reserve. On the day following the effective date of your release from active duty, as specified in paragraph 3 of this endorsement, you will assume the status of a member of the Naval Reserve on inactive duty. While on inactive duty you are subject to recall to active duty to the extent authorized by federal statute. Inform the command having custory of your service record [of your new address in Groton Massachusetts]....You shall promptly answer all official correspondence addressed to you as such and promptly comply with instructions contained therein."
Exactly. He was subject to call-up but had no drill obligation. The AWOL story goes nowhere for us.
Absolutely and without question.
Kerry Ready Reserve status didn't contractually end until December 16, 1971, and his remaining one-year of of Standby Reserve ended Dec 16, 1972 (actually he remained in reserve status - probably Standby - until 1978 upon offical termination of his commission by the SecNav).
Kerry is known to have met with the North Vietnamese Paris delegation twice in 1970 and 1971, and obviously as a commssioned officer in the U.S. Navy Ready Reserve.
Perhaps, perhaps not. Where's your evidence?
In any case my beef is that he was meeting with the Vietnamese while still a Ready Reserve commissioned officer. And this treasonous turncoat remained a Naval Reserve officer while I was drilling on the tarmac in Great Lakes. It makes me sick.
If he didn't like the war, if he was a CO, if he wanted to run for office, all of these are valid reasons to request termination of commission by the SecNav.
Did he do that? Who knows. Several years are missing from the Kerry chronicles.
Exactly right! And that needs to be our laser focus. Kerry returned from Vietnam and betrayed his shipmates and all Vietnam vets by accusing them of war crimes and aiding the enemy by spreading their propaganda and meeting with them.
Trying to make the case Kerry violated specific laws or regulations diverts attention from the real issue by spinning into legal arguments.
I've already given to the Swiftees and am fixin' to give 'em some more. The SwiftVets have broken the media blockade on Kerry with all guns blazing!
The 1978 date makes sense if Kerry had been given a discharge that was less than honorable -- and he appealed it after the mandatory waiting period.
Cableguy: I've seen many Kerry time-lines, but I have not been able to find the dates of the 2 separate medal "enhancement" requests. No one seems to know the sequence of when he asked for the first "enhancement", then the second "enhancement". Did the enhancement requests come BEFORE or AFTER he threw the medals/ribbons over the wall? Did he enhance the records before he ran for office (unsuccessfully) the first time? Before he ran for the senate? This has got to be the sickest, most conflicted man in the world who would glamorize & enhance the very medals he seemingly despises.
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.