[MNJohnnie]

Thanks for sharing.

[mike182d]

It doesn't change the fact that Kerry's a back-stabbing traitor who betrayed every soldier in Vietnam. If this really was a non-issue for Kerry, he would have released the full information ages ago when it would have saved him from that tumble towards the end of August. Since he still has not, and was officially discharged in March of 2001, there's much more to the story.

[Sunshine55]

Nothing to fear....the Swifties are personally responsible for this one.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1243434/posts?q=1&&page=101

[kAcknor]

BTTT for caution in the face of "Too good to be true".

Although, I hope it is....

[CatoRenasci]

Thoughts?

[PajamaTruthMafia]

It is for Kerry and his campaign to explain, not us. He can clear it all up by signing 180 and answering some questions on the subject. If he has nothing to hide it shouldn't be a problem!

[tomnbeverly]

I see the point however, why the secrecy ... If it comes out after the election.... and it is bad it may very well cause a call for impeachment.

[ravingnutter]

The US Code Sections cited, 10 USC 1162 and 1163 are no longer in effect, having been repealed in 1994.

They were in effect when he was discharged, so your point is moot.

[Sam Cree]

I agree that Kerry is a dishonorable person.
But I'm not too sure that the voters will care about that, considering Clinton's 2 terms, even given that they were less than enthusiastic about him.

Hope I'm wrong, though.

[Piquaboy]

My wife was telling me that she heard some retired Navy officer on the tube talking about this and that Kerry had received a General Discharge from the Navy.

[Nataku X]

FWIW, from another thread.

other thread..
To: BigKahuna
Here's 10 U.S.C.S. 1162 and 1163.. Both have since been repealed in
1994. Note 1163.
§ 1162. Reserves; discharge
(a) Subject to other provisions of this title [10 USCS §§ 101 et
seq.], reserve commissioned officers may be discharged at the pleasure
of the President. Other Reserves may be discharged under regulations
prescribed by the Secretary concerned.
(b) Under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, a
Reserve who becomes a regular or ordained minister of religion is
entitled upon his request to a discharge from his reserve enlistment
or appointment.
10 USCS § 1163 (1992)
§ 1163. Reserve components: members; limitations on separation
(a) An officer of a reserve component who has at least three years of
service as a commissioned officer may not be separated from that
component without his consent except under an approved recommendation
of a board of officers convened by an authority designated by the
Secretary concerned, or by the approved sentence of a court-martial.
This subsection does not apply to a separation under subsection (b) of
this section or under section 1003 of this title [10 USCS § 1003], to
a dismissal under section 1161 (a) of this title [10 USCS § 1161(a)],
or to a transfer under section 3352 or 8352 of this title [10 USCS §
3352 or 8352].
(b) The President or the Secretary concerned may drop from the rolls
of the armed force concerned any Reserve (1) who has been absent
without authority for at least three months, or (2) who is sentenced
to confinement in a Federal or State penitentiary or correctional
institution after having been found guilty of an offense by a court
other than a court-martial or other military court, and whose sentence
has become final.
(c) A member of a reserve component who is separated therefrom for
cause, except under subsection (b), is entitled to a discharge under
honorable conditions unless--
(1) he is discharged under conditions other than honorable under an
approved sentence of a court-martial or under the approved findings of
a board of officers convened by an authority designated by the
Secretary concerned; or
(2) he consents to a discharge under conditions other than honorable
with a waiver of proceedings of a court-martial or a board.
(d) Under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary concerned,
which shall be as uniform as practicable, a member of a reserve
component who is on active duty (other than for training) and is
within two years of becoming eligible for retired pay or retainer pay
under a purely military retirement system, may not be involuntarily
released from that duty before he becomes eligible for that pay,
unless his release is approved by the Secretary.
456 posted on 10/13/2004 2:05:10 AM PDT by GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY

[xkaydet65]

Understood. But Kerry's separation occurred in 1978 when 1162 and 1163 were in effect. Additionally there is evidence that his separation went before an officer board. I do not know the Navy regs that would deal with an officer board approving an honorable separation six years after the end of the original committment to service>

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.

[sirchtruth]

At this time it will not matter...Stay away.

The real issue is Kerry has not a principled bone in his body and will say ANYTHING to get elected.

But...

[pabianice]

Possibly.

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.

[The G Man]

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?

[snooker]

Agree with the need for care. But a simple question. Why the need for involving the USC in any normal service discharge? The need for involving the USC seems very suspect on it's face. I doubt this is normal practice.

But I await more analysis.

Why doesn't some intrepid reporter just ask ... Senator Kerry did you get a less than honorable discharge? Now that it's out there, using seeBS standards maybe they will do a show on the missing tidbits, don't you think.

Or even simpler why not just ask Kerry to sign the SF-180 and clear all this up.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Hush... now you've given them a modified limited hangout. :-P

[Moosilauke]

Sorry, but New York Sun doesn't qualify as a major news source, scarcely qualifies as a minor news source. MSM won't touch this. Whether bloggerdom gets excited remains to be seen. Your caution is well directed. Right now this story falls into the same category as those weekly reports of Osama's imminent capture reported by Pak newspapers.

[OKIEDOC]

Something smells about John Kerry's military service. Lets find out now before we make a mistake and maybe he is elected. God, I hope not.

[RVN Airplane Driver]

Trust me.....there is something amuck in the sKerry discharge thing...don't quite know yet what....but when a board convenes to give a simple discharge....something had to be rectified...