No, this is Bushwood...
;^)
Posted on 10/29/2004 10:52:29 AM PDT by wvromania
Navy chief on Swiftvets.com is saying they FOUND IT!!
most likely because they mention it was linked to FR, thus making their servers overload as DUummies also caught wind of this thread.....you can see this by above posts.
Powerline has gotten the message!! (sorry if duplicate)News on Kerry's Discharge?
I can't count the number of emails we've gotten from readers on the apparent mystery surrounding John Kerry's discharge from the Navy. There has been suspicion, but no hard evidence, that his original discharge was less than honorable, and that is why he refuses to make his military records public.
It appears that the Swift Boat Vets may finally have broken through on this issue:
Okay, folks.
We got it finally. We have the Former Secretary of the Navy who stated, "Yes, Kerry did receive an Other Than Honorable Discharge".
Stay tuned for more...
RESPONSE: We have been advised that material was recently posted to this forum referencing the nature of John Kerry's discharge from the military service. That material has been deleted from this forum.
i guess with everyone on FR, and even the DUmmies checking it out they thought they should put it on hold for a while. I BET THEIR SERVER WAS A HUMM'IN.
Clarification: I know Kerry didn't release all his records. But the MSM has uncritically reported his claims otherwise, so, IMO, I suspect most people think Kerry did release all his records.
When I shook off the dims...I shook them off altogether.
Navy Chief has been working to get the info for at least that long. This stuff isn't right out in the open and easily found. His info and documents are usually given to Thomas Lipscomb at the NY Sun.
One more possibility: someone hacked Navy Chief's password and posted a bogus story.
I have not had much hope for this story from the beginning. It could be true, but without heavy authentication, it's a dud.
They already got a complaint and a threat? Must be nervous...but who?
Eagerly waiting for more info.
Thanks!
Unfortunately I do
http://www2.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15171
No, this is Bushwood...
;^)
Check here:
http://conservativevoice.blogspot.com/
If those are the standard Navy tests given to all Naval personnel then above 50 represents above average with 75 being the maximum score one can achieve. So it looks like he is kinda stupid.....which we already knew.
Kerry huyas noyt released his records and is a traitor.
Not so. 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.
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 don't know but here is the link.
http://www2.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15171
Prove it false. I would love it. Maybe they are working on a strategy to break this.
Sounds like Chief oversteped his bounds.
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.