Posted on 10/13/2004 9:48:00 AM PDT by MindBender26
Kerry Lost Security Clearance!
Just spoke with reporter friend in DC. She is talking with former USN ONI types who worked on DOD/USN investigation that resulted in total loss of Kerry’s Navy security clearance.
Kerry had been granted a Top Secret by the Navy on October 11, 1967 based on a routine background investigation by Office of Naval Intelligence. A top secret clearance was required for his work at that time.
Obtaining and holding a security clearance of any level, especially TS or above, requires certain terms, obligations, commitments and conditions from the holder. One of the most important is the holder of the clearance must promptly and fully any contacts with any foreign officials, agents, etc.
Lieutenant Kerry left active duty with the Navy on January 3, 1970, but he still carried those obligations as a commissioned officer of the Naval Reserve. Without telling anyone and without receiving permission from superiors,FBI or counter-intelligence officers, he traveled to Paris in the summer of 1970. He claimed the purpose of his trip was a honeymoon with his first wife, Julia Thorne, but there was another hidden purpose.
Numerous North Vietnamese and Viet Cong intelligence agents and officials were in Paris, having arrived a year earlier for the “Peace Talks.” While in Paris, Kerry met with agents on a number of occasions and had extensive discussions with them about U.S. plans, procedures and how to get the U.S. to essentially surrender in Vietnam.
These clandestine meetings were never reported to the Navy.
Almost a year later, in April 1091, speaking as the leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against The War, Lieutenant Kerry told a Senate hearing about his meetings with enemy agents. Senior DOD officials wanted to prosecute him as a Naval Reserve officer for violating a number of laws and regulations, but this was vetoed by the Nixon White House. They didn’t want to give the anti-war crowd any additional PR ammunition.
However, the Navy immediately pulled Kerry’s security clearance. He became a Naval Reserve officer who was known not to be trusted. He kept his commission, but lost all access to any classified information. In the words of one of the now-retired agents, “Lieutenant Kerry wasn’t cleared to know what time it was!”
The bottom line is, Kerry was on the Intelligence Committee of the Senate after the Paris fiasco and another trip to support the Moscow-backed Sandinistas in Nicaragua.
Today, he couldn’t get a security clearance to pull KP duty, but he wants to be Commander in Chief of all our military in the War on Terrorism!
"You are wrong because the time period for a rewrite would not normally allow it to be done so many years after the fact and Kerry can not explain why it was necessary to have two separate re-writes."
I think perhaps I'm not expressing myself clearly. I have always said that a rewrite (as opposed to a reissue of the originals) would be improper, probably criminal.
What's this about two rewrites?
"You obviously don't understand the pain that Kerry's treachery has caused the Vietnam Veterans."
I was afraid I would create the impression that I'm supporting Kerry.
I'm not. I despise him.
But I only want to attack him for legitimate misconduct, of which there is plenty. I don't want to waste time on red herrings that have nothing more than misunderstanding of jargon and procedural matters at their core.
"How can someone who had their top secret classification stripped be Commander in Chief, someone who admittedly consorted with the enemy in a time of war?"
Now, there's something to attack him with. That's a valid issue.
There were two rewrites of the original commedation. I don't remember the dates, but it seems as though one rewrite was done in the seventies, about the time that Kerry ran for Congress and the second rewrite was done in the eighties. Kerry wrote the original commendation himself, the first rewrite omitted the story of Kerry shooting the retreating, wounded teenager in the back, which was the basis for the original commendation. The third rewrite changed the wording only slightly and that was done in the eighties. Each of the three rewrites carries the signature of a different Secretary of the Navy.
Unless those were actual corrections based on later findings of fact, that's unethical at the very least.
That is the WHOLE issue - Kerry is a traitor, the rest is just background, but the veterans want that background exposed because they want the country to know the pain that Kerry caused them. They have a right to express this pain and recieve some form of apology from Kerry and the people who followed his lead.
Were you the poster that was arguing with me about Kerry being in that uniform in the picture? My husband pulled out his Vietnam Yearbook and we looked at pictures of the Swiftboat crews and the only time that the officer was in uniform was when they were transferring prisoners. The rest of the pictures, you couldn't even tell if there was an officer aboard. (My husband was not a member of the swiftboat crew). The men wore tee shirts or no shirt at all. Actually, sometimes the officer was not aboard, like the night that the boat and crew were lost, no officer on board.
Don't you see, that's the point? Kerry is UNETHICAL, a traitor, a liar, an opportunist, someone who say and do anything to get what he wants. His whole tour of duty was a sham to advance his political ambitions. He had a Walter Mitty fantasy of following in the footsteps of John F. Kennedy and he was living out that fantasy by manipulating events to mirror Kennedy's service.
"Kerry's citations (paper documents) were NEVER "thrown away"
If we're dealing with improper rewrites, then it's irrelevant, but are you sure Kerry hung on to his citations? Wouldn't surprise me if he threw them away.
"Kerry's citations were re-written and re-issued and re-signed by Secretary of the Navy John Lehman"
Well, Lehman's signature, possibly facsimile, was affixed. Doesn't necessarily mean he knew about it.
"They had PREVIOUSLY been re-written and re-signed by Adm Hyland in the 1970's, after originally been approved by Adm Zumwalt."
Dern, he couldn't get it right the first time? He's even incompetent at skullduggery? How did this guy get two rich women to marry him?
Hey, maybe he didn't. Maybe he just had marriage certificates rewritten...
Oh, by the way, admirals don't neccessarily take a personal interest in every purple heart and bronze star that gets issued.
People keep talking about documents "signed by" so-and-so when in all likelihood some yeoman striker just affixed the signatures by machine.
"Were you the poster that was arguing with me about Kerry being in that uniform in the picture?"
No.
See this robe? I'm in the choir. I despise the loathsome SOB. The more so because I was a Naval officer, and I take it personally.
But, as I said, I only want to attack him for stuff he's actually guilty of.
“Kerry is UNETHICAL, a traitor, a liar, an opportunist, someone who say and do anything to get what he wants.”
Amen, sister.
That's how I remember it.
Except that I think you meant to say "pay entry base date" rather than "date of rank." Time in service for pay is calculated from the PEBD.
Concur.
We don't know what Kerry was requesting because we don't have his actual request. We do know that he received replacement citations and certificates for all of his medals in June in June 1985. The Silver Star citation originally sign by Adm Hyland was not changed by the Lehman signed citation except for the boilerplate last sentence. We need to know if Kerry received replacement medals as well. In 1971 he said he threw his medals away. In 2004 on GMA, he said he threw his ribbons away and someone else's medals. He explained away his 1971 statement by saying the medals and ribbons are interchangeable.
Kerry's Bronze star citation signed by Lehman was exactly the same as Zumewalt's original.
Hyland was the approving authority for Kerry's Silver Star and Zumwalt the approving authority for the Bronze Star.
What is curious about the Silver Star is the fact that Zumwalt wrote a citation on letterhead paper, which must have been used to present the medal to Kerry. O'Neill has mentioned that the Silver Star nomination was not properly vetted and that it was presented two days after the incident. The Hyland citation is the official one. It was significantly different from the Zumwalt citation, which could just be a matter of editing to make it fit on a single page and conform to existing standards.
As the Dem Presidential candidate, was he given access to briefings of security issues?
He was briefed to the extent POTUS thought is necessary,
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.