Posted on 10/29/2004 10:52:29 AM PDT by wvromania
Your point is incorrect. There is a large percentage of red-blooded Americans who would slough off from their life-long, staight-democratic-ticket-voting credentials and not vote for Qerri if he were to have gotten an other than dishonorable discharge.
What we may be witnessing, however, is a bigger, latent possibility. We know that Jean's medals apparently needed to be reissued. It could be that Qerry already knew when he threw somebody's medals over the fence, that his own were tantamount to, if not already, being stripped from him by virtue of the Navy's machinations against his traitorous activity.
Qerri may have been reacting rather than striking out boldly of his own initiative in his medal/ribbon tossing.
HF
See my tag line for another important accomplishment of Carter.
It's definately locked down...no new post, no new nothing.
and one of last year's recipients, Ambassador William Mittendorf [former Secretary of the Navy].
http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?theme=46&content=090005198006565f
WHY? TO LIBERALS, WHEN IT COMES TO A REPUBLICAN, THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE CHARGE IS THE STANDARD. EVIDENCE OR THE LACK OF IT, DOESN'T MATTER. THE SAME RULE SHOULD BE APPLIED HERE.
I empathize with your frustration but don't forget - Kerry jumped on the NY Times/CBS bandwagon and now has massive egg, perhaps "ostrich" egg, all over his Botoxed face, because the story has a) been debunked in so many different ways and b) has been spun around to showcase him as not supporting and critical of the military's competence.
So going with unsubstantiated rumours without having all the facts and doing all the research risks blowing up in one's face, just ask the NY Times [and can result in libel suits but that's another matter]
No one mentions this about the NY Times which just floors me - they had 3 guys working on that story and they never bothered to research their own archives for background material before writing this story because if they had, they would have know Judith Miller filed a story on April 4, 2003 talking about the 3rd ID having arrived at Al Qaqaa a week before the 101st.
It took the blogosphere less than 24 hours to find that and it took the Times about 3 days to mention that fact finally.
I know Judith got legal problems but hey, don't reporters at the Times ever talk to each other?
I have yet to see anyone ask a pertinent question. If a former SecNav was aware of OTH discharge, would he ever release the info if not required to? If he indeed would release it, why wait until such a late date? If a Bush supporter, he would have released it long ago; if a Kerry supporter, he would probably never release it, and certainly not prior to the election.
I had to leave for a while, & am catching up. I'll take a stab at it.
The greatest source of pride for Senator Miller is his service in the Marines. I can imagine the disgust Senator Miller, other Vets, and current Troops would have for someone perpetuating a fraud ("Reporting For Duty!") while campaigning for this country's highest office.
Several possibilities:
The source has recanted.
The source won't go public.
They need some sort of confirmation.
They are trying to get a second source on board.
They are plotting strategy.
They are putting together a press release.
Thanks. I think they're getting their info out through other channels of communication and don't want their board bombarded.
strange coincidence. just two days ago i traded in ford. got honda.
Well, rub salt in a festering wound.
POINT, why wait this long if its true it should have been out there months ago.
Your is exactly the question which needs to be answered before we all run off half-cocked on this story and embarrass ourselves.
Fantastic! Bookmarked.
Eva delete my last post to you all these numbers are making me dizzy. what number is this 544.
bookmarked
Subject: Fw: THE JIMMY CARTER LEGACY CONTINUESSean,
I was on active duty as a U.S. Navy lawyer when all of this was going on some 25 to 30 years ago, and so was Mark F. Sullivan, who at all relevant times was the personal lawyer to J. William Middendorf, then the Secretary of the Navy. We remember.
We are trying to break this absolutely true story nationwide, i.e., Fox News, C Span, and hopefully all the major networks. We are positive that John Kerry was one of those dishonorably dismissed from the Navy for collaborating with the Viet Cong, after he was released from active duty but still in the Navy, and for a totally unauthorized trip to Hanoi. He later got an "honorable" separation in 1978, some 12 years after joining the Navy, under President Carter's "Amnesty Program" for draft dodgers, deserters, and other malcontents who fled to Canada and Holland, among other places, to avoid military service to our country.
This is why he has refused, and continues to refuse, to release all of his Navy records: they reflect that he was Dishonorably Dismissed from the United States Naval Service. If they do not (which they do), he would have released them to the public. Again, he has not done so, because he well knows that the truth would kill his challenge to President Bush.
Sincerely,
DONALD L. NELSON
CAPT, JAGC, USNR
(Ret.)
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.