Posted on 10/31/2004 5:22:31 AM PST by xtinct
There is overwhelming evidence that the Navy gave John Kerry either a dishonorable discharge or an undesirable discharge – which is the equivalent of a dishonorable discharge without the felony conviction – and that, as a result of such discharge, he was stripped of all of his famous but questionable Navy awards and medals. And the kicker? The evidence is on his website!
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
bump
Heh! That's what I thought after I hit 'enter.' It's a real mess, and I mean it, Sam.
1) It would hurt their candidate...
2) They'd actually have to leave their ivory desks and do some digging. Might miss a 'whine' & cheese party.
3) It would hurt their candidate....
Well, who is putting the gag over SEAN'S mouth?
They sure would!
That's why democRAT candidates have never been afraid of looking absolutely stupid in their pronouncements (like the lying little Gephart always did).
They knew that they always had at least 43% of the electorate who would "pull the donkey" no matter what they said or stood for.
Question: Does anybody know whether World Net Daily is big or not? How many readers?
We should organize some sort of get out the news effort. We bloggers exposed Rathergate and the Swift Vets against the will of the MSM. We could make America see this info without the MSM. We are Freepers. This information must be spread. Anybody up for some late election time action? Any ideas? Come on! We can do it!
I'm just shaking my head here.
The media is slow in learning that people are using the Internet now for the truth. The media can't hide or cover-up anything anymore, because we will find the truth.
The media is in denial. They think just because THEY don't report it, WE won't find out.
WAKE UP MEDIA. YOU HAVE BEEN BUSTED.
I love Sean, I really do. I think his heart is in the right place and he does all that he can...to a point. But he doesn't vet stories...he waits until they are vetted to go with them. This is an 'allegation' at this point so I don't think he'll stick his neck out with it. I could be wrong....I wish I was!
grandpiano, we have been working on this for months......sending the information to the media. They refuse to research it. They refuse to air this information.
I realize most of the media is biased......but I can't believe they are ALL in favor of FnKerry becoming the President.
That the Navy chooses to proceed with an "involuntary separation" of an officer, from the Navy, is at the Navy's discretion.
Such an involuntary separation may occur at any time.
It may occur immediately after the officer becomes an officer, such as, when something really bad is discovered, about that officer, and the officer is "excused," to put if very mildly.
Or, the involuntary separation may take place AT ANY TIME later on ... some years AFTER the officer had any active duty, let alone reserve duty, or inactive duty obligations or standby obligations.
There is no "logical conclusion" though one is proposed by the author of the article, that Lt. Kerry received a less than Honorable Discharge, because his name came up, was brought up, drove up, whatever, before a Navy Board of Review of any type.
The best argument that you have, is that Lt. Kerry's "career path" through the Dept. of the Navy, was not stellar, and that it was subject to, what you might call, an examination of his less than honorable activities, such as associating with, even negotiating with, the enemies of the United States during wartime and while a commissioned officer --- that is a very serious offense.
Yet, given the serious offense, the Navy did not, in the end, produce for the public, any record of its investigation(s).
Furthermore, President Carter wrote out an amnesty regarding the Vietnam War, and Lt. Kerry fell under its umbrella (though, perhaps, not on all matters, we do not yet know for certain).
So, there is nothing that has so far turned up, that is subject to U.C.M.J. participation, for which, in other words, the case (if any) would be re-opened.
President Bush, for your information, has directed that this will not happen on his watch, and he has not flinched from that position; indeed, he has not challenged the record of Lt. John F. Kerry at all.
President Bush considers the matter closed and not worth pursuing, because it is damaging in unexpected returns --- it may richochet.
Boo hooing.......... :(
President Bush considers the matter closed and not worth pursuing, because it is damaging in unexpected returns --- it may richochet.
I am not sure if you are making a good case for FnKerry or what.
Xtinct, I think you have your facts wrong. As aformer Marine officer ( twice wounded and three times decorated for heroism in Vietnam and retired as a Lt. Col in the USMCR, I can offer you the facts.
There is no such thing as a certificate of discharge issued to someone upon separation. You receive a DD 214 which lists the condition of separation ( Homorable, General, GOS etc). As an Naval Officer, I received my DD 214 upon separation from active duty in 1970. I still retained my rand and commision and was transferred to the Inactive Reserve as a Captain. I entered the Active Reserve and served for 22 more years. My original DD 214 in 1970 as all Naval officers did. I still use it for my service related corresponance ( I am 80% diasabled).
I served on Admin discharge review boards several times. The sole purpose of these review boards are to answer appeals for men and women who received less than honorable discharges. For Kerry to receive a letter dated 1978 it becomes clear that he had to go through the appeals process.
This came up a while ago. Read # 14. Another freeper said he served about the same time as Kerry, and his time was up around the same time and didn't get his discharge papers until the same time as Kerry.
Xtinct, I think you have your facts wrong. As a former Marine officer ( twice wounded and three times decorated for heroism in Vietnam ) and retired as a Lt. Col in the USMCR, I can offer you the facts.
There is no such thing as a certificate of discharge issued to someone upon separation. You receive a DD 214 which lists the condition of separation ( Honorable, General, GOS etc). As an Naval Officer, I received my DD 214 upon separation from active duty in 1970. I still retained my rand and commision and was transferred to the Inactive Reserve as a Captain. I entered the Active Reserve and served for 22 more years. My original DD 214 in 1970 as all Naval officers did. I still use it for my service related corresponance ( I am 80% disabled).
I served on Admin discharge review boards several times. The sole purpose of these review boards are to answer appeals for men and women who received less than honorable discharges. For Kerry to receive a letter dated 1978 it becomes clear that he had to go through the appeals process.
Well, I for one, am only interested in the truth. Why
would Senator Kerry insist on President Bush making his
records public and then hide his own?
The truth whatever it is, which ever way it cuts.
I'm not sure about this but, if Kerry's commission was originally as an ensign in the United States Navy Reserve and was not at some later point selected for a Regular commission, then he could be discharged without resigning his commission at the end of his term of service. An officer holding a Regular commission serves at the pleasure of the President and would resign his commission in order to leave the service prior to being eligible for retirement.
Ths issue is not the WHEN of it, but the HOW: as a result of the 'board' -- did you check the WND article?
That would be about a half hour into Kerry's tour of duty
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.