SwiftVets.com

FreeFall · LCDR Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 421

Just got this from Judicial Watch:

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:
Dear Friends and Supporters:

The Kerry medals flap apparently is too hot to handle for the Navy. We received a response from the Naval Inspector General (IG) to our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for Navy IG records documenting the investigation of the awards and conduct of Lieutenant (jg) John Forbes Kerry, USNR. The request was prompted by a Sept. 17, 2004, letter we received from Vice Admiral Ronald Route, the Naval IG. Admiral Route declined to investigate the circumstances of Kerry's awards and conduct because it would not have been "productive." The records produced under FOIA reveal that the Naval IG's "investigation" of the circumstances surrounding Kerry's awards and conduct as a U.S. Navy officer consisted strictly of a review of existing files and archived regulations. While Navy Public Affairs officers originally told the press that there was no investigation being conducted concerning Judicial Watch's request, the Naval IG's records prove the Navy Public Affairs' statements were misleading. The substance of what would have been a legitimate investigation - interviews of eyewitnesses, reviews of travel records, transcripts, FBI files and other relevant material - was not pursued by Naval IG investigators. Instead, Admiral Route and his investigators exhausted their investigative efforts reviewing a Washington Post article from Aug. 22, 2004, and a Newsweek report from the Aug. 30, 2004, edition. The unnamed investigator(s) also relied on Kerry's presidential campaign Internet site to conduct the investigation.

In separate correspondence dated Oct. 5, 2004, from Secretary of the Navy Gordon R. England [click here], Judicial Watch learned that Secretary England has embraced Admiral Route's "investigation" and has declined to take any independent investigative or administrative action with respect to Kerry's awards or conduct. The leadership of the Navy has failed to ensure its awards process was not corrupted. This is shameful.

rhv5862 · PO2 Joined: 21 Aug 2004 Posts: 379 Location: Massachusetts

Navy knows whats in Kerry's records. They are do not want to investigate because even if Kerry losses he will still be in the Senate and can cause them a lot of problems. It is shameful.

RHV

one more captins mast · LCDR Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 438 Location: Texas

now
_________________
the strange mr aj

JK · PO3 Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 259

Navy IG should be ashamed. FOIA requests can be tedious I had waited six months to obtain documents on an issue and had to contact five different offices. If the Congress was doing its job they would insist on having a formal investigation and not rely on the Navy IG, perhaps GAO can do a more competent job. Another option is to have another IG perform the investigation due to the political pressure than can be placed on Navy. Or are there other solutions??

But time is running out too!!!!

JK

ashter · Seaman Joined: 22 Aug 2004 Posts: 185

sKerry must have friends in a lot of places... or just a lot of dirt on people. Perhaps he's been focussing on the gathering dirt part for the last 20 years. I can't believe the Navy IG would just blow this request off.

tiptie · Lt.Jg. Joined: 19 Aug 2004 Posts: 138 Location: Colorado

I believe that these wimps in the IG are afraid that if Kerry is elected that there would be some serious repercussions.

Remember, Kerry’s crowd has already threatened Sinclair to “watch out if they are placed in power”.

If we all can stop this arrogant, dangerous, pathological liar from becoming president then the pressure should continue AFTER the re-election of President Bush.

We need to keep this up after the election to totally destroy Kerry’s self-created image of himself. He does not deserve to sit another day in the Senate.

becca1223 · Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:38 am Post subject:

Objections to the Navy's refusal to open up the investigation can be addressed to Pat Chase, Assistant to R.A. Route, US Navy, Naval Inspector General. Pat's telephone number is (202) 433-2222.

Truegrit · Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2004 9:41 am Post subject: Navy should open records

The Navy should make these records available to the public, all of Kerry's service records. He is running for the top job in the country and the public has a right to know.
_________________
Ted Harwood, Ph.D.
Enlisted, U.S. Army ('57-'60)

rhv5862 · PO2 Joined: 21 Aug 2004 Posts: 379 Location: Massachusetts

Kerry keeps saying everything has been released even though the Navy says there are at least 100 documents that have not been released. This means the Navy has already looked into his records to have that information. Problem is Kerry will never sign SF 180. He cannot afford to have the truth come out.

RHV

Trickworm · Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:01 am Post subject:

I have a question. If the media can obtain President Bush's TANG records via a freedom of information request/suit even after he has signed a 180, why can't the same be done to obtain Kerry's records?

Unless Kerry's records are classified, which is either highly unlikely or highly suspicious considering his service and MOS, they should be made available by force of law via the freedom of information act.
_________________
"Uncommon valor was a common virtue"

mangdawg · Lt.Jg. Joined: 27 Aug 2004 Posts: 116

can he keep a lid on the AARs?

wouldn't others that were envolved in the same actions have access to them? how can he tie up the reports for all? i mean, there's a swiftie here that was on the boat. can't he get them?

cipher · Vice Admiral Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 902

The president did not sign an SF-180. As commander in chief, that would make available records of his military service as commander in chief (i.e., secret documents to the present time) that wouldn't be appropriate or wise to release.

What President Bush did do is write an Executive Order to release ALL his records from TANG and other ANG service. The EO has much more weight and power than an SF-180 without compromising any current military activities.

The FOIA filed by the media was just for the sake of doing it. Or to direct a search for records in an area where no one was expecting to find records. Signing an SF-180 causes a document dump of all known existing records. It does not guarantee ALL existing records are either known or released, hence an FOIA to initiate a search.

As to the SF-180, it is REQUIRED that the servicemember give permission to release records. It's always been that way, and probably always will be. An FOIA has no authority to release those records without the consent of the servicemember.
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92

Theresa Alwood · Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 2:01 am Post subject:

Becca

Do you have an e-mail address from Mr. Chase...just much easier than slow mail?

Thanks.
_________________
Born to raise a little hell!

mach9 · Seaman Apprentice Joined: 05 Oct 2004 Posts: 97

What's the penalty for leaking? Don't remember Ellsberg serving any time.

Stevie · Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 5:51 am Post subject:

boy, if I worked there, I'd do it..... it'd be worth getting a new job (I think I'd want a new job if that's how they work)....

even jail (for a short time) woud be worth it.... if someone would take care of my dogs....
_________________
Stevie
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage
morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should
be arrested, exiled or hanged.