SwiftVets.com

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

chief

me I have been trying to make my wife think I have

parisominia, I wake up screeming, and it scares her just

like curry, oops, kerry scares "terresssa" , then I say "hon"

the only thing that will help is Ice Creme.

ps chief got my ticket to the deal tuesday and a place in the

"welcome committee" for you know who

nut case work is never done, and Navy and military regulations are

not a total requirement if you can take the capitians mast ,and have

skill levels enough to get "$$" fines of low values and no "bust down

from your IPO level, with them sure you and your's by all odds will

most likley not make it to the end of your one year tour anyway.
_________________
the strange mr aj

openfish24 · Lt.Jg. Joined: 18 Aug 2004 Posts: 140

If the discharge was honorable why were the medals re-issued?

USAF66-70 · Lt.Jg. Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 136

Cipher says

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

hanna · Rear Admiral Joined: 07 Aug 2004 Posts: 701

Ok I have read every single post in this thread and other material on this subject and I still do not get how someone can enlist in 1966 for a 6 year term and still be involved with the Navy in any way in 1978 unless he voluntarily re-enlists. If this 1978 thing is a cooked up discharge so he can have an honorable one and he really left the service in 72' then wouldn't it be easy to establish that there was no activity on his part between 72 and 78....no pay, no drills, no assignments, and oh my gosh no more medals no not one in all that time?? UNTHINKABLE. I am anxious to listen to this in the morning but if anyone has words or enlightenment before then and feel like sharing, please do.

flagreen · Seaman Joined: 10 Sep 2004 Posts: 175

Do "we" have his pay records from the Navy? From both his active and reserve service? There might be a clue in those. Or do the pay records also require that he sign the 180 form?

avant · Ensign Joined: 30 Aug 2004 Posts: 59

drjohn · Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:04 pm Post subject:

"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."

This is the legislation during which Kerry used his Christmas in Cambodia story which was seared into his a**- oops, I mean mind.

CK_Phantom · Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:23 pm Post subject:

Cali-HeyGirl · Seaman Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 156 Location: Mayport

Rdtf · CNO Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 2209 Location: BUSHville

When I think about all this I have to remember how Clinton made sure his entire staff at the White House were able to avoid background investigations. They could have been criminals or traitors, but if you know about any of this remember how he was able to get away with putting anyone there in any position and the FBI was successfully kept from doing their basic background checks. They had access to highly sensitive info!! I think about that, and how there was no outrage - and just know that Kerry having a secret clearance pulled 30 years ago won't mean squat to kool aid drinkers, or even those just sipping. A shame!

hanna · Rear Admiral Joined: 07 Aug 2004 Posts: 701

CK_Phantom - Why did it require a board of officers and why did it not happen until 1978?

CK_Phantom · Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:27 pm Post subject:

Hanna, you can read the complete article here.

--- From the New York Sun ---

.....

The document is a form cover letter in the name of the Carter administration's secretary of the Navy, W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry's discharge as being subsequent to the review of "a board of officers." This in it self is unusual. There is nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action in the Navy that requires a review by a board of officers.

According to the secretary of the Navy's document, the "authority of reference" this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry's record was "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. "This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge.

.....

The "board of officers" review reported in the Claytor document is even more extraordinary because it came about "by direction of the President." No normal honorable discharge requires the direction of the president. The president at that time was James Carter. This adds another twist to the story of Mr. Kerry's hidden military records.

Mr. Carter's first act as president was a general amnesty for draft dodgers and other war protesters. Less than an hour after his inauguration on January 21, 1977, while still in the Capitol building, Mr. Carter signed Executive Order 4483 empowering it. By the time it became a directive from the Defense Department in March 1977 it had been expanded to include other offenders who may have had general, bad conduct, dishonorable discharges, and any other discharge or sentence with negative effect on military records.

.....

There is one odd coincidence that gives some weight to the possibility that Mr. Kerry was dishonorably discharged. Mr. Kerry has claimed that he lost his medal certificates and that is why he asked that they be reissued. But when a dishonorable discharge is issued, all pay benefits, and allowances, and all medals and honors are revoked as well. And five months after Mr. Kerry joined the U.S. Senate in 1985, on one single day, June 4, all of Mr. Kerry's medals were reissued.

--------------------
FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE CLICK HERE
_________________
----------
Phantom

US Army "Cold War" Veteran
Born in the USofA on the 4th of July.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.

Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759

hanna · Rear Admiral Joined: 07 Aug 2004 Posts: 701

Read that a million times before.......I misunderstood what you were saying about the thing being reviewed..my mistake.

Listened to Lipscomb interview. Sounds like it could go either way:((( You have to give Kerry credit for one thing.......he makes Slick Willy look like super glue;/

RMalloy · PO3 Joined: 23 Aug 2004 Posts: 280

What about the Teddy Kennedy factor? Kerry was a protege of Teddy's
from back in the Sixties. Kerry said he never met Teddy until the
Winter Soldier protest on the Mall in April, 71. Yet, Kerry mentions he
worked on Teddy's Senate Campaign in the Sixties, before Kerry went
off to his "tour of duty."

Kerry said he criss-crossed the state working on Kennedy's Campaign
in his Beetle in the sixties.
There is a photo of Kerry as a teenager on a boat with a bunch of Kennedy's,
John included. Kerry knew the Kennedy's.

Think about this? Ted Kennedy was a Senator when he was involved
in Chappaquidick. Ted Kennedy ran off and left a woman in a
submerged car while he slept if off in a hotel room. Kennedy remained the Senator
from Massachusetts. It was extraordinary for him to not be kicked out.

Here you have Kerry in thick with Kennedy. Strings were pulled. Favors
made. Who sponsored Kerry in the Skull and Bones at Yale? Could
have been Kennedy. Teddy was almost effectively neutered by
Chappaquidick yet he did later run for President and still remains
a Senator.

It is a conumdrum as to Kerry's ability to skate through everything
sleazy he's done but maybe someone with a lot of power was greasing
the blades for him.