SwiftVets.com

[d19thdoc]

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE IN THE ACTIVE MILITARY TO COMMIT TREASON! THIS IS THEIR DIVERSION OF DENIABILITY. DON'T FALL FOR IT.
_________________
For The Honor of the Fifty-Eight Thousand.
"He Can Lose, But He Can Not Hide"

[ASPB]

[rb325th]

His own Campaigns extremely weak retort to the issue is unreal!
"He was in Paris and met once by chance.." yadda yadda yadda
They totaly deny the second incident, that there is documentation in Kerrys own words (again) that he had gone a second time and met with Represenatives of the North Vietnames Govt.!
He came back both times and spoke at length about the discussions and presented the Norths"Peace Plan"!!
How the heck can they honestly try and deny something that is recorded both in Audio?Video of Kerry and his direct quotes in a Newspaper Article contained in the F.B.I Files?!?
They truely think the American People are Stupid!!
_________________
U.S. Army 1983-1995, 11C1P/11H2P NBTDT

[DaveL]

[Steve Z]

Hat's off to you, SooZQ !

Unlike most TV journalists, Brit Hume is a patriotic American!
_________________
The traitor will crater!

[poseidon]

[carpro]

Read it yourself and see what you think.


http://www.military-network.com/main_ucmj/SUBCHAPTERI.htm#802

802. ART. 2. PERSONS SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER

(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:

(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.

(2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipman.

(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.

(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.

(5) Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force.

(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

(7) Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial.

(8 ) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.

(9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.

(10) In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.

(11) Subject to any treaty or agreement t which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

(12) Subject to any treaty or agreement t which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons within an area leased by or otherwise reserved or acquired for use of the United States which is under the control of the Secretary concerned and which is outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. (b) The voluntary enlistment of any person who has the capacity to understand the significance of enlisting in the armed forces shall be valid for purposes of jurisdiction under subsection (a) and change of status from civilian to member of the armed forces shall be effective upon the taking of the oath of enlistment. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person serving with an armed force who--(1) Submitted voluntarily to military authority; (2) met the mental competence and minimum age qualifications of sections 504 and 505 of this title at the time of voluntary submissions to military authority: (3) received military pay or allowances; and (4) performed military duties: is subject to this chapter until such person's active service has been terminated in accordance with law or regulations promulgated by the Secretary concerned. (d) (1) A member of a reserve component who is not on active duty and who is made the subject of proceedings under section 815 (article 15) or section 830 (article 30) with respect to an offense against this chapter may be ordered to active duty involuntary for the purpose of-(A) investigation under section 832 of this title (article 32); (B) trial by court-martial; or (C) non judicial punishment under section 815 of this title (article15). (2) A member of a reserve component may not be ordered to active duty under paragraph (1) except with respect to an offense committed while the member was (A) on active duty; or (B) on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal service. (3) Authority to order a member to active duty under paragraph (1) shall be exercised under regulations prescribed by the President. (4) A member may be ordered to active duty under paragraph (1) only by a person empowered to convene general courts-martial in a regular component of the armed forces. (5) A member ordered to active duty under paragraph (1), unless the order to active duty was approved by the Secretary concerned, may not—(A) be sentenced to confinement; or (B) be required to serve a punishment of any restriction on liberty during a period other than a period of inactive-duty training or active duty (other than active duty ordered under paragraph (1).
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service."

[BB Stacker]

It may matter in a judicial sense whether or not Kerry was active or reservist at the time. There are certainly legal aspects to explore. But it will be politially damaging to Kerry in either case to have this little escapade to Paris aired on national media.

The Democrat spin masters have a herculean task on this one.

[m_drummond]

This is a good start, but rather than just releasing a statement, we gotta get the reporters educated. To a similar DNC flaks response, "How do we know Kerry's status is accurate as you say, we don't have all the documents. Why won't Sen. Kerry sign Form 180 so there won't be a records dispute?" "Can you update us on the status of Judicial Watch's complaint against Sen. Kerry?" "After you get Sen Kerry to sign Form 180 so we get all these disputed documents behind us, will the Kerry Campaign request that JAG analyze these documents and provide an opinion on whether or not Sen Kerry committed treason by negotiating with the North Vietnamese in Paris?"
________
Blowjob extreme

[ASPB]

At the time, Kerry held a reserve commission in the the U.S. Navy, active or inactive ready reserve may have variances as a matter of the UCMJ but it doesn't free him from the Logan Act or the Constitution.

He's Benedict Arnold in the minds of American voters if the story is told right.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[Debs]

The way I understand this from UFC is that while he was on inactive status in the Naval Reserves, as he was in 1971 when he engaged in all his anti-war activities, he would probably still be under the code of the UCMJ, but if he was on Standby Reserves, he could arguably claim to have civilian status.

Debbie
_________________
"No greater love..."

[carpro]

Article 6 gives me hope.

(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

It looks as if being in the Army reserve and the Navy or Marine reserve may not be subject to the same rules. Is this possible.

Someone needs to ask Navy JAG.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service."

[MACVJOE]

I do believe that the RNC is going to go after the Kerry AWOL Paris story. note :
http://www.bushcountry.org/

I also heard that the RNC is going to start pushing this issue.
_________________
Retired 86 Army
MACV Upper Delta 68-69

[EODARMY]

Here's Corsi on the law:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Author: Kerry's Meeting With Communists Broke U.S. Law
Marc Morano, CNSNews.com
Thursday, May 20, 2004
The 1970 meeting that John Kerry conducted with North Vietnamese communists violated U.S. law, according to an author and researcher who has studied the issue.
Kerry met with representatives from "both delegations" of the Vietnamese in Paris in 1970, according to Kerry's own testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971. But Kerry's meetings with the Vietnamese delegations were in direct violation of laws forbidding private citizens from negotiating with foreign powers, according to researcher and author Jerry Corsi, who began studying the anti-war movement in the early 1970s.
According to Corsi, Kerry violated U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953. "A U.S. citizen cannot go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power," Corsi told CNSNews.com.
By Kerry's own admission, he met in 1970 with delegations from the North Vietnamese communist government and discussed how the Vietnam War should be stopped.
Kerry explained to Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman J. William Fulbright in a question-and-answer session on Capitol Hill a year after his Paris meetings that the war needed to be stopped "immediately and unilaterally." Then Kerry added: "I have been to Paris. I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government."
However, both of the delegations to which Kerry referred were communist. Neither included the U.S. allied, South Vietnamese or any members of the U.S. delegation. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam was the government of the North Vietnamese communists, and the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PVR) was an arm of the North Vietnamese government that included the Vietcong.
Kerry did meet face-to-face with the PVR's negotiator Madam Nguyen Thi Binh, according to his presidential campaign spokesman Michael Meehan. Madam Binh's peace plan was being proposed by the North Vietnamese communists as a way to bring a quick end to the war.
But Corsi alleged that Kerry's meeting with Madam Binh and the government of North Vietnam was a direct violation of U.S. law.
"In [Kerry's] first meeting in 1970, meeting with Madam Binh, Kerry was still a naval reservist - not only a U.S. citizen, but a naval reservist - stepping outside the boundaries to meet with one of the principle figures of our enemy in Vietnam, Madam Binh, and the Viet Cong at the same time. [Former Nixon administration aide Henry] Kissinger was trying to negotiate with them formally," Corsi told CNSNews.com.
Corsi's recent essay, titled "Kerry and the Paris Peace Talks," published on wintersoldier.com, details Kerry's meetings and the possible violations of U.S. law.
Corsi also asserted that by 1971, Kerry might have violated another law by completely adopting the rhetoric and objectives of the North Vietnamese communists.
Definition of Treason
"Article three: Section three [of the U.S. Constitution], which defines treason, says you cannot give support to the enemy in time of war, and here you have Kerry giving a press conference in Washington on July 22, 1971 (a year after his meeting with the communist delegations in Paris) advocating the North Vietnamese peace plan and saying that is what President Nixon ought to accept," Corsi explained.
"If Madam Binh had been there herself at that press conference, she would have said exactly what Kerry said. The only difference is she would not have done it with a Boston accent," Corsi said.
The 7 Point Plan created by the North Vietnamese communists was nothing more than a "surrender" for the U.S., according to Corsi.
"You don't advocate that [7 point] plan unless you are on the communist side. It was seen as surrender. [The U.S.] would have had to pay reparations and agree that we essentially lost the war," Corsi said.
Communist Shill
"Kerry was openly advocating that the communist position was correct and that we were wrong. He had become a spokesman for the communist party," Corsi added.
Kerry's presidential campaign did not return repeated phone calls seeking comment, but campaign spokesman Michael Meehan told the Boston Globe in March, "Kerry had no role whatsoever in the Paris peace talks or negotiations.
"He did not engage in any negotiations and did not attend any session of the talks," Meehan added.
'From Their Point of View'
Kerry "went to Paris on a private trip, where he had one brief meeting with Madam Binh and others. In an effort to find facts, he learned that status of the peace talks from their point of view and about any progress in resolving the conflict, particularly as it related to the fate of the POWs," Meehan added. Kerry was reportedly on his honeymoon with his first wife, Julia Thorne, when he met with the communist delegations.
But Corsi does not accept the Kerry campaign's explanation.
"Meehan made it sound like they were just there on a honeymoon and they got a meeting with Madam Bin, but not every American honeymooner got to meet with Madam Binh. Unless you had a political objective and they identified you as somebody as sympathetic, you were not going to get invited to a meeting with Madam Binh," Corsi said.
"Kerry has skirted with the issue of violating these laws," Corsi added. Sen. Kerry's presidential campaign is "trying to fudge on the issue because they don't want to come clean on it entirely."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In June 1971, Le Duc Tho arrived in Paris to join the North Vietnamese Communist delegation to the peace talks. His arrival marked a sea change in the Communists' approach to advancing their goals via negotiations. Le Duc Tho was with Ho Chi Minh one of the original founders of the Communist Party of Indochina, one of North Vietnam's chief strategists.
He arrived to join a comrade, Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, who had been a member of the Central Committee for the National Front for the Liberation of the South, and was now Foreign Minister of the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PRG) of South Vietnam. The military arm of the PRG was widely known as the Viet Cong, just as Madame Binh was widely recognized as the Viet Cong delegate to the conference.
On July 1, 1971, within days of Le Duc Tho's arrival, Madame Binh advanced a new 7-Point Proposal to end the war. Central to this plan was a cleverly crafted provision offering to set a date for the return of U.S. prisoners of war in exchange for the Americans setting a date for complete, unilateral military withdrawal from Vietnam. In other words, America could have her POWs back only if we would agree we lost, surrender, and set a date to leave.
About one year earlier, two young Americans had also come to Paris, arguably for their honeymoon -- John Kerry, a young, clean-shaven Navy war veteran, accompanied by his new wife, the former Julia Thorne, whose lineage traced back to George Washington.
But honeymooning was not John Kerry's only purpose in traveling to Paris. Kerry's presidential campaign has now acknowledged that he "talked privately with a leading communist representative" there.
On April 22, 1971, as he testified before Senator Fulbright's Committee on Foreign Relations, John Kerry mentioned that in Paris he had meetings with "both sides" of the Paris Peace Talks. The strong likelihood is that John Kerry also met with Le Duc Tho, or some other representative of the North Vietnamese delegation, in addition to Madame Binh who was in Paris representing the PRG. There is no reason to assume John Kerry had any interest in meeting with representatives of the other two sides in the Peace Talks -- the United States or South Vietnam.
Madame Binh's proposal was carefully crafted to send a strong emotional message to the American home front; that the only barrier to having our POWs returned was America's own unwillingness to set a date to withdraw -- even if the proposed withdrawal amounted to a defeat. The 7-Point Proposal directly challenged the South Vietnamese proposal to set a date for a truce and a free election designed to reunify Vietnam. The PRG and the Viet Cong clearly agreed with the Premier of Communist China, Cho En-lai that complete withdrawal of American military forces from Vietnam was the only precondition that would be discussed.
On July 22, 1971, John Kerry called a press conference in Washington, D.C. Speaking on behalf of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), Kerry openly urged President Nixon to accept Madame Binh's 7-Point plan. As the New York Times noted the following day, John Kerry suggested that President Nixon had refused to set a date for withdrawal because North Vietnam had not guaranteed the return of American POWs. Now that the Vietnamese Communists were promising to set a POW return date, Kerry argued that Nixon had no reasonable course left, except to set a date for withdrawing US military forces. Kerry failed to mention one consideration President Nixon most likely found compelling -- that America's cause was just and that the interests of freedom might best be served halting the spread of Communism in Southeast Asia. The U.S., in President Nixon's view, had not fought the war to abandon our allies to Communism but to defend South Vietnam's right to self-determination.
Today, presidential candidate John Kerry would have us believe that the only goal of his anti-war activities was to speak up bravely against a war he knew to be without justification. All he wanted to do was to stop a war where military policies such as free fire zones, the issuance of .50 caliber machine guns to Swift Boats, and tactics such as search-and-destroy led inevitably to war crimes, the killing of innocent civilians and the burning of peaceful villages.
John Kerry today wants us to believe that he has always been an anti-Communist. Yet the historical record raises questions about that claim. Loyal Americans think twice about violating the legal provision against negotiating with foreign powers (18 U.S.C. 953) and the Constitutional prohibition against giving support to our nation's enemies during wartime (Article III, Section 3). Anti-Communists do not openly support proposals that amount to an American surrender to Communist enemies in time of war.
John Kerry may believe in his own mind that his participation in the anti-war cause lifted him to a new moral plane, one where he would not be restricted by conventional legal distinctions or common-sense understandings of patriotism. Yet the record shows that Kerry and the VVAW consistently coordinated their efforts with Communists, both foreign and domestic, represented their positions, and repeated their grossly exaggerated claims of American atrocities. In fact, it is hard to find any disagreement whatsoever between Kerry's words and actions as a leader of the VVAW and those of the Hanoi and Vietcong leadership. Had Madame Binh herself been permitted to testify before that Senate committee in place of John Kerry, the most noticeable difference might have been the absence of a Boston accent.

[Stevie]

carpo,

see posts 1 or 2 above here from Navy Chief.....in response to my post.
_________________
Stevie
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage
morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should
be arrested, exiled or hanged.