Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/27/2004 7:46:03 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2004 8:39:44 PM EST by cm]
well, i tried to be neutral and see what people though about somthing i heard, but didn't get much as far as an interpretation, so here it goes again, except this is the full context and everything...

the question is, did kerry get a dishonorable discharge.

listen to the following and let me know what you think.

The following is an interview conducted in Nov 1971, on the TV program Viewpoints, at the TV studios of WRC-TV, Washington, DC. Go to the url kerry 1971 interview
click on the blue box which says: A November 6, 1971 interview with John Kerry on protesting the war in Vietnam. (10 min.)

A real media file will play, when it plays listen closely to the section that starts around 2 minutes 50 secs.

Key conversation is Debbie: Was there every any question about you being dishonourably discharged? Kerry: oh no, no, that has never been questioned.

The last question was awkwardly phrased, as some people can say that it could be intrepreted as either 1) a dishonorable discharged had occurred, and D: was asking if there had been any questions about it, or 2) had there been raised any questions about a dishonorable discharge occurring

is this something, or do i need to go back to school and relearn english?

How does this apply – see the article written by writer Thomas Lipscomb in the NY Sun - subcriber link - the link is now protected, they (the paper ) protected it for subscribers, i will look for a copy somewhere. i will post a summary in another post below of this article

My impression of this is that she knew a dishon dc (dishonorble(y) discharge) had occurred, and was asking if anyone had said anything about it. If it had not occurred, wouldn't the question be "was there ever a question about the possiblity you might be dishon dc'ed?". also, kerry seems surprised, then, almost smuggly replies that there had never been any question about the dishon dc, as he brushes off the question.

edited to hot link site, unhot linked subscriber site, edited title
Link Posted: 10/27/2004 7:48:16 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2004 7:52:24 PM EST by MrKasab]
20 years in the Senate and this has never come up before?! If it had come up before, it would be something many people would remember.
Edit: neither link is good.
Link Posted: 10/27/2004 7:54:55 PM EST
I've been asking this for years, I don't want to see the upgrade that Jimmy Carter signed I want to see the first discharge DD214
Link Posted: 10/27/2004 8:01:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By TwoStage:
I've been asking this for years, I don't want to see the upgrade that Jimmy Carter signed I want to see the first discharge DD214



Ya know, for years its been rumored that Bush Sr.s service in WWII was really a sham. He was actually secretly planted by the Argentinians. I want to see his real DD214, not the phony one the Argents cooked up for him.

And as for W, well I think everyone knows that he was, and still is on the payroll of the TSS (Texas Secret Society). Their meetings are cloaked in total secrecy, that's why no one knows anything about them.

If my cousin's wife's hairdresser hadn't been dating a former FBI agent, well, I want to see his papers too.
Link Posted: 10/27/2004 8:06:59 PM EST

Originally Posted By jimb100:

Originally Posted By TwoStage:
I've been asking this for years, I don't want to see the upgrade that Jimmy Carter signed I want to see the first discharge DD214



Ya know, for years its been rumored that Bush Sr.s service in WWII was really a sham. He was actually secretly planted by the Argentinians. I want to see his real DD214, not the phony one the Argents cooked up for him.

And as for W, well I think everyone knows that he was, and still is on the payroll of the TSS (Texas Secret Society). Their meetings are cloaked in total secrecy, that's why no one knows anything about them.

If my cousin's wife's hairdresser hadn't been dating a former FBI agent, well, I want to see his papers too.



Nice try, sport. The DD214 Kerry has released is dated years after the expiration of his term of service, and his tardy separation papers make reference to review by a panel of officers, which is not part of the ordinary process for obtaining an honorable discharge. The Navy has confirmed that there are 100 pages of Kerry's military records which Kerry has not agreed to release.

Were you already an ass, or did you just make an ass of yourself?
Link Posted: 10/27/2004 8:24:10 PM EST
How is it he could even end up with that many pages in his records. I did four years and not counting any medical or dental records I probably have mabey 10 peices of paper I consider important. I realize this is some thing from 30 years in a different military, and he was an officer, but it seems extreme to have records that thick for his time in the service.
Link Posted: 10/27/2004 8:24:11 PM EST

here is a summary about the mystery concerning kerry's records

It is known that kerry enlisted in the naval reserves in feb 18, 1966 for a six year enlistment,. This should have consisted of 5 years of active service, either active duty, or active naval reserves, and 1 year of inactive standby reserves.

Kerry only served about three years of active duty, which meant that he should have had an additional three years of duty before discharge. As he was discharged from active navy to inactive naval reserve on jan 03 ’70, that would put his discharge on july 1, 1972.

Confusion exist, because on johnkerry.com, his honorable discharge from naval reserves
honorable discharge from reserves is dated feb 16, ’78, and his acceptance of discharge naval reserve show the navy accepting kerry’s discharge, dated jul 13, ’78 acceptance of discharge from reserves


what has been pointed out in an article by Thomas Lipscomb in the NY Sun is that the honorable discharge from naval reserves was given after a review based on Title 10, US code section 1162, and 1163.

Looking at the codes via cornell.edu,
The actual statues have changed, howerver, these sections do refer to
1162 reserve officers may be dicharged by the president, or by the secretary of the service they fall under
1163 refers to limitations on involuntary separation of reserve officers – see 12683 – an officer can’t be separated from a service except by a board of officers or a court martial

As noted, the discharge occurred under the Carter administration, which had granted amnesty to draft dodgers and antiwar protesters. As the NY Sun article points out, the first line of the honorable discharge naval reserves document states “by direction of the president”, something a normal honorable discharge would never involve.

It is noted that president Carter granted amnesty to thousands of draft dodgers shortly after attaining presidency, and it has been said that this amnesty extended to granting upgrades to discharge statuses, from general/dishonorable to honorable. The changing of a less than honorable discharge into an honorable one would explain why kerry’s discharge paperwork refers to the Title 10 codes, and why it occurred in 1978.

Link Posted: 10/27/2004 8:28:35 PM EST
The most recent attempt to obtain some of this information was by the group Judicial Watch. It has been noted in some articles that Judicial Watch was apparently specifically trying to get a copy of a honourable discharge form dd form 256n, for information about kerry’s discharge. The attempt to obtain the information through the FOIA was presented to the navy, however, the navy responded that it could not release 31 pages because a form 180 had not been filed yet. The naval response can be seen here judical watch

- been trying to do my homework ever since i first found this a/v - thanks to all those that responded to my question about how to confirm if someone was dishonorably discharged a few months ago...
Link Posted: 10/27/2004 8:42:36 PM EST
Originally he was for it, but then he opposed it, but knowing what we know now, he'd have done it the other way...

Oh, wait...nevermind.
Top Top