Glad to be of help, Ma'am!
Posted on 09/05/2004 2:59:39 PM PDT by Keen-Minded
I am 'taking your advice' here... but thought you might get a chuckle out of this one...
http://www.frailart.net/members/zforce/bushspeech.jpg
This is slightly off topic, but in the Silver Star incident, Kerry beached his boat and took off running after a VC that had pointed an RPG at the boat. Wouldn't this be a violation of his duty to stay with the boat as its captain?
Shouldn't Kerry have sent one of his crew after the VC?
I have a navy vet for a friend that doesn't understand how he was rewarded for leaving his post.
My understanding, based upon what I have read elsewhere on this board, was that there was some sort of standing order, or recognized 'SOP', in effect at the time which should have precluded Kerry from either 1) running the boat up on shore, and 2) from leaving the boat in the face of hostile fire.
Of course if 'there was no hostile fire', as some here have suggested, then I am not sure those rules would have been in effect. Of course, if there 'was no hostile fire', it is my understanding that no 'purple hearts' or 'Silver Stars' should have been awarded either. Perhaps this is another of those "You cannot have it both ways, John." situations.
Sorry I am so little help (I was seven years in the 'Blue-Water Navy', and we did all our Haiphong Harbor raids after dark), but perhaps others here with more relevant experience can give you the answers you seek. (I am sure there will be no shortage of volunteers, hereabouts!)
Why do you think they stand by him so adamantly and the other OFFICERS who ran the other boats, despise him so much? The knew what he was doing even then.
You guys gotta read "Unfit for Command".
BTTT!!!!!!!
Bye Bye Kerry Bump!
I just received this email from a retired Spec. Ops - tough as nails - guy who believes it's 100% true.
Geoff Metcalf
Friday, Sept. 10, 2004
Careful what you ask for ...
Since February I have been ranting that the veteran community would eventually, inevitably become the prime contributor to the destruction of the John Kerry campaign. For months, I have been the Lone Ranger and viewed as a moderately amusing gadfly.
Guess what? I was right in February, and March, and April, and May. I was right in June, July and August … and despite what smarter, more insightful and ‘connected’ pundits maintain, Kerry is TOAST!
In March, I wrote in “The Kerry Count,” “Friends and foes in the punditry class have been pontificating ad nauseam, manipulating a kaleidoscope of factoids and data to support whatever their individual prejudices may be.” Some have accused me of manipulating “perceptions” to support my personal prejudices.
Smarter, more dedicated men than this writer have been beating the drum for MONTHS:
The veteran community jihad against John Kerry is NOT a partisan issue. John O’Neill of www.swiftvets.com has said so, Larry Bailey of www.kerrylied.com has said so, Steven Sherman of www.viet-myths.net has said so … and it IS so.
The overwhelming majority of veterans loathe John Kerry. The reasons vary. Some hate him for his treasonous conduct pimping for Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Some hate him for what they view as self-aggrandizing hyperbole. Some hate him for his arrogance, pretension and unlikeability.
The Kerry campaign made a monumental strategic ‘whoops’ when they chose to build the foundation for ‘Versailles de Kerry’ on his Vietnam experience.
Do-overs have become chronic … and it ain’t over yet.
Frankly, if Kerry had taken a lower profile and not focused on his martial exploits (recreated in his home movies), he might have avoided the inevitable embarrassment and destruction of his antique fiction. Rather, by his OWN focus on apparently exaggerated derring-do, he will be forced to realize that there are consequences to everything we do and do not do.
Republicans will never criticize the “decorated war hero.” They are scared spitless of any linkage with the anti-Kerry veteran legions. However, thousands of decorated war heroes with significantly greater service, scars, experience and insights loathe and detest the pampered Brahmin prince.
But the excrement storm thus far is mere prologue. There IS more …
On Feb. 18, 1966, John Kerry signed a six-year enlistment contract with the Navy (plus a six-month extension during wartime). He also signed an Officer Candidate contract for six years – five years of ACTIVE duty & ACTIVE Naval Reserves, and one year of inactive standby reserves.
Since Kerry was discharged from TOTAL ACTIVE DUTY after only three years and 18 days, on Jan. 3, 1970, he was then required to attend 48 drills per year and not more than 17 days of active duty for training. Most significant, however, is that Kerry was also subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
That means as a commissioned officer Kerry was prohibited from making adverse statements against his chain of command or statements against his country, especially during time of war.
Another one of those interesting ‘clerical errors’ is that Kerry did not obtain an honorable discharge until March 12, 2001, even though his service obligation should have ended July 1, 1972.
On Jan. 3, 1970, Lt. John Kerry was transferred to the Naval Reserve Manpower Center in Bainbridge, Md. Therefore, there should be Performance Records for two years of obligated Ready Reserve, the 48 drills per year required and his 17 days of active duty per year training while Kerry was in the Ready Reserves. Have these records been released?
Has anyone ever talked to Kerry's commanding officer at the Naval Reserve Center where Kerry drilled?
Kerry’s conduct as a Ready Reservist participating as a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War was criminal, some veterans now argue:
Lt. Kerry, by his own words and actions, violated the UCMJ and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy officer. Failing a REAL good explanation, Lt. Kerry is in violation of Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution.
Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 & U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and Kerry's subsequent support of the communists while leading mass protests against our military in the year that followed, also place him in direct violation of our Constitution's Article 3, Section 3, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.
The Constitution's 14th Amendment, Section 3, states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Senator Kerry, having established his ‘service’ as the foundation for his campaign, has some explaining to do. The only way to chill the barrage of questions is to sign off on a Standard Form (SF) 180 and let the media examine John Kerry’s FULL military record.
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.
