Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Buzz Patterson: October Surprise? The Truth Behind Kerry's Military Discharge. What's Kerry Hiding?:
Human Events Online (via SwiftVets head's up) ^ | 10-26-04 | Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz" Patterson

Posted on 10/28/2004 10:31:26 PM PDT by cgk


Tuesday, October 26, 2004

October Surprise? The Truth Behind Kerry's Military Discharge. What's Kerry Hiding?:




"I have nothing to hide. I want you to ask me questions."
--John Kerry, Reuters, August 3, 2004

The only 180 John Kerry hasn't accomplished in his litany of flip-flops throughout his campaign is Standard Form 180, the paperwork necessary for the complete release of his military records from the Department of Defense repository.

The Kerry campaign and website continue to claim he has released all military records. In fact, they've released the few documents painting the senator in a favorable light. There are at least 100 pages, promising to be much more revealing, still unseen. Kerry controls their release. All he has to do is sign the Form 180. To date, he has refused.


It goes without saying the main stream media isn't clamoring for him to comply although they hounded President George Bush relentlessly to release his Air National Guard records. Bush, by the way, did the right thing--he signed his Form 180. Kerry has made his naval service the focal point for his election. Shouldn't we expect the war hero to open his military service to America? Where is the outrage (I ask tongue-in-cheek)? Where is the objective journalism? More realistically, what is Kerry hiding?

Thomas Lipscomb writing for the New York Sun and Geoff Metcalf of NewsMax.com have been pursuing Kerry's military record irregularities and his refusal to authorize their release tirelessly. Without Kerry's assistance, however, it will take a critical and very timely leak or we will never know the truth behind Kerry's military service in time for it to make the difference.

With true patriotism and integrity, John O'Neill and the Swifties have proven beyond any doubt that Kerry lacks the character and moral fiber to be the leader of our men and women in uniform. (As an aside, I've been touring the country with John O'Neill over the last several weeks, and I've never met a finer human being.)


The final element in Kerry's absolute failure to meet the standards our military deserves in a commander-in-chief, in this retired officer's opinion, is in the factual nature of Kerry's discharge (although I would love for some resourceful citizen find a way to republish and distribute Kerry's radical, anti-American tome The New Soldier -- which my publisher Regnery Publishing has offered to do for free -- and hand it out at the polls on November 2).

As for every veteran, the truth will be found the form DD214, the official Department of Defense document of release from military obligation given to Kerry when he exited military service on July 1, 1972. It is conspicuously absent from the documents released so far. Everyone serving in the military receives a DD214 the day they separate or retire from service. My suspicion along with a growing number of military personnel is that Kerry received an "other than honorable" discharge in the early 1970s as a consequence of his vehement anti-US, anti-military activities with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War and his potentially treasonous tête-à-têtes with North Vietnamese Communist officials in Paris. If not, let him release his records. If so, America should demand the release.

Kerry's activities during his post-war political resume building efforts are expressly prohibited by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 104, Part 904; the United States Code Title 18, Section 953 (18 USC Sec. 953); and, arguably, the Constitution, Article 3, Section 3. In fact, the Constitution's 14th Amendment, Section 3

declares, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President . . . (who has) engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." In another time and another place, at a minimum, Kerry would have faced courts martial. In another time and another place, Kerry would be breaking big rocks into little rocks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, the military penitentiary. Today, he stands on the brink of election as the leader of the free world.

Kerry has built an entire career based solely on four months in Vietnam and two years of post-war protesting. For a politician to have built so much on, and been so successful with, a foundation consisting largely of self-promotion, lies, and unpatriotic (some say treasonous) endeavors is utterly fantastic and extremely tenuous. And the Dems know it--ergo, the refusal on the part of the Kerry campaign to release the entirety of his military service records.

With what we do know, Kerry's paperwork doesn't pass the smell test. The few records so far released by his campaign identify FOUR "honorable" discharge dates (every other military member I know, myself included, received one). Kerry's released documentation notes discharges of January 3, 1970, February 16, 1978, July 13, 1978, and, most peculiarly, March 12, 2001. He has as many discharge dates as months he spent in Vietnam. In my twenty years in the Air Force and through the thousands of people I came to know and serve with, I have never heard of anyone in the military having more than one DD 214 with one discharge date. Kerry, according to his own campaign, has at least four.

There are five potential classes of discharge: Honorable, General, Other than Honorable, Bad Conduct, and Dishonorable. Why does it matter? It's the sum total of one's military service boiled down in a phrase. Most employers require former military members to attach their DD214 to their employment application. Anything other than "Honorable" is seen as a character flaw. Bad Conduct and Dishonorable obviously are causes for additional concern.

Because Kerry is submitting his employment application to the American people and might become our military's next commander in chief, we may be asking our troops to support a man who held himself to lower standards than he would demand from our 2.3 million in uniform. (This is precisely what happened under Bill Clinton's stewardship when the military prosecuted servicemen for sexual infidelity and harassment while the commander-in-chief was committing similar crimes in the Oval Office). In fact, if a former military member applies for employment with defense related industry, he is required to sign and submit Form 180. Kerry, seeking to be CEO for our nation's defense, has refused.

Here's the crux of the confusion. On February 18, 1966, Kerry obligated himself to a six-year commitment to the Navy, and to the tenets of the military judicial system, with an expiration date of July 1, 1972. On January 3, 1970, Kerry asked for, and was granted, an early transfer from his active duty service to the Naval Reserve. As a reservist, he was still under oath as a commissioned officer and subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He still carried a military ID card and was still a member of the U.S. armed forces. Kerry's service commitment came to an end, as scheduled, in July, 1972. As such, a DD Form 214 with a discharge status was due.

Kerry's "honorable" discharge, though, doesn't come until February 16, 1978. Why? Possibly because President Jimmy Carter, through Proclamation 4483, granted a full and complete pardon to all military personnel who committed offenses and violations of the Military Selective Service Act during the Vietnam War. He pardoned deserters, draft dodgers and those who went absent without leave (AWOL).

Interestingly, Kerry's honorable discharge letter from the Department of the Navy, dated February 16, 1978, notes that Kerry's discharge was taken "by direction of the President" and "with the approved recommendations of a board of officers convened under the authority of reference [10 USC Sec. 1163] to examine the official records of officers of the Naval Reserve.." This is extremely unusual. Review boards are not convened for discharges and certainly not "by direction of the President." The "authority of reference," 10 USC Sec. 1163, refers to "the grounds for involuntary separation from the service." What was being reviewed, then, was Kerry's involuntary separation from the service or, more likely, the disposition of his service. This simply would not have occurred if Kerry's discharge in 1972 had been "honorable." Why did Kerry's discharge meet a board? In all likelihood, he sought relief to improve his status of discharge from "dishonorable" or "less than honorable" to "honorable." If he signed his Form 180, we'd know. If he'd release his DD214 from 1972, we'd know.

Finally, and most bizarre of all of Kerry's military records so far released is a DD 215, "Correction to DD Form 214,"

initiated for John Forbes Kerry on March 12, 2001. Among other things, the new form changes Kerry's official US Navy separation date to March 1, 1970! As noted earlier, he wasn't eligible for discharge until July, 1972, and was so. Why, then, the new document in 2001? Why, 29 years later, is there the need to correct or change the record?

Here's why. By moving Kerry's discharge date to early in 1970, all of Kerry's post-Vietnam activities would be theoretically exempt from military justice. By moving his discharge date to March of 1970, Kerry's meeting with the enemy, North Vietnamese Communists in Paris in May of 1970, would be exempt. His joining the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) in June of 1970 and his radical, anti-war anti-government activities that followed would be exempt. The Winter Soldier Investigation in January, 1971, and Kerry's infamous testimony to Congress in April, 1971 would be exempt. His arrest for his protest activities in May, 1971, would be exempt. His attendance at a VVAW meeting in Kansas City where the assassination of several prominent and hawkish U.S. senators was discussed and voted on would be exempt.

Democratic presidential candidate Kerry has spent 35 years building a political career on four months in Vietnam. Apparently, he has spent 35 years covering up his post-war activities while still a member of the U.S. Navy many of which seem to be clear violations of the Constitution, US Codes, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Now, he stands on the verge of becoming our commander-in-chief, responsible for the stewardship of 2.3 million men and women in uniform. A former serviceman who won't come clean on his own record intends to command our forces and enforce the standards of military justice. We've been down this path before. America deserves to know. Our troops certainly deserve to know.

All it would take is for him to sign the Form 180.

- Posted 10:09 AM


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: buzzpatterson; dishonorable; kerry; kerrydischarge; napalminthemorning; swiftvets; vietnam; vvaw; wintersoldier; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 last
To: OldSmaj
John F'n Kerry is a worse liar, traitor, horse's ass and all around POS than Billy Boy Clintoon ever thought he could be.

Before this year I never imagined that Clinton could be seen in a positive way when compared to any other politician. I have changed my mind concerning him when it regards a contrast between him and either Al Gore or John Kerry.

Al Gore is mentally deranged and quite frightening. John Kerry on the other hand should be arrested, put in chains, and then given a fair trial for treasonous activities just before hanging him!

81 posted on 10/29/2004 7:38:33 AM PDT by Radix (Watch this Tag Line for an October surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub

Thanks for the ping!


82 posted on 10/29/2004 7:47:01 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Ref: "The cry should be
Where are Kerry's missing 1972 Discharge Papers!?

Is to remember. Easy to build around."


Absolutely!

RamS


83 posted on 10/29/2004 8:08:43 AM PDT by RamingtonStall (Ride Hard and far! ..... and with GPS, Know where you are!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub

Thanks for the ping, Tonk.

BTTT!!!


84 posted on 10/29/2004 8:10:46 AM PDT by TruthNtegrity ("No man works harder for his money than he who marries it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Comment #85 Removed by Moderator

To: cgk

Excellent post.


86 posted on 10/29/2004 8:20:16 AM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cgk
I and others have been writing about Kerry service and discharges for a while. Buzz Patterson does a great job of putting it all together.

Like Kerry I joined the service in 1966, with our service requirements ending in 1972. Kerry's numerous discharges and discharge dates are not normal and can only be the result of a discharge that was initially less than honorable.

Kerry's support of North Vietnamese during war make him unqualified to be President in accordance with the 14th amendment.

87 posted on 10/29/2004 8:20:39 AM PDT by LowNslow (Retired CWO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoeGar
Excellent summary. LtCol Buzz did not mention that the fact that Kerry's medals were re-issued which indicates that he got a Bad Conduct Discharge that rescinded them.

GREAT comment!!

Having many Navy friends, having worked on Navy contracts for 22 years of my career, I've been hearing them say this and wondered when someone would pick it up.

The "I threw them over the fence" was always a cover for the fact he had "lost" them, another way.

And Carter did us no favor with his blanket pardon but the subsequent discharge papers are still a mystery.

From the Buzz Patterson points, this one sticks out:

Finally, and most bizarre of all of Kerry's military records so far released is a DD 215, "Correction to DD Form 214," initiated for John Forbes Kerry on March 12, 2001. Among other things, the new form changes Kerry's official US Navy separation date to March 1, 1970! As noted earlier, he wasn't eligible for discharge until July, 1972, and was so. Why, then, the new document in 2001? Why, 29 years later, is there the need to correct or change the record?

I firmly believe that we need to inundate the MSM, Fox News, and the others that were suggested in the early comments to this thread, and try by sheer numbers of emails and telephone calls, to get this information out and center stage. We can make out own October surprise if enough of us got active on this topic alone.

88 posted on 10/29/2004 8:47:07 AM PDT by TruthNtegrity ("No man works harder for his money than he who marries it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
Unfortunately it's probably too late in the game for this issue to become front page news

PEOPLE HAVE GOT!!, absolutely must get over this unholy obsession with being validated by the LM. They are increasingly irrelevant. And you have to change as things change around you. We all prefer stability. It's the basis for a just society. But the sooner they are gone, replaced or transformed - the better. And that will contribute to a more just society, quite obviously. Much of the problem, today, IS directly caused by the LM themselve.

89 posted on 10/29/2004 9:02:09 AM PDT by sevry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rintense

Rush talking about this now...


90 posted on 10/29/2004 10:30:01 AM PDT by CedarDave (Served with pride alongside the Swifties, Coastal Division 13, Viet Nam, 1967-68.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave

Well, that was disappointing. He needs to dwell on this for more than a minute and a half.


91 posted on 10/29/2004 10:35:57 AM PDT by mwp99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: cgk

We should at least keep in public's eye that he refuses to sign form 180, that he has something very serious to hide. And hope some brave reporter will corner him about it.


92 posted on 10/29/2004 10:37:58 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tragically Single

If Kerry had ever used his DD214 to buy a house, using his VA benefits--it could be different than the one he's been allowing to be shown. The realtor/closing co./mortgage dept. of the VA would of had to have a copy of it. VA loans are assumable, so if the next buyer assumed his loan, might be in their files, as well. Might be interesting...


93 posted on 10/29/2004 10:51:44 AM PDT by RoseD (Oklahoma)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Dante3

The article by Buzz Patterson is the best synopsis of Kerry's questionable discharge history and most importantly, he does bring to the fore the one issue I hadn't quite appreciated, by making March 1970 the end of his service someone is attempting to ensure Kerry could be exempt from prosecution on his anti-war activities especially since I believe there isn't a statute of limitation on treason, so Kerry appears to have succeeded in whitewashing his military record.

Not only that but this makes it perfectly clear why the Navy refused Judicial Watch's request into a investigation into all of Kerry's medals. Between the questionable discharge issue and the questionable medals issue including foremost the unheard of three citiations for that Silver Star, a person or persons in the Navy was co-operating with Kerry on his whitewash, whether directed by someone in authority, Kerry himself or some other Senator from Mass., who knows.

For all we know those missing Navy records were shredded around the same time. By 2001, no doubt, Kerry likely figured he was making a run for the Presidency. Sydney Schanberg of the Village Voice, in his own investigation of Kerry as the Chairman of the POW/MIA Affairs Committee claimed Kerry's staff was shredding classified documents from that investigation to the protestation of intelligence agents who witnessed it. After all isn't it the DNC that claims Bush whitewashed his own military record - remember Bill Burkett, the DNC/CBS moonbat. What is it with Democrats and classified documents I wonder.

Of course Kerry's chairmanship of that Committee and his rush to establish normalization with Vietnam, covering up evidence that POWS and MIAs were seen alive in Vietnam, and the fact Kerry had a motive to be in such a hurry - his cousin secured $900 million dollars worth of Vietnam reconstruction contracts has oddly been ignored by the RNC and Swift Boats as well as the MSM.

But no wonder the Navy didn't want an investigation because they want to avoid their own scandal, that they could be so easily duped in issuing those medals in the first place or that Navy personnel could have been doctoring documents to aid the career of a Senator.

Now there had been some talk that the Navy was going to investigate the third citation of the Silver Star because John Lehman, the Former Secretary of the Navy publicly stated that he never wrote that citation nor signed it. I was scouting around and haven't find anything on it since this was reported by the NY Post several weeks ago.

Judicial Watch was appealing the Navy's decision not to investigate, and kudos to Judicial Watch for trying, but I'm not sure if the appeal has been heard yet.

But I seem to recall skimming across an item that said the citation was not signed by Lehman personally but was signed by one of those signature stamps. Hmmmmmm, kind of fits in with my theory here.

It amazes me that 60 Minutes or Bob Woodward wouldn't be all over something like this.

Of course now that Bob Woodward was snubbed by Kerry, Kerry better watch his back.


94 posted on 10/29/2004 11:23:24 AM PDT by littlelilac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
With only a few hours left, there is something we can do and that is to bombard your elected with the questions about Senator Kerry's discharge - it reeks of cronyism and hijinks in our government. E-mail the networks about this especially FOX - Brit Hume and Neil in particular - O'Reilly is on the fence. Somehow Kerry has gotten his "dishonorable discharge" changed - we know when, now we need to know the who and the how! Take ACTION.

SENATOR KERRY - TELL US ABOUT YOUR DISCHARGE AND SIGN YOUR FORM 180 - THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW THAT YOU DID NOT RECIEVE AN HONORABLE DISCHARGE FROM YOUR SERVICE IN VIETNAM!

95 posted on 10/29/2004 11:35:22 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

BTTT


96 posted on 10/29/2004 11:46:07 AM PDT by GretchenM (Rationing brings out the Ugly in some people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jackbill
Thanks :)

I believe it was done to correct medals as you've pointed out, but the wording also implies that the date of separation was changed (which to me looks like the same date of separation from his DD214).
97 posted on 10/29/2004 11:52:57 AM PDT by andyk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: hubno
Well, I understand all of that. In fact, I have my own framed discharge certificate (USAFR). However, LTC Patterson seems to think that the date of separation has been changed (ostensibly to decriminalize some of his post-war anti-war activities). Looking at Kerry's DD215 and DD214 reveal the same date of separation to me.

I must be missing something. At the same time, it has been shown that he would still be in violation of part of the UCMJ even as an inactive Naval Reserve officer (like when "honeymooning" twice in Paris with the commies).
98 posted on 10/29/2004 12:00:37 PM PDT by andyk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: LTCJ

the same America that elected, and re-elected Anklepants-a draft dodger of the highest order-not to mention his perjurious, adulterous activities, and his ability to prevaricate with the best of prevaricators...

A sad situation that this traitor has any chance at all of becoming the CIC-shows just how far this once-great country has fallen...

...and it brings tears to my eyes every time I think about it...


99 posted on 10/29/2004 10:54:59 PM PDT by snuffy smiff (Jean Fraud Kerry-the Botox BoatWarrior,"oh no, aground again and huge riceberg approaching")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Kristian; All
I wasn't ignoring your post. I usually surf with cookies off. Hung around for responses for a while then turned those darn cookies off. Just turned them on again.

You: "But, president Bush being the commander in chief, can't he ask Kerry to sign the forms needed to allow his record to be made public?"

I don't know the legal answer, but I believe our right to privacy trumps Bush being Commander in Chief.

Can anyone with specific legal knowledge answer Kristian?
100 posted on 11/02/2004 11:18:18 PM PST by MIsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson