Shoe on other foot for Kerry. Hmmmmm...

[Kurt Stover]

Kerry was AWOL from Navy Reserve service
April 25, 2003

John Kerry signed an agreement as part of his naval officer commission to serve at least 3 years on active duty and the remainder of his obligated 6 year service in the Ready Reserves. Ready Reserves are those who must attend drills.

This is the agreement he released with his military records:

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/j...offcandagr.pdf

You will note that Kerry obligated himself to at least 3 years active duty, and the remainder of a 6 year obligation in the READY (not Standby) Reserves.

He further agreed that while in the READY Reserves (from discharge to 1972) he would perform no less than 48 drills per year and up to 17 active duty days per year, or alternatively 30 active duty days per year.

None of the released records shows any record of his performing these Ready Reserve obligated days in 1970, 71, 72, after which he was transferred to the Inactive Reserves. (This is as of 22 April - he may have released more since then). The only Performance of Duty form released covers 1966. There should be one for every year.

Nor is there any excusal from drilling status in his records, or alternatively, pay and attendance records indicating that he performed any drills in 1970-72 as required of a Ready Reservist.

It was George Bush's alleged non-performance of his obligated reserve duty that caused all the furor last February, yet Kerry apparently can not show his performance of his obligated Reserve duty.

The Kerry campaign has said that his separation from active duty put him in the inactive, non-drilling Naval Reserve so he could run for Congress. This is NOT true, as follows:

This following website record shows his transfer from the Ready Reserves to the Standby (Inactive) reserves did not occur until March 1972, NOT upon his release from Active Duty to run for Congress (1969/70).

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/j...2stndyrsrv.pdf

And this following form indicates the official transfer from the Ready Reserves to the Standby (Inactive) Reserves did not formalize until July 1972.:

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/j...ervicercrd.pdf

Contrary to what Kerry's minions say, the wording on his Release from Active Duty (to run for Congress) does NOT put him in the INACTIVE RESERVES - it puts him in Inactive Duty status, which includes Ready Reserves with attendant drill obligation. BIG difference - and the confusion is understandable. The legal specifics are Title 10 duty (Active Duty) Green Card) vs.. Title 32 duty (Inactive Duty) Red Card).

Had he been placed in the INACTIVE RESERVES in 1970 upon his release from AD, as Kerry's people suggest, there would not have been the 1972 Transfer to the Standby Reserves form that I show above - he would have already been there.

Also, if the timing of these records is correct, as a drilling Ready Reserve naval officer, in 1970-72 he was somewhat restricted by military regulations in what comments he could make in public regarding statements on the military leadership and the National Command Authority. Yet this is the period of his most public protests and anti-war demonstrations. In fact, his hairdo in the 1970-72 period would not meet Navy standards, and he would be sent home from drill if he had ever attended one.

[namgrunt]

Gunny
I wish you could see the grin on my face as I read this posting. I felt like the Cheshire Cat in Disney's "Alice in Wonderland", with a grin this wide.

The more landmines Kerry lays for President Bush, the deeper into his own minefield he locks himself. When the time arrives to vote, he won't be able to back out safely in any direction without tripping a mine of his own making.

He is already unravelling, as witnessed on Good Morning America, with host Charlie Gibson. On the act of tossing decorations over the fence at the Capitol building, Gibson said "Senator, I saw you...", implying Gibson was PRESENT, or that he had access to newstape. Kerry told Gibson to his face, "No, you didn't see me...", which caused Gibson's jaw to drop a bit, but he didn't follow through with a hardball question.

I'm of the opinion that during the election run, we will uncover a scarecrow beneath Kerry's multi-thousand dollar suits. He is a carefully crafted artifact in the form of a man. He is a chameleon, changing patterns to suit the moment. If this is how he handles the American public he expects to put him in office, then how will he act toward foreign leaders and countries which don't have our best interests at heart? What sort of country will exist at the end of a Kerry term in the Oval Office? Not pleasant to contemplate.

Not the right man for the job is my conclusion of Kerry.

[USMC-FO]

All this is interesting to read but when all is said and done does not seem, to me, to amount to much more that a wad of spit. Those that oppose Kerry or Bush can find ample reason to support their own unique perspective with both men if they choose to dig deep enough and parse enough documents to support one point of view or another.

In reading this, and I am not a lawyer, there are easily enough escape lines from this agreement that I doubt it would be hard to get out from under the supposed stipulations of the agreement.

When all is said and done many feel that Bush basicly drew a 'tit' assignment and didn't meet the mimiums of the guard and which we all recall was used to skate hard time on the front. Just as many will never forgive Kerry his actions on the capitol steps or his insufficent wounds.

What does this all really point to? A very divided nation. We all loose in that senerio.