Re: Kerry and the 14th Amendment
From: Fred Bloggs (nospam_at_nospam.com)
Date: 09/16/04
- Next message: Ken Smith: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Previous message: Clifford Heath: "Re: incredible"
- In reply to: mountains_at_iname.com: "Re: Kerry and the 14th Amendment"
- Next in thread: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Kerry and the 14th Amendment"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:26:10 GMT
mountains@iname.com wrote:
> In <SKRxk$NZLLSBFw8q@jmwa.demon.co.uk>, on 09/15/04 at 10:23 PM,
> John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> said:
>
>
>>I read in sci.electronics.design that mountains@iname.com wrote (in
>><414891bb$3$woehfu$mr2ice@giganews.aros.net>) about 'Kerry and the 14th
>>Amendment', on Wed, 15 Sep 2004:
>
>
>>>I will continue to point out that his actions were taken while he
>>>was an active member of the Armed Services.
>>
>
>>But someone has already posted that he wasn't.
>
>
> They are wrong. Just posting that he wasn't doesn't mean jack.
>
> Its not hard to find this information. Just takes a few minutes to find out
> that he signed up in 1966 for a six year tour of happiness. Since he mostly
> did his thing in 1971, even a liberal can figure out that he was still in the
> military.
>
> Besides that, he didn't receive an honorable discharge until 2001! He also has
> received a medal that no other man man on earth has ever gotten, so I guess
> shooting a fleeing, wounded kid in the back is really a brave and honorable
> thing to do.
>
He applied for an early release from active status in October 1969 and
it was granted in January 1970. This is a form of Administrative
Discharge most likely- it simply means that his full active duty
obligation was not fulfilled. All of the Armed Services have provisions
for early release for good and valid reasons such as sole supporter of
family member and a myriad of other circumstances. In the case of Kerry
it was so that he could run for Congress. After that point in time he
was an inactive reservist which means he was subject to call up but does
not mean he was under the jurisdiction of the Navy insofar as obtaining
authorization for any meetings with the enemy apparently, which probably
don't exist when there is no declaration of war. Did the US declare war
on North Vietnam?
- Next message: Ken Smith: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Previous message: Clifford Heath: "Re: incredible"
- In reply to: mountains_at_iname.com: "Re: Kerry and the 14th Amendment"
- Next in thread: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Kerry and the 14th Amendment"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
