Senator Kerry "might " be in trouble.

from JoeUser Forums


Tuesday, Sept. 21, 2004 2:16 a.m. EDT
Navy Launches Second Kerry Medal Probe

The U.S. Navy has launched a new probe into Sen. John Kerry's Silver Star citation, after the Navy Secretary whose signature appears on the document said he never signed the award.

"It is a total mystery to me," former Navy Secretary John Lehman told the Chicago Sun-Times in August.

Story Continues Below



"I never saw it. I never signed it. I never approved it. And the additional language it contains was not written by me," he complained.
The Lehman document is the last of three versions of Kerry Silver Star citation that have been posted to Kerry's campaign website.

On Friday, Navy Inspector General Adm. R. A. Route closed out a superficial probe into the circumstances of Kerry's war decorations; one that verified only that appropriate procedures were followed when the commendations were issued.

But Monday's New York Post reported: "Lehman's disavowal of citation No. 3 has prompted a separate investigation."

Word of the second Kerry medals probe comes as complaints escalate over the top Democrat's refusal to authorize the release of his full military file.

Last week he told radio host Don Imus that all the Navy records he had in his possession had been posted to the campaign web site.

But Imus never asked why Kerry hadn't signed Form 180, which would authorize the release of nearly 100 pages from his military file which remain under seal.
politics
8,342 views 25 replies
Reply #1 from PolMach Forums Top
Can we stop putting this garbage out?

Vietnam is over.

Let's leave Bush and Kerry alone for what happened in the 70's.
Reply #2 from PolMach Forums Top
I agree with Crunchy....however I found that the article drmiler quotes is from NEWSMAX lol So you know it must be true!!!

Here is a followup from Reuters....from the Reuters article it appears that the Navy didn't open the probe but a right wing group asked the Navy to open the probe which would make the NEWSMAX story misleading (ok I'm not really surprised by that)!

HEADLINE: KERRY MEDAL PROBE DENIED

BYLINE: BY REUTERS

DATELINE: WASHINGTON

BODY:
The U.S. Navy has rejected a legal watchdog group's request to open an investigation into military awards given to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry during the Vietnam War, saying his medals were properly approved.

"Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver Star, Bronze Star, and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval process was properly followed," Vice-Admiral Ronald Route, the Navy's inspector general, said in a memo.

Kerry has been criticized by a group of Vietnam veterans called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth about whether he earned the decorations Kerry's side has touted in his campaign for the presidency.

LOAD-DATE: September 18, 2004

Sorry Drmiler....
The Political Machine 2024
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #2 By: rugbyshawn - 9/21/2004 11:01:20 AM
I agree with Crunchy....however I found that the article drmiler quotes is from NEWSMAX lol So you know it must be true!!!

Here is a followup from Reuters....from the Reuters article it appears that the Navy didn't open the probe but a right wing group asked the Navy to open the probe which would make the NEWSMAX story misleading (ok I'm not really surprised by that)!

HEADLINE: KERRY MEDAL PROBE DENIED

BYLINE: BY REUTERS

DATELINE: WASHINGTON

BODY:
The U.S. Navy has rejected a legal watchdog group's request to open an investigation into military awards given to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry during the Vietnam War, saying his medals were properly approved.

"Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver Star, Bronze Star, and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval process was properly followed," Vice-Admiral Ronald Route, the Navy's inspector general, said in a memo.

Kerry has been criticized by a group of Vietnam veterans called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth about whether he earned the decorations Kerry's side has touted in his campaign for the presidency.

LOAD-DATE: September 18, 2004

Sorry Drmiler....

I didn't post "just" because it was "NewsMax" I post that one because it wasthe last I looked at in a long line of articles. BTW just because "Reuters" says it don't always make it so either!
Try again!

Link


Link
Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top
In both the other links you sent, you prove my point. The Navy didn't open the investigation, it was requested by a legal watchdog group, Judicial Watch. The articles you sent talk about opening the investigation but they are older (sept 5 and 8, respectively) than the Reuters article which gives the conclusion of the JW's bid to open the investigation (i.e. there was no evidence of improper rewarding of medals). I just wanted to let you know as your subject title suggests Kerry might not be in trouble.

About the Newsmax versus Reuters comment...well if you think NewsMax is objective and Reuters is not.....
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
About the Newsmax versus Reuters comment...well if you think NewsMax is objective and Reuters is not.....


I NEVER said that. What I said was just because "either" one printed it don't make it so!
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Number 1 the first article is DATED 21 Sept! Also the first article DOES NOT prove your point. "You" made the blanket statement that the USN wasn't going to look into the allegations. I then countered with one that says you wrong.


A navy spokesman confirmed on Friday that the inspector-general's office at the Pentagon had authorised the inquiry. "It is the responsibility of all personnel to correct errors in official records," said the spokesman. Another official said privately: "There's a feeling that it's time to deal with this thoroughly, once and for all."

Among other records to be examined is a citation of Mr Kerry for bravery that was apparently signed by the former Navy Secretary, John Lehman, and contributed to the award of his silver star. The glowing citation states: "By his brave actions, bold initiative and unwavering devotion to duty, Lt Kerry reflected great credit on himself." But Mr Lehman denies all knowledge of the commendation. "It's a total mystery to me," he said last week. "I never saw it, I never signed it and I never approved it." The inquiry will also investigate other reports and citations leading to the award of Mr Kerry's


Again I repeat "Want to try again?"
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Get a life. Are we now going to derogate the founding fathers' motivations and their stand on the contiuance of slavery?
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #7 By: stevendedalus - 9/21/2004 1:48:09 PM
Get a life. Are we now going to derogate the founding fathers' motivations and their stand on the contiuance of slavery?


And just "what" does this have to do with the current conversation?
Reply #9 from PolMach Forums Top
what it has to do with the current conversation -- do we have to keep rehashing this same history. Everyone say it with me THIRTY FIVE YEARS AGO. Republicans get pissed that democrats are saying that Bush was AWOL in 1972. But then the Republicans are saying that Kerry doesn't deserve his *insert medal here* in 1971-72. Shut the fuck up. It's annyoing, it's boring, it's old news. Fallujah and Darfur should be on your lips, and net job losses and "no-go" zones and 5 million americans that have lost health care under Bush. 17 percent increases in medicare. 11.2 percent increases in health costs -- the fourth year in a row of double digit increases. Drmiler you are as petty as Texans for Truth and Dan Rather and Larry Thurlow and Regnery Press and Rush Limbaugh and Al Franken and all the rest of the bullshit, scandal mongering press just hoping they can get their hands on some new form and version of a cum stained blue dress. THIS SHIT DOESN'T MATTER. It doesn't fucking matter one iota. Being an AWOL daddy's boy doesn't disqualify Bush from being president. Being a vietnam vet who pissed some folks off with anti-war statements doesn't disqualify Kerry. Get some real issues or just sit on your hands and quit typing.
Reply #10 from PolMach Forums Top
Okay here is my question short and simple sort of.

With the Freedom of Information act you can get a candidates full military record, but only if that person has signed a Standard Form 180, now Bush has, but Kerry has not, why not? I don't care about Vietnam but the man did bring it up and now refuses to sign a SF 180 to release his FULL record so that people can get it with the Freedom of Information Act, is this because he does not like being in the public view? What is the reason? If he was going to bring up Vietnam than why not have his SF 180 signed so everybody could look at his record? Is he afraid? What is it? I would like to know. Right now you and I can get Bush's entire military record through the FoI Act because he signed a SF 180, now shouldn't the guy you support be the same way? Just some questions.
Reply #11 from PolMach Forums Top
Go to the Judicial watch website Link

Even there they state that the navy is not going to look into it despite all the spin the website puts into it (hinting he doesn't deserve the medals)...

As Crunchy also says, the navy response on top of what was reported by Reuters was that the matter wasn't worth looking into, especially something that occurred 30 years ago where everything seemed to be in order.

Now back to the real issues....
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
LEAVE PAST RECORDS ALONE
Reply #13 from PolMach Forums Top
FoI Act is FYI.

Simple.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
THERE WILL SOON BE AN OFFICIAL REPORT WHICH STATES THAT KERRY RECIECED 2 OF HIS HIGHEST MEDALS FRAUDULENTLY!!!
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #11 By: rugbyshawn - 9/21/2004 2:36:13 PM
Go to the Judicial watch website Link

Even there they state that the navy is not going to look into it despite all the spin the website puts into it (hinting he doesn't deserve the medals)...

As Crunchy also says, the navy response on top of what was reported by Reuters was that the matter wasn't worth looking into, especially something that occurred 30 years ago where everything seemed to be in order


It would seem that the sources I quoted were wrong. I apoligize for that to all who were reading this thread.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
THERE WILL SOON BE AN OFFICIAL REPORT WHICH STATES THAT KERRY RECIECED 2 OF HIS HIGHEST MEDALS FRAUDULENTLY!!!


And it comes from Dan Rather and 60 Minutes

Reply #17 from PolMach Forums Top
It is all well and good to complain the we leave this history alone but you need to make that complaint to Senator-in-absentia Kerry. He is the one who campaigned on Viet Nam for months and featured it in his convention. He doesn't give us much else to discuss. If he does not want Viet Nam discussed, then he should stop bringing it up.
But OBVIOUSLY he wants it discussed. That's your guy. A real genius.
Reply #18 from PolMach Forums Top
so true, wingman412.

Not bringing up Kerry's Vietnam record would be akin to not bringing up the fact that Bush led us into Iraq. I don't hear bush supporters saying, "Let's forget about the fact that he brought us into Iraq...that's in the past." FOR THE MOST PART, Bush supporters continuously have to defend Bush's decision to take the US into Iraq...and they should...because a person's past actions have berring on how they will act in the future.

I'd rather have discussion about their past record than stupid mudslinging that isn't based on a plan or facts. Stuff like this really bothers me "candidate B says he can create more jobs...well, he's an idiot, I can do better...but I won't give specifics until Nov. 3."
Reply #19 from PolMach Forums Top
I'm not sure which is the more asinine post, this one or the one about "kerry encouraging death of americans."

it's garbage when it's about kerry, it's garbage when it's about bush, i've said that from the beginning.

Kerry said Bush is living in a "fantasy world of spin."

And you righties are the in the Junior Spinner's Club.

I don't think anything Bush did 30 years ago is vital to national whatever. Especially since it appears he did a fat lot of nothing.

What's funny is that this inane post got more attention than the article on how George Bush has WEAKENED nuclear reactor safety standards...Which Kerry intends to strengthen again. But hey, nuke safety isn't NEARLY as important as Bush in the Guard and Kerry in Nam.
Reply #20 from PolMach Forums Top
Of course, we all know how Republicans like to treat veterens. Max Cleland is "unpatriotic," John McCain is "crazy," and John Kerry is a liar. I pity the current soldier in Iraq who runs for office against future generations of the Bush family -- imagine how the rhetoric on this war will change then.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
Little whips post- Hello?! Have you been reading the "hypocrites" posts? They say everything from the past is garbage.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
Oh yeah. Here comes jr. bush that one nephew. Pretty soon anyone who has voted in the past will be called a flip flopping cooky unpatriotic bastard.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top

drmiler,


Perhaps you should put your application in to be the Michael Moore of the right...This is BEYOND ridiculous!

Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

Why is it "garbage" when its against Kerry, but its of VITAL NATIONAL IMPORTANCE if its something about what Bush did 30 years ago?


There are plenty of us here who think that BOTH are garbage...I am one.

Reply #25 from PolMach Forums Top
There are plenty of us here who think that BOTH are garbage...I am one.


me too! me too! a thousand times me toooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!