Didn't Kerry earn the "right" to protest?

4. During my service in Vietnam, I neither witnessed nor participated in any American war crimes or atrocities against civilians, nor was I ever aware of any such actions. I did witness the results of Vietcong atrocities against Vietnamese civilians, including the murder of tribal leaders.

...

8. During the Winter Soldier Investigation, John Kerry and other leaders of that event pressured me to testify about American war crimes, despite my repeated statements that I could not honestly do so. One event leader strongly implied that I would not be provided transportation back to my home in Baltimore, Maryland, if I failed to comply. Kerry and other leaders of the event instructed me to publicly state that I had witnessed incidents of rape, brutality, atrocities and racism, knowing that such statements would necessarily be untrue.

Steve Pitkin sworn affidavit, 2004

Originally posted by Pyros

Originally posted by Phoenix
An officer of the military whether active or reserve is violating the UMCJ when criticizing the chain of command, offers aid and comfort to the enemy and meets with representitives of that enemy.

This person does not enjoy freedom of speach on these matters as a member of the military - it is against the law.

Kerry did not recieve his discharge until 1978, all of his actions in question before that discharge were a violation of the UMCJ period.

When people call him a traitor its not rhetoric - its the truth.

When one wonders if he had "earned the right" to protest - the answer is an emphatic NO, he broke the law doing so - no question about it.

If he had been discharged then that would be another matter entirely.

The fact that he was not discharged makes this whole question a hypothetical endeavor.

You are incorrect. The UCMJ clearly states:

"(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.

are still subject to this body of law".

See 10 U.S.C. 802(a)(1) and (3) (which is Article 2, UCMJ); see also Rules for Courts-Martial (RCM) 202 (found in the Manual for Courts-Martial, or MCM).

There are also cases interpreting this, but the statute is clear enough. You have to be serving in a regular component, i.e., active-duty, or performing inactive-duty training in order to be subject to the UCMJ.

John Kerry's action, while a member of the inactive reserves, are not subject to the UCMJ. That is a legal fact. Period. If he is guity of violating any rule at all, it would be the Logan Act, of which not one single American citizen has ever been charged or convicted. If John Kerry, rabble-rouser and malcontent that many branded him to be, had commited serious crimes, including treason, don't you think that Richard Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover would have been all over him like a cheap suit? They knew then Kerry had not broken any laws, which is why it was never an issue....until now.





[edit on 1-10-2004 by Pyros]

Boy oh boy I knew if I had patience I could back up my original assertion,
Here it is

SECNAVINST 5420.174C

Section 9-1 of SECNAVINST 5420.174C has an extremely important piece of information:

**************************************

�d. The following applies to applicants who received less than fully honorable administrative discharges because of their civilian misconduct while in an inactive duty status in a reserve component and who were discharged or had their discharge reviewed on or after April 20, 1971: the NDRB shall either re characterize the discharge to Honorable without any additional proceedings or additional proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with the Court�s Order of December 3, 1981, in Wood v. Secretary of Defense to determine whether proper grounds exist for the issuance of a less than honorable discharge, taking into account that:

(1) An other than honorable (formerly undesirable) discharge for an inactive duty reservist can only be based upon civilian misconduct found to have affected directly the performance of military duties;

(2) A general discharge for an inactive duty reservist can only be based upon civilian misconduct found to have had an adverse impact on the overall effectiveness of the military, including military morale and efficiency.

PDF File

So in essence Kerry could have recieved a less than honorable discharge based on (A) civilian misconduct found to have affected directly the performance of military duties; or (B) adverse impact on the overall effectiveness of the military, including military morale and efficiency.

The assertion that Kerry had to be active reserve is WRONG

Respectfully, Phoenix