Rudy Canoza sloppily forging Richard Clayton Wieber bleated and
lied:

>
> On 1/4/2013 8:40 AM, Ray Keller wrote:
>> http://www.wnd.com/2004/11/27300/
<http://www.wnd.com/2004/11/27300/>
>> *Kerry's non-honorable discharge
>> There is overwhelming evidence that the Navy gave John Kerry
either a
>> dishonorable discharge or an undesirable discharge
>
> There is no evidence of that whatever.

Of course Rudy's ignorance is well known. As well known as John
Kerry's undesirable discharge.

"The document is dated February 16, 1978. But Mr. Kerry's military
commitment began with his six-year enlistment contract with the Navy
on February 18, 1966. His commitment should have terminated in 1972.
It is highly unlikely that either the man who at that time was a
Vietnam Veterans Against the War leader, John Kerry, requested or
the Navy accepted an additional six year reserve commitment. And the
Claytor document indicates proceedings to reverse a less than
honorable discharge that took place sometime prior to February
1978."

"There are a number of categories of discharges besides honorable.
There are general discharges, medical discharges, bad conduct
discharges, as well as other than honorable and dishonorable
discharges. There is one odd coincidence that gives some weight to
the possibility that Mr. Kerry was dishonorably discharged. Mr.
Kerry has claimed that he lost his medal certificates and that is
why he asked that they be reissued. But when a dishonorable
discharge is issued, all pay benefits, and allowances, and all
medals and honors are revoked as well. And five months after Mr.
Kerry joined the U.S. Senate in 1985, on one single day, June 4, all
of Mr. Kerry's medals were reissued."

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 07:52:38 +0100, J. Magness <jmagness@verizon.com>
wrote:

>Rudy Canoza sloppily forging Richard Clayton Wieber bleated and
>lied:
>
>>
>> On 1/4/2013 8:40 AM, Ray Keller wrote:
>>> http://www.wnd.com/2004/11/27300/
><http://www.wnd.com/2004/11/27300/>
>>> *Kerry's non-honorable discharge
>>> There is overwhelming evidence that the Navy gave John Kerry
>either a
>>> dishonorable discharge or an undesirable discharge
>>
>> There is no evidence of that whatever.
>
>Of course Rudy's ignorance is well known. As well known as John
>Kerry's undesirable discharge.
>
>"The document is dated February 16, 1978. But Mr. Kerry's military
>commitment began with his six-year enlistment contract with the Navy
>on February 18, 1966. His commitment should have terminated in 1972.
>It is highly unlikely that either the man who at that time was a
>Vietnam Veterans Against the War leader, John Kerry, requested or
>the Navy accepted an additional six year reserve commitment. And the
>Claytor document indicates proceedings to reverse a less than
>honorable discharge that took place sometime prior to February
>1978."
>
>"There are a number of categories of discharges besides honorable.
>There are general discharges, medical discharges, bad conduct
>discharges, as well as other than honorable and dishonorable
>discharges. There is one odd coincidence that gives some weight to
>the possibility that Mr. Kerry was dishonorably discharged. Mr.
>Kerry has claimed that he lost his medal certificates and that is
>why he asked that they be reissued. But when a dishonorable
>discharge is issued, all pay benefits, and allowances, and all
>medals and honors are revoked as well. And five months after Mr.
>Kerry joined the U.S. Senate in 1985, on one single day, June 4, all
>of Mr. Kerry's medals were reissued."

Generally speaking a dishonorable discharge only come from a court
marshal and Melvin Laird Sec Def prevented the Navy from doing that.
Kerry dodged the bullet by remaining in the inactive reserve with a
lot of help from democratic politicians until Jimmy Carter gave
amnesty to all of the Vietnam deserters and protestors allowing him to
end his reserve status with an honorable discharge. It is likely the
discharge he would have received in 1972 would have been "General
Discharge Under Honorable Conditions" which is code for "fuck up".
Lots of guys who were a discipline problem or just couldn't get with
the program got them.