Kerry's Original Discharge "Other than Honorable"

Dear Swift Vets, A very astute Texas observer on the continuing controversy has come to the same conclusion as many others this day: Kerry's original discharge in 1972 was other than honorable, possibly even dishonorable.

If it were honorable, why then did he have to have another discharge document issued by the Navy, and purportedly signed by Secretary of the Navy John Lehman in 1978 granting him an honorable discharge?

Lehman now has reportedly indicated the signature that was supposedly his on the Kerry related documents of that period (around 1978) may not be his. He should be contacted directly by you and your team to clarify this. 

It also appears that the original awards documents had to be redone and signed by Lehman, some years after the fact, but again, there are questions as to the validity of the Lehman signatures.

I have structural reasons to believe that the restated discharge of 1978 was in fact an upgrade of the original discharge.  I further believe the 1978 discharge was too weak for Kerry, causing him to get Bill Clinton to do another honorable discharge in 2001 to cover the weaknesses of the purported original upgrade. 

Why else would he need this second honorable discharge verified by Clinton?

It is absolutely outrageous that anyone could try to keep the American People from knowing this, if it is in fact the case.  How could anyone vote for a Commander in Chief who did not get an Honorable Discharge for his service to his country?

Somewhere, somehow, we have to obtain the real answers to these questions.

C. Austin (Bud) Burrell. "De Oppresso Liber"