Thomas Norman; phony SEAL

| December 17, 2017 | 61 Comments

Our partners at Military Phonies share with us their work on this Thomas Norman fellow. Apparently, he tried to join some stolen valor communities, hiding in plain sight, as it were, pretending to be a SEAL that served in Vietnam and suffers in silence. That backfired;

The problem with pretending to be a Vietnam Veteran is you have to have been on active duty during the Vietnam War – he joined the reserves in 1974, but he didn’t go on active duty or attend boot camp until a month after the communists marched into Saigon, effectively ending US participation in the Vietnam War.

He was an Aviation electronics technician (E-1) when he completed his service after a few enlistments on active and reserve duty lasting about 15 years. None of it as a SEAL.

Category: Phony soldiers

Comments (61)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Vexatious Defendant says:

    Ah, NO.

    ST-5 was not around then.

    LEGIT!

    But what do I know about that …

  2. The Stranger says:

    A 15 year E3? Gotta be a story there!

  3. HMCS(FMF) ret says:

    E-3 after 15 years? NAVAPLVACT WASHINGTON DC? I’m guessing that someone was very, very naughty and got booted out of the Navy.

  4. Wilted Willy says:

    Here we have one first class asshole poser, he can’t even come up with a good story?

  5. Frankie Cee says:

    I left him some love on his facebook page, as did a few others. He claims “LT O-3” there. He should like this message:
    “Dumbass, did you not think that the Internet would expose you? Standing in the blood of better men than you go get some glory, has only pissed all over the service that you did have, and will make you goooooogle famous. The internet is forever, you fool. Drop in over here at This Ain’t Hell blog and see what the real veterans think of your lyin’ ass:
    http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=76598

  6. thebesig says:

    Originally posted by Jonn Lilyea:

    …but he didn’t go on active duty or attend boot camp until a month after the communists marched into Saigon, effectively ending US participation in the Vietnam War.

    Thomas Norman, phony Vietnam Veteran made a similar mistake to a phony Vietnam War Veteran that I ran into. Many people assume that the U.S. military was in the thick of the Vietnam War until the fall of Saigon, but, both math and history fail to support their claims… Forgetting the history part of it causes many of them to fall victim to claiming to be Vietnam Veterans with service starting in 1974 or 1975.

    The reality?

    Major and minor combat operations ended, for the United States, at the end of March, 1973. We had limited military involvement after that. In fact, the last of the U.S. combat units were out of Vietnam at the end of March of 1973 per the Paris Peace Accord signed not long before that… The U.S. stepped back after that and played a supportive role while South Vietnam shouldered the balance of the war. Our main effort at that point was mainly materials and funding, with limited military role.

    Thanks to a Democrat Controlled Congress, the “good guys” were defunded. We defeated the Vietnamese military in the battle field, we lost the Vietnam War in the streets of the U.S. and in the halls of Congress. American liberals won the Vietnam War for the communists, and they did this on American soil.

    • 26Limabeans says:

      I was there in 1970.
      She was “just a peakin” about then.
      But I left in December and they were drawing down big time. Early outs for those with less than four months committment left.
      Everybody was hell bent on getting the fuck out of there. The commies knew it. Everybody new it.
      BUT THOMAS NORMAN the PHONY SEAL did not know it.

    • rgr769 says:

      Most of the major ground combat units de- activated and/or departed the RVN in late 1971 and early 1972.

  7. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    Cocksucker.

  8. Hondo says:

    Hmm. According to the 2nd page of his record of assignments, his final duty station (Mar-May 1989) was an organization with the acronym “NAVAPLVACT” in Washington, DC.

    I believe that’s Navy acronymese for “Naval Appellate Leave Activity”. I understand personnel on unpaid appellate leave while awaiting final approval of a court-martial sentence are assigned (for accountability purposes) to such an activity. I also think that means that this tool received a punitive discharge and reduction to E1 as part of a court-martial sentence.

    But I guess I could be wrong.

    • thebesig says:

      Which means that he might not even be able to claim to be a veteran.

      • Hondo says:

        Depends. Presumably, his first term of service ended under honorable conditions (he was able to later enlist again). If so, and if his subsequent punitive discharge was a BCD vice a DD, he may well be entitled to VA bennies. I’m pretty sure only a DD results in a statutory bar to VA benefits – the VA can (and I understand on occasion does) determine his later service to have been “other than dishonorable” and grant him benefits in spite of his BCD. Hell, with a BCD for his last discharge and a previous “good” discharge, he might not even need such a determination unless he was going for bennies associated with conditions incurred during or exacerbated by his second enlistment.

        No, that shouldn’t be the case; IMO one’s FINAL discharge should have to be honorable to receive a damn thing from the VA. But under current law and the way the VA interprets same, that’s the way it apparently is today.

        • thebesig says:

          This is why I left it at “might”. Federal law doesn’t specify breaks in service, regarding which service period would determine someone’s veteran status, other than “had served under conditions other than dishonorable”.

          Without that distinction, it becomes an “iffy” situation.

          Although he presumably got an honorable discharge in his first term of service, the nature of his exit leaves open the possibility that he didn’t serve under other than dishonorable conditions.

          As for the VA. That may be determined regionally. When I contacted a Soldier regarding returning to good standing, we talked about his conversation with the VA if he were to get an Other Than Honorable discharge. The VA told him that his latest discharge would determine his eligibility for specific types of benefits. His previous honorable discharge wouldn’t be considered for benefits purposes, and he still would’ve needed the VA to make a determination.

          • Hondo says:

            Published documentation from the VA says otherwise. See the answer to the question “Q: What if the individual in question had more than one period of active military service?” in this document published by the VA. It’s found about 1/2 way through the document.

            Bottom line: according to the VA, unless otherwise barred by Federal law from receiving VA benefits persons with multiple periods of service whose last period of service ended badly (OTH, BCD) can indeed receive VA benefits based on earlier service that ended honorably. The VA’s published interpretation is that under such conditions the “bad” discharge only invalidates the last period of service; the individual remains eligible for benefits related to their earlier service.

            In this guy’s case, if he received a BCD from a Special Court Martial he’s likely eligible for VA bennies since he had a previous 6-year enlistment that (presumably) ended with an honorable or general under honorable conditions discharge. However, if he received a BCD from a GCM, no – any punitive discharge from a GCM apparently is a statutory bar to receipt of VA benefits (see 38 USC 5303).

            • Hondo says:

              Addendum: even if the BCD was from a GCM, he may still qualify for benefits based on his earlier, presumably honorable period of service. The language in 38 USC 5303 specifically says that the bar relates to benefits “based upon the period of service from which discharged or dismissed”. A separate, earlier period of qualifying service thus may allow him VA benefits based on that earlier service in spite of a GCM conviction.

              IMO this is one of the major problems with the VA. If an individual receives an OTH, BCD, or DD/Dismissal, IMO they shouldn’t be eligible to receive squat from the VA. But under current law and VA policy, if they’ve completed their first enlistment and fornicate Fido later in their career, then they indeed appear to be eligible for VA bennies.

              And you and I (and all other US taxpayers) are stuck with paying the bill.

              • thebesig says:

                Hondo: Published documentation from the VA says otherwise.

                Not actually, a reading of the document actually supports the arguments that I made above, and does not take away from my argument. I haven’t been arguing against you, just adding a perspective that does not take away from what you said. So, to make that clearer, I’m going to take a different approach so you would see that we are not actually arguing in this specific topic.

                Hondo: See the answer to the question “Q: What if the individual in question had more than one period of active military service?” in this document published by the VA. It’s found about 1/2 way through the document.

                From the document:

                A: A discharge found by VA to have been issued under dishonorable conditions does not, in and of itself, bar an individual from receiving VA benefits based on a separate period of service which terminated under honorable conditions. In addition, the law provides for basic eligibility for benefits based on completion of the full term of an enlistment even if no discharge was issued at the completion of that period of service due to enlistment or reenlistment. For example, if an individual enlisted for three years, completed the three years and reenlisted for two more years, then received a discharge under other than honorable conditions during the second enlistment, VA benefits may be provided based on the first period of service, even if it is determined that the character of discharge of the second period of service is a bar to benefits. However, disability compensation would be payable only for disabilities incurred during the first period of service, not for disabilities that were incurred during the second period of service.

                Hence, what I stated above,

                “As for the VA. That may be determined regionally.” — thebesig

                I followed that up with this:

                “The VA told him that his latest discharge would determine his eligibility for specific types of benefits. His previous honorable discharge wouldn’t be considered for benefits purposes, and he still would’ve needed the VA to make a determination.” – thebesig

                I bolded specific words in the response to the question that you brought up from the document, as well as to my own payments, tying them together. Note, “may” implies option. It may be provided, it may not be provided for the first period of service, or even the second or final period of service. This is based on a review by the regional VA office. Now, had it read “shall,” the above soldier that I talked to would not have provided me with the information that I referred to above. As I indicated above, and is supported in both the link that you provided and the law that you referenced to, a determination has to be made before benefits could be provided in situations like this.

                Hondo: Bottom line: according to the VA, unless otherwise barred by Federal law from receiving VA benefits persons with multiple periods of service whose last period of service ended badly (OTH, BCD) can indeed receive VA benefits based on earlier service that ended honorably.

                You actually supported my argument in the above posts. Can is not will. Again, the soldier above talked about how the VA told him that it would be based on his last discharge. A review of the situation, as well as of his discharge if he were to receive an OTH, may have determined otherwise, or have supported what he was told.

                Hondo: The VA’s published interpretation is that under such conditions the “bad” discharge only invalidates the last period of service; the individual remains eligible for benefits related to their earlier service.

                What you said later on in the same post:

                “However, if he received a BCD from a GCM, no — any punitive discharge from a GCM apparently is a statutory bar to receipt of VA benefits (see 38 USC 5303).” — Hondo

                Both the statement, and 38 USC 5303, don’t provide much allowances for previous honorable services.

    • Vexatious Defendant says:

      Yes, you are correct again Hondo.

    • NHSparky says:

      I’d be interested in seeing what, if any, pay forfeiture he had as well. A Special CM can only take 2/3 pay, whereas a General CM can result in forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

      I’m kinda leaning towards him having had a Special CM, based on the ~6 months he spent at NAVSTA Puget Sound before being kicked to the curb, meaning he got a BCD vs. DD.

      Either way, boy dun fucked up.

  9. 26Limabeans says:

    WTF is that on his head?

  10. bullnuke says:

    Mission
    The Navy and Marine Corps Appellate Leave Activity’s mission is to efficiently command, administer and manage the centralized tracking of all Navy and Marine Corps personnel placed on involuntary appellate leave; and members assigned by the Naval Clemency and Parole Board to parole or supervised release while expediting the discharge process; and to perform such other functions and tasks as direct.
    Appellate Leave Defined
    Appellate leave is the authorized absence of a service member (appellant) from the physical presence of the command, in a non-pay status, pending completion of the appellate review of their court-martial conviction where a dismissal or unsuspended dishonorable or bad conduct discharge was adjudged.

    – MILPERSMAN 1050-310 through 1050-380
    – MCO 1050.16A

    Policy: Use required (involuntary) or voluntary (permitted) leave to aid in removing from the presence of the active force, expeditiously, those members being punitively discharged or dismissed.

  11. 1610desig says:

    He “studied BS…at Purdue”. That, I can believe…

  12. Ex-PH2 says:

    Idiot, jerk, slacker.

  13. Skippy says:

    Safe to say he pissed a lot of people off while in service

  14. Green Thumb says:

    Extra loser.

  15. Skyjumper says:

    Hayzeus H Christ!!

    Here I am, taking a break from baking Christmas cookies for my grown-up kids, and then I see this “Phuck Wit” claiming to be a Navy SEAL.

    Geez, doesn’t anyone ever want to claim to be a cook or a baker??

    I’m a 69 year old Viet 11B old fart
    (also held 19E & 19K before retiring) and I’d rather talk about some great baking/cooking receipes instead of “war stories”.

    This old slick dick probably couldn’t even burn water, but he sure cooked his goose by his “Look at me, I’m a hero” shit.

    “Stormin’ Norman”, you, your bullshit and your false teeth will live forever on the internet.

    Now back to making more cookies. 🙂

    • Tallywhagger says:

      I only make chocolate chip cookies once a year, at Christmas time. One trick I stumbled upon was to cut the butter in half and substitute shortening. The butter melts at lower temperature and causes the cookie to spread pretty thin and then to burn on the bottom. The shortening has a higher melting point and keeps the dough in smaller diameter.

      To each, as they like, I like to use parchment paper just to be able to get the cookies off the baking tray quickly. Once they set you can put them on a cooling rack and then reuse the parchment paper.

      Most recipes call for vanilla and that’s good but a dash of almond extract works for me.

      Meanwhile, bake on Garth! And Merry Christmas.

  16. rgr769 says:

    Wow, this is a two-fer Sunday, with two fake SEAL POSers on the “day of rest.”

  17. Combat Historian says:

    SEAL Vietnam vet…Nope…

    Peace-time sailor who eventually stepped on his deck and was cast to the curb as an E-1…Afraid so…

  18. Jeff LPH 3, 63-66 says:

    Looks like the Seal fakers are still in the lead out of the TAH starting gate, and the race is on. Wasn’t there a song with that title back in the 50’s or very early 60’s?

  19. Tim says:

    A lot of guys with an MBA from Purdue sell furniture for a living I bet.

  20. OldManchu says:

    The SEAL phonies are completely kicking the Ranger phonies ass as we close out 2017. C’mon Army! 2018!!!!

  21. Ex-PH2 says:

    These guys all try the same things. They must have a playbook of some kind, something about ‘How to Pretend To Be A SEAL/SPECOPS/RANGER and Get Away With It’.

    But maybe that’s the subtitle, so the eye-catching line is probably ‘Being a Fake Hero for Dummies’ – something like that.

  22. Jay says:

    15 year E-1….seems legit. Got a GCM with BS…i’m betting he jumped on his crank with BOTH feet to do that.

  23. Atkron says:

    Sailed on Midway in ATKRON 56…I guess the games with multi-faceted dice just wasn’t enough for that AT; he had to go create his own game.

    Turd suck

  24. RCAF_CHAIRBORNE says:

    Im sure that most SEAL’s give up the high speed life to sell furniture in Bumfuck, Indiana

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *