SwiftVets.com

[Bob Chamberlain]

The full text of this post is available as a PDF document at:

http://www.betrayed-vietnam-vet.info/files/purple_heart_1.pdf

The First Purple Heart

John Kerry’s first Purple Heart was awarded for an injury he received during an incident that occurred on the night of December 2-3, 1968, while he was assigned to Coastal Division 14. There is no documentary evidence to support the award of this Purple Heart. This is consistent with the sworn statements of the three officers who would have prepared these documents. These officers all state that the “missing” documents were never prepared because John Kerry’s injury was not caused by enemy action and, therefore, that the award of the Purple Heart was not justified. Three months later, after being reassigned to another unit, John Kerry somehow was able to manipulate an award of the Purple Heart for this injury. This award can only have been made at John Kerry’s instigation. John Kerry must have claimed that the injury was the result of enemy action and he must have failed mention that the Purple Heart had been denied by his original unit commander. The actual circumstances under which this first Purple Heart was awarded are totally unknown. As a bare minimum, there must have been an administrative request sent from John Kerry’s unit to the U.S. Navy Support Activity, Saigon. Without such a request, the Purple Heart simply could not have been awarded. This administrative request has not been made public by John Kerry and he refuses to sign a form SF-180 to allow the Navy to release this document. Based on the evidence that is available, it can only be concluded that John Kerry fraudulently manipulated the award of this Purple Heart.

All credible evidence indicates the following:

• That John Kerry was slightly “wounded” by a fragment of a grenade he fired from an M-79 grenade launcher during an incident in which there was no confirmed enemy contact.
  
• That the attending physician and John Kerry’s unit commander denied his requests for the award of a Purple Heart, based primarily on this lack of enemy contact.
  
• That later, after transferring to another unit where the circumstances of this “wound” were unknown, John Kerry fraudulently used the medical treatment record of this band-aid “wound” to obtain the award of this first Purple Heart.

John Kerry claims that his band-aid “wound” somehow resulted from enemy fire, justifying the award of the Purple Heart. He is silent on the question of how, precisely, this Purple Heart came to be awarded. Some explanation is required, because the administrative request for the award was not made through Coastal Division 14, the unit to which Kerry was assigned at the time of the incident and the only unit authorized to make such a request.

Whether or not John Kerry came under enemy fire on the night of December 2-3, the evidence is clear that the senior officers of his unit believed he had not and, as was their right and duty, they denied his request for a Purple heart. The evidence is also clear that the “wound” in question was little more than a scratch, hardly worthy of a Purple Heart. Nevertheless, John Kerry managed somehow to maneuver around his superior officers and manipulate a Purple Heart for this band-aid “wound”. Such actions are unworthy of an officer and clearly indicate the character of the man. Just two weeks into his tour of duty, it is obvious that John Kerry actively sought the ornaments of glory, whether or not they were earned, and had no shame in the methods he employed to acquire them.

Facts On Record: This first Purple Heart was awarded for an incident that took place during the night of December 2-3, 1968. No after action report for this incident was filed. John Kerry received a very minor injury that was treated, quite literally, with a dab of antibiotic ointment and a band-aid. A record of this medical treatment was made, but no personnel casualty report was filed. John Kerry’s unit commander did not submit an administrative request for the award of a Purple Heart for this injury. Nevertheless, by some as yet unexplained process, John Kerry was awarded a Purple Heart for this injury on February 28, 1969, nearly three months after the incident.

John Kerry was serving in Coastal Division 14 on December 2, 1969. His unit commander was Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard (retired at the rank of Commander). His unit operations officer and second in command was Lieutenant William Schachte (retired at the rank of Rear Admiral after serving some 10 years in the Judge Advocate General Corps, the final year as the Acting Judge Advocate General of the Navy). The physician who treated John Kerry’s “wound” was Dr. Louis Letson (retired at the rank of Lieutenant Commander and from a second career as a civilian general practitioner). The medical treatment record for this “wound” was signed by Jess Carreon (now deceased), who was the duty corpsman that day. All three living witnesses claim that John Kerry’s requests for a Purple Heart were denied at the time they were made in December, 1968. None of these witnesses were aware that John Kerry had received a Purple Heart for this “wound” until much later, in some cases when they read about it in Kerry’s book Tour Of Duty, published in 2004. It was at this time that they came forward to dispute John Kerry’s version of events.

Standard practices for the award of a Purple Heart
An after action report was filed as a matter of course for any action involving enemy contact, especially if that contact resulted in casualties to friendly personnel. No after action report was filed for the incident on December 2-3, 1968. This is an indication that, in the opinion of the operation commander, no enemy contact was made.

A personnel casualty report was filed as a matter of course for any injury resulting from enemy contact, if for no other reason than to provide one element of the documentation required for the award of a Purple Heart. No personnel casualty report was filed for John Kerry’s injury from the incident on December 2-3, 1968. This is confirmation that this very minor injury was believed not to have resulted from enemy action and thus would not lead to the award of a Purple Heart.

Upon determination that an injury was caused directly or indirectly by enemy action, the unit commander initiated an administrative request for the award of a Purple Heart. No such administrative request was prepared for John Kerry’s injury from the incident on December 2-3, 1968. This is confirmation that this very minor injury was believed not to have resulted from enemy action.

The administrative processing of a request to award a Purple Heart normally required anywhere from a week to a month to complete. The fact that it took nearly three months for the award of this first Purple Heart to be made indicates something very unusual in the processing of this award. Most specifically, the timing of the award suggests that the administrative request for this first Purple Heart likely was submitted on or about February 20, 1969, when John Kerry was treated for his second band-aid “wound”. Since John Kerry refuses to sign a form SF-180 to allow the release of his full military records, no information about this administrative paperwork is available.

Analysis: If this first Purple Heart had resulted from enemy action as claimed by John Kerry, there should have been an after action report filed for the action, most likely by the operations officer for Coastal Division 14, Lieutenant William Schachte. There would have been a personnel casualty report filed by Dr. Louis Letson, the officer who treated the wound. There would have been an administrative request for the award of the Purple Heart signed by the commander of Coastal Division 14, Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard, forwarded through Coastal Squadron One to the commander of the US Naval Support Activity, Saigon. None of these documents exists. Clearly, on December 3, 1968, all three officers did not believe that John Kerry’s injury resulted from enemy action and therefore did not qualify for the award of a Purple Heart.

However, a Purple Heart simply does not fall from the sky. Someone, somewhere must have initiated an administrative request for this Purple Heart. The award of this first Purple Heart was made by the commander of the US Naval Support Activity, Saigon, through the commander of Coastal Division 11 to John Kerry. This strongly indicates that the administrative request for the Purple Heart must have originated from within Coastal Division 11. John Kerry received his second band-aid “wound” on February 20, 1969, at which time he was assigned to Coastal Division 11. The award of a Purple Heart for his injury from December 3, 1968, was made on February 28, 1969. The award of a Gold Star (second award) to this Purple Heart was made on March 5, 1969, for his injury from February 20, 1969. All of this strongly suggests that John Kerry began his campaign for his first Purple Heart at the time of this second “wound”.

Second and subsequent awards of the Purple Heart actually are awards of a Gold Star to the original Purple Heart. If John Kerry were to receive a Purple Heart for both of his band-aid “wounds” without generating undue questions or investigation, it was necessary for a Purple Heart to be awarded for the first “wound” so a Gold Star to this Purple Heart properly could be awarded for the second “wound”. At the time this second “wound” was being treated, it would have been simple for John Kerry to point out that he somehow had never received a Purple Heart for the “wound” which was treated (as recorded in his medical records) on December 3, 1968, and begin his campaign to receive a Purple Heart for this “wound”.

Official Navy Records
The only available Navy records for this first Purple Heart are the notation of treatment in John Kerry’s personal medical records and the notification of award for the Purple Heart, both released by John Kerry. As a minimum, there should also be a Personnel Casualty Report for the “wound” and an administrative request for the award, both originating from Coastal Division 14. These documents are known not to exist because the responsible officers state that they never were written. However, as an absolutely bare minimum, there simply must be an administrative request for the award prepared by someone else at a later time. John Kerry has chosen not to make this document available. Since John Kerry refuses to sign a form SF-180, no other information on the award of this Purple Heart is available.

The medical treatment record for this “wound” dated December 3, 1968, reads:

Shrapnel in left arm above elbow. Shrapnel removed and appl bacitracin dressing. Ret to Duty.

The notification of award for the Purple Heart reads:

28 FEB 1969
From: Commander U. S. Naval Support Activity, Saigon
To: LTJG John F. KERRY, USN, [service number]
Via: Commander Coastal Division ONE ONE
Subj: Purple Heart Award; presentation of
Enlc: (1) Purple Heart Medal, Ribbon and Lapel Pin
1. On behalf of the Chief of Naval Personnel, the commander U. S. Naval Support Activity, Saigon hereby awards you the Purple Heart for injuries received on 2 December 1968.
2. A certificate of this award will be forwarded directly to you by the Chief of Naval Personnel.
Donald A. Still
Chief Staff Officer

Evaluation Of The Evidence
Point 1: Rightly or wrongly, it is abundantly clear that, on the morning of December 3, 1968, Louis Letson, Grant Hibbard and William Schachte did not believe that John Kerry’s injury met the criteria for the award of the Purple Heart. It was their duty to make such determinations and to submit paperwork only for those cases that they felt met the criteria. It is pathetic, given the extremely minor nature of his injury, that John Kerry so coveted a Purple Heart as to circumvent this decision of his superior officers and misappropriate an award he had “earned” only in his own mind.

Point 2: In essence, the only real point of difference between the recollections of the various witnesses is the question of whether or not William Schachte was aboard the “skimmer” on the night of December 2-3, and this is a side issue of no real importance. Most important is the fact that nobody, apparently not even John Kerry himself, is at all certain that the Vietnamese they engaged that night were in fact enemy soldiers or that these soldiers returned fire. In the statements made by Kerry and his two witnesses, Runyon and Zaladonis, no mention at all is made of seeing weapons in the hands of these Vietnamese. Both Runyon and Zaladonis think that maybe they did receive enemy fire, but neither one of them is at all certain of the fact. No attempt was made to search the sampans sighted, so it is unknown if they were transporting enemy equipment. For all the evidence that is available, these Vietnamese could just as well have been fishermen, who were smart enough to run before John Kerry could have them shot. Given these facts, Lieutenant Commander Hibbard was fully justified in his decision that Kerry’s injury did not meet the criteria set for the award of the Purple Heart. However, it is clear that John Kerry later maneuvered someone into submitting an administrative request for the award of this Purple Heart. Given the state of the supporting evidence, it is clear that John Kerry must have made false representations about the presence of enemy activity and it is clear that he failed to mention that his commander at the time, Grant Hibbard, had denied his request for a Purple Heart. On this evidence alone, it can be stated that the award of this Purple Heart was improper.

Point 3: This Purple Heart cannot have been awarded without the submission of an administrative request to the U.S. Naval Support Activity in Saigon. John Kerry claims to have released all of his military records, yet this document is missing. John Kerry refuses to sign a form SF-180, which would allow the National Personnel Records Center to release any and all of John Kerry’s military records to the general public. Obviously, John Kerry believes certain records exist that he does not want to be made public. Apparently, the administrative request for this Purple Heart is one of those records or John Kerry would have released it himself. What evidence might this document disclose? A forged signature perhaps? Who knows. In any case, John Kerry’s refusal to make this document available casts grave doubt on the truth of his claims and statements.

Point 4: It really doesn’t matter which of the witnesses remembers correctly or which version of events is the truth. It really doesn’t matter whether the Vietnamese fired at John Kerry that night or not. What matters is that the officers charged with making such determinations evaluated the evidence available to them at that time and made their decision. They decided that the evidence failed to support the award of a Purple Heart. If John Kerry disagreed with this decision, he could have appealed further up the chain of command and requested a line of duty investigation. But only officers in John Kerry’s chain of command as of December 2, 1968, were empowered to grant or deny his request for a Purple Heart. Clearly, John Kerry did not follow this established military procedure and instead maneuvered someone outside of Coastal Division 14 into submitting a request for the award of this Purple Heart. On this evidence alone, it can be stated that the award of this Purple Heart was improper.

Individual Statements and Testimony

The following report of Dr. Louis Letson’s memories was written by Byron York and posted on the National Review Online on May 4, 2004. The original text of this report can be found on the Internet at the URL:

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200405041626.asp

Kerry was treated for the wound at a medical facility in Cam Ranh Bay. The doctor who treated Kerry, Louis Letson, is today a retired general practitioner in Alabama. Letson says he remembers his brief encounter with Kerry 35 years ago because "some of his crewmen related that Lt. Kerry had told them that he would be the next JFK from Massachusetts." Letson says that last year, as the Democratic campaign began to heat up, he told friends that he remembered treating one of the candidates many years ago. In response to their questions, Letson says, he wrote down his recollections of the time. (Letson says he has had no contacts with anyone from the Bush campaign or the Republican party.) What follows is Letson's memory, as he wrote it.

I have a very clear memory of an incident which occurred while I was the Medical Officer at Naval Support Facility, Cam Ranh Bay.
John Kerry was a (jg), the OinC or skipper of a Swift boat, newly arrived in Vietnam. On the night of December 2, he was on patrol north of Cam Ranh, up near Nha Trang area. The next day he came to sick bay, the medical facility, for treatment of a wound that had occurred that night.
The story he told was different from what his crewmen had to say about that night. According to Kerry, they had been engaged in a fire fight, receiving small arms fire from on shore. He said that his injury resulted from this enemy action.
Some of his crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore. The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks.
That seemed to fit the injury which I treated.
What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry's arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle.
I simply removed the piece of metal by lifting it out of the skin with forceps. I doubt that it penetrated more than 3 or 4 mm. It did not require probing to find it, did not require any anesthesia to remove it, and did not require any sutures to close the wound.
The wound was covered with a bandaid.
Not [sic] other injuries were reported and I do not recall that there was any reported damage to the boat.

Dr. Letson clearly did not remember one “fact” correctly. There was no mortar aboard the “skimmer” for John Kerry to fire. Dr. Letson obviously has confused “grenade” or “grenade launcher” with “mortar”. However, given the span of 35 years, I feel that this lapse of memory can be allowed a man with no real weapons training or experience, without impugning his memory that Kerry’s claim of enemy action was disputed by other crewmembers on December 3.

On July 21, 2004, Dr. Letson executed a sworn affidavit concerning his treatment of John Kerry’s “wound”. The pertinent section of this affidavit is reproduced below. The full text of this affidavit can be found on the Internet at the URL:

http://www.betrayed-vietnam-vet.info/files/letson_aff.pdf

“In December of 1968, I treated John F. Kerry (“Kerry”) in Cam Ranh Bay in connection with the slight injury for which he later claimed and received his first Purple Heart.
The crewmen with Kerry told me that there was no hostile fire, and that Kerry had inadvertently wounded himself with an M-79 grenade. This was barely lodged in Kerry’s arm.”

On July 21, 2004, Grant Hibbard executed a sworn affidavit concerning John Kerry’s request for a Purple Heart. The pertinent section of this affidavit is reproduced below. The full text of this affidavit can be found on the Internet at the URL:

http://www.betrayed-vietnam-vet.info/files/hibbard_aff.pdf

“In December 1968, Kerry came into my office in order to apply for a Purple Heart. He had a tiny scratch ?? less than from a rose thorn. I had already spoken to Lieutenant William Schachte USN (now Rear Admiral USN retired) and others who were present during the incident and had reported that Kerry had fired an M-79 too close, inflicting a tiny wound upon himself. I turned down the Purple Heart request. I was shocked to later learn that he subsequently received an undeserved Purple Heart for this wound.”

The following statement made by Rear Admiral William L. Schachte was posted on the National Review Online on August 28, 2004. The original text of this statement can be found on the Internet at the URL:

http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document200408280010.asp

EDITOR'S NOTE:A new voice has been added to the debate over the circumstances surrounding Sen. John Kerry's first Purple Heart. William Schachte, who was a lieutenant in the Navy during Kerry's Vietnam tour — and who later rose to the rank of Rear Admiral — has released a statement describing the events of December 2-3, 1968, when Kerry received a minor shrapnel wound for which he was awarded the Purple Heart. What follows is Schachte's statement, in full. — Byron York
Statement of RADM William L. Schachte, Jr. USN (Ret.)
August 27, 2004

As was true of all "Swiftees," I volunteered to serve in Vietnam and was assigned to Coastal Division 14 for a normal tour of duty.
I was a Lieutenant serving as Operations Officer and second in command at Coastal Division 14 when Lieutenant (junior grade) John Kerry reported to us in mid-November, 1968. Lt. (jg) Kerry was an Officer-in-Charge (O-in-C) under training in preparing to be assigned as one of our Swift Boat O-in-C's.
At some point following President Johnson's announcement of the suspension of bombing in North Vietnam in March 1968, we were directed to become more aggressive in seeking to find and destroy or disrupt the enemy in our operating area. As part of this effort, I conceived a new operation that became known as "Skimmer OPS." The concept was simple. A 15-foot Boston Whaler was sent into an area where, based on coordinated intelligence, North Vietnamese cadre and Viet Cong were expected to be meeting or where, for example, concentrations of enemy forces might be involved in the movement of arms or munitions. We were to draw fire and quickly get out of the area. This would allow more concentrated firepower to be brought against the enemy forces we had been able to identify.
These operations were carried out only in "hot" areas and well away from any villages or populated areas. A Swift Boat would tow the skimmer to the general area of operations, and the ambush team would then board the skimmer and proceed to the designated area of operations. The Swift Boat would be riding shotgun and standing off, occasionally out of sight, to provide fire support and long-range communications. The Skimmer was powered by an outboard motor, and we carried an FM radio, handheld flares, an M-60 machine gun with a bipod mount, and an M-16 mounted with a starlight scope. If the night was heavily overcast, we brought an M-14 mounted with an infrared scope. We also carried an M-79 single-shot grenade launcher. In addition to our combat gear and flak jackets, we often carried .38-caliber pistols.
The operation consisted of allowing the skimmer to drift silently along shorelines or riverbanks to look or listen for sounds of enemy activity. If activity was identified, we would open fire with our automatic weapons, and if we received fire, we would depart the area as quickly as possible, leaving it to air support or mortar fire from a Swift Boat standing off at a distance to carry out an attack.
I commanded each of these Skimmer operations up to and including the one on the night in question involving Lt. (jg) Kerry. On each of these operations, I was in the skimmer manning the M-60 machine gun. I took with me one other officer and an enlisted man to operate the outboard motor. I wanted another officer because officers, when not on patrol, were briefed daily on the latest intelligence concerning our sector of operations and were therefore more familiar with the current intelligence. Additionally, at these daily briefings, officers debriefed on their patrol areas after returning to port.
On the night of December 2-3, we conducted one of these operations, and Lt. (jg) Kerry accompanied me. Our call sign for that operation was "Batman." I have no independent recollection of the identity of the enlisted man, who was operating the outboard motor. Sometime during the early morning hours, I thought I detected some movement inland. At the time we were so close to land that we could hear water lapping on the shoreline. I fired a hand-held flare, and upon it bursting and illuminating the surrounding area, I thought I saw movement. I immediately opened fire with my M-60. It jammed after a brief burst. Lt. (jg) Kerry also opened fire with his M-16 on automatic, firing in the direction of my tracers. His weapon also jammed. As I was trying to clear my weapon, I heard the distinctive sound of the M-79 being fired and turned to see Lt. (jg) Kerry holding the M-79 from which he had just launched a round. We received no return fire of any kind nor were there any muzzle flashes from the beach. I directed the outboard motor operator to clear the area.
Upon returning to base, I informed my commanding officer, Lt. Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, of the events, informing him of the details of the operation and that we had received no enemy fire. I did not file an "after action" report, as one was only required when there was hostile fire. Soon thereafter, Lt. (jg) Kerry requested that he be put in for a Purple Heart as a result of a small piece of shrapnel removed from his arm that he attributed to the just-completed mission. I advised Lt. Cmdr. Hibbard that I could not support the request because there was no hostile fire. The shrapnel must have been a fragment from the M-79 that struck Lt. (jg) Kerry, because he had fired the M-79 too close to our boat. Lt. Cmdr. Hibbard denied Lt. (jg) Kerry's request. Lt. (jg) Kerry detached our division a few days later to be reassigned to another division. I departed Vietnam approximately three weeks later, and Lt. Cmdr. Hibbard followed shortly thereafter. It was not until years later that I was surprised to learn that Lt. (jg) Kerry had been awarded a Purple Heart for this night.
I did not see Lt. (jg) Kerry in person again for almost 20 years. Sometime in 1988, while I was on Capitol Hill, I ran into him in the basement of the Russell Senate Office Building. I was at that time a Rear Admiral and in uniform. He was about 20 paces away, waiting to catch the underground subway. In a fairly loud voice I called out to him, "Hey, John." He turned, looked at me, came over and said, "Batman!" We exchanged pleasantries for a few minutes, agreed to have lunch sometime in the future, and parted ways. We have not been together since that day.
In March of this year, I was contacted by one of my former swift boat colleagues concerning Douglas Brinkley¹s book about Senator Kerry, "Tour of Duty." I told him that I had not read it. He faxed me a copy of the pages relating to the action on the night of December 2-3, 1968. I was astonished by Senator Kerry¹s rendition of the facts of that night. Notably, Lt. (jg) Kerry had himself in charge of the operation, and I was not mentioned at all. He also claimed that he was wounded by hostile fire.
None of this is accurate. I know, because I was not only in the boat, but I was in command of the mission. He was never more than several feet away from me at anytime during the operation that night. It is inconceivable that any commanding officer would put an officer in training, who had been in country only a couple of weeks, in charge of such an ambush operation. Had there been enemy action that night, there would have been an after action report filed, which I would have been responsible for filing.
I have avoided talking to media about this issue for months. But, because of the recent media attention, I felt I had to step up to recount my personal experiences concerning this incident.

The following is a written report of a telephone interview with William Schachte conducted by Lisa Meyers of NBC on August 24, 2004. This written report was posted on the MSNBC website on August 27, 2004. The transcript apparently was edited to some degree by Lisa Meyers and/or MSNBC in the process of making the report. The original transcript of this interview can be found on the Internet at the URL:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5840657

The key points that can be extracted from this transcript are as follows:
1) Admiral Schachte, as operations officer of Coastal Division 14, originated the idea of these “skimmer” operations and was aboard the “skimmer” for each and every operation.
2) Admiral Schachte states that each and every “skimmer” operation was manned by himself plus one enlisted man to operate the outboard motor and one other officer.
3) Admiral Schachte initiated the firing the night of December 2-3 when he thought he saw some movement, but there was no return fire and the presence of enemy forces was never confirmed.
4) Admiral Schachte filed no after action report because there was no enemy contact and opposed any award of a Purple Heart to John Kerry, since there was no enemy activity involved in his injury.
5) Admiral Schachte states that the unit commander, Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard, agreed that the award of a Purple Heart was not warranted.

NBC's Lisa Myers conducted the following interview with Rear Adm. William L. Schachte (USN Ret.) in Washington, D.C. on Aug. 24, 2004. Portions have been edited for clarity.

Myers: When did you first meet John Kerry?
Adm. William Schachte (U.S. Navy, ret.): In Vietnam in 1968. I was – like everyone, by the way, serving on small boats in combat in Vietnam – I was a volunteer. When John reported aboard, I was then the lieutenant and the senior, second in command officer of Coastal Division 14. I was also the operations officer, and John reported sometime in mid-November – as an officer in charge under training. And that's the first time I met him.
Myers: And so you were his superior?
Schachte: Yeah, I was one of his superiors, yes.
Myers: And how long did you serve with Senator Kerry?
Schachte: Until he left our area; I believe it was the 4th of December [1968] or so.
Myers: So for a period of roughly how long?
Schachte: Well, a couple of weeks. Several weeks. But he was out on patrol and I was with him one night in particular – in the skimmer [Note: Schachte claims the date of that night was 12/02/68, the same date listed in military records for the incident that earned Kerry his first Purple Heart; “skimmer” is a type of small water craft used by U.S. forces in Vietnam].Which was the subject of that first matter concerning his Purple Heart…
I had been a patrolling officer and when I became the operations officer and the number two in command, it was subsequent to the bombing halt announced by President Johnson. We got orders to turn up the heat, try to be more aggressive, do things differently. And I conceived an operation – it became known as ‘skimmer ops.’ Very simple operation – we had a 15-foot Boston whaler. We would send that boat into ‘hot’ areas… The operation was very simple. The boat was to go into these areas and, by the way, I must mention that these areas were all non-population areas, not near any villages or anything else. We knew if anybody or anyone were around, they were enemy. We would go in, draw fire and get out immediately. Let others – swift boats standing off or maybe air support come in and take care of the enemy forces… ["swift boat" was the common name for Patrol Craft Fast vessels (PCFs) used by the U.S. Navy in Vietnam]
Myers: So you were basically trying to smoke out the enemy?
Schachte: Yes. Bait 'em, if you will. We had these boats. We had an M-60 machine gun forward, an M-16 mounted with a starlight scope. On a hazy night, a badly overcast night, we had a M-14 mounted with an infra-red. M-79 grenade launcher – those were single-launch launchers in those days. Flares…an FM radio. And we, in addition to our combat gear – helmets, flak-jackets and what-not – we had .38-caliber pistols. I usually carried one. A lot of times different folks didn't want to carry them…
The boats were manned by two officers and one enlisted person. Officers because officers were briefed daily. We had daily intelligence briefings seven days a week, with the latest intelligence from the area. Or in the patrolling boat – officers would come back and debrief their area. So, the officers had a good feel for everything that was going in our area of operation and our sectors.
The enlisted person operated the motor. Now, this was my idea. And I went on each one of these – in command of each one that we did up to and including the night with Lieutenant Junior Grade Kerry.
I did that because it was my idea and people volunteered for this. And I didn't think it was right having one of these operations and being on a swift boat or back at Operations Center or something like that.
Myers: Because you thought it was a dangerous operation?
Schachte: Yes, and I had to be a part of it. It was my idea. The night in question, we-- as always, the swift boat would tow the skimmer out to the designated area. And we would board the skimmer. This night our call sign was ‘Batman.’ I got into the boat. My weapon was forward – the M-60 machine gun. John got in the boat. I don't remember who the enlisted person was. We then proceeded to the designated area. The swift boat would stay off, sometimes out of sight, sometimes not. But far enough away that they could ride shotgun on the mission.
Providing, also, long-ranged communications. All we had was this FM radio. We would then go into an area and as we did this night, shut the motor down and just drift. And we would drift along the shoreline or river bank or whatever it happened to be – looking for movement, or listening for sounds of movement. This night, we were in an area – I recall we were so close to the beach you could actually hear the water lapping on the shoreline. It was between two and three in the morning – I don't remember. I detected what I thought was some movement. So, I took one of the hand-held flares and popped it instantly. It went up and when it burst – I don't know if you've heard that described, but it really lights up the area. I thought I saw the same area of movement. So, I opened up on it with my M-60.
Those guns were double loaded with tracers – Tango India, target identification. And John, right after I opened up, opened up with his M-16 and I could see he was firing in the direction of my tracer fire, which is why we had the double-loaded tracer. My gun jammed after the first burst and as I was trying to clear my weapon – John's gun apparently jammed too because he wouldn't fire anymore – I heard the old familiar, ‘thump’ – ‘POW!’. And I looked, and John had fired the M-79 grenade launcher.
We were receiving NO fire from the beach. There were no muzzle flashes. The water wasn't boiling around the boat as it were – and the only noise was the noise we were making. So, I told the boat operator – the motor operator – to, you know, ‘let's leave the area.’ And we did, went back to port, eventually – went back to the swift boat and went back to port. And that morning, I went in and debriefed my commanding officer – our division commander, then Lieutenant Commander [Grant] ‘Skip’ Hibbard.
And I told him what happened. And I told him I was NOT going to be filing an after-action report, which is required if you have enemy action, because we had no enemy action. And I also after giving him all the details and I said, ‘Oh, by the way – ’ and I don't remember my exact words – ‘John nicked himself with the M-79.’ Those M-79s, by the way, have a kill radius of about five meters. A little over five yards. But, there is a shrapnel area beyond that. And that's what happened. And I was upset because that could have gone in somebody's eye and so on and so forth.
The division commander said, ‘Fine, understand – no after-action report required.’ Then, I found out that John had come in. And then I went back into a meeting and he had this small piece of shrapnel in his hand and he was requesting a Purple Heart. I was opposed to that. The division commander was opposed to that.
And John left our division four or five days later. I departed country maybe three weeks later. Skip left a few days after I left. So, we were all gone. And I forgot about it. Until some years later, someone told me – and I don't recall who – to my surprise, John had been awarded a Purple Heart for that incident.
Fine, I felt I did my duty that night and that morning and it didn't bother me. And that's the way things were until about 20 years or so later. I was then an Admiral and I was in uniform – didn't have my hat on; I'd left that someplace in an office I was visiting. I was in the basement of the Senate Russell Office Building. And you have this subway system in the Capitol. I was waiting for a subway with a friend.
And he pointed – ‘Look, that's Senator Kerry over there.’ And I said, ‘I know him.’ And he said, ‘You do?’ And I hadn't seen or talked with John since Vietnam. And I guess I embarrassed my friend because I said, ‘Hey, John!’ Just like that. Well, he turned around, looked at me – it's about 20 paces away – and he kind of strolled over to me. And that call sign that night, if I haven't mentioned it, was ‘Batman.’ I think I have. But, John walked over to me and got kind of close and he said, ‘Batman.’ And I was really impressed that he had that degree of recall. And, of course, we exchanged pleasantries. And we were going to do lunch. And, of course, we never did. And that was the last time I've seen him in person or been with him. And that went on. I retired – so on and so forth. And this March, I got a phone call from one of my swift boat colleagues, ‘have you seen Tour of Duty?’ [the book, Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War, by Douglas Brinkley (William Morrow, 2004)]
And I said, ‘No, I certainly haven't.’ …And he said, ‘Well, let me at least fax you these pages about an incident that we all you know you got personal information on and so on and so forth.’ So, I said, ‘Fine.’ And he did. And I looked at that fax and read his account – and I was astonished. I'm not in the boat. The sampan issue and people and he's firing the hand-held grenade and so on and so forth. [note: the account of the incident attributed to Kerry in Brinkley’s book describes the mission encountering people in sampan vessels; Schachte recalls seeing no people or vessels]
One other point: John was new in-country. He'd never been in a firefight. We never would – anybody with any combat experience will tell you – you would never assign somebody like that to an ambush mission like this, endangering, you know, other people if you didn't have some degree of experience.
We always had two officers in the boat.
No after-action report – no fire received and so and so forth. Well, I thank my friend for sending me that information. But, I told him, ‘Look, I'm not going to get involved in this.’ You know, and I've heard from them and different people that they had a number of eyewitness reports on different things. And I just didn't want to expose my family to all of that. And I kind of maintained that posture – I'm not a member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth…
Myers: …are you saying that John Kerry accidentally injured himself?
Schachte: Yes. Clear-- of course, it was an accident.
Myers: That there was no enemy fire?
Schachte: There was no enemy fire – no after-action report, no muzzle flashes – nothing. No return fire from the beach at all.
Myers: So, in your view, he did not deserve the Purple Heart?
Schachte: That's what I told my commanding officer at the time.
Myers: And your commanding officer felt what?
Schachte: He agreed with me, after I related the story.
Myers: So, if you didn't support a Purple Heart and your commanding officer did not put in Kerry for a Purple Heart, how did he get it?
Schachte: You'll have to ask him. I don't know. And after– like I say, I had done my duty. It was over. I didn't care. I mean, that was not my issue. I was doing other things with my life.
Myers: Here's how John Kerry has described what happened that night. Quote: ‘My M-16 jammed and as I bent down in the boat to grab another gun, a stinging piece of heat socked into my arm.’ Is that accurate?
Schachte: It's accurate that his gun jammed, but it's not accurate (LAUGHS) that he was reaching something. He had already fired the M-79.
Myers: And that's what injured him?
Schachte: Yes.
Myers: It was an accidentally, self-inflicted wound?
Schachte: Yes, right. Which could have been very dangerous to any of the other two of us in that boat.
Myers: If you both were firing weapons, how can you be absolutely certain that there was no enemy fire that hit John Kerry that night?
Schachte: Because when both guns jammed after the first burst, there was this moment of eerie silence until I heard the M-79 go off and the subsequent – almost immediate explosion from that weapon. And if you were there, (LAUGHS) you would know if you're being shot at, believe me.
Myers: …So what happens when you all return from the mission?
Schachte: We went back. I reported to the division commander. I debriefed him on what had happened that evening, earlier that morning. And that I was not going to file an after-action report because there was no enemy action. We received no fire from the beach and that John had gotten nicked from a round at – I don't remember my exact words. But, John had gotten nicked from an M-79 that he fired too close to the boat.
Myers: And there was no enemy fire involved?
Schachte: None.
Myers: Period?
Schachte: Yes.
Myers: You're absolutely certain?
Schachte: Yes.
Myers: 36 years later?
Schachte: Hey, listen, when somebody's shooting at you [LAUGHS], you know it. There was no – and some of the reasons you remember these things is because the starkness of what happens while that's going on…
Myers: You seem to be saying that John Kerry lied then and is lying today. That's a very serious charge. What proof do you have?
Schachte: The only thing that I can tell you – several things – number one, no after-action report, which would have been required. I was in command of those missions and I was in the boat that night. We always had two officers in the boat that night-- in the boat when we did those operations, and an enlisted man on the motor. I saw no muzzle flashes or anything else. Now, that's what I saw. And it's not for me to judge what other people are going to think about that. That's up to other people.
Myers: But, you are, in a sense, saying Senator Kerry is lying and did not deserve his first Purple [Heart].
Schachte: I'm saying that he did not deserve the first Purple Heart from what I saw. You can characterize it anyway you want. But, I'm not going to say that.
Myers: Do you believe that John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam?
Schachte: Listen, everybody in that combat environment, as I said earlier, were all volunteers. I was only with him for this very small piece of that truncated tour that he had. I can only speak to what I saw that night and what-not. You have to ask others that spent more time with him. I couldn't give a judgment on something like that.
Myers: But, based on what you saw, do you believe John Kerry served honorably?
Schachte: From that night, from that incident, I would say that John Kerry sought a Purple Heart that was turned down that he later got. How he got it -- I don't have a clue….
Myers: Do you believe that John Kerry showed courage?
Schachte: Listen, anybody on any of those boats at any time – I was there, we were there for Tet [1968 Tet Offensive by North Vietnam and Vietcong forces], and further times – you don't-- you don't show up on the boat if-- unless you've got a little bit of that in you.
Myers: Courage?
Schachte: Yes.
Myers: So, you're not saying that John Kerry was not courageous?
Schachte: No.
Myers: Or that he did not serve honorably?
Schachte: I can't judge that. All I can tell you about is that very brief period that I was with him on.
Myers: You say…that John Kerry was so new to country, there's no way you could have sent him out on a mission by himself?
Schachte: Yeah, not alone – in charge – no, uh-uh [negative].
Myers: Can you remember the name of the enlisted man that was with him?
Schachte: No. I really can't.
Myers: But, you're absolutely certain that John Kerry would not have been -- never have been sent off in–
Schachte: Listen, my boss would not have permitted that and neither would the chain of command. You just don't DO that on a mission on an ambush operation like this that's, um, dangerous, that dangerous. It's not fair to the person to put him in that situation. And it's not a situation of absolute necessity. We were just trying to turn the heat up. And that's why we sought volunteers. And that's why I went as a volunteer myself on these missions.
Myers: And John Kerry volunteered for that mission?
Schachte: Yep.
Myers: …What proof do you have that you were actually in that boat that night?
Schachte: Well, my report back to the division commander, the fact that we had officers in those boats, the fact that I was in the boat for those that we did up to and including that evening. And what I saw.
Myers: But, there's no documentation.
Schachte: No, listen, we're in a wartime environment. We didn't write up doctrines and stuff. We made the necessary reports – if you had a Casualty Report, After-Action Report, Operational Status of the Boats [Report], whether they were combat ready or not. I was responsible for all that as the operations officer. But, those are the kinds of things that we kept record of, records of.
Myers: And there would not have been any damage report on that...
Schachte: Correct, there was none-- yeah.
Myers: The thing a lot of people are going to be asking Admiral is, it's been 35 years--
Schachte: Mm-hmm [affirmative].
Myers: Why speak out now in the heat of a presidential campaign?
Schachte: Well, the timing is something that's driven by the publication of Tour of Duty. As far as the timing is concerned, that was the precipitating thing that got those of us who were eyewitnesses, who served with John Kerry in Vietnam – made us aware of-- of what he was saying. I was not interviewed by anybody for that book. Nor do I know anybody of my colleagues that were interviewed.
I'm non-partisan. Listen, I have voted Democrat, Republican. I voted for President Clinton the first time he ran. And I know what you're talking about. That has nothing to do-- this is not a partisan issue. This is an issue of people stepping forward to tell their facts as they saw them.
Myers: John Kerry and two enlisted men insist they were on the boat that night and you were not. Why should we believe you?
Schachte: …there are two officers on each boat, each time we did one of these missions. I reported to the division command. I think he [then-Lt. Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, Coastal Division 14] has been public with a sworn affidavit [released by the organization Swift Boat Veterans for Truth] as to my coming in to him and telling him what happened…
Myers: You think the two enlisted men are just making it up?
Schachte: I don’t-- I can't tell you anything about their motives. The only thing I can tell you is what I know, who I talked to about it – after the incident and-- and that's all I can say…
Myers: Admiral, how can you be certain that John Kerry did not deserve that first Purple Heart?
Schachte: Well, other than the fact that I was in the boat with him when he fired this M-79 round too close to the boat and got nicked by it, I can't give you much more than that…
Myers: Can you think of anyone else who would recall your presence in the skimmer that day?
Schachte: Well, there are several people that may know the answer to that, and some of which have-- one in particular has requested not to be involved. And I certainly honored that. Maybe someone who was in-- the place where we-- we stayed – after the incident. I think I said something to a couple of the guys, and they may have been able to remember the remark.
Myers: You said you went on, as I recall, that you went on nine different missions.
Schachte: Thereabouts. I'm not sure the number.
Myers: In this skimmer?
Schachte: Yeah, yeah.
Myers: Do you recall roughly where John Kerry's mission was in the sequence?
Schachte: It was the last one I went on. It was the last one I went on.
Myers: All right. And he went on only one.
Schachte: Yes. And then he departed about four days later to go South…
Myers: Why would John Kerry say that you weren't in the boat if you were?


Schachte: You'll have to ask John.
Myers: Can you think of a motive?
Schachte: Uh, I'll let you speculate. I'm not going to.
Myers: Is it possible in your view that John Kerry simply forgot that you were there?
Schachte: It could've been. I know he had vivid recollection of our call sign that night. It was repeated to me over 20 years later. But of course, that's possible.
Myers: …Everyone is going to wonder why now? Why come forward in the closing weeks of a presidential campaign. What is your motive?
Schachte: My only motive, as is the motive as I understand it of those brave eyewitness – witnesses that have come forward with sworn affidavits and what not – is to tell the truth. The timing was not in my control. The publication of his book and then the way he made this such an issue out of this whole campaign, his Vietnam service, and then some recent media discussions of all of those areas of his service that have been the matter of debate, my name has surfaced. And I just felt that it wasn't fair for me to continue to not – what I finally determined to be – to not do my duty, and just step forward, and say what I knew of that night, and not watch my colleagues continue to get beat up about he [Editor's note: I] wasn't there, and a lot of other things that I'm not even going to mention. In the print and the TV media.
Myers: …So you're not calling John Kerry a liar?
Schachte: All I'm telling you is what I know happened that night and who I told about it and what- not… I'm not into name-calling. I just want to tell you what I knew that happened that night.
Myers: In your mind, John Kerry showed courage just going out on the mission.
Schachte: Sure.
Myers: You mentioned that you don't have a political motive. What have you done politically since you've been out of-- retired from the Navy?…
Schachte: Yeah, well, I guess the first thing I did when I retired – I was working for the Mayor of Charleston who was running for Governor. He's a Democrat. And I was his statewide get-out-the-vote coordinator for that election. Unfortunately, we lost in the primary or in the primary runoff. I have contributed to Democratic Senators, one in particular from my own state. And have voted Democrat or Republican, depending on the person and the issues. I don't consider myself a partisan person. And I really haven't had any active involvement in politics other than that time when I was helping the person running for Governor in South Carolina in 1994.
Myers: What about President Bush?
Schachte: …First of all, let me tell you, I went to a number of rallies for Senator McCain, my wife and I. In fact, at the request of a long-time personal friend, I helped sponsor a luncheon for Senator McCain and made a financial contribution that went along with sponsorship. I did not go to the luncheon. And we were -- I was discussing these matters with my wife. And finally decided that I-- I was going to fully support George Bush. And before the election I got a call from a fellow general officer asking me if I was supporting Bush. And I said, "Yes, I was." And that I had contributed financially.
And he said they were going to put together a letter entitled ‘Veterans for Bush.’ And I said, ‘I'll be glad to sign that letter, but only if I can edit it.’ And of course, they agreed to that. And – that was really the extent of my active involvement with President Bush in the primary campaign.
Myers: You said you have contributed to him since you retired from the Navy?
Schachte: Yes, I have.
Myers: How much total?
Schachte: Total, I don't know. I gave him $1,000 when he ran the first time. And $1,000 so far this year.
Myers: Have you had any relationship or any contact with his campaign?
Schachte: Oh, absolutely not. I don't know that I know anybody in his campaign. And that, by the way, that's one thing that is really -- it's difficult to get beyond those accusations that we're somehow puppets for this campaign. I mean that really strikes at the heart of your own personal honor. I mean I can't speak for others. And I've tried to keep that -- or I shouldn't have said anything now. But -- yeah, I know where you're going with that. But that answer's absolutely not.
Myers: So you're not doing this to help President Bush?
Schachte: For Lord's sake, no. Would I invite what's going to happen? (LAUGHS) I mean, I-- no. Absolutely not.
Myers: …you've been around this town. I mean, why risk tarnishing your own reputation by wading into this morass?
Schachte: It is a matter of personal honor. I'm sorry. There are times in life when you have to do what you know is right regardless of the personal consequences.
Myers: You told me before that one of the reasons you wanted to-- decided to speak out…is [because of] some of the things that were being said about you by the Kerry people on television…
Schachte: Well, that was the thing that pushed me over the side. But I'd rather not get involved in those specifics. I mean that in a sense is history. And I realize that I had to do my duty. I had to step up and be heard. Only on the only thing that I can talk about – which was this experience.
Myers: So you're not saying that John Kerry was, quote, ‘unfit for command?’
Schachte: Listen, who is fit for command in the context of Commander-in-Chief is up to the American people to decide…
Myers: You said you are not a member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
Schachte: I admire them, but I'm not a member.
Myers: Okay. But you do support their cause.
Schachte: I support men that are willing to stand up and put up with what they've been putting up with just to tell the truth – of what they know to be the truth. And this is America. I mean that's what we do here.
Myers: Do you worry that your own reputation could be tarnished by getting involved in this?
Schachte: Oh, of course. Absolutely. And I knew that consequence was looking me dead in the face. But I also knew that it's not a higher calling. But there are times in life when you have to do what you know is right regardless of the personal consequences. And it's-- it's not easy. And the reason I stayed out of this from the beginning is because I didn't want to get wrapped up into whatever kind of frenzy was going to follow. But I also knew that there were people who knew from what I told them of what happened that night. And I thought that would take care of it…
Myers: Some people will say, ‘Look, you contributed money to the President's campaign.’
Schachte: Yeah.
Myers: Here it is the closing weeks of a very tight election. That this is all about politics.
Schachte: Well, see that's-- that's the probably the worst thing you could say to me. That I'm some kind of a political operative. That I would throw my reputation to the wolves to stand up for something that – as the inference is – is not true and expose my family to everything… I wouldn't do that. And I don't think anybody would do that.

John Kerry’s Version Of Events
The following excerpt was taken from pages 146, 147 and 148 of the book Tour Of Duty. It describes John Kerry’s version of events about as clearly as anything I have been able to find. The key point that can be derived from this excerpt is that the Vietnamese encountered simply ran when discovered. Kerry does not claim to have seen any weapons nor does he actually claim that the Vietnamese ever fired on his party. There is no indication at all that these men were any different from the other “boatloads of fishermen they found in sampans, all operating in the curfew zone” during the course of that night. Kerry spotted the men through a night vision device. Kerry popped an aerial flare, catching the men by surprise. The men ran, obviously with good reason. Kerry and his crew opened fire – and then left. No effort was made to determine if the men were Viet Cong. No effort was made to determine what was being carried in the sampans. In truth, there is zero evidence that the men Kerry saw were anything more sinister than simple fishermen who had the good sense to disappear as quickly as possible when caught out in a curfew zone. And this point is critical. The criteria for the award of a Purple Heart quite clearly require that the injury for which the award is being made must have resulted from enemy fire or from friendly fire that clearly was directed against enemy personnel or equipment. If there was no enemy fire and no confirmation that the men observed were enemy personnel or that the sampans were transporting enemy equipment, the injury John Kerry received, whatever the source, does not qualify for the award of a Purple Heart.

In the following excerpt, any words enclosed in quotes are enclosed in quotes in the original text and presumably are Kerry’s direct words – either from an interview or from some document made available to the author. Based on the overblown style of the writing, the probability is high that much of this text has been quoted from Kerry’s war journal. I have “condensed” this excerpt to some extent in that I have left out some intervening material (much of it explanatory text written by the author) to present as coherent an account as possible, in Kerry’s own words, of the “action” in which he was injured. No quotes have been taken out of context and the order of the quotes has not been changed.

“Three of us, two enlisted men and myself, had stayed up all night in a Boston Whaler patrolling the shore off a Viet Cong-infested peninsula north of Cam Ranh… Most of the night had been spent being scared shitless by fishermen whom we would suddenly creep up on in the darkness… Then, very early in the morning, around 2:00 or 3:00, while it was still dark, we proceeded up the tiny inlet between the island and the peninsula to the point designated as our objective. The jungle closed in on us on both sides. It was scary as Hell. You could hear yourself breathing. We were almost touching the shore. Suddenly, through the magnified moonlight of the infrared ‘starlight scope’ I watched, mesmerized, as a group of sampans glided in toward the shore. We had been briefed that this was a favorite crossing area for VC trafficking contraband.”
With its motor turned off, Kerry paddled the Boston Whaler out of the inlet into the beginning of the bay. Simultaneously the Vietnamese pulled their sampans up onto the beach and began to unload something; he couldn’t tell what, so he decided to illuminate the proceedings with a flare. The entire sky seemed to explode into daylight. The men from the sampans bolted erect, stiff with shock for only an instant before they sprang for cover like a herd of panicked gazelles Kerry had once seen on TV’s Wild Kingdom. “We opened fire,” he went on. “The light from the flares started to fade, the air was full of explosions. My M-16 jammed, and as I bent down in the boat to grab another gun, a stinging piece of heat socked into my arm and just seemed to burn like hell. By this time one of the sailors had started the engine and we ran by the beach, strafing it. Then it was quiet.”
“We stayed quiet and low because we did not want to illuminate ourselves at that point,” Kerry explained. “In the dead of night, without any knowledge of what kind of force was there, we were not all about to go crawling on the beach to get our asses shot off. We were unprotected; we didn’t have ammunition, we didn’t have cover, we just weren’t prepared for that…So we first shot the sampans so that they were destroyed and whatever was in them was destroyed.” Then their cover boat warned of a possible VC ambush in the small channel they had to exit through, and Kerry and company departed the area.

The authors of the book John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography interviewed two men, William Zaladonis and Patrick Runyon, who are recognized by John Kerry as the enlisted men with him on the “skimmer” (Boston Whaler) the night of December 2-3. Their recollections of that night are presented, with a number of direct quotes, on pages 72 and 73 of the book. These paragraphs are excerpted below without any changes. The key point that can be derived from this excerpt is that neither man is at all certain if there was any enemy return fire. Further, neither man has any idea of how John Kerry received his wound.

Two men serving alongside him that night had similar memories of the incident that led to Kerry’s first wartime injury. William Zaladonis, who was manning an M-60, and Patrick Runyon, operating the engine, said they spotted some people running from a sampan to a nearby shoreline. When they refused to obey a call to stop, Kerry’s crew began shooting. “When John told me to open up, I opened up,” Zaladonis recalled. Zaladonis and Runyon both said they were too busy to notice how Kerry was hit. “I assume they fired back,” Zaladonis said. “If you can picture me holding an M-60 machine gun and firing it – what do I see? Nothing. If they were firing at us, it was hard for me to tell.”
Runyon, too, said he assumed the suspected Vietcong fired back because Kerry was hit by a piece of shrapnel. “When you have a lot of shooting going on, a lot of noise, you are scared, the adrenaline is up,” Runyon said. “I can’t say for sure that we got return fire or how [Kerry] got nicked. I couldn’t say one way or the other. I know he did get nicked, a scrape on the arm.”

BC - Length limit exceeded - continued in a second post.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[RiflemanDD730]

This FIRST PURPLE HEART could be very important in getting quick public recognition of Kerry’s duplicity for the following reasons.

1) Kerry requested the medal HIMSELF.
2) He was officially DENIED by his command.
3) The denials are verified by current affidavits.
4) The Navy has recently conducted a review of medals.
5) The Navy needs only to release the documents they found to justify their conclusion that “proper procedures” were followed. No further investigation is needed.

This is the one area in the Kerry saga that is simple. No conflicting 35 year-old memories. No suspect AAR’s or Casreps. This is also one medal that we know Kerry himself requested because his command turned him down. We know the Silver Star and Bronze Star were initiated by others. And he could make the case that the other two Purple Hearts may have been recommended by others.

The first Purple Heart could be the opener to this can of worms.

The Navy Inspector General indicated in his letter that a full investigation would not be productive as follows.

"Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30 years ago would not be productive," "The passage of time would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of the time in which the events took place.”

This of course might be true for the other medals BUT IT IS NOT TRUE FOR THE FIRST PURPLE HEART!!!

ALL THAT IS NEEDED IS FOR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TO RELEASE THE DOCUMENTS!!!

I’ve sent a Navy IG hotmail requesting the release and sent an email to my congressman requesting his help.

It would be helpful if the Inspector General heard from a lot of people and a lot of congressmen.

[RiflemanDD730]

RiflemanDD730
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 37
Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 8:28 am    Post subject: Kerry's medal "process" OK'd by US Navy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was sent to the Navy Inspector General.

Subject: IMMEDIATE PUBLIC CLARIFICATION OF R.A. ROUTE 9/17/04 LETTER
To: NAVIGHotlines@navy.mil
CC: "Glenn Reynolds" <pundit@instapundit.com>, "Michael Dobbs" <dobbsm@washpost.com>, feedback@powerlineblog.com, hannity@foxnews.com, "Hugh" <hhewitt@hughhewitt.com>, "Brit Hume" <Special@foxnews.com>, joe@msnbc.com, "Ed Morrisey" <captain@captainsquartersblog.com>

Re: September 17, 2004 Letter from R. A. Route
Reference 2040700 Ser N5/1348 17 SEP 2004 To Mr.
Thomas Fitton

Subj: REQUEST FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLIC CLARIFICATION
REGARDING THE PROCEDURES SURROUNDING THE PURPLE HEART
AWARDED JOHN KERRY FOR A NON-HOSTILE OPERATION ON
DECEMBER 2,1968

1) No public documentation supports this award.
Specifically, a casualty report and an after action
report have been reported as being necessary. Does
the Inspector General mean to say that these exist but
are being withheld? Or are they not required? The
reply to Mr. Fitton is inadequate and requires an
immediate clarification as this matter involves the
integrity of the Navy as well as a presidential
candidate.

2) The appropriate section of Mr. Fitton’s letter is
titled: Fraudulent Medals: It begins "With respect to
Senator Kerry’s justifications for award of the Purple
Heart " and ends " That Kerry would seek the Purple
Heart for such ‘wounds’ is a mockery of the intent of
the Purple Heart and an abridgement of the valor of
those to whom the Purple Heart had been awarded with
justification.”

3) Please give this your immediate attention.

[RiflemanDD730]

RiflemanDD730
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 38
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:07 pm    Post subject: PH #1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Willie Koczynski

You may be on to something. Zumwalt was trying to build morale by giving medals. His troops were in frequent actions. He was pressed for time. He reportedly called in Kerry while Kerry was in Saigon on a 2 day R&R. They apparently flew back to Kerry's base together for the awards ceremony.

I posted this scenario previously in a discussion involving actions on 20 Feb and 28 Feb and the basis for the decorations for Kerry and his crew awarded on Mar 6. The edit refers to a news article discussed in that thread.


Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:35 pm    Post subject: Going After Kerry's 2nd Purple Heart
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possible scenario.

The medals in the picture represent those from 28 Feb plus one purple heart from 2 Dec for Kerry. The medals from 20 Feb are not yet processed. The media story starts out with the 20 Feb and 28 Feb actions but the 20 Feb part is edited out for brevity.

Zumwalt wants to pump up morale. The 28 Feb action looks like an opportunity to hand out medals more so than the 20th. He calls in Kerry while he's in Saigon and lets him know he caught the brass ring(Silver Star). Kerry, still steaming over having no purple heart from 2 Dec casually lets Zumwalt know that A PH is "in the works" from 2 Dec and wouldn't it be nice alongside a SS? Zumwalt tells his staff to make it happen fast and don't worry about the PH paperwork(the missing after action report) Kerry says its "in the works".

Summary: Kerry and crew get 28 Feb medals(with 20 Feb in process), and Kerry gets a PH only on the basis of a casualty report. The "in the works" action report of course doesn't exist.

[RiflemanDD730]

RiflemanDD730
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 39
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:10 pm    Post subject: The clock is ticking. What will influence undecided voters?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The clock is ticking. What will influence undecided voters Nov. 2?

Influencing undecided voters seems to be the most important objective of the research on this site. It may be appropriate to review what is likely to influence them in the short time left before the election. The undecideds will probably only respond to a blockbuster announcement of wrongdoing. This could be a confession from one of the band of brothers that his story supporting Kerry is false, or a document that proves Alston never was on Kerry’s boat, or that one of the medals was definitely awarded incorrectly due to an action by Kerry himself (not due to someone else giving the awards or misinterpreting documents). The first Purple Heart award is the one that could do it because it involves Kerry himself.

There is a good example of how this occurred in the recent past. Bob Kerrey dropped out of the 2000 presidential primary when he was confronted with documentary evidence that he verified a false after action report claiming to have killed 17 Viet Cong when in fact only women and children were killed. The false report was the basis for his Bronze Star. This information was uncovered in a 2-year investigation for Newsweek. The story was killed after Bob Kerrey dropped out of the 2000 race but the reporter got the NYT Magazine to publish it in 2001 and CBS ran the story on 60 Minutes after which Bob Kerrey admitted publicly that the medal was “inappropriately awarded”. In this case it is Bob Kerrey himself attesting to the filing of a false report that is the key factor.

Key issues in the John Kerry case are the validity of medal awards, suspicions concerning changes in documents, and unfounded claims of heroism. What in the John Kerry case is similar to the Bob Kerrey case? The following is a review from my perspective.

SILVER STAR. Did Kerry’s actions rise to the level of this award? That seems to be the question here. His command thought so. Zumwalt’s citation has a lot of detail implying that the award includes Kerry’s performance as OTC as well as his personal action in killing the enemy soldier. Is it likely that proof will be found that Kerry significantly changed documents to influence his command to give him this award? Probably not. Zumwalt’s summary shows that he wanted to reward his sailors to boost morale. The chances are low of finding Kerry himself significantly involved. Changes in the citations are interesting but do they change Zumwalt’s original assessment?

BRONZE STAR – 3rd PURPLE HEART. Hostile fire and the severity of Kerry’s wound seem to be the issues. The band of brothers testifies that hostile fire was present and documents support them. It looks like a confession or proof that the documents are false are the only challenges here. The severity of the wound issue can be related to the apparent combining of a wound received earlier in the day with a bruise received during the action in a casualty report. This could be very important if it could be shown that Kerry was behind it and he had the intent to defraud. So it’s probably unlikely that there is a blockbuster on the BZ because of the testimony of the BOB but the 3rd PH documentation might offer a possibility if Kerry’s fingerprints are found on a fraud.

SECOND PURPLE HEART. This one seems pretty straightforward. From what I read he was wounded from hostile fire, was treated, the reports were filed, and he got his award.

FIRST PURPLE HEART. Kerry himself is involved here. He personally asked for the medal. He was turned down by his command. The three command officers involved have filed current affidavits attesting to the fact that there was no hostile fire and that’s why they turned down his request. Even the two enlisted men who claim to have been in the boat with Kerry do not confirm hostile fire. No documentation is known that supports hostile fire. The Navy just concluded a review that indicated that “procedures” were properly followed in awarding all medals but it did not provide any background. That means that they checked something about this award. All that is necessary is to have the Navy make public what they found. Was it an after action report? Was it some kind of administrative letter that gave the award without an after action report? There had to be something to justify their claim that procedures were properly followed.

A blockbuster that will affect undecided voters most likely will arise from the first Purple Heart. The Navy Inspector General needs to be bombarded with requests to release the information SPECIFICALLY ON THE FIRST PURPLE HEART. If generic requests are made to complete the investigation or release all information on all medals they will simply fall back to their original position that the passage of time precludes any likelihood of reaching a definitive answer. The Navy must be forced to focus on one thing. That thing is their responsibility to show what they have on the first Purple Heart. It requires no additional work, ONLY TO MAKE PUBLIC THE INFO THEY ALREADY HAVE.

The clock is ticking.

The Navy Inspector General Hotline
http://www.ig.navy.mil/ComplaintProcedure.htm

The home page of the Navy Inspector General
http://www.ig.navy.mil/

Senators and Congressmen might be very helpful.Back to top

[RiflemanDD730]

 
RiflemanDD730
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 40
Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 11:28 pm    Post subject:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The documents that support the first Purple Heart may be the ticking time bomb. Kerry’s command turned him down. Someone had to write something to OK the medal. The Navy said recently that “procedures” were followed. The Kerry camp is on record that they have no after action report. Kerry’s memoirs indicate that he had had not been under fire nine days after Dec. 2. What is that “something” that OK’d the medal? Who wrote it? Here are parts of an email that were sent to various news media, bloggers, and my congressman asking them to follow up with the Navy Inspector General to release that “something”.


START EMAIL

This FIRST PURPLE HEART could be very important in getting quick public recognition of Kerry’s duplicity for the following reasons.

1) Kerry requested the medal HIMSELF.
2) He was officially DENIED by his command.
3) The denials are verified by current affidavits.
4) The Navy has recently conducted a review of medals.
5) The Navy needs only to release the documents they found to justify their conclusion that “proper procedures” were followed. No further investigation is needed.

The Navy Inspector General indicated in his letter that a full investigation would not be productive as follows.

"Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30 years ago would not be productive," "The passage of time would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of the time in which the events took place.”

This of course might be true for the other medals BUT IT IS NOT TRUE FOR THE FIRST PURPLE HEART!!!

ALL THAT IS NEEDED IS FOR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TO RELEASE THE DOCUMENTS!!!

END EMAIL

[RiflemanDD730]

RiflemanDD730
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 41
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2004 8:21 am    Post subject: Letter to VADM Route on Immediate Information Release
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Admiral Route’s letter states, “We found that existing documentation regarding his medals indicates the awards approval process was properly followed.” This means that documentation exists for the first Purple Heart. The release of this documentation will require no additional investigation requiring reconstruction of thirty-year-old facts and circumstances as might be required for the other medals.

A letter was express mailed to Admiral Route requesting release of the documents or, if there is a restriction on their release, to make information on that restriction public. Copies of the letter with requests for follow up on the Admiral went to Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, Joseph Schmitz the Inspector General of the Defense Department, and Congressman Gary Miller of the 42nd CA district. All of these letters were reported as received by the post office and proof of delivery is pending.

Because the first Purple Heart is a very straightforward issue, and the Navy has already indicated the documentation exists, this may be the one area where a conflict between Navy documents and sworn affidavits by Kerry’s command are highlighted. Also, because it is a simple matter to release documents that have already been discovered, it may be the one area that can have a significant impact in the short time before the election.

For this reason the letter to Admiral route is being posted with a request that all of you who are so inclined use your contacts to get Admiral Route to do his duty to the Navy and the American people.



VADM R. A. Route
Department of the Navy
Naval Inspector General
1014 N Street SE Suite 100
Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5006

Dear Admiral Route,

This refers to your letter of September 17, 2004 to Mr. Thomas Fitton of Judicial Watch (Refer to 2040700 Ser N5/1348 17 Sep 2004). Enclosed are copies of your letter to Mr. Fitton, Mr. Fitton’s letter of August 18 and my September 18 email to you.

Your letter states that documentation exists to indicate that the awards process for Senator Kerry’s medals was properly followed. Please publish that documentation for the first Purple Heart medal awarded for action on December 2, 1968. It is my understanding that this should include an after action report to show that the required hostile fire was present, and a casualty report to verify that an appropriate injury occurred.

You must be aware that the officers in command at the time are on record stating that these records were not filed by them because there was no hostile fire and Senator Kerry’s wound was superficial. Withholding information on this issue cannot be in the public interest.

No additional review of thirty-year-old events is needed for the release of the existing documentation for the first Purple Heart that you discovered in your careful examination that indicates that the awards process was properly followed. There is no need for a reconstruction of facts or consideration of the context of the time of the event. All that is needed is a release of the documents that your letter indicates exist in the files today.

It is my understanding that an after action report and casualty report are public documents not subject to the control of the participants. Therefore the release should be routine and immediate. If, however, these documents are restricted for some reason, the fact that a restriction exists should be made public.

This is a very serious issue that involves the integrity of the Navy and its officers and men and women. The Naval Inspector General maintains that integrity. The immediate release of the existing documentation or a statement on release restriction on the first Purple Heart is part of maintaining that integrity.


Sincerely,Back to top

[RiflemanDD730]

It's obvious from the string of posts that were made by me in various threads and included here that I have a "thing" about the 1st Purple Heart award. This info was given to many news agencies and bloggers and help in getting the info released from Admiral Route was solicited from the following.

1) Thomas Fitton of Judicial Watch
2) Joseph Schmitz, Inspector General of the DoD
3) Gary Miller, Congressman 42nd CA district
4) John Warner, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee

In addition, a Freedom of Information Request was submitted to the DoD.

The windmills have been identified and tilted.

Don Quixote (aka RiflemanDD730)