Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

trumad

(41,692 posts)
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 02:27 PM Oct 2013

Medal of Honor fraud? Sure looks like it.

Wow! Helmet Cam video's sure blow this story apart. I encourage you to click on the McClatchy link below to and read this unbelievable story.

via Charles Pierce:

But videos shot by Army medevac helicopter crewmen show no Taliban in that vicinity or anywhere else on the floor of the Ganjgal Valley at the time and location of the "swarm." The videos also conflict with the version of the incident in Marine Corps and White House accounts of how Meyer, now 25, of Columbia, Ky., came to be awarded the nation's highest military decoration for gallantry.

The videos add to the findings of an ongoing McClatchy investigation that determined that crucial parts of Meyer's memoir were untrue, unsubstantiated or exaggerated, as were the Marine Corps and White House accounts of how he helped extract casualties from the valley under fire. The White House and Marine Corps have defended the accuracy of their accounts of Meyer's actions. The Marine Corps declined to comment on the videos. Army National Guard Sgt. Kevin Duerst, the helicopter crew chief whose helmet camera recorded one of the videos, confirmed the absence of insurgents on the valley floor as the aircraft flew in on a first run to retrieve casualties. "We totally flew over everything. . . . There was nothing going on down there," Duerst said in a telephone interview Friday. "There was no serious gunfight going on."
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/10/14/205341/videos-contradict-medal-of-honor.html
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
1. K&R.
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 02:58 PM
Oct 2013

But I'm less concerned with the cynicisms and exaggerations of combat vets suffering from PTSD, some who deal with stress by living in a fantasy world, than chicken-hawks who sometimes pretend to be combat vets.

Have you ever bought drinks at a VFW hall? It's known that some stories can get out of hand. In the Marine Corps, they are called sea stories. While other vets can know that they are not true, they build camaraderie. Sometimes, even buddies will support a sea story to make the teller's story more real. This can be done for entertainment to take in the gullible.

But it is common knowledge that they are not supposed to be shared in a serious way with civilians. Some do, however, exaggerate the exploits of buddies to impress women with whom they do not expect to have a long-term relationships.

Maybe the story that was told is not true. But in comparison to the single story that may be shown to not be true, how many chicken-hawks are out there who have told stories about being at Ka-san? Or being in military intelligence? I wonder how many are going to claim they were in Iraq? Or Afghanistan?

Does this guy have PTSD?

It may turn out that the story is untrue? Do combat vets who were given a ribbon or two really give a shit? Ask around and you'll find more than one that doesn't and won't.

 

boomer55

(592 posts)
2. Our Military Industrial Complex lying to create "Hero's"? who would have believed it?
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 02:59 PM
Oct 2013

Besides the informed.

panader0

(25,816 posts)
3. Whether or not this guy deserves the MOH I don'r know.
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 03:03 PM
Oct 2013

But if "There was no serious gunfight going on", how did so many get killed/wounded?

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
4. It's my understanding that MOH documentation and testimony is pretty thorough--
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 03:10 PM
Oct 2013

and it sounds like there was an awful lot of confusion and differing accounts of who was where when--the folks in the Army and Marines should have determined the accuracy of accounts by now. Let both men have their medals and be done with it. I don't see the point of casting a cloud now.

grantcart

(53,061 posts)
5. its not just throrough the bars are high and the people involved are determined
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 03:20 PM
Oct 2013

not to lower the bar.

I will point out that the newspaper source is stridently anti Obama,

the article is getting lots of love at FreeRepublic:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2820730/posts?q=1&;page=67

It is also interesting to note that Swenson was openly critical of his commanding officers who were disciplined after investigations were opened. Doesn't seem like the kind of situation that the brass would want to intervene and help.

From the wiki:



Swenson has received the Medal of Honor on 15 October 2013. He was nominated for his actions as an Embedded Trainer in the Battle of Ganjgal near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border on 8 September 2009. He is reported to have repeatedly entered the "kill zone" in order to rescue wounded American and Afghan soldiers, much like his teammate Dakota Meyer who was awarded the Medal of Honor in 2011.[6]

For reasons which remain unclear, the paperwork was lost, causing a significant delay in the nomination process. Some believe that Swenson was being punished for loudly criticizing his senior officers (for not sending fire support) in an after-action investigation into the battle.[7] His case was reopened in 2011 at the urging of Marine Corps General John R. Allen.[8] Dakota Meyer strongly advocated for Swenson's Medal of Honor in his book, Into the Fire: A Firsthand Account of the Most Extraordinary Battle in the Afghan War, writing that if it weren't for Swenson, he (Meyer) would not be alive today.[9]

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
6. Meyer and Swenson obviously have different accounts and different perspectives--
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 03:39 PM
Oct 2013

Swenson seems to contradict some of Meyer's version. Meyer's medal was fast-tracked, Swenson's package disappeared into the ether--that may have been inappropriate, and should be investigated (interestingly, I read that Petraeus himself signed the medal package for Swenson before it disappeared). Although I will say that my husband's award for something or other during a Middle East deployment was also lost in the ether due to higher ups rotating in and out, returning stateside and not following up. So it happens--but his was a routine award, nowhere near MOH status--you'd think that would garner SERIOUS attention up the chain of command. It's suspicious all around, especially in light of Swenson criticizing commanders, but I think both men probably deserve their medals and it should be left alone.

 

trumad

(41,692 posts)
7. Wrong--this is from Charles Pierce---the furthest thing from a Right Wing shrill...
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 03:41 PM
Oct 2013
"Let us establish one thing at the outset. The writer, Jonathan S. Landay, is as good as it gets. He was one of the few people who cut through the bullshit that was being peddled to lie the country into Iraq, and he did it while serious people like Tim Russert were waiting by the phone for someone to call. If he says this is what his reporting concludes, then this is what his reporting concludes, and the White House and the Marine Corps have the burden of proof to bear, and no-comment isn't going to cut it."

The helmet CAM videos clearly show inconstancy in the story.

Getting your facts for Wiki? That's kind of shaky you think?

grantcart

(53,061 posts)
9. The facts from the wiki article that are relevent, IMO
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 03:54 PM
Oct 2013

is the unchallenged fact that after the incident Swenson publicly called out his superiors and that they eventually faced disciplinary action.

This establishes two things

a) the review was not 'brass friendly'

b) it received much more scrutiny than normal.

The only media source 'investigating' the story AFIK, McClatchy, the newspaper that continues to allocate significant resources to 'investigate' Benghazi.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/13/191130/in-talking-points-controversy.html#.UZI_c8rYX40

show me a mainstream source and I would be more interested.

But the key fact is that someone who publicly calls out his superiors is not the kind of guy who is thinking about getting the Medal of Honor. In my book we should honor him for that alone.
 

trumad

(41,692 posts)
10. Sorry---I'll go with the word of Pierce regarding Landay's bonafides rather than yours.
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 04:07 PM
Oct 2013

Truthout which is a terrific left leaning site, publishes the guy all the time.

http://truth-out.org/author/itemlist/user/44699

Response to trumad (Original post)

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
12. First casualty of war is always the truth...
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 04:19 PM
Oct 2013

And just IMO, there are much bigger things in the war to get pissed off about rather than who did or didn't deserve to get some medal...

I guess next you'll tell me that Chris Kyle's "adventures" weren't 100% completely true...

dembotoz

(16,806 posts)
13. 2 medals of honor from one battle
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 04:27 PM
Oct 2013

something must have gone on


maybe one error but two would be a bit hard to believe.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Medal of Honor fraud? Su...