So, the guy has 3 PHs, 1 BS w/V, 1 SS. He was in country 4 months. Folks are suggesting this is fishy. My take is that Combat Kerry is "fishy", but trying to dissect his awards and decorations from VN is counter productive, here's why:
The 3 PHs, as Combat Kerry readily admits were each minor "wounds". They may very well have been scratches that did not even require stitches. It does not matter, PHs were handed out like aspirin in some units. 3 minor "wounds" in 4 months is no big deal. Any time someone in my platoon was treated by our medic (who was assigned to the platoon and went on missions w/us) they were eligible for a PH. They did not have to take it, they could ask doc not to submit the paperwork. But, if they wanted, they could get one. Scraping your arm diving for cover and you qualified, same as if you took a punji stake in the leg. Combat Kerry seems to have never passed an opportunity to collect a PH. A PH is only indicative of a combat wound, it does not, by itself, represent an award for valor or heroism. As someone said here on a different thread "if it bleeds, it is a PH".
The BSM w/V, This was awarded to Combat Kerry in the well publicized event where he pulled the SF guy out of the drink under enemy fire. Nothing "fishy" about this event or this award.
The SS,This award was made to Combat Kerry for the event where he beached his boat and went ashore and administered a "coup de grace" to an enemy combatant. There are some questions being raised about whether Combat Kerry acted properly and the condition of and threat posed by the combatant. There are also questions being asked about what Admiral Zumwalt may have said about Combat Kerry's behavior based on a third party's claimed quote by Admiral Zumwalt many years ago. But, the major questions associated with this event have been addressed and answered compellingly by the witnesses and individuals involved. In 1996 as part of Combat Kerry's response to a newspaper article that raised these very same questions, Combat gathered all the players and they all vouched for Combat Kerry and they all supported the specific details of the event and the award. Admiral Zumwalt was there (he is the officer who approved the SS) and he is quoted as having said he wanted to put Combat Kerry in for an even higher award, but it would have taken too long to get approved. The gunner Mr. Belodeau was there and supported Combat Kerry and even went so far as to say that previous articles had misquoted him regarding the condition of the enemy combatant. Nothing "fishy" about this award unless it can be proven that Combat, his drew, his commanding officer and Admiral Zumwalt were all in on it.
So, forget the PHs for the moment. What we really have is two separate events that have been well publicized and the witnesses and participants ALL are on the record supporting the details as reported. Two events in 4 months. I was a grunt in VN, so I don't know from Navy Swift boats, but 4 months is a long time and 2 events in 4 months is not a lot.
Regarding Combat Kerry's SS, it may be that lesser individuals (not politically connected) would have been reprimanded for beaching their boat. Combat Kerry may have been a "hot potatoe" to the Navy, because of his known connections. But it doesn't matter, the decision was made by the Navy commanders to award him the SS. Since all questions regarding this issue have been addressed and answered by the very people who witnessed the event and approved the award, there is nothing left to question on this award. Remember, these folks chose to come to Combat Kerry's side and stand shoulder to shoulder almost 30 years after this happened.
I don't think it is realistic to expect any vet organization to attack Combat Kerry on his awards. To do so would require an attack on each and every vet who participated in or witnessed these events. That ain't gonna happen, nor should it.
As frustrating as it may be, I think we should leave this alone.
If there is a point to be made with the Purple Hearts, it's the fact that he used these "minor wounds" to flee from his obligated sworn duty and leave his "band of brothers" behind to seek a safer and cushier job in Washington. Not very becoming of a "War Hero" running for election as President of the United States on just such a label. It's one thing to say you served, "...it was hell, my buddies were dying all around me and everyone would have jumped at any chance to go home"... THAT I can understand, but to be labeled a War HERO? Nah, words mean something.