Replies

I would like to make some comments on the three citations that have been referred to: No. 1 (Zumwalt); No. 2 (Hyland), and No. 3 (Lehman).

Comments have been made about the difference between citations 2 and 3, but to me what is striking is the difference between the original citation 1, on the one hand, and 2 and 3 on the other.

If you read Citation 1, you get the impression that Kerry was the modern naval equivalent of Horatio Hornblower or "Lucky" Jack Aubrey of the Patrick O'Brian series. It gives the impression that it was the single-handed leadership of Kerry which saved the day, as well as his personal assault upon the enemy.

In particular, it states he single-handedly went ashore in pursuit of a VC that was apparently shooting rockets at his ship, single-handedly killed him and recovered the rocket launcher.

In Citations 2 and 3 Lt. (j.g.) Kerry's personal involvement in the action has been substantially toned down. For example, the citation now states that Kerry's boat 23 and 94 moved upstream because of a "request from U.S. advisors ashore," not because of Kerry's command of the operation.

Most glaringly different is the description of Kerry's supposed assault on shore. While the first citation posits that he single-handedly went after a VC and killed him and captured the rocket launcher supposedly aimed at his boat, this is totally absent from citations 2 and 3. They simply say "he personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy." They go on to say that "upon sweeping the area, an immediate search uncovered an enemy rest and supply area which was destroyed." Absolutely no specific reference to Kerry's supposed personal bravery in single-handed attack on the rocket position, or any reference to the rocket-bearing VC. If it had happened don't you think the subsequent citations would continue to mention Kerry's supposed personal action with regard to the VC, since it would have been the principal reason he would have been entitled to the Silver Star?

Which leads me to ask this question: Who submitted the original report on Kerry's actions? Since he was the commanding officer of the mission, didn't Kerry himself write and submit the action report which would have formed the initial basis for the award?

Which leads me to posit this theory on why there were these multiple citations. Kerry's initial citation was based largely upon his own "puffed up" account of what had occurred which exaggerated his actions. Upon reflection in later years, Kerry decided this could come back to haunt him (e.g., that other persons would not verify what was in the citation). Therefore, he had the citation re-issued so that while it still seemed apparent that he was entitled to the Silver Star, it reduced reference to his personal involvement.

Which would also explain why the original citation, which is the most glowing as to his personal actions, has not been posted on his website. He does not want people asking the questions I am asking.

Here is my take on the differences between the Zumwalt, Hyland, and Lehman versions of the Silver Star citations

Zumwalt: This is more than likely the original citation taken from the award submission. Normally, as part of the nomination form, the nominator must provide a synopsis of the award (citation) that can fit on a single page suitable for framing with the certificate. I suspect that Zumwalt forwarded the award to CINCPAC, ADM Hyland, for the final signature, including the citation. Due to the lengthy time delays processing these awards, it is not unreasonable to posit that it took CINCPAC for 12-18 months later. It is worth noting that the requirement to go to CINCPAC applied only to the Silver Star, hence only the Zumwalt and Lehman citations for the Bronze Star. p> Hyland: CINCPAC probably edited the Zumwalt citation to make it fit on to one page and to clean it up a bit to fit the existing format.

Lehman: Except for the last sentence, the citation is the same as Hyland's. What makes this curious is that it is many years later, at least a decade, and I doubt if Silver Stars had to go to SECNAV for approval. My take is that Kerry requested replacement medals (physical ones) and due to the fact that Kerry was no longer an active servicmember, administrative requirements mandated that SECNAV's office had to approve the issue of the replacments once it was verified from official records that Kerry had actually earned them.

Now that we have the Drudge Report item that Kerry said he threw his own medals away (something he has denied including on his website), I believe Kerry really did throw his medals away and decided in the 1980s, either during his run for LT Governor in 1982 or the Senate in 1984, that he wanted the medals replaced so he could exhibit them. He probably never thought that anyone would be investigating all of this 20 years later.