Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Navy agrees admiral was entitled to wear combat decorations
AP | June 25, 1998 | AP

Posted on 02/20/2003 10:55:17 AM PST by honway

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Navy has quietly accepted that Adm. Jeremy "Mike" Boorda was entitled to wear combat decorations on his uniform -- the challenged Vietnam War awards that led to his suicide two years ago.

Navy Secretary John Dalton put into Boorda's file a letter from Elmo Zumwalt Jr., the chief of naval operations during the war, which says it was "appropriate, justified and proper" for Boorda to attach the small bronze combat V's to the ribbons on his uniform. The Navy also modified Boorda's record to list the V's among his other decorations -- recognition that they were earned.

But that stops short of what Zumwalt sought -- unambiguous public recognition that Boorda violated no regulations.

Nonetheless, Zumwalt, in an interview Wednesday, called Dalton's action "posthumous validation of Admiral Boorda's right to have worn the V's based on instructions given by me when I was chief of naval operations."

"My interpretation is that retroactively he has been authorized to wear the V's," Zumwalt added.

Wearing an unauthorized decoration is a severe breach of military protocol.

Decision becomes part of naval records

On May 16, 1996, when his right to wear the decorations was about to be questioned, Boorda, 56, the first enlisted man to become the chief of naval operations in the service's 198-year history, went home, wrote a note "to my sailors," stepped into his garden and fatally shot himself in the chest.

He acted after learning that two Newsweek reporters were on their way to question him about the matter.

The decision by Dalton, who will retire at the end of the year, to place Zumwalt's memo in Boorda's file made it part of naval records.

The "V" stands for valor and signifies service in combat. Boorda served on a destroyer, the USS Craig, in 1965 and as executive officer on another destroyer, the USS Brooke, in 1973, both in combat situations.

In his suicide note, Boorda said, "I am about to be accused of wearing combat devices on two ribbons I earned during sea tours in Vietnam. It turns out I didn't really rate them. When I found out I was wrong I immediately took them off, but it was really too late."

He added: "I couldn't bear to bring dishonor to you."

The matter is complex. The regulations were ambiguous and evolving and Zumwalt said in his memo that his directions authorizing the wearing of the decorations were delivered verbally "in over 100 visits to ships and shore stations" rather than in writing.

Zumwalt's memo and Dalton's were not made public. The Washingtonian magazine reports on them in its forthcoming July issue. The magazine made copies of the memos available to The Associated Press.

Advised by the Navy's Office of Awards and Special Projects in 1995 that he was not entitled to the decorations, Boorda removed the V's from his uniform.

Navy rules revision makes Boorda eligible

In 1965, Boorda did not qualify for the Combat V, the Washingtonian said. But in 1967 the Navy retroactively upgraded all Navy Commendation for Achievement ribbons awarded between 1961 and 1967, making Boorda eligible for the award.

"Admiral Mike Boorda's citations for awards of the Navy Achievement Medal and Navy Commendation Medal plainly state they were awarded for service including `combat operations' and `while operating in combat missions,"' Dalton's memo said.

Zumwalt's said that during the war, his "statements as the official military spokesman for the Navy made it appropriate, justified and proper for Mike to wear the V."

Despite the intense attention paid to Boorda's suicide, the Navy made no acknowledgment of Dalton's action until questioned Wednesday. Dalton's "memorandum for the record" was dated April 3, 1998, almost two years after Boorda's suicide.

Boorda's widow, Bettie, could not be reached for comment. She has an unlisted telephone number. Her son, Edward, captain of the USS Russell, reported on duty in the Arabian Gulf, could not be reached. Dalton did not respond to requests, made over three days, for an interview.

In a 20,000 word investigation of the Boorda suicide in 1996, Nick Kotz wrote in the Washingtonian that the decorations dispute may have been only one factor pushing Boorda toward suicide. He cited hostility from the Navy's "old guard," who considered him a "political admiral" and felt he had appeased politicians in his handling of the Navy's Tailhook sexual harassment scandal.


TOPICS: Editorial; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: boorda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 next last
To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Navy has quietly accepted that Adm. Jeremy "Mike" Boorda was entitled to wear combat decorations on his uniform

------------------------------------------------

I think you are missing the big picture.
The Navy accepted that Boorda was entitled, but Clinton did not;thus the three member Clinton selected civilian Board.

Clinton had a lot invested in the fabricated story about the improper wearing of the "V" device. He was not going to let something like the truth to get in the way.

If you remove the "V" device story, there is no motivation for a Boorda "suicide".

If Clinton's three member civilian board had announced to the world that the record confirms Boorda was entitled to the "V" device like the Navy said, then some folks may have started questioning the "suicide".

141 posted on 02/20/2003 5:11:33 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: honway
You have already misstated at least one fact on this thread. Your credibility is suffering.

No, I haven't. Your ability to comprehend facts is piss poor.

You want to post a link where this story was covered.

Already done.

I haven't read Jim Webbs'opinion. If you provide a link it may be worth more than your "extensive coverage" remark.

A self proclaimed expert like yourself hasn't read James Webbs' opinion? Now whose credibility is suffering. Google can help you or whoever is there helping you to find his remarks. I'm not here to make up for your laziness and lack of knowledge.

As commander of a Carrier Battle Group, he would fly backseat.

At most on an infrequent basis, if at all. Commanders of CVBGs don't spend a lot of time during a cruise in the cockpit. By the way what CVBGs did Boorda command?

142 posted on 02/20/2003 5:19:06 PM PST by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
His OQR said that he was not entitled to wear the Combat V

Do you just make this stuff up?Have you read his OQR? Do you have a copy of it?

Have you ever seen a OQR that says "this officer is not entitled to wear the Combat V?

How about: "this officer is not entitled to wear the Medal of Honor"?

143 posted on 02/20/2003 5:19:24 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

Comment #144 Removed by Moderator

To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
The views of former Secretary of the Navy James Webb, several senior Naval officers, several senior Naval SNCOs, several senior Marine officers, several senior Marine SNCOs, the vast majority of Naval Air, letters to Navy Times. Despite the praise being heaped upon Boorda here by a few individuals, the prevailing consensus in the fleet was that he was a piss poor CNO who was allowing Slick to emasculate the Navy without a fight.
\ \ \ \ \ \

Okay. I'll bite. What is an SNCO?

145 posted on 02/20/2003 5:39:45 PM PST by BenR2 ((John 3:16: Still True Today.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: arm958; txradioguy; honway; dennisw; dighton
I was an Army SFC attending a course in Wash., D.C. when Boorda killed himself. Some of my classmates were Navy Petty Officers and Chiefs. They revered Admiral Boorda, and they were practically in tears. It was a sad day.

When I was stationed in Europe and still living in the barracks, circa 1990, Adm. Boorda came through for "Admiral's Call". I was working night shift or something or other, so I missed it. Several of us were chatting out on the sidewalk, when a guy who lived above us came back from Admiral's Call. He was rather excited and started telling us all about it.

He told us how he brought up the barracks maintenance problems, and Admiral Boorda was livid, and he was coming to the barracks to see it for himself. We couldn't believe he did this, but he felt comfortable because it was Admiral Boorda. This was a legitimate issue: the barracks had leaking water pipes in the walls, which were constantly being "repaired", and the residents were being reassigned rooms like they were stuck in a revolving door, but the leaks never got fixed. What added insult to injury, was that these guys were repeatedly failing room inspections for musty rooms and moldy bathrooms, and it was not their fault. He was sick and tired of failing inspection, and didn't care who in his chain of command got sore at him (his immediate supervisors were none too pleased).

So sure enough, soon afterward, Admiral Boorda came though our barracks. That sailor had told him the absolute truth, and Boorda, who really did have a geniune compassion for the "average" enlisted men and women, was fit to be tied. It was worse than he expected. Needless to say, after all the bogus maintenance that had gone on for a year or more, the problems were suddenly resolved in a very short amount of time.

Admiral Boorda had an excellent reputation before this happened, so much so that people actually wanted to go to Admiral's Call. That incident, however, showed many of us just how well-deserved that reputation was.

That was the "trouble" with Admiral Boorda. He was a no-nonsense, results-oriented, honorable man. IOW, he was surely a pox on the Xlintoon administration. I don't know how he could have been in the presence of X42, without becoming sick to his stomach.

IMO, somebody wanted to teach Admiral Boorda a lesson.

146 posted on 02/20/2003 5:48:23 PM PST by Thinkin' Gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: honway
It's an AP byline, Einstein. Search the archives of any newspaper that was posting stories from the AP in July of 1999 and you'll be able to find it more than likely buried in the bowels of the paper, not on the front page. Why? Because it vindicates those who were questiong Boordas' actions and shows that the media, along with Dalton and Zumwalt, got the story wrong.

Additionally, my "extensively covered" comment in post #116 refers to your original "editorial" post: "My editorial is that this AP article never made it to the mainstream media." Quoting out of context is indicative of either disingenuousness or stupidty and you and I both know which one applies to you. The mainstream media jumped all over the original story that you posted that Boorda was entitled to wear the Combat Vs, which was at the time and still is untrue, and that reporters, namely Hackworth, drove Boorda to committing suicide. Pure Bravo Sierra. The only one responsible for Boordas' suicide is Boorda himself. He was a quitter plain and simple. People of impeccable integrity and sound mind don't off themselves. A good reporter would have known that memos slipped into an OQR after the fact don't change the truth. Notice how little coverage the decison by the Board for Corrections of Naval Records confirming that Boorda was not entitled to those two Combat Vs got. You and the media were, and in your case still are, suckers. Face it kid, you're just not very bright.

147 posted on 02/20/2003 6:06:37 PM PST by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: honway
Pull your head out of your ass, putz.
148 posted on 02/20/2003 6:09:47 PM PST by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: All

Tonight at 6pm on RadioFR! Interviews with Grover Norquist, John Hager and Michael Zak! Plus, Doug from Upland interviews Ted Hayes, homeless advocate and strong supporter of military action in Iraq!

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep! HIFI broadband feed HERE!

Click HERE to chat in the RadioFR chat room!

Miss a show?

Click HERE for RadioFR Archives!

149 posted on 02/20/2003 6:09:59 PM PST by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
The mainstream media jumped all over the original story that you posted that Boorda was entitled to wear the Combat Vs

Additionally, my "extensively covered" comment in post #116 refers to your original "editorial" post:

Fair enough. Do you have any links to a single article in the mainstream press that supports your statement about the original article?

People of impeccable integrity and sound mind don't off themselves

At least we agree on one thing. Admiral Boorda was a man of impeccable character, according to the folks I know who worked for him.

Face it kid, you're just not very bright.

I have heard that before. I do try my best to tell the truth.Please refer to reply #144.

150 posted on 02/20/2003 6:27:13 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Chapita
Men, generally, commit suicide by a shot to the head [women to the chest]. Unusual suicide!

Wrong. Women almost never, ever commit suicide with a gun.

We women are vain creatures to the very end. Even in voluntary death we do not want to damage our features. Women will, instead, cut their wrists; use gas (in the garage w/ the motor running, or the kitchen with the gas stove unlit); take poison; take sleeping pills; mix medicine-and-alcohol (Dave Berry's mother committed suicide this way), or leap from a great height.

It's also curious that the Admiral chose to shoot himself in the chest-- an awkard and uncertain way to go about it: You must push the trigger away from you, and you must use your thumb(s).

151 posted on 02/20/2003 6:41:55 PM PST by yankeedame ("Oh, I can take it, but I'd much rather dish it out.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: First_Salute
I agree with you completely.

One of the reasons I eventually left the Marines was I couldn't afford to stay in. Sure, nobody joins the military to get rich. But it got pretty bad.

I was single and had no children and I still could barely pay the few bills I had.

In 1996 my unit was notified it was being deployed to the gulf. One day later I drove out to town to pay my insurance. I'll never forget this as long as I live. There in a church parking lot was one of my young Marines, whom I knew was married and had a young child, standing in a food line. He couldn't pay rent and feed in a sky rocketing economy and buy food.

And we were about to send this Marine overseas to possibly die in another Persian Excursion. "Okay proud warriors we're going to the gulf to kick that paper hanging son of B**ch's butt once and for all. Some of you elite warriors may not come back. But it's important for your country. Now go stand in that hand-out line and beg for food."

It breaks my heart to this day.

That was the state of my Marine unit. And I think it wasn't much better for anybody else either. I remember there was a case in Kadena Air Force Base of a Maintenance Chief committing suicide because he stated clearly that a part on an aircraft needed to be replaced. His professional judgement was over-ridden due to lack of funding. The plane went up and the Pilot and Co-pilot were killed on the very next flight due to failure in the part that crew chief wanted replaced.

Jeez, sorry for the rant.

I think Admiral Boorda cared too deeply and felt too much for the Sailors and Marines who followed him... He believed strongly in his nation and saw the military a noble calling.

I think he had far more important things on his mind than ribbons. I think he was thinking about how to "turn this ship around".

And maybe may have let slip a few good ideas as to exactly how he would do it...
152 posted on 02/20/2003 6:43:10 PM PST by ChuckSnow5 (...For those in peril on the seas....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: honway
Well, the press has done a wonderful job of misreporting and confusing. And some of the posters here are helping it along.

First off, the "V" we are talking about is an attachment to a medal. It signifies valor in combat as opposed to other things such as sustained superior performance. Since so many posters on this thread don't understand the intricacies, here's the exact definition from the Navy Awards Manual:

...The "V" is authorized for wear on these decorations if the award is for acts or services involving direct participation in combat operations. In all cases, the Combat Distinguishing Device may only be worn if specifically authorized in the citation. Eligibility for the Combat Distinguishing Device shall be based solely on acts or services by individuals who are exposed to personal hazard due to direct hostile actions, and not upon the geographical area in which the acts or services are performed. Each case must be judged on its own merits.

Since they were not specifically authorized in the appropriate award citations, Admiral Borda was not authorized their wear on those medals/ribbons.

Now this is important. There is no "assuming" here. The citation must cite the "Combat Distinguishing Device". If it ain't in the service jacket, it ain't on your chest!

Was there confusion about the evolution of this device? Sure. That's what a review by the Navy's Office of Awards and Special Projects clears up on a case by case basis.

Based on this sloppy article, I'm not sure what, if anything, was cleared up. Was a letter from Admiral Zumwalt placed in Admiral Borda's service jacket maintaining Admiral Borda should be entitled to the V's? Sure. So what?! Many things go into service jackets. The important question is; "Were the medal citations ammended to include the combat V's?"

The article seemed to address that question thusly: The Navy also modified Boorda's record to list the V's among his other decorations... But that statement is nonsense. V's are not "listed among other decorations". They are part of specific awards. So we don't know.

That just fits in with the rest of the stupdity of the article. Such as; Admiral Borda was the first enlisted man to become CNO. No enlisted man has ever become CNO. Borda was an Admiral with four, count them, four stars. He was the first man to rise from the lowest enlisted rank to the highest Flag rank (Admiral) and serve as CNO.

Here's another whopper; "Wearing an unauthorized decoration is a severe breach of military protocol." What sophistry. It's against federal law!

And this is my all time favorite from the article; "But in 1967 the Navy retroactively upgraded all Navy Commendation for Achievement ribbons awarded between 1961 and 1967, making Boorda eligible for the award." Does anyone know what this statement means? I think it means all Navy Letters of Commendation awarded between '61-'67 were unilaterally upgraded to Navy Acheivement Medals. Deductively, Admiral Borda received one Acheivement Medal in that fashion. But it still has nothing to do with a combat V!

So, to wrap this up; Admiral Borda was not authorized the combat V devices. The Navy did not change that status. And, the author of the AP article is an idiot!

BTW, I knew one of Admiral Borda's sons and a daughter-in-law in the Navy. They were both fine officers. And so was their dad.

153 posted on 02/20/2003 6:44:57 PM PST by DakotaGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
I think I see where you are coming from, but I would like to confirm it.

1. Do you believe Vince Foster committed suicide in Ft. Marcy Park?

2.Do believe six weeks after the Foster death when Jerry Parks, the former head of security for Clinton/Gore 92, was gunned down it was unrelated to Clinton?

3. Do you think it was a coincidence when Clinton was sexually assaulting Kathleen Willey adjacent to the Oval Office, her husband was dying by self inflicted gunshot wound in a parked vehicle?

4. Do you think the former wife of Clinton's co-defendant in the Jones case, Kathy Ferguson, shot herself in the head in a living room with all her bags packed in front of her?

5.Do you think Kathy's Police Officer fiance shot himself in the head by Kathy's graveside 4 weeks later?

6. Do you think former CIA Director William Colby fell out of a canoe 20 days before Boorda's suicide?

7.Do you think one of the first Clinton White House interns, Mary Mahoney received five gunshots, the last to the face, 2.5 miles from the White House in a Starbucks as a result of a botched robbery? No money was taken and two of her co-workers were murdered as well. Nobody heard a shot.

8. Do you believe the decision to give a LASIX injection to heart patient James McDougal in a federal prison hospital shortly before his death was a mediaction error?

9. Do you find it a coincidence that during the Bush Administration not a single Deputy White House Counsel, not a single member of the Joint Chiefs, or a former wife of a co-defendant of the President has committed suicide? Not a single former CIA Director has fell out of a canoe. Coincidence?

154 posted on 02/20/2003 6:54:39 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: DakotaGator
The "V" is authorized for wear on these decorations if the award is for acts or services involving direct participation in combat operations

From the article:

"Admiral Mike Boorda's citations for awards of the Navy Achievement Medal and Navy Commendation Medal plainly state they were awarded for service including `combat operations' and `while operating in combat missions,"' Dalton's memo said.

155 posted on 02/20/2003 6:59:42 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: honway; SMEDLEYBUTLER
Here's a link to Webb's speech:

http://www.jameswebb.com/speeches/navalinstitute.htm

I've got to agree with S.B. on this one. Boorda was not a universally popular CNO. A lot of people (including myself) felt he let the Clintoons rake the Navy over the coals for Tailhook for far too long. His abandonment of ADM Arthur was especially disgusting. The fact is, he didn't have the balls to stand up for the Navy against the politicians.

156 posted on 02/20/2003 7:19:32 PM PST by GATOR NAVY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: DakotaGator
here's the exact definition from the Navy Awards Manual:

...The "V" is authorized for wear on these decorations if the award is for acts or services involving direct participation in combat operations. In all cases, the Combat Distinguishing Device may only be worn if specifically authorized in the citation. Eligibility for the Combat Distinguishing Device shall be based solely on acts or services by individuals who are exposed to personal hazard due to direct hostile actions, and not upon the geographical area in which the acts or services are performed. Each case must be judged on its own merits.

Check the date on your Navy Awards Manual.

This article does not explain the fact that the quote you provided:

In all cases, the Combat Distinguishing Device may only be worn if specifically authorized in the citation

did not exist in the Navy Awards Manual in effect at the time of the Award to Boorda.

I have read from an individual who was in the Navy during this time period that some recipients would not have it specifically stated in the citation, but when presented with an Achievement Medal at the appropriate Unit ceremony individuals woud receive a medal with a V device attached when the award was based on performance during combat operations. Sailors are warriors and not all are lawyers. If the commander presents a guy a medal with a V on it he assumes he has earned it. I have no specific source that states this happened to Boorda, only it happened to many during this time frame.

Because of the confusion the Manual was revised later. I do not believe the intent was to retroactively yank the V off of every medal presented at a ceremony because the proper clause was not in the citation.

157 posted on 02/20/2003 7:23:19 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: GATOR NAVY
he didn't have the balls to stand up for the Navy against the politicians.

Right. Had he stood up to them he would probably be enjoying a long and healthy retirement.

158 posted on 02/20/2003 7:26:54 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: ChuckSnow5
It is good that you got out with the sob story case you present. Look in any BEQ parking lot see the poor poor vehicles leaving for liberty.
159 posted on 02/20/2003 7:29:05 PM PST by flyer182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Thinkin' Gal; SLB; 2sheep; Wally Cleaver; Boyd; BlueDogDemo; Lion Den Dan
Thanks for sharing your personal account with Jeremy Boorda.
160 posted on 02/20/2003 7:40:44 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson