Ouch!
Printable View
Anyone gotten the book yet?
I tried on Friday, but none of my area stores were carrying it.
They had plenty of Bill Clinton's book though.
Barnes and Noble had nothing. Borders had a note saying that if you wanted it you had to put your name on a list and they'd get it for you.
I ordered it that night from Amazon.
While we're on the subject, may I ask what is really going on with these people? Each side (vets and Kerry) seem to be pointing fingers at each other. Are they telling the truth or is this all a big scandal?
This isn't a new or recent attack on Kerry. John O'Neil and his fellow swift boat vets have been dogging Kerry for 35 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie
I can't wait for this to simmer down actually and for GWB to start hammering Kerry on his Senate record.
I ordered the book last night, read any of it or still waiting Squid?
And this is good too ... Kerry's campaign now admits that his first Purple Heart was for a minor, self-inflicted wound. A Purple Heart is only supposed to be awarded as a result of hostile fire.
http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/artic...40824130358175
what a peach this guy is. Unless you like apples, I like apples too :nuh:
Well, that cleared it all up for me. Looks like everything is just starting to fall apart for him. Now let's see if they can convince the other half of this nation that Kerry is just one big phony.
If the other half of the nation can't see it, then they are half retarded/brainwashed. :tongue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie
You can be awarded the Purple Heart legitimately for a self inflicted wound, provided the wound was received during a militarily signifcant action.
Hurting yourself while destroying enemy equipment/stores is sufficient.
My quibbles with his record come when his claims of action under enemy gunfire are refuted by many other witnesses, his injuries are self reported and require no hospital stay, and he meets with the enemy (Kerry met with North Vietnamese ambassador in Paris while still in the military.)
Kerry's testimony before congress was used as part of the torture of our POWs in Vietnam.
Today's real heroes lose legs and arms and ask their commanders when they can get back out in the field with their buddies. They don't seek the earliest possible release from their commitment and then lead the movement against their buddies - which directly resulted in the anti-military backlash against these folks when they returned home.
The real heroes also don't build an presidential campaign around rewriting their personal history as one of an virulant anti-war activist and admitted war criminal to one of war-time hero and champion of the armed services.
I'm just sayin'.
Real heros don't ask for medals.
I find it noteworthy that the major booksellers don't carry this book. This is not the first time - remember "Bias" anyone? Some people look at me funny or call me paranoid when I make note of the fact the bookstores seem to be liberally selective towards what they pick. But the facts speak for themselves.
The good news is that Amazon.com makes a lot of conservative dollars that B&N lets walk away.
I'm preparing a blog-entry on this topic. In the meantime, here's a photo I took last weekend:
http://squidly.com/images/bordersnote.jpg
Barnes and Noble didn't have it. Borders had that note up.
They claim that they're simply sold out and awaiting shipment.
FWIW, Amazon is also backordered.
Theres a Barnes and Noble at the mall I work at, that was the first place I went.. They are on Backorder as well.
The purple heart can ONLY be awarded for wounds inflicted by the enemy.
If it is awarded for any form of self-inflicted wound it is not legitimate (but I'm sure it has been abused in this way)Quote:
The PURPLE HEART is awarded to members of the armed forces of the U.S. who are wounded by an instrument of war in the hands of the enemy and posthumously to the next of kin in the name of those who are killed in action or die of wounds received in action. It is specifically a combat decoration.
The quote from that site (I know where you got it from) is the not full criteria for which the award is evaulated.Quote:
Originally Posted by [AK]Choozoo
This one is more precise. Kerry qualified under section 3, category a, item 1.
The criteria has also apparently changed over the years, and it's still open to interpretation by folks doing the awarding.
FWIW, I got my interpretation from listening to an interview with General Tommy Franks on the radio. The idea is that destroying enemy equipment on the field of battle during a time of war was akin to a combat action, and that ultimately the source of the injury (enemy or accidental self-infliction) was unimportant.
And Richie - Kerry filed that report. That might be the reason it matches his version of events.
This one is a bit more clarified. And in MS Word Format. I'll post it here for ease. blowing a weapons cache or similar event, doesn't fit in. And in my opinion, if you really need to question whether you deserve it or not, you don't.
https://www.perscom.army.mil/tagd/ a...teriaJul02.doc
DTG 091135Z JUL 02
FROM: CDRPERSCOM//TAPC-PDO-PA//
TO: COMCFLCC DOHA KUWAIT KU//C1//
COMUSARCENT-CDRTHIRD FT MCPHERSON GA//AFRD-PA//
INFO: USCINCENT MACDILL AFB FL//CCJ1-MPSA//
AIG 7403
AIG 7406
SUBJECT: CLARIFICATION OF PURPLE HEART CRITERIA--CORRECTED COPY
A. AR 600-8-22 MILITARY AWARDS, DATED 25 FEBRUARY 1995.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO CLARIFY THE INTENT AND CRITERIA FOR AWARD OF THE PURPLE HEART (PH) AS OUTLINED IN PARA 2-8, REF A.
2. WHILE CLEARLY AN INDIVIDUAL DECORATION, THE PURPLE HEART DIFFERS FROM ALL OTHER DECORATIONS IN THAT AN INDIVIDUAL IS NOT "RECOMMENDED" FOR THE DECORATION; RATHER HE OR SHE IS ENTITLED TO IT UPON MEETING SPECIFIC CRITERIA. SINCE 22 FEBRUARY 1932, AS AMENDED BY VARIOUS LAWS AND EXECUTIVES ORDERS, THE PH MAY ONLY BE AWARDED FOR WOUNDS, INJURIES, OR DEATH SUFFERED AFTER 5 APRIL 1917, BY ANY PERSON SERVING WITH THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES UNDER ANY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. IN ANY ACTION AGAINST AN ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES.
B. IN ANY ACTION WITH AN OPPOSING ARMED FORCES OF A FOREIGN COUNTY IN WHICH THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES ARE OR HAVE BEEN ENGAGED.
C. WHILE SERVING WITH FRIENDLY FOREIGN FORCES ENGAGED IN AN ARMED
CONFLICT AGAINST AN OPPOSING ARMED FORCE IN WHICH THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A BELLIGERENT PARTY.
D. AS THE RESULT OF ANY ACT BY ANY HOSTILE FOREIGN FORCE.
E. WHILE SERVING OUTSIDE THE TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES AFTER 28 MARCH 1973, AS PART OF A PEACEKEEPING FORCE.
F. IF WOUNDED OR KILLED AFTER 28 MARCH 1973, AS A RESULT OF
INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST ATTACK AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OR A FOREIGN NATION FRIENDLY TO THE UNITED STATES.
3. WHEN CONTEMPLATING AN AWARD OF THIS DECORATION, THE KEY ISSUE THAT COMMANDERS MUST TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IS THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE ENEMY CAUSED THE INJURY. THE FACT THAT THE PROPOSED RECIPIENT WAS PARTICIPATING IN DIRECT, OR INDIRECT, COMBAT OPERATIONS IS A NECESSARY PREREQUISITE, BUT IS NOT A SOLE JUSTIFICATION FOR AWARD.
A. EXAMPLES OF ENEMY-RELATED INJURIES WHICH CLEARLY JUSTIFY AWARD OF THE PURPLE HEART ARE:
(1) STRUCK BY ENEMY BULLET, SHRAPNEL, OR OTHER PROJECTILE CREATED BY ENEMY ACTION.
(2) INJURY CAUSED BY ENEMY PLACED MINE OR TRAP.
(3) INJURED BY ENEMY RELEASED CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL OR NUCLEAR AGENT.
(4) INJURY AS A RESULT OF VEHICLE OR AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT CAUSED BY
ENEMY FIRE.
(5) CONCUSSION INJURIES CAUSED AS A RESULT OF ENEMY GENERATED
EXPLOSIONS.
B. INJURIES OR WOUNDS WHICH CLEARLY DO NOT QUALIFY FOR AWARD OF THE PURPLE HEART ARE:
(1) FROSTBITE OR TRENCH FOOT INJURIES.
(2) HEAT STROKE.
(3) FOOD POISONING NOT CAUSED BY ENEMY AGENTS.
(4) CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, OR NUCLEAR AGENTS NOT RELEASED BY THE
ENEMY.
(5) BATTLE FATIGUE.
(6) DISEASE NOT DIRECTLY CAUSED BY ENEMY AGENTS.
(7) ANXIETY REACTIONS.
(8) ACCIDENTS, TO INCLUDE EXPLOSIVE, AIRCRAFT, VEHICULAR, AND OTHER
ACCIDENTAL WOUNDINGS NOT RELATED TO OR CAUSED BY ENEMY ACTION.
(9) SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS.
(10) POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDERS.
(11) JUMP INJURIES NOT CAUSED BY ENEMY ACTION.
4. IT IS NOT INTENDED THAT SUCH A STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE WOUND OR INJURY TO BE CAUSED BY DIRECT RESULT OF HOSTILE ACTION BE TAKEN THAT IT WOULD PRECLUDE THE AWARD BEING MADE TO DESERVING PERSONNEL. COMMANDERS MUST ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING AN INJURY, EVEN IF IT APPEARS TO MEET THE CRITERIA. NOTE THE FOLLOWING EXAMPLES:
A. IN A CASE SUCH AS AN INDIVIDUAL INJURED WHILE MAKING A PARACHUTE LANDING FROM AN AIRCRAFT THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT DOWN BY ENEMY FIRE; OR, AN INDIVIDUAL INJURED AS A RESULT OF A VEHICLE ACCIDENT CAUSED BY ENEMY FIRE, THE DECISION WILL BE MADE IN FAVOR OF THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE AWARD WILL BE MADE.
B. INDIVIDUALS INJURED AS A RESULT OF THEIR OWN NEGLIGENCE; FOR
EXAMPLE, DRIVING OR WALKING THROUGH AN UNAUTHORIZED AREA KNOWN TO HAVE BEEN MINED OR PLACED OFF LIMITS OR SEARCHING FOR OR PICKING UP UNEXPLODED MUNITIONS AS WAR SOUVENIRS, WILL NOT BE AWARDED THE PURPLE HEART AS THEY CLEARLY WERE NOT INJURED AS A RESULT OF ENEMY ACTION, BUT RATHER BY THEIR OWN NEGLIGENCE.
5. PER PUBLIC LAW 103-160, 30 NOV 93 (CODIFIED IN 10 USC 1129),
THE PH MAY BE AWARDED TO MEMBERS WOUNDED OR KILLED IN ACTION BY
FRIENDLY FIRE. THAT IS, MEMBERS KILLED OR WOUNDED IN ACTION BY
FRIENDLY FIRE SHALL BE TREATED IN THE SAME MANNER AS A MEMBER WHO IS KILLED OR WOUNDED IN ACTION AS THE RESULT OF AN ACT OF AN ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES.
A. THIS PROVISION APPLIES TO ANY MEMBER WHO IS KILLED OR WOUNDED IN ACTION BY WEAPON FIRE WHILE DIRECTLY ENGAGED IN ARMED CONFLICT, OTHER THAN AS THE RESULT OF AN ACT OF AN ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES, UNLESS (IN THE CASE OF A WOUND) THE WOUND IS THE RESULT OF WILLFUL MISCONDUCT OF THE MEMBER.
B. THIS PROVISION IS RETROACTIVE TO 7 DECEMBER 1941.
6. A WOUND IS DEFINED AS AN INJURY TO ANY PART OF THE BODY FROM AN
OUTSIDE FORCE OR AGENT SUSTAINED UNDER ONE OR MORE OF THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN PARAGRAPH 2 ABOVE. A PHYSICAL LESION IS NOT REQUIRED, HOWEVER, THE WOUND FOR WHICH THE AWARD IS MADE MUST HAVE REQUIRED TREATMENT BY A MEDICAL OFFICER AND RECORDS OF
MEDICAL TREATMENT FOR WOUNDS OR INJURIES RECEIVED IN ACTION MUST HAVE BEEN MADE A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RECORD.
7. REQUESTS THAT CANNOT BE DETERMINED BY COMCFLCC OR OTHER
PH AWARD APPROVAL AUTHORITIES WILL BE FORWARDED TO HQ, PERSCOM
(TAPC-PDO-PA) FOR DETERMINATION. IN SUCH CASES, DETAILED
CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE INJURY/WOUND WILL BE FORWARDED WITH THE REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION.
8. PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE INFORMATION AND GUIDANCE IN THIS MESSAGE RITERIA IS PASSED TO ALL COMMANDERS WHO HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED PH AWARD APPROVAL AUTHORITY.
9. POC FOR THIS MESSAGE IS ARLETTE KING AT COMM (703) 325-9171, DSN
221-9171
.
A self inflicted injury incurred while blowing up enemy weapon stores on a battlefield is considered an awardable injury.
Yeah, it seems close, but it's an awardable injury. I personally think 4B should exclude it. But evidently they considered this the same as if a bullet exploded in the breach of your gun while you were firing at an enemy, causing a wound to your face.
Far be it from me to defend the awarding of his medal - I'm just sayin' is all.
where does it fit in? I still don't see it.
Could a theatre commander award one for that, yes. Would it be valid per this current reg? No.
One thing to note about Armed Forces Regs, is that there is no wiggle room. There is no interpretation, it's in black and white for a reason.
How many people got Purple Hearts for this due to the Gulf War?Quote:
(3) INJURED BY ENEMY RELEASED CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL OR NUCLEAR AGENT
you need to be treated by a medic or physician. Not sure of the numbers, but I'm sure they are out there somewhere
A buddy of mine went to the local B&N to find Unfit and although they had stacks of Bill Clinton's book (on display, behind the counter, in the biography section, in the new book section, in the politics section) they didn't have a single copy of Unfit. He was quite upset that the number one book on the best seller list wasn't there yet Bill Clinton's book (which hasn't been #1 for a while, as well as about 50 copies if Hillary's book) was everywhere. When he asked an employee where in the store he could find it, the employee (rather than look up in the computer) called his manager who came out and said that someone had 'deleted' their order. Hmmmm. The next day he forwarded me this news report:
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Controversial book "Unfit for Command," which fires an election-year salvo at Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites)'s war record, has claimed one unintended victim -- bookstore chain Barnes & Noble Inc .
Barnes & Noble, the world's largest bookseller, on Monday issued a statement saying it had sold out of the book and, in effect, held up its hands in surrender to what it called "thousands of complaints" from both supporters and detractors of the book.
Supporters, Barnes & Noble said, are claiming the bookseller has intentionally not stocked the title or is hiding it, while detractors are asking stores to remove it altogether.
"(Complaints) started in the stores, and the home office has been inundated as well," said a company spokeswoman.
She said the company's statement was meant to "set the record straight." It is not Barnes & Noble's fault, she said, but rather small publisher Regnery Publishing who cut the chain's original order in half.
"We've been put in the difficult position of having to defend ourselves over a title we can't seem to get enough copies of from the publisher," Barnes & Noble chief executive Steve Riggio said in the statement.
A spokesman for Regnery was not immediately available for comment.
The book, written by John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi, questions the accounts of an attack on Kerry's swift boat during the Vietnam War, and his actions in the subsequent skirmish that led to his receiving a Silver Star medal.
O'Neill is a member of a group calling itself Swift Boat Veterans for Truth which in key campaign states has been placing television advertisements that seek to discredit Kerry's war record.
Many veterans have come forward to support the U.S. Senator from Massachusetts who is running against President Bush (news - web sites), and Kerry has accused the Bush campaign of collaborating with Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
On Monday, Bush called for the ads to be stopped.
As for the book, Barnes & Noble said it is awaiting additional copies in order to restock its shelves, and it expects more later this week.
But even the new order would not be enough to meet demand, the bookseller said.
Riggio said Barnes & Noble would not remove any title from its shelves, nor does it have any political agenda.
Demand for the book is very high.. amazingly so.
Nice to see Bush asked for the ads to stop.. good move on his part, makes him look good.
Bush asked for ALL ads to stop. That's not good enough for Kerry. Kerry has responded by sending Max Cleland (multiple amputee vet) with a handwritten note for Bush to Bush's ranch. He wants a photo op of the handicapped vet standing, hat in hand at Bush's gate.
Classy.
Regarding the purple heart thing - again I can only report what I heard from from a radio interview. Tommy Franks relayed a story of a tank unit in Iraq that was destroying enemy stores. Something malfunctioned inside the tank...it caught fire, and one of the tank crew bashed his own head (cutting it) on the way out of the vehicle. He received a purple heart.
The explanation given was that taking action against enemy equipment on the battlefield can be considered 'good enough' to warrent the award.
Don't shoot the messenger! I'm just telling you what I heard.
Both Kerry and Cleland should be ashamed of themselves for the childish stunt in Crawford. Call me cynical, but I can't help but feel that Cleland, who doesn't seem particularly bright to me, is being shamelessly exploited by John Kerry and his party. Here's a real war hero with the devastating wounds to prove it being wheeled out in Crawford and Boston like some kind of carnival freak to campaign for a guy who "earned" (read: requested) three Purple Hearts in four months for "wounds" that did not necessitate a single hospital stay.
I assume you folks know that both Bob Dole and Bush Sr. were certifiable war heroes in World War II. Not surprisingly, they were both awarded medals for their courageous service. Can anyone tell me, without doing any research, what medals they received? I doubt it, and I know why. Neither Bush nor Dole BRAGGED about their war records! They didn't need to rely on their experience in WWII while campaigning for the presidency because they both have very distinguished records in government, which is what really matters. What Kerry did thirty years ago is not as important as what he has done in recent years (next to nothing).
Kerry's senate record is virtually devoid of any accomplishments. His Vietnam record is all he has. Thus, he lined up a handful of vets to sing his praises at the DNC, then came out and, after snapping a handsome salute to the audience, proudly proclaimed, "I am John Kerry, and I am reporting for duty." He subsequently subjected the nation to a speech touting his war record and vapidly declaring all the ways that Bush is a failure without offering any alternative policies in detail. He has no problem telling us WHAT he is going to do, but great difficulty telling us HOW he is going to do it because he has no plan. Of course, we know how he would attempt to achieve his objectives without him actually telling us, and it involves raising taxes, kissing EU/UN ass, and treating terrorists with more sensitivity ("I believe I can fight a . . . more sensitive war on terror." -- John Kerry at the UNITY 2004 conference).
Reliving Vietnam rather than establishing a solid platform will spell defeat for Kerry in November. The swift boat vets are, without a doubt, hurting Kerry, illustrated by his drop in the polls this week. This could just be temporary, but if Kerry continues to change his story and throw lawyers at the swift vets rather than simply addressing the charges, which seem to have real validity considering that they have been corroberated by a couple hundred vets who served with Kerry and denied by only a handful, I think this issue will bring him down. Americans realizing that Kerry is all ambition and no substance can't be helping, either.
Kerry's a slimy politician.. no doubt about that.
My family has been/voted Democrat for years.. My dad has as much distaste for Kerry as I do. I think that says a lot.
Come Nov. I am voting for Bush, just to keep that slimeball out of office.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a convert! One down, two hundred million to go.
Ive followed this as portrayed by many different sources. Kinda hard not to eh? This one evening stood out for me tho. In short, recently on his national talk radio show Michael Savage got hold of one of these Vets. The Vet was on the same boat as Kerry when these supposedly brave actions took place and according to him what took place that day was standard procedure as per branch specific code and had Kerry not acted in the manner he did he would have been subject to court marshall! Somehow he ends up with medals tho go figure.
For him to receive such medals stinks of some form of politics especially considering Kerry's father had some pull at the time. Seems to me reguardless one can draw the conclusion that medals recieved in the Vietnam era did not carry nearly as much wieght as the ones recieved by the likes of Dole and other WW2 figures.
I agree with palooka, the fact that this is even politicized is sad and most certainly a sign of the times.
I wouldnt say he's done next to nothing tho as both him as his father have doing damage for some time. Up to nothing good however i agree.
A second generation liberal with deep roots in the muck it would seem as per this article about him and his father. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in603542.shtml
And there was much rejoicing. Yay!Quote:
Originally Posted by [AK]Slaughter
Rofl!
Finally got it through Amazon yesterday...just started reading it. The writing style is a bit Ann-Coulteresque...which is to say it's "angry-screedy".Quote:
Originally Posted by [AK]Squidly
A little off topic, but the next book I'm looking forward to reading in January when Newt Gingrich's new ideas for a "Contract with America" comes out. Newt flat out "gets it" when it comes to policy and economics. Particularly with Health Care.
You should try his two Civil War books, while you're at it, Hy. I'm in the middle of the first one (Gettysburg).
well, the VC corroborate his story, and would vote for Kerry.
Fox News Story
Well if Charlie says so, it is good enough for me! I'm now voting for Kerry.Quote:
Originally Posted by [AK]Choozoo
:tophat:
I find it very funny that all of the "Swift Boat Vets" who are dogging Kerry weren't even there at the time. Or how about the doctor who said "I treated Kerry" but some other doctor signed the medical report?
Or how about the after action report that the sbv said that kerry wrote? Why isn't his name or initials on it?
It's like John stewart said, "When I said I was there, I mean I was in the same country"
These guys just came out of the woodwork, and are full of crap. If they were so incensed about this, why didn't they talk during Kerry's senate run?
Oh, i know why, because the republicans weren't paying them to do so!