Following recent Republican efforts to discredit Kerry's military service
medals, the ultra conservative group Judicial Watch, best known for nuisance
lawsuits against Democrats, asked the Navy to open an investigation into the
matter.

In response to that request, Navy Inspector General Vice Admiral Ronald A.
Route conducted a review of Kerry's Vietnam-era military service awards and
concluded Friday that procedures were properly followed in the approval of
Sen. John Kerry's Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Heart medals,
according to an internal memo written to Navy Secretary Gordon England.

"Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver
Star, Bronze Star, and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval
process was properly followed," Route wrote in the memo. "In particular, the
senior officers who awarded the medals were properly delegated authority to
do so. In addition, we found that they correctly followed the procedures in
place at the time for approving these awards."

"Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30
years ago would not be productive," Route continued. "The passage of time
would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and
would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of
the time in which the events took place."

For more information on this story, see;

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/...0917_1894.html

Those of us who earlier defended Kerry's medals will now certainly watch
to see if those Republicans who were so quick to openly belittle Kerry's
medals in recent weeks will be as quick to openly admit their mistake, or
will they now choose to attack the Navy Inspector General's review instead.

Stewart

Dwight Stewart wrote:

Following recent Republican efforts to discredit Kerry's military service
medals, the ultra conservative group Judicial Watch, best known for nuisance
lawsuits against Democrats, asked the Navy to open an investigation into the
matter.

In response to that request, Navy Inspector General Vice Admiral Ronald A.
Route conducted a review of Kerry's Vietnam-era military service awards and
concluded Friday that procedures were properly followed in the approval of
Sen. John Kerry's Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Heart medals,
according to an internal memo written to Navy Secretary Gordon England.

"Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver
Star, Bronze Star, and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval
process was properly followed," Route wrote in the memo. "In particular, the
senior officers who awarded the medals were properly delegated authority to
do so. In addition, we found that they correctly followed the procedures in
place at the time for approving these awards."

"Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30
years ago would not be productive," Route continued. "The passage of time
would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and
would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of
the time in which the events took place."

For more information on this story, see;

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/...0917_1894.html

Those of us who earlier defended Kerry's medals will now certainly watch
to see if those Republicans who were so quick to openly belittle Kerry's
medals in recent weeks will be as quick to openly admit their mistake, or
will they now choose to attack the Navy Inspector General's review instead.

Sure, procedures WERE followed, but still, they were awarded based upon Kerry's
bogus reports!

You folks are sure getting desperate!

dxAce

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...
Following recent Republican efforts to discredit Kerry's military
service
medals, the ultra conservative group Judicial Watch, best known for
nuisance
lawsuits against Democrats, asked the Navy to open an investigation into
the
matter.

In response to that request, Navy Inspector General Vice Admiral Ronald
A.
Route conducted a review of Kerry's Vietnam-era military service awards
and
concluded Friday that procedures were properly followed in the approval of
Sen. John Kerry's Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Heart medals,
according to an internal memo written to Navy Secretary Gordon England.

"Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver
Star, Bronze Star, and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval
process was properly followed," Route wrote in the memo. "In particular,
the
senior officers who awarded the medals were properly delegated authority
to
do so. In addition, we found that they correctly followed the procedures
in
place at the time for approving these awards."

"Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over
30
years ago would not be productive," Route continued. "The passage of time
would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and
would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context
of
the time in which the events took place."

For more information on this story, see;

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/...0917_1894.html

Those of us who earlier defended Kerry's medals will now certainly watch
to see if those Republicans who were so quick to openly belittle Kerry's
medals in recent weeks will be as quick to openly admit their mistake, or
will they now choose to attack the Navy Inspector General's review
instead.

Stewart

That just means all the paperwork was accounted for.

"-=jd=-" wrote:

I don't think anyone ever doubted the
process that the USN follows to award
medals after the "after-action" report
has been filed. I think what's been
doubted, with ample reason to do so,
is the actual circumstances surround
the events, in addition to whomever
wrote the reports that the awards were
based on. (snip)


The awards process includes an investigation or review of the facts and
circumstances to justify an award. The Admiral made that very clear when he
said an "additional review" today would not be productive. He also made it
very clear in that same paragraph that any review included the "facts and
circumstances" of the events. Those who did review the "facts and
circumstances" thirty years ago found that Kerry did deserve those medals.
That should be more than enough to satisfy all but the most fanatical.

Stewart

"helmsman" wrote:

Bottom line is that kerry still hasn't
released ALL his records. (snip)


If that is indeed the case, what do you expect to find in those records
that the Navy's Inspector General didn't find?

Stewart

"-=jd=-" wrote:

(snip) The USN did not re-investigate
the fact and circumstances of the actual
events because, if they did, they would
have at least contacted the actual OIC
of the mission. (snip)

What the USN validated was that the
paperwork was in order and there was
no reason (based on the paperwork that
was filed) to deny the award. (snip)


Do you truly believe the senior officers who awarded Kerry's medals some
30 years ago failed to properly review the facts and circumstances of the
events surrounding those medals?

"In particular, the senior officers who
awarded the medals were properly
delegated authority to do so. In addition,
we found that they correctly followed
the procedures in place at the time for
approving these awards." - Navy I.G.
Vice Admiral Ronald A. Route


(snip) However, the actual OIC of that
mission (as I have shown) flatly denied
Kerry's original request and it appears
Kerry did some kind of later end-run
behind the guy's back and convinced
someone else that he should get the
P.H. (snip)


Perhaps you don't understand military procedures. The mission commander
(OIC as you call it) had no authority whatsoever to approve or deny a medal.
That authority rests with much more senior officers. At the very most, the
mission commander can initiate the paperwork for a medal, or, in the
situation you describe, refuse to initiate that paperwork. Regardless, he is
never the final word. If he refused, as you say, Kerry had a right under
military regulations to take the matter up with a higher authority. And, if
what you say is actually true about the mission commander refusing to
initiate the paperwork, clearly that higher authority disagreed with that
mission commander and decided instead to initiate the paperwork himself. At
least two even more senior Navy officers, co-signers of that paperwork as it
traveled through the chain-of-command, agreed with that higher authority, as
did the office of the Admiral of the Navy when those medals were finally
granted.


(snip) However, I reserve the right to judge
Kerry as having an apparent character-defect
in that he would do some kind of end-run
behind the back of the commander that
denied him the award


Well, you're certainly free to judge people anyway you choose. However,
I'll repeat again that the mission commander had no authority to deny Kerry
an award. A mission commander can only initiate or not initiate paperwork.
The authority to approve or deny awards rests with officers much more senior
than that mission commander. Further, I'll repeat again that the mission
commander is not the final word even when it comes to that paperwork.
Everyone within the military has a right to appeal decisions through the
chain-of-command. In Kerry's case, if that is indeed what Kerry did, that
higher ranking officer in that chain-of-command clearly agreed with Kerry,
not the mission commander.


(snip) It gives the appearance that Kerry
filed the request for that award by less
than honorable means - either by writing-
up his own award application -or- he got
someone else with *zero* first-hand
knowledge of the events to do it for
him. (snip)


Military procedures would again dispute that. First, I'm not aware of any
situation where a junior officer would be allowed to file paperwork for his
own awards. Normal military procedure expects paperwork to be filed by a
superior. Second, when signing paperwork for any medal, each signing
officer, through the chain-of-command, attests to a review of the facts and
circumstances described, and compliance of those facts and circumstances
with the award requirements under applicable military regulations. Vice
Admiral Route, when reviewing the paperwork for Kerry's medals, said correct
procedures were followed in the approval of those awards. That would include
the initial paperwork on file all the way up to the final signitures of the
granting authority.

Stewart

Dwight Stewart wrote:

Those of us who earlier defended Kerry's medals will now certainly
watch to see if those Republicans who were so quick to openly
belittle Kerry's medals in recent weeks will be as quick to openly
admit their mistake

It would be a very cold day in hell, if that ever happened!!

or will they now choose to attack the Navy
Inspector General's review instead.

Very predictably, it's already happening.

"-=jd=-" wrote:

Then, you've confirmed what I said -
that (snip)


No, I haven't confirmed a thing you've said. Instead, I said there were
proper procedures in place to be followed in the granting of awards and it
appears those procedures were indeed properly followed. The Inspector
General, Admiral Route, did more than just check over the paperwork. He also
verified the "officers who awarded the medals were the properly delegated
authority to do so." So, unless there is clear evidence of a problem
elsewhere (not just random quotes taken out of context from random sources),
that should effectively end the debate.


(snip) The question still remains, did
Kerry himself write the paperwork up
and either have someone sign-off on
his verbiage -or- did kerry himself
sign as someone else? (snip)


Well, it's bloody obvious nothing will convince you. So, since I have no
desire to engage in talk about mystic conspiracies or wild speculation about
outright fraud, I'll move on to more reasonable discussions.

Stewart

= = = "Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
= = = ink.net...

"-=jd=-" wrote:

Then, you've confirmed what I said -
that (snip)



DS,

It has been reported that the battle damage report for his Boat
on the day that he got his Silver Star shows that there was none.

~ RHF
..
..
No, I haven't confirmed a thing you've said. Instead, I said there were
proper procedures in place to be followed in the granting of awards and it
appears those procedures were indeed properly followed. The Inspector
General, Admiral Route, did more than just check over the paperwork. He also
verified the "officers who awarded the medals were the properly delegated
authority to do so." So, unless there is clear evidence of a problem
elsewhere (not just random quotes taken out of context from random sources),
that should effectively end the debate.


(snip) The question still remains, did
Kerry himself write the paperwork up
and either have someone sign-off on
his verbiage -or- did kerry himself
sign as someone else? (snip)


Well, it's bloody obvious nothing will convince you. So, since I have no
desire to engage in talk about mystic conspiracies or wild speculation about
outright fraud, I'll move on to more reasonable discussions.

Stewart
..

"dxAce" wrote:

Sure, procedures WERE followed, but
still, they were awarded based upon
Kerry's bogus reports!


Provide some evidence that they were awarded based on reports written by
Kerry, something beyond unsubstantiated personal anecdotes or outright
biased rhetoric. Until then, I'll ignore such bogus claims. By the way, if
you wanted to delete newsgroups, you should have deleted the shortwave
newsgroup, not the two political newsgroups. I post mainly from the
political newsgroups and only rarely visit the shortwave newsgroup.

Stewart