Well, this "EXTREME elder" has two Harley's, neither of which is a "trike"

Wray..

It looks as if some of the phonies are now fronted feelings, if I may speak in the vernacular of the day. I wonder if it's live or Memorex? Not that they are phonies, but the discussion seems to be off the topic when one compares apples to oranges, then takes cheap shots. Causing an uproar in a discussion area about other issues should be ignored, and/or taken to another board.

Just a point - while on a very busy 378 there were a number of individual but mostly unit commendations we got that the ship's office never did get around to putting together page 7s for the whole crew. For ex. we earned the nat'l Defense Medal but the office just blew off 180 p. 7's ... A shipmate shot Expert on both rifle and pistol at range practice, but the GMC never wrote up the list (including two other first-time Experts and my puny little Sharpshooter). But we all were clearly entitled to these ribbons as they were announced at quarters and you saw the officers wearing them, and we were told to too. But, of nine ribbons from that 378 tour, only four are on my DD-214. Now, do I wear them or not? According to CO's orders, I do. If someone were to ask for my 214 and challenge me, what do I say? To me it's not an ethical dilemma, just a practical one.

But of course the serious awards would be written up...

And definitely all active-duty veterans know that serious medals are often given out (or not) inaccurately. Age-old story. I agree that the words of my shipmates mean more than enough to me. A bit of colored ribbon I don't need... plus, if some civilian asks what did you get that for, who really wants to try and explain that moment on a tossing ship in a heavy storm where I got it right? I just remember it with my own happiness, and the knowledge that most others on that ship could have done exactly the same thing... and did, and no one noticed either. Medal schmedal. The point was and always will be teamwork. I actually did nothing special - or else we all did, and we did for years. Those are the memories I pull out, and I don't even know where I put the damn ribbons after my discharge.
If you need it that bad to boost your phony ego - well, that's a dark happiness. I don't expect phonies and wannabes are really happy people. I've no time for them but I ignore them.

quote:

But we all were clearly entitled to these ribbons as they were announced at quarters and you saw the officers wearing them, and we were told to too. But, of nine ribbons from that 378 tour, only four are on my DD-214. Now, do I wear them or not? According to CO's orders, I do. If someone were to ask for my 214 and challenge me, what do I say? To me it's not an ethical dilemma, just a practical one.

What you could do is write to Coast Guard Headquarters Medals and Awards Branch and then BCMR (Board of Corrections of Military Records) to have the "missing" awards added to your DD214CG. Records do have mistakes in them sometimes and they do get corrected...

If you can prove you were on a unit for a substantial portion of the period for an award you can request it.

The enclosures at the end of the manual have a listing of awards for each unit/cutter. Might help if you can reference specific dates.

http://www.uscg.mil/directives...999/CIM_1650_25D.pdf

Something all the active duty need to remember, when it comes time to get your DD 214, you are the responsible one for ensuring it is correct... If it's not, don't sign it.. Make the YN do it over.. I have done that more than once. Of course it today's CG I'm not sure how often you get a DD-214. Regardless, it is a VERY IMPORTANT document, be sure it is done correctly!

Wray..

If an award is identified after seperation / retirement, you can have your DD 214 corrected, and request a DD 215 CORRECTION TO DD FORM 214, CERTIFICATE OF RELEASE OR DISCHARGE FROM ACTIVE DUTY. Be prepared to provide documentation (TAD Orders, ships roster, etc...), award or service school certificate. I received an MSM at my retirement & the DD 214 was already signed.

Masters Mate, great info. I was able to get dates for my Unit Awards from the Enclosures of the Awards Manual. Good stuff!

LT Gunner,
I'd still say the command didn't do their job by having your MSM entered on your DD-214... They knew what they were giving you and probably had it approved far in advance of your DD-214 getting signed... not that it really matters now.

Wray...

quote:

Originally posted by Wray:
Something all the active duty need to remember, when it comes time to get your DD 214, you are the responsible one for ensuring it is correct... If it's not, don't sign it.. Make the YN do it over.. I have done that more than once. Of course it today's CG I'm not sure how often you get a DD-214. Regardless, it is a VERY IMPORTANT document, be sure it is done correctly!

Wray..

Wow this post brings back memories. I was retired TDRL in 99. Then cleared FFFD in 01. I needed a new DD 214 to reflect my new retirement date by years of service. The first one I got, it was obvious the someone in HQ took my old DD 214, whited out the signature block and other info that needed to be changed. Then copied it and filled in the new info and signed it. You could still see part of the original signature. I called and explained why this was unacceptable. Then I think I got another one that was missing info. I ended up faxing notes, indicating what should go in each box on the entire form. It took weeks to get it right.

quote:

Originally posted by Wray:
LT Gunner,
I'd still say the command didn't do their job by having your MSM entered on your DD-214... They knew what they were giving you and probably had it approved far in advance of your DD-214 getting signed... not that it really matters now.

Wray...

Sure it matters. As noted, it's the member's responsibility to ensure the DD 214 is correct. So I took the time and effort to get it right and received a DD 215 documenting the correction.

LTGunner,

I think Wray's comments were directed towards what they should have done, not towards your actions taken correcting it.

I think if he had start "not that it really matters now", but they should have done... It would be viewed the way he meant.

Hopefully, it won't continue to be a problem.

Thanks EMC & I concur. I just wanted to highlight that a DD 214 can be corrected after the fact and that it is STILL the member’s responsibility to correct. DD 214s don’t correct themselves.

Gunner.. yes they can be corrected by the DD-215... excellent point for those that need to make corrections, and yes as EMC said, when I said "not that it matters now" I was referring to the point that you had retired, any the YN couldn't re-do it, not that it shouldn't be corrected. Sorry for the confusion.

Have a Great 4th of July...

Wray...

Thanks for the reply Wray,

You never know, retirees can always be involuntarily called back to active duty at any time, and I wouldn't want to be a "Military Phony" wearing awards I didn't earn or have documented...

<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/us/02imposters.html?_r=1&hp>

The New York Times
August 2, 2009
In Ranks of Heroes, Finding the Fakes
By IAN URBINA

Last August, the Texas Department of Transportation started asking applicants for more documentation after discovering that at least 11 of the 67 Legion of Merit license plates on the roads had been issued to people who never earned the medal.

Last September, the House of Representatives passed a bill naming a post office in Las Vegas after a World War II veteran who, it later turned out, had lied when he claimed he had been awarded a Silver Star. The legislation was rescinded.

In May, one of the most prominent veterans’ advocates in Colorado was detained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation after it was discovered that his story about heroic service in Iraq and severe injuries from a roadside bomb was an elaborate hoax.

Military imposters are nothing new. But the problem has grown or at least become more obvious as charlatans are easily able to find fake military documents, medals and uniforms on auction Web sites.

At the same time, the Internet has also stepped up the cat-and-mouse game, allowing watchdogs to uncover fraudulent claims much faster and mobilize a more effective response.

“Public opinion of the military went up after the Sept. 11 attacks,” said Thomas A. Cottone Jr., who from 1995 to 2007 ran the F.B.I. unit that investigates cases of military service fraud, “and as more people joined the military and were being publicized winning medals, more phonies were getting ideas.”

Mr. Cottone said that in 2007 he received about 40 to 50 tips per week, roughly triple the number before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Nonetheless, verifying claims of military service and awards remains difficult because no official and comprehensive database exists. The problem has recently led to a number of embarrassing and potentially costly blunders by organizations with much at stake in policing the issue.

In April, The Associated Press found that the Department of Veterans Affairs was paying disability benefits to 286 supposed prisoners of war from the Persian Gulf war of 1991 and to 966 supposed prisoners of the Vietnam War. But Defense Department records show that only 21 prisoners of war returned from the gulf war, and that fewer than 600 are alive from the Vietnam War.

Last month, The Marine Corps Times found 40 erroneous profiles in this year’s Marine Corps Association Directory, including false claims of 16 Medals of Honor, 16 Navy Crosses and 8 Silver Stars.

In response, some members of Congress are calling for an investigation of the veterans department. Katie Roberts, a spokeswoman for Veterans Affairs, said the agency was working with the Defense Department “to analyze and verify the accuracy of the data.”

“The department fully intends to complete this review by the fall,” Ms. Roberts said.

A pending bill also seeks to make verification easier by requiring the Defense Department to create a national online database of all medals and honors awarded.

Committing military fraud usually starts with the fabrication of a false DD-214 form, a one-page summary that all service members receive when they are discharged. The forms, which are used to prove military service, list rank, training, awards and length of time in the service.

No database of these documents exists, but a 2004 study by the National Archives, which stores the paper records, concluded that all of those forms issued since 1947 could be digitized at a cost of $12 million, resulting in an annual savings of $4 million over the cost of retrieving paper records.

In April, a Defense Department report said such a database would be expensive and incomplete, since 18 million documents were destroyed in a St. Louis warehouse fire in 1973. Advocates say that other records can be used to substitute for the missing files.

For the time being, a spirited corps of volunteer debunkers, many of them veterans connected by the Internet, comb small newspapers searching for poseurs, file Freedom of Information requests for military files, and field requests for research help from employers, biographers and obituary writers.

“This kind of fraud matters,” said Doug Sterner, a decorated former Army sergeant, “because it cheapens the valor of service, warps the historical record and scams taxpayers of millions of dollars in veterans’ benefits.”

Over the past decade, Mr. Sterner has built an online database of 120,000 valor-medal recipients going back to the Civil War.

Special Agent Mike Sanborn, who since 2007 has led the unit in the F.B.I.’s Washington office that handles stolen valor cases, said that while the bureau did not keep statistics on the crime, the biggest increase came after 2006 with the passage of the Stolen Valor Act, which made it a federal crime to falsely claim, verbally or in writing, that a person had been awarded a medal. Previously, the law only prohibited wearing a medal that a person did not earn.

Some First Amendment scholars worry that laws regulating the use of symbols are similar to those against flag burning, which the Supreme Court has said are unconstitutional limitations on free speech. Others have also questioned whether overzealous activists risk slanderously and erroneously accusing people of fraud because of missing or misprinted military documents.

“Before we make any accusation, we check historical and military records, as well as tracking down former service members,” said Mary Schantag, who runs the P.O.W. Network in Skidmore, Mo., a nonprofit group that investigates claims to military honors and prisoner status.

Ms. Schantag, who is married to a veteran, said she had seen fraud complaints grow to more than 12,800 in 2008 from 22 when the group first went online in 1998.

Because prisoners of war and military medal winners have performed a service to society with their bravery and in some cases have endured humiliating forced marches, torture or other trauma that may haunt them for years, the government extends them special benefits, from free parking and tax breaks to priority in medical treatment.

Having been awarded a medal or classified as a prisoner of war does not directly increase a veteran’s monthly disability check. But tales of physical or psychological suffering can influence whether a veteran receives some money or nothing at all in disability payments, veterans’ advocates say.

Ms. Schantag said she had seen cases in which civilians lied for self-aggrandizement or money and veterans embellished their records to win the trust of loan officers, earn leniency in criminal sentencing or defer child-care payments.

Robert W. Levy, a former mayor of Atlantic City, resigned in 2007 after it was revealed that he lied about being a Green Beret and having been awarded combat infantryman and parachutist badges.

A decorated veteran who spent 20 years in the Army, including two tours of duty in Vietnam, Mr. Levy said in an interview that he did work with the Green Berets during the war, but that over time after he came home the experience led him to start making claims that he had been a member of the unit.

“It was wrong, and I should have corrected it ages ago,” he said. “I ruined my life with those claims.”

I really feel sorry for these people because if they want to serve their community and country if they can't be in the military directly, they should have joined an auxiliary. I really have lots of respect for you guys in the military, especially having a Dad in the National Guard. I'm in both auxiliaries since I couldn't serve due to my visual impairment, and they give me a way to support our military. Sometimes when I post on my website, I write like Dad because I'm so used to being around it, but I know auxiliary is a long way to go as far as being in the military. I'm just glad to be able to support you guys and glad to honor our fallen veterans with my job as an honor guard bugler. Thanks so much you guys for your service, and don't let these fakes get to you. They will pay one way or another for being fake.

for some reason this didn't make it here:
From Wray and Surface Force.

quote:

Posted Thu 29 October 2009 01:49 PM Hide Post
The following was posted by Bill Wells at Chiefs.com
------------------------------------------------
I just got this from the P. O. W. Network,


quote:

BARNHARD WAS JUST INDICTED BY A FED GRAND JURY.

Posted Fri 30 October 2009 04:57 AM Hide Post
Thanks Wray, I see the DOJ has also put out a Press Release. Seems he is being charged with making fraudulant claims against the VA (as recently as last April).

http://www.justice.gov/usao/va...nhart_19oct2009.html

No good deed goes unpunished.