On Dakota Meyer
Beretverde sent us a link from the McClatchy news group which questions the veracity of the narrative for Medal of Honor awardee, Dakota Myer.
But an exhaustive assessment by a McClatchy correspondent who was embedded with the unit and survived the ambush found that the Marines’ official accounts of Meyer’s deeds — retold in a book, countless news reports and on U.S. military websites — were embellished. They’re marred by errors and inconsistencies, ascribe actions to Meyer that are unverified or didn’t happen and create precise, almost novelistic detail out of the jumbled and contradictory recollections of the Marines, soldiers and pilots engaged in battle.
Earlier in the article, they admit that with or without what they call “embellishment” Myer would have been awarded the medal regardless. So, it makes you wonder “What’s their point, then?”
It’s just the media answering questions that no one asked.
Category: Media
Front page of our paper today….which is owned by McClatchy. I think the point is to pull down another act of Valor in an unpopular war.
Honor and Courage
So, they’re going to question the entire thing based on one reporter’s take on things? Really? A reporter vs combat vets. Yea, I’m willing to go with that…NOT.
The reporter was in the middle of that fight affected by numerous combat stress factors (see the book “On Combat”) like time dilation that make things seem different than they did to other people watching the fight from an observation post. He was also hiding behind a wall most of the fight and was in no position to confirm or deny the heroism of Meyer.
That reporter is a piece of shit.
One guy who was hiding behind a wall all of a sudden knows more than the HOW MANY soldiers and Marines that were there to verify the actions of Sgt. Meyer?
Yeah, color me unimpressed, newsie.
Same deal, different actors – the hero is not focused on his/her own actions but on the whole picture and the others involved. Those wanting a novel can go to the library and find plenty.
Leave the heroes alone and let them live their lives. They have earned the right more than most of us. Instead, they are forced to hire “publicists” to deal with the unwanted attention.
Crazy.
So one reporter’s opinion is now the bottom line on the story? Imagine-I know it is hard- that the reporter doesn’t have his shit wired or is lying…
McClatchy News Group has had an anti-military slant for years.
My battalion kicked an embedded reporter out of our AO in Anbar Province for making up shit and exaggerating stories.
I don’t like the media much for anything anyway.
Don’t hear any Soldiers or Marines bad-mouthing Meyer, so some a-hole reporters opinion doesn’t mean shit to me.
I’m going to ask one question that kind of jumped out at me:
What’s McClatchy’s relationship with BAE Systems?
Or a reporter just found out that his kid will be going to college on an BAE scholarship.
The fact that it is from McClatchy should be a huge red flag on this, IMO.
#8 PLHE, good question. Very good question.
This is what happens when there are no Lynch, Tillman, or Haditha cases to obsess over–they just start looking for a story.
@8 and @9…they have NO fucking relationship with BAE Systems.
To suggest or imply they do is utter BS…ass-clowns.
@11 the sad thing is that in their own way Lynch and Tillman were heroes if not in the ways that the media initially reported.
This is what comes from the want and belief that there is no nobility in the world. I also think in their own way that reporters are a little jealous of Soldiers (by extension Marines and Airmen, and Sailors). Reporters may comment on history, and may say this or that and may even try to guide history (but as the case with Vietnam, 40 years later we are learning that they failed in many ways) but it is the Soldier that makes that history. That shapes that history by the force of his will, and that willpower that few reporters (save maybe Joe Galloway, and a few notable exceptions) will ever understand.
“@8 and @9…they have NO fucking relationship with BAE Systems.
To suggest or imply they do is utter BS…ass-clowns.”
My, my, my. There’s an old saying: when one throws a stick at a pack of dogs, the one who yelps is the one you hit.
What’s your dog in this fight, anyway?
No dog at all regarding this particular case…except you obviously don’t know jack shit about defense contracting–I do.
No defense contracting firm is going to risk being barred by DOD or any other agency of the USG for doing something that is so obviously stupid and immoral.
Make no mistake…DOD contracting firms get into trouble…sometimes because of human mistakes or through pure malfeasance. They usually pay a very, very heavy price for doing so once DOD/USG becomes aware of same, so for the most part, they work very hard to police themselves in a very proactive manner.
My dog…I’m retired .mil and have worked for DOD contractors for over 10 years.
So, what’s your dog in this fight?
You lost me at “McClatchy correspondent”
Not one to always shoot the messenger… but the Pat Tillman lies still chaps my ass. I just couldn’t help thinking about Tillman’s official line of BS, when this story broke.
@#13
“This is what comes from the want and belief that there is no nobility in the world. I also think in their own way that reporters are a little jealous of Soldiers”
Gawd, you can wrap up so much of what’s wrong with MOST of those who oppose the military these days with that simple but complete statement.
Excellent observation.
@ 12 Spigot: Good grief!! Over react much, do you??
A simple question, one which several of us were wondering about, was asked. IF you had knowledge of a relationship or the lack of relationship it would have been really nice to have shared that with us. As it stands, I seriously question the truth of your denial of a relationship simply because your response was so utterly over the top that it has no credibility whatever.
“…and this correspondent walked into a three-sided ambush by 50 to 60 attackers.” This guy was embedded during the battle on the rising terrances, so he was an eye witness to at least some of the battle. I could have sworn he actually took some footage, it was posted at the Long War Journal if memory is correct, don’t know if its still there. I recall him not getting very far in the fight and then assisting in the carrying away of the wounded Westbrook. A large extent of the fight he could not have reasonably seen.
There is someone here on this board(can’t remember who), who constantly floats the idea of “politics” influencing the decision process of the MOH. I have constantly pointed out I see no evidence of that, its the nature of the conflict. The article’s description of the Commandant of the USMC and other senior Marines believing their service being owed a living one is unbelieveable. If these statements are true then the only service remotely playing interservice politics with the MOH was the Marine Corps!
All that said even if the Marine Corps service leadership is guilty of pushing this, it does not disqualify Meyer. The action of a possible MOH recipient must be just individually. Its merits alone, not because a said service believes it their turn or their owed.
I’m wondering..I thought that for a MOH to be awarded you had to have witnesses yet the story said the Corp relied mostly on his own testimony as to what happened. This seems a little odd to me. What stops anyone in a battle from telling whatever he wants to get a MOH if that is the case??
#20 I meant to say “judged” individually.
@20 I have often commented on the politics of under awarding valor. I have to tell you, there were days I was so scared shitless even putting on my IBA was a challenge. The words “above and beyond the call of duty” seem somehow pale compared with that kind of terror. Fighting, when you are facing your enemy is an act that requires an incredible amount of courage. To fight, when every fiber of your being screams that you run the other way.
Time and again I have heard accounts of valor in combat, that quite frankly seem to be deserving of better awards than they get.
@23 – Very true. When you see the female BDE Legal NCO get a BSM but never leave the FOB, and see countless PFCs who kit up everyday and face the mean streets of the Muhallas get ARCOMs at best……you can’t help but get the feeling that politics and general inequity is at play.
FWIW, here’s the authors response when interviewed on NPR:
In a conversation this afternoon with All Things Considered host Melissa Block, Landay said Meyer absolutely deserved the medal. “He was nominated for a good reason,” Landay said. “His commander and the people who were there in the valley saw him perform incredibly heroic acts. And that was what he was put in for. It’s what happened to his story once it got back here, to Washington, that I wrote about. There were deeds that were attributed to him that are impossible to verify from the witness statements of those same people who attested to his bravery. Those are documents that the Marine Corps has. Those are documents that the Marine Corps could have used to vet and do due diligence on his story. And they failed to do that. And in doing that, they failed him.”
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/12/15/143759277/report-marines-promoted-inflated-story-for-medal-of-honor-recipient
@19, OWB: The fact is, it’s a ludicrous question designed to accomplish only one thing–smear an honorable company (and industry) and it’s employees.
I have zero interest in the conflict between Dakota Meyer and BAE Systems…it is between them and will, no doubt, be hashed out in a civil trial or settlement. And, by the way…BAE would not be engaging in a sale of any military equipment to Pakistan or any other country without coordinating the sale with and receiving approval from DOD/DOS. That said, just because they could make a legal sale to Pakistan, doesn’t mean that they should, IMHO.
But the fact that anyone with any knowledge at all of the adversarial relationship between the press and defense industry/DOD could insinuate that one of the world’s largest defense contracting firms and a bull shit news organization would be in cahoots to defame a MOH winner…come on…I really can’t believe anyone…ANYONE…could form that level of fantasy in their minds.
And I could not give a shit less as to what you think regarding my level of credibility.
#23 “have often commented on the politics of under awarding valor.” Doc I wasn’t referring to you. I’m pretty sure it one of the Marine regulars. The awarding of valor awards has always had a degree of subjectivity to it and impossible to convert to an exact science. Your point is well taken though especially in regards to the bronze star(and possibly silver) being debased, since your allowed to give such an award for meritorious service(*cough* NCOs, *cough* officers) in a war zone. That said the DSC, nevermind the MOH, intergrity have actually held up very well. Its the nature and circumstance of the conflict that should dictate the number, if any possible, possible recipients.
#27 last sentence meant to say number of recipients.
@27, I’m pretty sure only the BSM is one of those awards that officers get just for being there. I didn’t even know that there was a V devise for the ARCOM until after my first deployment.
The SSM I’m pretty sure is only for valor in combat. Of course I thought the DFC was the same way, but apparently not, and I think its a *little* weird that the Air Medal which is supposed to be equivalent to the BSM, is below the Purple Heart.
Actually the whole hierarchy is pretty freaking weird. I know that MOH DSC/NX/AFC and the SSM are supposed to be above reproach.
#25 “…And that was what he was put in for. It’s what happened to his story once it got back here, to Washington, that I wrote about.” and then “Those are documents that the Marine Corps could have used to vet and do due diligence on his story. And they failed to do that. And in doing that, they failed him.”” and I would say not just Meyer but the nation. This was my whole point CI.
“The article’s description of the Commandant of the USMC and other senior Marines believing their service being owed a living one is unbelieveable. If these statements are true then the only service remotely playing interservice politics with the MOH was the Marine Corps!” I said above. The entire article is damning about the conduct of Marine leadership at the Pentagon! Every American should be pissed at this bullshit!
#31 A few Marines should have been tossed on their asses for this.
29# “didn’t even know that there was a V devise for the ARCOM until after my first deployment.” Doc your hitting one of my pet peeves. The Arcom with “V” device should be barred. If your going to go through all that trouble… GIVE THE POOR FUCKER THE BRONZE FUCKING STAR! The bronze star is a valor award, that can only be given in a war zone, isn’t it? Most of the recipients of such don’t have a V device on their BSM do they? If an action warrants an Arcom with a “V” device then it should also warrant a BSM.
“The SSM I’m pretty sure is only for valor in combat.” it is, but since it can be awarded at lower levels with less scrutiny, it is more susceptible to corruption then the MOH and DSC.
DSC has to go through Sec Army. I think SSm has to go through a theater commander if I remember correctly. BSM I believe has to go through Division commander.
“I think SSm has to go through a theater commander if I remember correctly.” I thought it was a Major general(Division commander), I thought it was the highest award that a Division commander to award. Things could have changed though.