Posted on 01/15/2006 4:00:20 PM PST by armydawg1
Jack Murtha's 'Fake' Purple Hearts - An Open Letter
May 5, 2002
Dear Jack,
I’m writing on matters of joint concern. A number of weeks ago I was talking with someone who is a mutual acquaintance and your name came up. It was an unusually frank discussion and I considered it private. I did relate some opinions about you and shared some recollections about experiences with you in Congress. I was, to be honest, critical about how you misled me about ABSCAM where you convinced me you had voluntarily told federal agents about the offer of money to you and I learned later, after I had successfully defeated the ethics charges against you, that you had merely manipulated the system to cooperate with federal agents to avoid prosecution.
I also shared my recollection of when you admitted, back in our corner, that you didn’t earn your purple hearts (you indicated you had small scratch on your cheek that wasn’t even directly related to an APC that ran over a small anti personnel mine that was behind you). The other purple heart you even declined to explain.
At the time you were feeling particularly vulnerable, because it wasn’t too long after you had called me crying and sobbing, thanking me for “saving your life” before the ethics committee. There was no doubt in my mind that you were expressing to me that you did not believe you did anything sufficient to earn the purple heart, and that you didn’t want to be active in my efforts to laud Vietnam Veterans that served with us.
Given what I know about the brave men who served in the Marine Corp., I did not criticize you, but to be honest, I was shocked and disappointed in you personally. We both knew what was at issue, and we both know what happened and that you wanted to avoid the limelight. Later, we ended up having to run for the same seat. It was a good clean race and I admit I knew I couldn’t win, simply on the basis of voter turn out alone. During that time some people came to me with documents indicating you had used influence, after the fact, or had embellished your purple heart awards. I did not respond, and I said nothing. In doing so I may have betrayed my comrades in arms because I knew then what you had told me in the corner of the house - but I had told no one about that and I stood mute. But a few weeks ago my conversation was private and I was not seeking to do you any harm, though it would be ridiculous for me to infer that I have any respect for what you’ve done.
Regardless, shortly thereafter a reporter called me and I was put in a very different position. I could either deny what I said in private conversation, and thus lie, or I could fess up to the truth, or, I could take the cowards way out and stand mute. If I say something, I should either have the courage to back it up, or I shouldn’t open my mouth. Regardless it was too late, and I did not choose to lie. So I admitted to what I had said. However, I later received two calls from two different aides of yours, and later I was called a liar in the press. I am not a liar and I want an apology for the remarks you authorized that I didn’t tell the truth about our conversation. I don’t know how you got yourself awarded the purple hearts, but I know you indicated you didn’t earn them.
By the way. I’m not an ingrate. I deeply appreciate the help you gave me for the last governor’s primary. In fact, out of respect for you, when I realized that the race was going no where, I didn’t even cash the check you sent, (which I kept). Being grateful for your help, I have not sought to hurt you - but I will not betray or exploit the young men who died while fighting, with me, for this country. Never coming forward is one thing - I never have. Lying is another. Coincidentally I just settled an 11-year old law suit with Barbara Hafer where she apologized in writing for campaign defamation and admitted that federal agents (Thornburgh’s political friends) lied to her. I will not accept your falsehoods now. Enough is enough.
You clearly indicated to me in a moment of weakness, that you hadn’t deserved the purple hearts and there was no confusion on that. You may deny that all you wish - but you and I know that that conversation took place. Please apologize now. You may fool a few reporters into believing that merely because you got some perfunctory paperwork made out by a friend, that that means you earned the purple hearts. But even if you were awarded the medals later, there should be affidavits from witnesses. These things should be easy to get - where are they? I bet they don’t exist Jack because you are the one who’s lying. Luckily there’s one easy way to settle all this. Call a press conference. Explain where you were and what you were doing when you got the purple hearts. Explain who was with you and treated your wounds, but most important Jack describe your wounds or the lack thereof, as you did for me, years ago. I am absolutely certain that you won’t do that - because, though you may have manipulated some paperwork that says you were awarded the medals (for political purposes) you can’t produce the witnesses or documents to show any wounds or circumstances under which they occurred.Unless the Marine Corps gives out medals for unsubstantiated non -combat related telltale scratches, procured for use in political campaign - then show me the money Jack - because there should at least be evidence by affidavit, or record of the scratches, that’s what getting a purple heart requires - show me.
You may be able to take advantage of a few Washington reporters who don’t have sufficient experience to understand - but you can’t fool combat veterans of the Vietnam war by hiding behind “Unit” losses - we’re used to those stories. I have my orders describing my combat awards Jack - to back up my DD-214. Where’s your’s? And Jack - don’t ever call me a liar.
Sincerely,
Don Bailey
Submitted by Kelly Anne
What about other charges?
You backed up your statement that I'm emotional? Hardly. I've been pretty clear I'm not emotional about the issue but about the name calling by someone who thinks he saved the country.
Who said I don't want to be on the thread? Now you're just making stuff up.
Really? You really believe that? Somehow I doubt it.
Believe what?
Why does it bother me so much?
Because you are trying to silence the debate amoung those vet here discussing it, if you truly believe that only Vets should be discussing this, then why the push to prevent that from happening by saying it shouldn't happen at all.
See the logic,
you say want vets to do it
but you say don't want vets to discuss it
and you say republicans should not discuss it
or be a part of it all
because according to you and yours Muthra is a senile old man and republicans will be seen by the liberals as mean spirited if we did attack him.
I got news for you, the liberals hate us anyway and don't need any reasons to think we are mean spirited.
Any attack on anything Muthra says is automatically condemned by the liberals anyway, so what is your solution if you have one?
Other charges, almost impossible, but we can dream.
What a way to not answer the question. Believe what?
And who says I don't want to be on the thread. You're not making sense. Which is why I didn't answer your original question to me on this thread. It made NO sense.
You have simply just got to be shi**in' me........
Pssst. Here's a hint. And here's how I know there's a problem with your reading comprehension.
You just said that "you say want vets to do it
but you say don't want vets to discuss it
".
Which part of my posts that say the veterans SHOULD handle it and leave the Republicans out of it don't you understand?
The rest of your nonsense post I just ignored.
>>>Other charges, almost impossible, but we can dream.
Now this is what I want to know. Why is it a dream?
When you are done arguing about why we should be discussing this....Ping me back. This is worth discussing!
I read that, and saved it, to discuss it with a friend.
Heck of a piece.
"You would allow him to continue to spout off so that he can be ignored."
Dang, I feel like I'm in a deja vu'. Didn't America go down this road already?
I said that you said that you want vets to handle it.
The Vets here are discussing it and you are trying to prevent any discussion of it by saying that republicans should stay way from it.
Your point being that if a Vet is a "good" republican they will do nothing about Muthra for fear of embarassing the party.
Ergo you are trying to prevent what you are saying you want to happen I.E. Vets doing anything about Muthra.
See how hard it is to explain to you, your own words, even you don't know what you are saying.
In my mind, loyalty to the Party above all else, is a sure sign that the person making such a restriction on others is beyond the shadow any doubt a liberal.
For the simple reason that most republicans don't believe in such union thug/commissar/mafioso tactics of loyalty, republicans are loyal to conservative ideas and not to the party.
OMG.
Wow - that famous "logic" of yours just got a big fat "F".
1. There is NOWHERE that I've said if a vet is a good Republican, they will do nothing for fear of embarrassing the party. That's a flat out lie. Or else you're reading comprehension is even worse than I thought.
2. I've said that veterans should handle it but the Republican party needs to stay far away from it. If that stifles the veterans so much that they are afraid to debate it here, they really are weenies, aren't they?
3. Honey, you need a good night's sleep and try again in the morning. That was a pathetic attempt. Just pathetic.
It's implied in every time you've said that republicans should do nothing about Muthra.
I've made my case and proved it as well.
LOL. In your mind, hon. In your mind.
If you see no difference between the Republican party and veterans, shame on you.
That famous logic you've talked about is sadly lacking. Maybe tomorrow you'll feel fresher.
Are you honestly reading what you are typing?
"I've said that veterans should handle it but the Republican party needs to stay far away from it. If that stifles the veterans so much that they are afraid to debate it here, they really are weenies, aren't they?"
pathetic weenies ARE NOT afraid to debate it here.
the arguements with tonk and usmcobra are "stifling the veterans", etc., would WOULD like to discuss it.
move on.
would=who
Which part of the Republican party should stay far away from this don't you get? Are you saying that veterans groups have a big (R) behind their names?
Because you know that's not the case. How much more clear can I be? Veterans should go for it. And leave Republicans (groups, organizations with an R after it) out of it.
Which part of that don't you get?
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.