Swift Vets and POWs for "Truth" v. The Truth
[Formerly Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth" v. The Truth]

Acknowledgements

JOHN KERRY'S FIRST PURPLE HEART

SUMMARY FACTS
(For detailed proof, scroll down or click here)

• John Kerry could NOT have gotten his Purple Heart(s) without his Commander's recommendation. Indeed, regulations do not allow combatants to nominate themselves Purple Hearts or award it to themselves. 

• The severity of a person's injury is irrelevant to the award of a Purple Heart. The injury had to be sustained due to an outside force or in action against an enemy or hostile foreign force - or even from friendly fire (including self-inflicted wounds as long as gross negligence was not involved). So SBV's claims against Kerry on these aspects are outrageous and without merit. Not to mention the fact that, as Richard Holbrooke has pointed out, "The distance between a light wound and death is an inch. It's one aorta. It's one artery."

• Many purple heart awards were made to Swift Boat personnel in the Vietnam era, for wounds similar to those sustained by Kerry. So, SBV's claim that Kerry did not deserve his award is equivalent to saying that the Purple Hearts won by many of those who served in Vietnam were undeserved. I invite them to announce this in public. 

• One of Kerry's crewmates who was actually involved in the incident that led to Kerry's injury stated that Kerry's injury could not have been self-inflicted since Kerry was bending down to pick up an M-16 at the time. The two crewmates who were with Kerry during the incident categorically dismiss as false the claim that Kerry got his injury due to misfiring an M-79 grenade launcher. 

• SBV's claim that another person (William Schacte) served on Kerry's boat and confirmed that Kerry's injury was self-inflicted is also false. William Schacte did not serve in Kerry's boat that night. O'Neill backpedaled from the claim. Not to mention that the two crewmates of Kerry who were with him that night categorically state that Schacte was NOT on their boat, and that Schacte's claims are categorically false. And the icing on the cake - SBV's own website and report of the events contradicted Schacte and O'Neill - so they revised their website!

• SBV member Louis Letson, who claims he treated Kerry and downplays his wound, was NOT the doctor who signed Kerry's sick call sheet and was not a Kerry crewmate. There is no proof he ever treated Kerry and he apparently started to recollect his memories of Vietnam just last year (2003).

• SBV member Grant Hibbard's claim (not to mention William Schacte's claim) that Kerry applied to him (Hibbard) for a purple heart is false and contradicted by Hibbard's previous statement that Kerry did not ask for a medal. Hibbard's claim about Kerry's injury was a "scratch" in his "forearm" is also false and contradicts the glaring fact that Kerry was injured above the elbow where shrapnel had gotten lodged in.

• SBV member Thurlow's claim that people present "with Kerry" at the time of his Purple Heart incident confirm that it was a fabrication - is also false. The person cited by Larry Thurlow, as being present, was Steve Gardner, who was not even in Kerry's boat at the time!

DETAILED FACTS

1. SBV claim on legitimacy of Kerry's first purple heart 

2. SBV claim on Kerry's truthfulness regarding his first purple heart

3. SBV claim on seriousness of Kerry's injury that led to his first purple heart

4. SBV claim on Kerry's having "applied" to Hibbard for a purple heart

5. SBV claim that people who were "with Kerry" confirm his purple heart "was fabricated"

6. SBV claim that Kerry's injury was due to Kerry's mistake in firing an M-79 grenade launcher

7. SBV claim that William Schacte served on Kerry's boat the night Kerry received the injury that led to his first purple heart (and that Schacte confirmed Kerry's injury was self-inflicted)

1. SBV CLAIM ON LEGITIMACY OF KERRY'S FIRST PURPLE HEART: 

...The following morning, John Kerry arrived at the office of Coastal Division 14 Commander Grant Hibbard to apply for a Purple Heart. Having already been informed by Schachte that Kerry's injury was self-inflicted rather than the result of hostile fire, Commander Hibbard told him to "forget it." Hibbard recently said of Kerry's minor scratch, "I’ve seen worse injuries from a rose thorn." Nevertheless, John Kerry managed to obtain his coveted Purple Heart for this incident nearly three months later after being transferred to Coastal Division 11.
...
Military regulations state that to qualify for a Purple Heart, an injury must come "from an outside force or agent," and treatment for the wound must "have been made a matter of official record." While John Kerry managed to satisfy the second criterion by insisting that an amused Dr. Letson provide an official Band-Aid, nicking himself with a fragment from his own poorly-aimed grenade fails to meet the first qualification."

[More via Daily Howler]: 

THURLOW: ...[Steve Gardner said Kerry] received an injury due to a mistake he made when he fired an M-79 close aboard and was hit by his own shrapnel. That doesn’t constitute a Purple Heart. You‘ve got to be injured by hostile fire.

FACT
(i) Kerry could NOT have gotten his Purple Heart without his Commander's recommendation. Indeed, regulations do not allow combatants to nominate themselves Purple Hearts or award it to themselves. 
(ii) The severity of the injury is irrelevant to the award of a Purple Heart. The injury had to be sustained due to an outside force or in action against an enemy or hostile foreign force - or even from friendly fire. So SBV's claims are outrageous and without merit.
(iii) Many purple heart awards were made to Swift Boat personnel in that era, for wounds similar to that sustained by Kerry. So, SBV's claim is equivalent to saying that the Purple Hearts won by many of those who served in Vietnam were undeserved. I invite them to announce this in public.  
(iv) One of Kerry's crewmates who was actually involved in the incident that led to Kerry's injury clearly remembers the injury was due to enemy fire. 

eRiposte note: Recollections of incidents from long ago are often blurred - leading to a "he said, she said" situation. The point is that the Purple Heart was awarded back then based on established Navy policy.

REFERENCES
Thomas Lang, Campaign Desk: 

Lt. Mike Kafka, a spokesman with the Navy Office of Information (CHINFO) in Washington D.C., told us three pertinent facts:

1 -- No soldier determines if he is eligible for a Purple Heart; only his commander can determine that specific U.S. Navy criteria have been met for the award. Hibbard told the Globe that while he was skeptical at the time as to whether Kerry came under enemy fire and whether he was even wounded, at the time he dropped the matter and told Kerry "do whatever you want." But that's not enough for any soldier to be awarded a Purple Heart; that requires the recommendation of a commander; and Hibbard was the commander. It is unclear as to whether another commander stepped in or Hibbard finally signed on to the Purple Heart.

2 -- The severity of the injury, which the Chicago Tribune dwells upon, apparently does not bear on whether a soldier qualifies for a Purple Heart. Paragraph 4 of the "Purple Heart Criteria for U.S. Navy" states that "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 [in 1968, those were: in action against the enemy, or as a result of action by "any hostile foreign force"]. A physical lesion is not required; however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer..." Kerry's wound was treated by a medical officer, who removed the shrapnel and applied an antiseptic.

3 -- Whether the injury is related to enemy fire, which the Times chose to emphasize, is germane to the question at hand. Enemy fire is essential for any soldier to receive a Purple Heart. A training accident doesn't qualify. Paragraph 3 of "Purple Heart Criteria for U.S. Navy" defines "enemy-related injuries" as those incurred when a solider is "struck by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other projectile created by enemy action."

Thomas Lang, Campaign Desk:

Alas, today, the Washington Times' fatally-wounded coverage of Kerry's newly-released service records makes yesterday's various media bloopers look like journalism at its finest.
...
Hurt quotes one Mel Howell, a retired Navy officer who flew helicopters in Vietnam, but who apparently never served with Kerry, as saying, "Most of us came away with all kinds of scratches like the ones Kerry got but never accepted Purple Hearts for them."

As Lt. Mike Kafka, a U.S. Navy spokesman, told us yesterday, in line with official U.S. Navy documentation, wounded combatants neither nominate nor award themselves Purple Hearts. The Purple Heart is awarded only after a commander determines that a soldier or sailor has incurred a wound inflicted by the enemy and forwards a recommendation to his superiors.
...
One veteran, Ray Waller, is identified as "a combat medic in the Marines" who "was responsible for determining whether injuries warranted Purple Hearts."
...
However, as noted above, Navy medics neither award Purple Hearts nor recommend others for a Purple Heart. Commanders do that based on, as US Navy guidelines put it, confirmation of medical treatment by "the doctor that provides medical care."

The expansive Waller goes on to tell Hurt that he had "never heard of" a shrapnel injury so minor that it did not require a tetanus shot and time off which had led to a Purple Heart. As Lt. Kafka notes, however, the written "Purple Heart Criteria for the U.S. Navy" does not list either a tetanus shot or time off due to injury as a requirement for receiving a Purple Heart.

FactCheck.org: 

...even a "friendly fire" injury can qualify for a purple heart "as long as the 'friendly' projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment," according to the website of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

Maria L. La Ganga and Stephen Braun, Los Angeles Times:

Kerry had been on a mission in a "skimmer" boat north of Cam Ranh Bay. Noticing Viet Cong on a beach, Kerry fired on the guerrillas. Two crewmates, Bill Zaladonis and Pat Runyon, have confirmed that they also fired on the fleeing guerrillas.
...
Navy rules during the Vietnam War governing Purple Hearts did not take into account a wound's severity — and specified only that injuries had to be suffered "in action against an enemy."

Self-inflicted wounds were awarded if incurred "in the heat of battle, and not involving gross negligence." Kerry's critics insist his wound would not have qualified, but former Navy officials who worked in the service's awards branch at the time said such awards were routine.

A Times review of Navy injury reports and awards from that period in Kerry's Swift boat unit shows that many other Swift boat personnel won Purple Hearts for slight wounds of uncertain origin.

Media Matters:

In an August 20 New York Times article, Runyon expressed resentment at how Swift Boat Veterans for Truth had distorted his version of events after he -- mistakenly believing Swift Boat Vets was a pro-Kerry group -- sent the group a statement describing the skimmer incident. "Runyon said the edited version was stripped of all references to enemy combat, making it look like just another night in the Mekong Delta. 'It made it sound like I didn't believe we got any returned fire,' he said. 'He [the SBVT investigator] made it sound like it was a normal operation. It was the scariest night of my life.'"

Bill Sloat (Cleveland Plain Dealer) via Buzzflash:

An Ohio factory worker who was with John Kerry on a dangerous night mission 36 years ago in Vietnam said he has no doubt Kerry was grazed in a firefight and deserves his first Purple Heart for a combat injury.

"We were on about a 14-foot boat with an outboard motor. We started out, taking a guess, around 10 p.m. We were sup posed to sneak up and check sampans," said Pat Runyon, a 58-year-old grandfather from Eaton, a small southwestern Ohio town near the Indiana border.

Runyon, an enlisted man who served on Swift boats in Vietnam, was not a regular member of Kerry's crew.

He said in an interview Sunday he somehow was chosen - "Let me tell you, I didn't volunteer" - to go out on the Dec. 2, 1968, mission, called a "skim op" in Navy slang.

The small, flat-bottomed boat - Runyon called it a "skimmer" - carried three men - Kerry in command, Bill Zaledonis on a machine gun and Runyon operating the outboard motor.

Once in place on the river, the three U.S. sailors paddled and drifted. Covered by the darkness, they hid to stop sampans, small vessels common in Southeast Asia. Guerillas used the sampans to smuggle weapons in the Mekong River Delta.

Runyon said Kerry was wounded after one vessel tried to avoid an inspection.

"Lt. Kerry said, 'I'm going to pop a flare, and when I do, I want that engine started,' " Runyon said. But the outboard would not crank. Meanwhile, the sampan's crew steered it to the riverbank, and people started running on the shore. Runyon said shooting broke out.

Somehow, Kerry's weapon stopped firing. Runyon thinks he ran out of ammunition. He said Kerry bent down to pick up another gun and got hit in the arm.

"It wasn't a serious wound," Runyon said, and Kerry was able to start shooting again. When the firefight was over, Runyon said Kerry told him all he felt was a "burning sensation."

Runyon said he remembers the incident clearly because it was the first time he had been in combat. "I hadn't seen any kind of action or anything," he said.

He said Kerry, Zaledonis and himself were the only men aboard. When he got the motor started, they took off. He said the outboard was in bad condition and did not have a handle to steer with. "I had to wrap my arms around it, like hugging it, to turn it," he recalled.

Runyon now works the second shift at a plant that makes auto parts in Eaton. He works in the shipping department.

He is supporting Democratic nominee Kerry for president, but said he is not a Democrat and has never been active in politics. He said he and Kerry met for the first time since that night in 1968 at a rally in Dayton this year.

Runyon said he introduced himself to the Massachusetts senator and Kerry did not remember him. "When I talked to him about that night, he remembered the incident but not my name. He just eased up once he knew I was who I said I was."

Runyon was at a Democratic picnic Sunday in Trotwood, a Dayton suburb, where he told the small gathering of party activists that an anti-Kerry veterans group was smearing the senator with false charges. "It's very poor to try and discredit him after [36] years," Runyon said. "That's very poor."

Runyon said that firefight with Kerry is his brush with fame.

"I saw a nice, quiet guy who knew he was in command and didn't flaunt it. He could make a decision, and he made the right one because we got out of there alive. That's all I can tell you."

2. SBV CLAIM ON KERRY'S TRUTHFULNESS REGARDING HIS FIRST PURPLE HEART: 

[Louis Letson]: I know John Kerry is lying about his first purple heart, because I treated him for that injury.

[via FactCheck.org]: Letson says Kerry's wound was self-inflicted and does not merit a purple heart...Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time...says that he “turned down the Purple Heart request,” and recalled Kerry's injury as a "tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn." 

FACT
Letson was NOT the doctor who signed Kerry's sick call sheet and was not a Kerry crewmate. There is no proof he ever treated Kerry and he apparently started to recollect his memories of Vietnam just last year (2003).

REFERENCES
FactCheck.org:

...even a "friendly fire" injury can qualify for a purple heart "as long as the 'friendly' projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment," according to the website of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
...
medical records provided by the Kerry campaign to FactCheck.org do not list Letson as the “person administering treatment” for Kerry’s injury on December 3, 1968 .  The medical officer who signed this sick call report is J.C. Carreon, who is listed as treating Kerry for shrapnel to the left arm.

In his affidavit, Letson says Kerry's wound was self-inflicted and does not merit a purple heart. But that's based on hearsay, and disputed hearsay at that. Letson says “the crewman with Kerry told me there was no hostile fire, and that Kerry had inadvertently wounded himself with an M-79 grenade.” But the Kerry campaign says the two crewmen with Kerry that day deny ever talking to Letson.

Also appearing in the ad is  Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time. Hibbard’s affidavit says that he “turned down the Purple Heart request,” and recalled Kerry's injury as a "tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn." 

That doesn't quite square with Letson's affidavit, which describes shrapnel "lodged in Kerry's arm" (though "barely.")

Hibbard also told the Boston Globe in an interview in April 2004 that he eventually acquiesced about granting Kerry the purple heart.

Hibbard: I do remember some questions on it. . .I finally said, OK if that's what happened. . . do whatever you want

Kerry got the first purple heart after Hibbard left to return to the US. 

Information cited at John Kerry.com:

Letson Offers NO PROOF He Treated Kerry.
Despite Letson's claims to have treated Kerry, he is not listed on any document as having treated Kerry after the 12/2/68 firefight. Offering only an account of dates and places-which is readily available in Kerry's biography and media accounts-Lester has produced nothing to verify his treatment of Kerry.
...
Letson Didn't Record His Memories of Vietnam Until Kerry's Emergence in 2003.
"Letson says that last year, as the Democratic campaign began to heat up, he told friends that he remembered treating one of the candidates many years ago. In response to their questions, Letson says, he wrote down his recollections of the time." [National Review Online, 5/4/04]

3. SBV CLAIM ON SERIOUSNESS OF KERRY'S INJURY THAT LED TO HIS PURPLE HEART:

[Boston Globe's Michael Kranish reporting on Grant Hibbard's statements; via Daily Howler]: “He had a little scratch on his forearm, and he was holding a piece of shrapnel,” recalled Kerry’s commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard. “People in the office were saying, ‘I don’t think we got any fire,’ and there is a guy holding a little piece of shrapnel in his palm.” Hibbard said he couldn’t be certain whether Kerry actually came under fire on Dec. 2, 1968, the date in question and that is why he said he asked Kerry questions about the matter.
...
Thirty-six years later, Hibbard, reached at his retirement home in Florida, said he can still recall Kerry’s wound, and that it resembled a scrape from a fingernail. “I’ve had thorns from a rose that were worse,” said Hibbard, a registered Republican who said he was undecided on the 2004 presidential race.

FACT
Hibbard's claim is false and self-contradictory. Not to mention he gave very positive ratings to Kerry weeks after the injury! (Mr. Hibbard seems to love serial flip-flopping (to put it very mildly). Of course Mr. Somerby (below), has a more appropriate phrase to describe this compassionate conservative.

REFERENCES
Bob Somerby, Daily Howler (bold text is eRiposte emphasis):

The Globe “found that Kerry’s commanding officer at the time questioned Kerry’s first Purple Heart,” the scribe wrote. In fact, Kranish has never presented any evidence supporting this conclusion. In particular, he has never presented any correspondence (or other record) showing that Hibbard challenged Kerry’s award in real time. Nor has he ever quoted anyone saying that Hibbard did so. What did the Globe’s “examination” really find? It really found that commander Hibbard questions Kerry’s Purple Heart now. Kranish has never presented a bit of evidence to show that Hibbard questioned it then. Did Hibbard “question Kerry’s Purple Heart” at the time? It’s possible, but, despite what Kranish says, the Globe has presented no evidence.
...
Even as Kranish wrote his report, he knew Hibbard’s memory wasn’t that swift.
...
What was wrong with Hibbard’s memory? As we’ve seen, Hibbard seemed to have a clear recollection of Kerry’s puny wound. “He had a little scratch on his forearm,” he said, showing off his potent memory skills. But uh-oh! Kranish knew that this memory was false. In an April 20 Globe report, Kranish said the Kerry campaign had already shown him “a record verifying that Kerry was treated for the wound and that shrapnel was removed” from his arm. (He had seen the record “earlier this year,” Kranish said. “That document was cited in last week’s story.”) But what does that medical record show? It shows that Kerry was wounded above the elbow—not on the forearm, as Hibbard “recalls.” Among many others, Katharine Seelye quoted the document in the April 21 New York Times:

SEELYE (4/21/04): [Kerry aide Martin] Meehan offered a “Sick Call Treatment Record” from Mr. Kerry’s personal medical files with these handwritten notes from someone who treated to him on Dec. 3, 1968, at the naval support center at Cam Ranh Bay:
“Shrapnel in left arm above elbow. Shrapnel removed and appl bacitracin dressing. Ret to Duty.”

As the record shows, shrapnel was removed from Kerry’s arm “above the elbow.” Hibbard’s ancient “memory” is faulty—and Kranish knew that all along. But so what? Knowing that Hibbard’s memory was wrong, he let Hibbard vent all the same.
...
Thirty-six years later, Kranish knew that Hibbard could not “still recall Kerry’s wound.” But so what? He let the angry old man blow off steam, mocking the severity of Kerry’s “fingernail scrape.” As Kranish knew (but didn’t say), the “scrape” didn’t appear on Kerry’s forearm at all—and required removal of shrapnel.

For the record, one more problem with Hibbard’s story surfaced on April 21. On that day, Kerry posted more than 140 pages of military records on his campaign Web site. According to Seelye, the records “showed uniformly positive evaluations from his commanders.” And guess what? Even Hibbard gave Kerry the highest possible marks—just two weeks after the troubling incident which he described to the Globe!

SEELYE (4/22/04): Even a commander who, 36 years after the fact, questioned a Purple Heart awarded to Mr. Kerry in 1968, recorded no reservations at the time. The officer, Grant W. Hibbard…told The Boston Globe last week that the wound for which Mr. Kerry won his first Purple Heart was no more than a small scratch.

But there was nothing negative about Mr. Kerry in an evaluation that Mr. Hibbard wrote two weeks after that incident.

For the most part, Mr. Hibbard wrote, Mr. Kerry was under his command for too short a time to evaluate him fully. Of 16 categories for rating, including professional knowledge, moral courage and loyalty, Mr. Hibbard checked “not observed” in 12. Mr. Hibbard gave Mr. Kerry the highest rating of “one of the top few” in three categories—initiative, cooperation and personal behavior. He gave Mr. Kerry the second-best rating, “above the majority,” in military bearing. Reached Wednesday at his retirement home in Florida, Mr. Hibbard said he had no comment.

In the Globe, Kranish had recorded Hibbard’s complaints about Kerry’s troubling conduct. Hibbard had complained about the way Kerry “persisted” in his quest for the Heart; to his own “chagrin,” the commander relented (see above). But how amazing! Just two weeks after this troubling incident, Hibbard had to evaluate Kerry—and he gave him the highest possible marks for “cooperation” and “personal behavior!” Does it sound like Hibbard was really aggrieved? Or does it sound like he may be a phony old hack—the kind of fellow whose shaky reports are normally kept out of print?

Steve Gilliard (via Hesiod):

Former UN Ambassador Richard Holbrooke served as a foreign service officer in Saigon and the Mekong Delta during the late 1960's, and described the danger on Wolf Blitzer Reports today:

BLITZER: All right, I just want to get you on the record on this whole issue of Vietnam, John Kerry's service in Vietnam.

You were a young American diplomat serving in Saigon during the Vietnam War. So this is a personal matter for you as well. When the Democratic candidate makes such a big issue of his Vietnam service during the war at the Democratic Convention and now other veterans opposed to him come out and say, effectively, he's lying about that, what do you do to make sure that this does not become a negative campaign issue for the man you want to be the next president of the United States?

HOLBROOKE: First of all, Wolf, I don't think that the Republicans are doing themselves any service by questioning the credentials of a man, John Kerry, who volunteered three times. First, only a handful of his classmates in college volunteered for military service at all.

Then he volunteered for Vietnam. And then when he was on a slow boat out in the South China Sea, he asked for the Riverine Force to command a swift boat. I was not just in Saigon, as you said. I spent three years in Vietnam and a year and a half of that in the Lower Mekong Delta, in the same area where John Kerry was. I was a civilian, but everyone was getting shot at down there.

I was not in as much danger as John Kerry, but I know those mangrove swamps very well. Danger and death lurked behind every single turn. And when the attack ads say that his wound was only a light wound, what are they talking about? The distance between a light wound and death is an inch. It's one aorta. It's one artery. It is unbelievable to me, given the danger that people in the Riverine Force faced, that any of them would go to town and be used this way 30 years later.

I'm embarrassed for the people who have done this ad. And I think that everyone should read what Jim Rassmann wrote in today's "Wall Street Journal," reaffirming how he owes his life to John Kerry. Rassmann is a Republican who was not recruited by the campaign, but just got angry about the earlier misrepresentation.

Anyone who served in Vietnam deserves the admiration of all Americans. We're not attacking. John Kerry, myself, we're not attacking those people who are attacking Kerry. They served. He served. He was wounded three times. He saved lives. And let the record speak for itself. As Senator Kerry himself says, let them attack. They're just advertising his heroic war record.

4. SBV CLAIM ON KERRY'S HAVING "APPLIED" TO HIBBARD FOR A PURPLE HEART

 [via the Los Angeles Times]: In a Swift Boat Veterans for Truth affidavit, Hibbard said Kerry came into his office "to apply for a Purple Heart," but that he turned down Kerry's "Purple Heart request."

[via Media Matters]: In his August 27 column, syndicated columnist and CNN Crossfire co-host Robert Novak presented his interview with retired Rear Admiral William L. Schachte Jr. ...
Schachte...told Novak that..."Kerry requested a Purple Heart."

FACT
Mr. Hibbard's claim is self-contradictory. He stated in another interview that Kerry did NOT come to him to apply for a purple heart. Schacte showed he was willing to pass on a lie as well.

REFERENCES
Maria L. La Ganga and Stephen Braun, Los Angeles Times:

But in a conflicting interview this summer, Hibbard said Kerry did not directly ask for the medal but a medical report. (The report would have been automatically forwarded to Navy administrators in Saigon who oversaw Purple Heart awards.)

5. SBV CLAIM THAT PEOPLE WHO WERE "WITH KERRY" AT THE TIME CONFIRM HIS PURPLE HEART "WAS FABRICATED"

[via Daily Howler]: 
THURLOW: Well, on a first-hand basis, I understood that the Purple Heart that he received at Cam Ranh Bay was fabricated and wasn’t based on any factuality at all, but—
...
THURLOW: I learned that from the people who had been with him at that time, when he reported that he received an injury from hostile fire, when in fact, there was none.
...
THURLOW: I can’t give you a specific name. It was a crew member that came from Cam Ranh Bay to our division.
...
THURLOW: OK. The only name that comes to mind now is a guy that is actually a member of our group. But what I’m telling you is the story—
...
THURLOW: Steve Gardner.

FACT
False. Steve Gardner was not even present on Kerry's boat at the time of Kerry's injury that led to his first purple heart! 

REFERENCES
Daily Howler:

Under pressure, Thurlow coughed up a name—Steve Gardner. But alas! If Matthews was even minimally prepared, he’d have known that Gardner wasn’t present, in any way, during the incident in question. (This fact is not is dispute....

6. SBV CLAIM THAT KERRY'S INJURY WAS DUE TO KERRY'S MISTAKE IN FIRING AN M-79

[More via Daily Howler]: 

MATTHEWS: Steve Gardner. And he told you at the time that John Kerry received his first Purple Heart that he didn’t deserve it?
THURLOW: Well, what happened is he said that he [Kerry] received an injury due to a mistake he made when he fired an M-79 close aboard and was hit by his own shrapnel. That doesn’t constitute a Purple Heart. You‘ve got to be injured by hostile fire.

[via Media Matters]: In his August 27 column, syndicated columnist and CNN Crossfire co-host Robert Novak presented his interview with retired Rear Admiral William L. Schachte Jr. -- who claims to have been the commander on the December 2, 1968, mission for which the U.S. Navy awarded Senator John Kerry (D-MA) his first Purple Heart -- as decisive evidence supporting allegations by the anti-Kerry group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that Kerry did not deserve the award because his wound was self-inflicted and minor. Having landed what he called Schachte's "first on-the-record interview about the Swift Boat Vets dispute," Novak quoted Schachte claiming that he was on Kerry's crew for the mission and denying that the boat received hostile fire...
Schachte...told Novak that "Kerry nicked himself with a M-79 (grenade launcher)." He added, "Kerry requested a Purple Heart." Schachte also said, "There was no fire from the enemy."

FACT
The two crewmates of Kerry who were actually on the boat with Kerry at the time the incident occurred categorically dismiss the fact that Kerry fired an M-79. Kerry was using an M-16. Moreover, they confirm categorically that Kerry did NOT get injured from shrapnel from a grenade launcher (M-79). 

REFERENCES
Scott Lehigh, Boston Globe (via Atrios):

"I am reasonably sure we didn't have an M-79," Zaladonis said. "I didn't see one. I don't remember it."

Runyon says the only weapons the trio had were an M-60 machine gun, two M-16 combat rifles, and, possibly, a .45 caliber pistol. Is he 100 percent sure there wasn't an M-79 grenade launcher in the boat?

"I wouldn't say 100 percent, but I know 100 percent certain that we didn't shoot them," replies Runyon. He does remember Kerry having trouble with his M-16. "His gun jammed or he ran out of ammunition -- I don't know which -- but he bent down to pick up the other M-16," he says.

Zaladonis, who was manning the machine gun, recalls Kerry telling him to redirect his fire to another area. "If we got return fire, I am not sure," he said. But he adds that there's one thing he does know: "I know that John got hurt." And not by shrapnel from a grenade launcher.

7. SBV CLAIM THAT WILLIAM SCHACTE SERVED ON KERRY'S BOAT THE NIGHT KERRY RECEIVED THE INJURY THAT LED TO HIS FIRST PURPLE HEART (AND THAT SCHACTE CONFIRMED KERRY'S WOUND WAS SELF-INFLICTED)

[via Media Matters]: During his August 12 appearances on Crossfire and on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, O'Neill claimed that another anti-Kerry veteran, William Schachte, served on a boat (a small whaler) with Kerry the night Kerry received the injury that resulted in his first Purple Heart.

[via Media Matters]: In his August 27 column, syndicated columnist and CNN Crossfire co-host Robert Novak presented his interview with retired Rear Admiral William L. Schachte Jr. -- who claims to have been the commander on the December 2, 1968, mission for which the U.S. Navy awarded Senator John Kerry (D-MA) his first Purple Heart -- as decisive evidence supporting allegations by the anti-Kerry group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that Kerry did not deserve the award because his wound was self-inflicted and minor. Having landed what he called Schachte's "first on-the-record interview about the Swift Boat Vets dispute," Novak quoted Schachte claiming that he was on Kerry's crew for the mission and denying that the boat received hostile fire...
Schachte...told Novak that "Kerry nicked himself with a M-79 (grenade launcher)." He added, "Kerry requested a Purple Heart." Schachte also said, "There was no fire from the enemy."

FACT
William Schacte did not serve in Kerry's boat that night. O'Neill backpedaled from his claim on another show. Not to mention that the two crewmates of Kerry who were with him that night categorically state that Schacte was NOT on their boat, and that Schacte's claims are categorically false (as has been shown in above sections). 

And the icing on the cake - SBV's own website and report of the events contradicted Schacte and O'Neill - so they revised their website!

REFERENCES
Media Matters:

On Hardball, John Hurley, the national director of Veterans for Kerry responded, "There were three men on that boat that night, John Kerry, Bill Zaladonis, Pat Runyon, period, three men on that boat. ... There was no one else on that boat that night." When pressed on Crossfire by Former Clinton White House special counsel Lanny Davis about the number of men on the whaler, O'Neill could only reply that "[t]here were at least three and possibly four men on the whaler."

Media Matters:

The account of the incident on Swift Boat Vets' own website contradicts Schachte's assertion, also in Novak's column, that Schachte was the commander on Kerry's boat. According to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's website (archived copy here):

The action that led to John Kerry's first Purple Heart occurred on December 2, 1968, during the month that he was undergoing training with Coastal Division 14 at Cam Ranh Bay. While waiting to receive his own Swift boat command, Kerry volunteered for a nighttime patrol mission commanding a small, foam-filled "skimmer" craft with two enlisted men.

The two enlisted men who joined Kerry on the December 2, 1968, mission, William Zaladonis and Patrick Runyon, have both insisted (here and here) that no one apart from Kerry was with them on the boat that night. "There definitely was not a fourth," Runyon told The Boston Globe.
...
In an August 20 New York Times article, Runyon expressed resentment at how Swift Boat Veterans for Truth had distorted his version of events after he -- mistakenly believing Swift Boat Vets was a pro-Kerry group -- sent the group a statement describing the skimmer incident. "Runyon said the edited version was stripped of all references to enemy combat, making it look like just another night in the Mekong Delta. 'It made it sound like I didn't believe we got any returned fire,' he said. 'He [the SBVT investigator] made it sound like it was a normal operation. It was the scariest night of my life.'"

Media Matters:

Three days after Media Matters for America first reported that the website of anti-Kerry group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth contradicted the account of the group's star witness -- retired Rear Admiral William L. Schachte Jr., who claims he was the commander on the December 2, 1968, mission for which the U.S. Navy awarded Senator John Kerry his first Purple Heart -- Swift Boat Veterans for Truth altered its website's account of the incident to make it consistent with Schachte's version of events. According to Schachte, Kerry did not deserve the award because the "skimmer" he supposedly commanded that night did not receive enemy fire, and Kerry's wound was the result of Kerry's own improper use of an M-79 grenade launcher.

The original version of the account on the Swift Boat Vets website begins:

The action that led to John Kerry's first Purple Heart occurred on December 2, 1968, during the month that he was undergoing training with Coastal Division 14 at Cam Ranh Bay. While waiting to receive his own Swift boat command, Kerry volunteered for a nighttime patrol mission commanding a small, foam-filled "skimmer" craft with two enlisted men.

As MMFA explained, this description matches Kerry's own account, as well as the account of Patrick Runyon and William Zaladonis, two enlisted men who insist that: (1) Schachte was not on the skimmer; (2) that Kerry was in command; and (3) that Runyon and Zaladonis were the only other people besides Kerry on the small craft.

The new, altered version of the Swift Boat Vets account reads:

The action that led to John Kerry's first Purple Heart occurred on December 2, 1968, during the month that he was undergoing training with Coastal Division 14 at Cam Ranh Bay. While waiting to receive his own Swift boat command, Kerry volunteered for a nighttime patrol mission on a small, foam-filled "skimmer" craft under the command of Lt. William Schachte. The two officers were accompanied by an enlisted man who operated the outboard motor.

The Web page's footer reads: "Last Updated Monday, August 30 2004 @ 09:09 PM PDT." -- three days after MMFA's item appeared.

In addition to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's own website, MMFA has noted that other evidence substantially undermines Schachte and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's attack on Kerry's first Purple Heart. MMFA has extensively documented and refuted Swift Boat Vets' attacks on Kerry in the media.

Kate Zernike and Jim Rutenberg, New York Times [via Hesiod]:

The group also offers the account of William L. Schachte Jr., a retired rear admiral who says in the book that he had been on the small skimmer on which Mr. Kerry was injured that night in December 1968. He contends that Mr. Kerry wounded himself while firing a grenade.

But the two other men who acknowledged that they had been with Mr. Kerry, Bill Zaladonis and Mr. Runyon, say they cannot recall a third crew member. "Me and Bill aren't the smartest, but we can count to three," Mr. Runyon said in an interview. And even Dr. Letson said he had not recalled Mr. Schachte until he had a conversation with another veteran earlier this year and received a subsequent phone call from Mr. Schachte himself.

Mr. Schachte did not return a telephone call, and a spokesman for the group said he would not comment.

Scott Lehigh, Boston Globe (via Atrios):

But rather than quoting the two men known to have accompanied Kerry on that mission, "Unfit for Command" asserts a third person was along. William Schachte, later a rear admiral, "was also on the skimmer," the book claims.

It offers this account: "After Kerry's M-16 jammed, Kerry picked up an M-79 grenade launcher and fired a grenade too close, causing a tiny piece of shrapnel . . . to barely stick in his arm. Schachte berated Kerry for almost putting someone's eye out." Schachte could not be reached for comment. But in a brief interview yesterday, O'Neill asserted that Schachte had told him, as well as other military men, that he had been on the skimmer.

"I spoke to Admiral Schachte," O'Neill said. "He places himself on the skimmer." O'Neill also hinted that Schachte will soon address the issue himself. So what do William Zaladonis and Patrick Runyon, the two men who were on the skimmer with Kerry at the time, say?

"Myself, Pat Runyon, and John Kerry," says Zaladonis, the engineman on Kerry's first swift boat, "we were the only ones in the skimmer."

"There definitely was not a fourth," says Runyon.