Three Hearts and You’re Home FREE!
The medical description of Kerry’s first wound.
Some critics of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry have questioned the circumstances surrounding the first of three Purple Hearts Kerry won in Vietnam. Those critics, among them some of Kerry’s fellow veterans, have suggested that a wound suffered by Kerry in December 1968 may have made him technically eligible for a Purple Heart but was not severe enough to warrant serious consideration, even for a decoration that was handed out by the thousands. Whatever the case, Kerry was awarded the Purple Heart, and, along with two others he won later, it allowed him to request to leave Vietnam before his tour of duty was finished.
Kerry was treated for the wound at a medical facility in Cam Ranh Bay. The doctor who treated Kerry, Louis Letson, is today a retired general practitioner in Alabama. Letson says he remembers his brief encounter with Kerry 35 years ago because “some of his crewmen related that Lt. Kerry had told them that he would be the next JFK from Massachusetts.” 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. (Letson says he has had no contacts with anyone from the Bush campaign or the Republican party.) What follows is Letson’s memory, as he wrote it.
I have a very clear memory of an incident which occurred while I was the Medical Officer at Naval Support Facility, Cam Ranh Bay. John Kerry was a (jg), the OinC or skipper of a Swift boat, newly arrived in Vietnam. On the night of December 2, he was on patrol north of Cam Ranh, up near Nha Trang area. The next day he came to sick bay, the medical facility, for treatment of a wound that had occurred that night.
The story he told was different from what his crewmen had to say about that night. According to Kerry, they had been engaged in a fire fight, receiving small arms fire from on shore. He said that his injury resulted from this enemy action.
Some of his crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore. The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks.
That seemed to fit the injury which I treated.
What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry’s arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle.
I simply removed the piece of metal by lifting it out of the skin with forceps. I doubt that it penetrated more than 3 or 4 mm. It did not require probing to find it, did not require any anesthesia to remove it, and did not require any sutures to close the wound.
The wound was covered with a bandaid.
No other injuries were reported and I do not recall that there was any reported damage to the boat.
Kelly Says: May 5th, 2004 at 8:24 pm
If you’ll reread my original comment, you’ll see that my exact words were, “in the case of WMDs, Saddam is innocent until proven guilty.” No sane person can say that Saddam is wholly innocent. I know about all of the mass graves and torture stories, and I believe them. Getting rid of Saddam is the one good thing Bush has done so far, but the way they went about it was shoddy and half-assed, not to mention suspicious. I know some people love to imagine Bush with his shirt off riding through the desert on a white horse to liberate millions of oppressed people and to take terrible weapons out of the hands of a psychotic despot, but if those were the real reasons for going there, we would be in North Korea right now removing Kim Jong Il, an authentic nutcase who has tortured and murdered tens of thousands of innocents, and who we know for sure is building nuclear weapons as I write this. But invading N.Korea wouldn’t have slaked Bush’s thirst for revenge, and with no oil, it wouldn’t have helped Halliburton’s stock quote. There is no punishment terrible enough for Saddam, but Bush is no hero, either. He based the whole thing on WMDs, and so far, he’s failed. Until they do find something, our reputation as a trustworthy ally of the free world has been severely damaged. Just imagine how much more difficult it’s going to be to make a case for preemptive war in the future, even if we’re absolutely sure there’s a threat. You think we had trouble getting allies before? We’ll have to find a clear photograph of Kim Jong Il aiming a missile at Seattle if we want anyone to believe us. Iran, Syria, and N.Korea are probably more secure from America than they were a year ago. Next time, we really will have to wait for the enemy to strike first.
And just for the record, Zack, I think that the 9/11 commission will have plenty to say about Clinton. If you ask me, Clinton should have gone after Bin Laden full force after the bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, Monica or no Monica. If he had, 9/11 would never have happened.
My point is simple, the individuals this country has placed into leadership positions as of late have been a pathetic and sad bunch. We should be able to do a hell of a lot better. And that’s not necessarily an endorsement of Kerry.
zack Says: May 5th, 2004 at 10:16 pm
Revenge, oil, Halliburton, yeah we’ve heard it. Well(sigh), I was gonna stop there and go on with my point, However, I can’t let that go. You seem sensible enough (misguided, but sensible). Tell me, honestly. Do you REALLY think that W. , or ANY President for that matter, would actually take us to war for any of those three reasons? To get revenge for his father, 10 years earlier? For oil, which we could have had ten years ago, and aren’t taking now? Or to help the stock price of Halliburton??? I would not even make that claim against Clinton, and having lived under him as governor AND President, I wouldn’t put much of anything past him! MOST of the Democrats in Congress were convinced Saddam had WMD while Clinton was President. Clinton himself even said “It’s not a matter of IF, but WHEN he’ll use them”.
Now, where was I going…Oh yeah, the typical comment by Democrats…”He based the whole thing on WMDs, and so far, he’s failed. Until they do find something, our reputation as a trustworthy ally of the free world has been severely damaged.” That, ladies and gentlemen, is the purest form of CYA! You’re basically saying (though you’ll never admit it) that you DO believe that he had WMD, but are going to use this opportunity to bash Bush while you can. Then, when they’re found, you’ll revert back to that disclaimer “Until they do find something”. I can hear liberals around the world singing together….”We said there MIGHT be some!”. Kerry’s already saying that. I am sending you an e-mail to show you what they managed to bury before we got there. Look at the pictures then tell me that the UN searched everywhere! If they could completely hide 2 dozen high-tech Russian jets in the sand, they surely could hide a few little barrels of chemicals! You already know that Saddam HAD WMD, Kurdish graves don’t lie. If he had ‘em then, do you really think he is the kind of guy to just give ‘em up? Now, honestly, isn’t it a just a tiny bit more likely that it’s simply the hatred of Bush that is blinding the common sense of so many otherwise reasonable people? Because you admit that they (WMD) MIGHT be there, yet you’re more willing to, at least for the time being, trust Saddam than to trust your own President…. Now THAT’S sad.
zack Says: May 5th, 2004 at 10:18 pm
well, I guess your e-mail address is not on here. E-mail me and I’ll send the pictures of our soldiers digging-out the jets.
Kelly Says: May 6th, 2004 at 7:40 am
Misguided. Yeah, that’s me alright. I’ll be the first to admit it. I think it’s safe to say that the entire country has been misguided on about 50 different things. Misguided on WMDs, misguided on Bush’s military record, misguided on the actual cost of Medicare reform, misguided on who it was that outed CIA agent Valerie Plame, misguided on the actual cost of the Iraq war (that extra $87 billion was a classic bait-and-switch), misguided on what we knew before 9/11, I could go on and on. I always had a feeling Bush was a complete fraud, and he’s spent the past 3 1/2 years confirming those suspicions. I wouldn’t say I hate him, I’m just extremely disappointed with him. I supported the whole Iraq war from day one, but Bush screwed it up. And if you don’t think it’s at least likely that Bush and Cheney, two guys who built their lives out of oil, would want to launch a war in one of the most oil-rich nations on the planet in order to make a few bucks, then you aren’t considering all of the angles and are, in fact, blinded by forced admiration. You guys can go on believing all the lies, but one is enough for me. Now, I wouldn’t say that I trust Saddam more than the president, but Bush made it sound as if we’d find the WMDs within a month. One year later, nothing. We can believe whatever we want, but the rest of the world has no trust in us now, and who can blame them? What good is there in being the most powerful nation on the planet if most people outside the U.S. believe our word to be worthless? This is Bush’s legacy. He’s divided our allies and united our enemies. You’re right about two things, Zack: I don’t trust our president, and that IS sad.
And now, at the risk of delighting all of my readers, I think I’m going to move on down the line. I guess I’m just getting bored with having to repeat myself. How many times can I make the same point before I realize that my words aren’t making it through your anti-reason filters? I’ve posted comment after comment and all I’ve gotten back are responses that seem to go around in circles. I feel like I’m trying to have a meaningful political debate with a bunch of trained circus apes. I see now that this is less a forum for humorous political discussion and more an orgy of right-wing masturbation. I’m going to see if I can find a more substantial conservative website. All I’ve learned here is that some people are too easy to rile up.
And Zack, don’t waste any time looking for my email. I used a fake one on my first comment because I thought I had to. I just knew I’d get some hate mail if I used a real one. But don’t worry, I believe you about the buried Russian planes. It just doesn’t prove squat about WMDs.
zack Says: May 6th, 2004 at 2:28 pm
Just remember, you’re the one who came to a site called “Laughatliberals.com”, jumped in to try and convert us, when you got cornered you called us “Trained circus apes”?, and the site “An orgy of right-wing masturbation”??? That makes it hard to laugh at liberals with such hatred and personal attacks. The site is about fun with politics. We thank you for moving on. We’ll stay here. (Remember the day when conservatives were called “mean-spirited”?)
Emory Says: May 7th, 2004 at 1:32 am
Kelly, I’ll miss reading your comments. You made some good points. I hope you’ll drop by in the future.
Anonymous Says: May 14th, 2004 at 1:37 am
that picture of the jets being uncovered, is probably the most ridiculous example anyone could give. we currently have in orbit sattelites that can focus somewhere between one or two feet. where are those images of WMD. it’s all a loud of poop, and anything good that comes out of iraq, is definately going to line the pockets of bush’s friends and family. you tell me what hasn’t been done or justified for the sake of greed!
Anon2nd Says: May 14th, 2004 at 1:50 am
^^^^
a loud of poop??
^^^^
Huh?
Anon2nd Says: May 14th, 2004 at 1:52 am
BTW:
The (GA) State Republican Party is going to be having an event in Columbus, GA - this Friday and Saturday.
All are invited, Liberals too.
Roger Estrada Says: June 6th, 2004 at 3:04 pm
Discover the waffles in John Kerry’s records with his own words and votes in 20 years in the senate
herb Says: July 18th, 2004 at 9:17 am
Anyone supporting a Bush/Cheney ticket shouldn’t be casting rocks at anyone’s service record because at least there is one. How people who are supposedly proud of their own military service can support one man who ducked active service by pulling strings to get into a Guard unit closed to the average man at the time and the other who dodged the draft thru student deferments, the same thing that they call Clinton a draft dodger for btw, is beyond me. Also, for you youngsters, don’t say Bush had a chance of being called to duty. Unlike today, where the Guard is regularly called on to supplement the active forces, in the Nam era less than 1% of Guardsmen were called up. The Guard was were you went to avoid the draft when you were no longer elegible for deferments.
Steve Says: September 25th, 2004 at 2:19 am
Actually, you have not evidence of all the stuff you are spewing, so keep your mouth shut until you can produce documents, herb. In fact, you would be well advised to keep you mouth shut all together, because the last documents “produced” by someone with your opinion turned out to be fakes.
Mike Williamson Says: May 17th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
“Ducked” into a Guard fighter unit that had already deployed to ‘Nam, volunteered to fly a fighter with a very bad safety rating, spent a year learning the fine points of piloting and combat, which requires perfect vision, hearing, balance, high intelligence and physical fitness.
Man, that’s some string-pulling.
I think his detractors in this matter are just jealous because they can’t hope to meet those standards.
Oh, by the way, Herb…22 years service, including 4 as a shop chief in the Air Guard. Tell me of your service to our country.
Or else STFU, civilian.