What is stolen valor?
This may sound like an odd question being asked on a community site that highlights stolen valor, but the question is nuanced.
It may be best to rephrased to – What do you consider stolen valor? The answers may surprise you.
After screening a tremendous amount of cases, it was my hope that they would settle into logical categories. This would allow us to rack and stack them but maybe it is a bridge too far. I think there are general categories which I will attempt to define here but I’m looking for help in that there may be more categories or fewer, even all lumped into one. All of these are not hypotheticals since they have actually been reported.
I’m soliciting your opinion and looking for things like – “Well the law is the law but in my view any unearned medal claimed is stolen valor.”
CATEGORY ONE
Violations of the Stolen Valor Act of 2013. Claiming the Medal of Honor, Distinguished Service Cross, Navy Cross, Air Force Cross, Silver Star, Purple Heart, Combat Action Ribbon, Combat Infantryman’s Badge, Combat Action Badge, Combat Medical Badge, Combat Action Medal, etc. Not all at once, mind you, but any one of these medals.
It does not include the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) or Bronze Star Medal with “V” device. Most of us would consider this an act of stolen valor to claim this.
Jonn addressed this quite well under TAH FNG:
20. Q: What do you mean by “Stolen Valor”?
A: As used here, “Stolen Valor” is a short-term for false claims regarding one’s military service, decorations, badges, or qualifications. As such, it’s a bit broader than the legal definition contained in 18 USC 704.
CATEGORY TWO
P.O.W. claims.
False claims of “specialty” forces / spec warfare – Green Beret (SF), Ranger, Navy SEAL, USAF PJ, etc. These do not seem to be covered under the Stolen Valor Act but sometimes get the most attention. Perhaps they are the most common.
However, have they technically stolen valor if not under the legal definition? Jonn addressed this well as pointed out above but this is TAH’s definition and not a legal one. Would a district attorney prosecute on these claims alone? Usually they don’t but if money was being made and that dollar amount is high, they will go after the case but often it will be prosecuted as fraud.
CATEGORY THREE
Claiming to have served in a theater of war that you have not. This is egregious but may not be a category because they would fit into category one unless, say, they claim Grenada and Beirut but did not go to Grenada. Have a Combat Action Ribbon and only claimed one but would not have two due to circumstances, so technically they are not claiming another medal, but another theater of operations. Or, in the theater of operations in Vietnam but were not in the country of Vietnam. Basically, avoid claiming medals in Category One.
CATEGORY FOUR
Claiming to have served and you haven’t, or embellishing your service short of claiming medals in Category One. These tend to be further under the radar but they do upset people that hear the stories. I don’t think this is a violation of the Stolen Valor Act unless it is used to gain money or other things of value. Is a one night stand something of value? Some would argue that it is.
CATEGORY FIVE
Miscellaneous – claiming PTSD from combat but never served in a conflict, counseling people with PTSD and falsely claiming you have it from combat, deceitfully using a particular set of words – but not technically lying – to lead your listener to draw the conclusion that you were this or that or you did this or that, [fill in the blank].
Private claims to immediate family – who know he or she is lying but forgive him in spite of it. They are curious enough to want them to verify but don’t plan to confront the person.
CATEGORY SIX
Wearing Army, Navy or Marine Corps bling but have never served. I’ve often wondered – What is the difference between this and with someone wearing a ball cap with the Dallas Cowboys’ star on it? We do not accuse them of falsely claiming that they played in the NFL. This argument has a flaw, but I can’t put my finger on it. The wearing of military clothing is freely sold in stores and online – they don’t restrict the sales to people that are SEALs for SEAL bling, or Rangers for Ranger bling. There is theft by implication and this bling is usually a good conversation starter but is there something to the argument that they are wearing the bling to honor and show their respect?
Then there’s the whole issue of tattoos, which may be a step above clothing, pins, and badges. Probably deserves another category but I don’t want to make this too confusing with too many categories.
SUMMARY
I’m interested in stimulating discussion on this. Should I look at categories another way? i.e. Claims that cause high emotional damage (i.e. killed villagers – women and children, lost buddies in Somalia, etc). Claims to leverage high-stakes (fraud)? Claims that gain low stakes (free meal at Applebees)? Claims in newspapers that may alter history when the person was never there, etc.
“What is stolen valor?” – it’s a simple question but I’m guessing the answer may vary.
I was at Waterloo, taking pictures. Wanna see ’em?
Illinois isn’t too far from Iowa so I can believe that.
Is the John Deere factory still open there?
I had a Waterloo Boy gas engine years ago.
If this was cooking Thursday it might be appropriate to talk about our involvement in the Battle of Chateaubriand
SCOTUS Justice Potter Stewart’s, “I’ll know it when I see it.” is a good starting place, followed by “Take that shit off.” or other public shaming. I think you have the levels pigeon-holed pretty well, Steve. Let me get some caffeine in me and I’ll think a little bit more clearly.
Pics or it never happened, Ex.
*grin*
Yes, it is the difficulty they faced when trying to define pornography. I hesitate to use that example but it may fit.
It wasn’t a very satisfactory definition then, either.
I always thought that phony POWs and false claims of Purple Hearts were the lowest of the SV pantheon.
Hah! Too easy!!
Plenty of pictures here, including Old Hookey (for his nose) a/k/a Beau. Blucher’s in there, too.
https://www.britishbattles.com/napoleonic-wars/battle-of-waterloo/
I’ll weigh in more on this later. Need to get ready to go have a proper send off for a Former Marine, an in country VietNam, decorated combat Veteran. Master Gunnery Sergeant Arthur A. Slocumb. He was my friend and Brother from another Mother. RIP Tuffy. I’ll see you on the other side…soon.
Sorry for your loss, 5/77. Fair winds and following seas, Marine.
So sorry for the loss of your friend.
It is times like these that remind us of how fragile life really is. The sadness and grief is a unique mixture with the gratitude we have for knowing the departed and how truly blessed we are to experience our own life and opportunities.
S/F
Thanks men, I appreciate the kind words. Tuffy was the 2nd Marine Brother I’ve lost this year. We sent Jim on his way 2 weeks ago. Both of these men were finally killed by Viet Nam. Complications from Agent Orange, breathing problems and cancers. Both were wounded Combat Veterans, never complained and kept their PTSD in close. Never lead a charge upon the Golden Corral either.
On the definition of Stolen Valor. As stated above, I know it when I see it. I also know it when I hear and now, when I smell it. These bastards just really piss me off, especially on days like today. I have an embellisher I’ve been kinda tracking for awhile now, he’s slick, maily fake book posts and such. He used to be the heroic door gunner, but for the last little while he’s the Airborne Ranger Sniper boonie rat. Haven’t made up my mind if I should send the info to MP or just send in for an FOIA. Got ’bout everything but his ssan, name, DOB, City, Co., State, even the Basic/AIT unit he was in before he reported to GANG. What y’all think?
I Love this place, keep up the good work!
Making comments, directly or indirectly, or wearing things that would lead a reasonable person to believe you are something that you are not. Also, failing to correct the record when someone else says or suggests you are something that you are not. Lying by omission. I think these qualify.
How about Photoshopping your ugly melon on the picture of an honorably retired sailor and drawing in a shitty replica of a Chief’s rank insignia on said picture? Where does THAT fall in the aforementioned classification system?
That falls into thick woods next to a golf course.
And there it is!
-rimshot-
Giggling
Another area of deception not included in the Stolen Valor law is false claims of being “retired military.” Some liars try to build trust by portraying themselves as having had long, faithful, and honorable military careers. Once confidence is established they usually attempt to gain money or goods through fraudulent means. Some of them like to include their military branch, rank, “Ret.” etc. in a signature block to bolster respect.
If you can’t show me your DD Form 2 (identification card) then STFU. If said liar doesn’t have his/her ID card then I want to see the official order placing him/her on the Army of the United States, Retired List or in the Retired Reserve. At the very least, said liar should be able to produce a DFAS military retiree pay account summary to prove receipt of retired pay. Is said liar listed as retired in the Army White Pages? Trust but always verify.
Now I’ll go sit quietly on the curb and clap as the “heroes” stumble past me along the boulevard of adulation. All pretenders must Fall Out!
Very good points.
As for the law itself, I don’t think anybody on active duty would be stupid enough to wear an unearned medal, especially a valor medal, but it happens.
So, it seems that most of the medal claims are with people that have gotten out, most likely when they sense some ambiguity that can provide them cover.
Also, many of these claims started before the internet reached a maturity level. Now you can check things at the speed of light and I imagine the resources will get even better over time. That may contribute to being rare to the guy with a huge chestful of medals anymore.
Many are playing a more sophisticated game as you point out. Strategically getting benefits vs. flashing themselves around at a parade.
actually, people on active duty are that stupid.
In my time as a PSG and 1SG I had three different troopers in different units wear awards and skill badges they had not earned.
One was sporting a soldier’s medal…one a CIB..and one showed up wearing a ranger tab.
All of them must have eaten a bowl of dumbass for breakfast if they thought they were going to pull that stupid crap and get away with it.
When I was a young Spec4, one of the 1SGs in our BN was relieved and reduced for falsely wearing a silver star. Turns out he never actually went to VietNam…LOL
So yes, it happens on active duty as well.
AW Shop LPO, I spotted a junior AW sporting a ring that looked dicey. A horned helmet on a skull, and lightning bolts. I asked him WTF, and he proudly told me it was his grandfather’s ring from WWII. Seems granddaddy was in the Waffen SS.
Told him to take that shit off when he was in uniform, or explain it to our Master Chief. He was Jewish…
Back on 2008, a middle aged E-5 that worked for me transferred to 5th Marines and checked in sporting a MSM on his Alpha’s, claiming it was his end of tour award. He told the 1stSgt the award hadn’t posted in the system and he couldn’t produce a certificate since “it was packed away in the TMO shipment”.
Fast forward – during the 15 minute conversation with the 1stSgt, I told him the Marine wasn’t entitled to it and the only end of tour award I knew he received was the PCS orders he was executing to 5th Marines.
I later heard he didn’t last long there and I believe the Corps divested itself of his service for that and some other issues that came up.
We have had people in reserve components who have been profiled here for wearing special forces tabs and ranger scrolls that that they never earned when serving on active duty. Unfortunately, reserve component units are unlikely to check the official records of NCO’s and officers wearing unearned bling. There was even an active duty chaplain major at Fort Lewis who falsely claimed for several years on AD that he was a fully qualified special forces officer prior to becoming a chaplain. Fortunately, he was exposed and got the boot.
Ah, yes, Chaplain Probst.
Hey, you left out the best part. He was the Group Chaplain for the 1st Special Forces Group. 😉 The story he told was that he’d been an enlisted SF guy in Vietnam (this was in the early 1990’s so there were still a few legit Vietnam vets in the military) and that he’d had some kind of epiphany in combat that made him “see the light” and decide to become a chaplain.
http://articles.latimes.com/1990-08-08/news/mn-390_1_army-heroic-chaplain
Another form is what I call the “appeal to authority” form. To wit: “I did three tours in the Viet of the Nam and I have 48 confirmed kills and a Silver Star; therefore, my argument about [insert political topic here] is more valid than yours.”
Only 48? I’ve killed more flies than whoever that is! At least 1,500, maybe more! Wasps, too – a lifetime minimum of 750!
48 confirmed kills – rubbish (snorrttt!!!)
Definitely happens in the active ranks, too.
Had a dumbass claim a Bronze Star and 2! confirmed killed out of SOI. Needless to say, ALL of us boots were some sorry, unhappy bastards due to that shitbags idiocy.
Here’s my attempt: Stolen Valor is a distinct type of fraud that occurs when the perpetrator(s) attempt to profit (monetarily or otherwise) by claiming awards that they did not receive and/or deeds that they did not do; while in military service.
//But I’m no grad student.
… or never served in the first place.
Nice, concise but all-inclusive definition. If you sprinkled in a “pursuant to” you could be easily mistaken for a lawyer. 😉
I’m no lawer
Edit(?): […] while allegedly in Military Service.
If it’s an overarching definition of SV you’re looking for, this would be it.
It’s a good topic for a blog that made its bones identifying valor thieves. Most of us are particularly pissed off when someone falsely claims a Purple Heart, whether the false claimant is a Veteran or not. Now, shift from a physical wound to a psychic one. The Purple Heart criteria do not include PTSD. How about SV qualifying criteria? Is a person who falsely claims compensable PTSD from service experiences a valor thief? If not, why not? Is it the mere absence of a decoration that mollifies or excuses the false claim? Put another way, if PTSD did qualify one for a Purple Heart (provided the condition was directly traceable to combat experience) and the false claimant did receive a Purple Heart solely for PTSD, would that change anything in terms of SV?
This is very helpful Air Cav.
At the end of the day or later, I would love to be able to form a go-to, hip-pocket statement such as “Yes, there is the law, but many in the TAH community feel that exist many circumstances that fit into a stolen valor criterion that the law does not speak to and its commission or oversight does not mean it was considered and discounted, but more importantly, does NOT mean it’s not stolen valor.”
Probably too long and may lose something with the length, but hopefully, it conveys meaning.
Could be something we insert into the TAH FNG, but I shudder the thought at touching Jonn’s thoughts. Perhaps as a color-coded addition.
Thank you for your input.
COP Sayed Abad, Aug 2012 (as I recall). VBIED detonated outside the wire. I was told that all military personnel there were recommended for the PHM by the battalion commander. The worst overt injury that I know of (to a soldier) was a broken arm, although many suffered temporary hearing loss. 2 local civilians on post were killed when the building they were in collapsed on top of them. I was somewhere in the air above Bagram at the time. I don’t know if the PHM was awarded to all those that were there.
During TET when they sent mortars and such into the barracks area the first time, there was a line at the medical facility for, I kinda remember) of around 35 that showed up with broken noses and toes. Seems that the design of the barracks had posts down the canter of it holding up the second floor and those that had not built cubicles yet had the surprise of meeting those posts in an abrupt stopping manner when running out of the building. Didn’t hear anything about any that missed that sharp turn at the top of the stairs from second floor.
Knew of a similar story with someone during the Iraq War.
He was in Kuwait and they had underground shelters with low wooden beams at the entrance. During a scud attack, this individual ran into the shelter and straight into the beam. He had a small bruise and wanted a Purple Heart but didn’t get one.
I asked about the date and I said there was only one day that Sadaam fired scuds and they landed in the desert. The day he was claiming was not that day.
He admitted it was not the same day and was a false alarm, which occurred frequently but his claim was… wait for it…
… at the time he was under the impression they were taking direct fire and it was all real to him.
He still could not understand how he was denied a Purple Heart.
Experience of the past has proven to me that for the one who is a poser one way or other, there are at least 4 that are not saying or doing anything to draw attention to who they are. If you came back and applied for a job and just put that you were a vet and were not asked about your past, you most likely got a job. If you let them know you served in VN, most likely, because of the rumors that had been spread about VNV, you kept looking for a job. If they didn’t ask, you didn’t tell. If in later time they found out you were a VNV but that you also did a quality job they kept you there and left you to do your job because of you work ethic. Thus the saying of, don’t ask don’t tell, worked for many and many are still not telling.
I would cut the sundae in half and label them Veteran and non Veteran.
Both catagories have similar sub catagories.
The Veteran ones are sad and hurt the most.
They deserve scorn from their brothers and sisters.
The non Veteran ones are open season and great entertainment. Easy to spot and trip up.
Use them as examples to the general public.
We all fear the scorn of our military peers but the non Veteran has no such peer.
Both are liars, of course. but the embellishers, who absolutely know better, are worse than the civilians. There is a tiny bit of flattery in someone pretending to be what they never were in that imitation being a form of flattery sort of way. Not much, but since they didn’t get the military training, they are unlikely to know better. Well, except for the lying part. Everyone should know better than that.
If it’s about getting vet’s benefits, then it should be classed as stolen valor.
I’m waiting for some draft car burning, duty dodging hippie from the 1960s to show up some day wanting his “bennies” because the merchants who give discounts to veterans want a valid ID and he doesn’t have one, because he was, as the Late Great Jonn Lilyea used to say, just a stank ass hippie, someone who ran away when he might never have been sent into a war zone.
I know some stores that give discounts to senior citizens, but don’t demand to see you SS or Medicare card. On the other hand, sometimes it’s better to wait for sale prices. Knockdowns on prices mean a new shipment of stuff is coming in. Sales are GRRREAT!!!
I also cook.
If it’s about getting VA benefits to which they’re not qualified, it’s fraud – plain and simple.
When something can be gotten free by lying, sooner or later someone will lie to get it. And the smart money is on “sooner” rather than later.
The FSA is full of those lying to qualify for their bennies. Over 4 billion dollars in Earned Income Tax Credit refunds are paid out every year to illegals claiming children residing outside the U.S., including nieces, nephews, and fictitious children. For over five years he IRS IG has reported it, but the IRS refuses to do anything to stop it, saying Congress needs to change the tax laws. Some of those refunds are in the five to ten thousand dollar range. If these illegals were prosecuted and jailed for tax fraud and all other related crimes, it might be stopped or minimized. But the D-rats and their ilk can’t be bothered.
Likely because that money buys a lot of D-rat votes!
I do not see any point whatsoever in trying to “categorize” stolen valor into some number of hierarchical categories for at least two reasons.
First: each TAH reader has his/her own opinion on what constitutes the “worst” form of SV. Those opinions are not uniform.
Some feel that false claims of being combat wounded (receiving the PH) are the lowest of the low. Others place phony POWs in that innermost ring. Others take greatest umbrage to those who falsely claim combat service, or service in a particular conflict; others detest most strongly those who claim the MoH or other high decorations for valor.
All can agree that each of those types of claim are despicable, and mark the false claimant as a Lugen Sack von Scheiße (English acronym: LSoS). However, each reader will “rack and stack” them differently. So getting consensus on what’s the “worst” category is problematic.
Bottom line: all of the above (and those making various other types of false military claims) are lying sh!tbirds. Let the reader decide just how bad of a sh!tbird they are for themselves; don’t try to dictate that.
Second: I don’t see how establishing some kind of “hierarchy” of LSoS will accomplish anything productive. However, trying to do so will cause arguments and hard feelings. And, frankly, to me it smacks of little more than “make work”. I just don’t see any point in doing something that accomplishes little except to cause arguments among readers. (If we’re concerned with tracking statistics, some kind of tagging system for articles could be implemented to track that. And such a tagging system need not be limited to “binning” cases into half a dozen categories.)
Regarding the site’s definition of stolen valor, my view is we need to stay away from using 18 USC 704 completely regarding that definition (as we have in the past), for at least three IMO good reasons. First, that’s criminal law – and we’re not prosecutors. We need to stay in our “lane” (exposure of false speech via true speech). Let the prosecutors decide if the conduct in question violates 18 USC 704 or not; that’s their lane.
Second: a careful reading of 10 USC 704 defines stolen valor in terms of false claims made for the purpose of gain. I personally don’t care if someone tries to get “something of value” by falsely claiming to be a Ranger, a SEAL, being a combat veteran, or any one of a laundry list of other things. In my book, if their claim is false they’re guilty of stolen valor – whether they’re looking for dollars, other tangible benfits with monetary value, a roll in the hay, sympathy, prestige, or simply want to fool others. (Given the SCOTUS’ 2013 decision regarding the original SVA, good luck in getting the SCOTUS to buy any argument that the latter four constitute a “thing of value”. The SCOTUS majority which invalidated the original SVA seem to have rejected that argument implicitly back in 2013 when they rejected precedents set by prior cases holding that false speech that injured others lacked constitutional protection.)
Third: as noted above 18 USC 704 only appears to cover false claims concerning certain specified decorations and badges; other false claims don’t seem to be covered. I’m not willing to give someone a pass on false claims of being a POW – and POW status (or receipt of the POW Medal) doesn’t seem to be addressed by 18 USC 704. Ditto false claims to having completed various difficult and/or dangerous qualifications – I’m not willing to give someone falsely claiming a SEAL Trident or jump wings or the EOD “crab” a pass, either. Or someone falsely claiming to be a Vietnam War veteran when they never earned the VSM. Or someone falsely claiming to have been a military aviator. Or someone making any one of a multitude of other false claims about their military service.
Bottom line: for this site’s purposes, I think the definition for stolen valor Jonn published in the site’s FAQ is quite sufficient. If someone is making provably false claims about their military service – including any decorations, qualifications, or badges they were awarded or earned during that service – they should fear becoming an example here. I also think we can depend on the site’s leadership to use good judgment regarding cases that are borderline.
Just my opinion. YMMV.
I agree, I don’t see why we need to waste time trying to pigeon hole our profiled LSOS’s. If you are significantly prevaricating about real or imaginary military service, you should be concerned you will be outed here or one of the other SV sites. Obviously, TAH is not going to waste time on some guy who was in Kuwait but falsely claims a foray into Iraq without any other false claims. I don’t think we will live long enough to out those almost 14 million falsely claiming on the Census to have served in Vietnam.
Thank you for your perspective AND taking the time to formulate it in a well-structured and well-thought-out post, Hondo.
I really liked the part about staying in our lane in regard to 18 USC 704.
I didn’t want to admit this, but there was a selfish motive on my part to rack and stack, although the criteria are different.
Behind the curtains – we sort through dozens of new case submissions each and every day. Many are passed over due to lack of evidence. There are some we don’t even respond to because it becomes insistence that “But he said it right to my face on several occasions” is evidence. It is quite rare that someone is willing to do an affidavit due to lack of evidence. It is a time-intensive endeavor to enter into an email exchange on the importance of evidence when usually it does not bear fruit at the end other than we spent the time giving it consideration and a response.
* “My ex-boyfriend was wearing an Army cap when I ran into him the other day and never served a day in his life.”
* “There is a homeless guy on the corner of such and such in Possumwallow MT holding a sign that says ‘Wounded, disabled Veteran. Will work for food… but prefer money.’ I don’t know his name or where he lives but he’s down on that corner every day from 9-2. I’m a veteran and I find this despicable if he is not telling the truth. Can you please check him out and I’ll gladly donate to him if he’s legit.”
* “There’s a guy telling women he is a combat vet and he gets emotional and financial support from them until they figure it out and he moves on.” ME: “Did you date him and give him money?” HER: “Yes, but I am more concerned about Stolen Valor than being jilted.” ME: “Do you have evidence he made these claims?” HER: “Does ‘pillow talk’ count as evidence?” ME: “Sounds bad but I’m not sure there is much we can do without evidence. Even if you provided an affidavit, it may appear that it is just a matter of being vindictive.” HER: “But don’t you think other women should be warned? He is probably sleeping in some woman’s bed this very moment. I’m very concerned about her.”
* “There is a guy that was in Afghanistan, but he is claiming a Purple Heart. I think he has a Purple Heart but he was easily 75 yards away from the explosion and I believe he duped the Medical Officer. Can you look into it?” Believe it or not, I have gotten medical log/injury reports from aid stations in Iraq/Afghanistan, but once they get the Purple Heart and it is entered into their record, up to a year later, not much can be done in spite of others resenting the circumstances.
I realize this is a behind-the-scenes issue and we are working it, but the concern is prioritizing the cases for investigation. Nine out of ten cases turn out to have the person be legit or more likely not worth pursuing due to a variety of reasons. Number one reason being lack of evidence, followed by borderline claims.
Based on your comment of “Let the reader decide just how bad of a sh!tbird they are for themselves; don’t try to dictate that.” … I said all of the above to say this – that this decision is helpful to have a feel of when deciding which cases have the proper merit to investigate and write up so we are hitting the nail on the head.
The shorter version is – Know thy audience. For the most part we think we do, but want to account for interesting perspectives that may come to the surface with a discussion.
Thanks again for your thoughts on the matter, Hondo.
My bad, only thing I DON’T have is ssan. Got everything else. My poor old stroked out brain ain’t hitting on all cylinders this PM. Think I need a cold beer.
Forgot to mention, we had some Marines from the Reserve Unit locally as an Honor Guard for Tuffy.
We give 50% discounts on range time to first responders and all military past or present. Had a guy in today who claimed he had persuaded his captain in Basic to release him from the Army to become a computer contractor for the government. He referred to his DIs, could not remember his BCT unit number, or his MOS. I enthusiastically told him to bring in his DD214 and I would get him his discount… doubt I will see him again.
Phonies looking for freebies and discounts are everywhere.
Disclosure: civilian here.
I would define stolen valor as any material misrepresentation of one’s own military service or details thereof.
So, the guy wearing a MARINES t-shirt might be wearing it because his brother is a Marine, If he states as such, fine – no stolen valor, because there is no material misrepresentation.
For those who don’t think stolen valor is a big deal (I am not among them), the civilian version is academic credential fraud – claiming an academic degree when one has not earned it. I don’t want some numbnut who hasn’t gone to medical school claiming to have an MD degree.
Yes but I think there are strict laws about claiming to be a doctor, dentist, lawyer or law enforcement officer.
I don’t think the same applies to other professions, such as plumber, electricians, etc. but someone will certainly clamp down on them without the proper licensing.
I know i’m late weighting in on this subject,(life,,cheeezz), but this is my take on the subject. After almost fast approaching 8 years of assisting in outting SV posers I’ve come to a simple understanding of things. 1st those with the real military accolades have a certain level of notoriety, or following. I.E. publicly known such as Kyle, or Benavidez. Emulating a false history based off of one of these well known heroes is an easy catch for just about anyone with a military background, it is normally the civilian who falls for it hook, line and sinker. Then there are the posers who are just to outrageous in their claims, these are the posers who claim, ‘classified, or Top secret’. Missions are secret, not individuals. It’s hard to convince the civilian masses of that fact. Are there levels, or categories of SV? I feel that is up to the individual and how strong their belief in protecting the valor of our military is. The team I work with at MP, after years of experience can tell a ‘bar room’ story from actual SV. The individuals we expose normally go way past the level, and we don’t go by hearsay. If concrete proof of SV is not presented then its off our table. Why is SV so important to expose? Simply put, it’s more for the unknowing civilian population who would shower these posers with unearned accolades, and more importantly hard earned cash. These posers put a stain on veterans/ military to civilians, and in my opinion, gives hesitation to the next vet who is legit. I can’t count the number of people who send us messages thanking us for exposing someone that tried to scam them, and found our site with a google search of the poser’s name. So in closing because I ramble, What is SV, theft pure and simple, whether embellishment, or full blown lie.