Airborne In Normandy   FAQs   Links    Homepage   Store   Contact  Us     About Us    WWII Research 

(This is an email I received last night) (all documents listed below are here)

To webmaster@lzxray.com,

 I received an email last night January 19, 2017, where you stated this;

 “What he continues to overlook is that Plumley served in Korea in the early 70’s.  He could have been awarded the third CIB there.  Unfortunately, we will never know since the records are incomplete”.

I will give you the benefit of doubt about the statement above.  Plumley’s records including his service in 1972-73 while in Korea are complete.

http://www.airborneinnormandy.com/plumleylast.htm

Attached (on pages one thru nine) once again is the regulations for the Combat Infantryman Badge and a complete record of his service from day one in 1942 to 1974. 

Page one from the May 1944 Circular for the eligibility for the CIB and that it is restricted to being in an assigned regiment or below, not attached. 

Page two is the cover sheet for the current Army Regulation 600–8–22 for the Award of the CIB.  On page three (page 96 in the regulations) highlighted in red shows the same eligibility for the CIB, assigned to an infantry unit, not attached.

Plumley was never assigned or for that matter attached to a an infantry regiment in WWII.  He was in the 320th Gli FA Bn from start to finish.  If you look at page nine of the records I sent to you it shows every day where Plumley was from the day he joined to the day he left the Army on December 31, 1974.  It also shows the units he was in. 

Plumley was in WWII but was never qualified to wear the CIB as he was in an Artillery Arm of Service not Infantry.  Attached on page six it shows an Arm of Service for an infantryman.  On pages seven it shows an Arm of Service for an Artilleryman.  Page eight shows that Plumley was in an Artilleryman Arm of Service not Infantry.  So there was no CIB for Plumley in WWII.

In the second part of your email from last night you say that “we will never know as the records are incomplete”.  That is far from the truth.  Once again look to page nine of my attached documents and it shows where he was from day to the day Plumley retired.   

Now onto the Korea war and where Plumley was.  Plumley was in Ft. Campbell and then Germany during that time period, never in Korea until 1972.  Once again referrer to the records on page nine that shows where Plumley was for his entire career in the Army so Plumley still isn’t qualified to wear a CIB.

Now comes Plumley and that he did receive the CIB for his time in there.  Remember this was Plumley’s first CIB that met the criteria for that award.  Yet he was wearing a CIB in the April 1965 picture in the Bayonet newspaper.  His first CIB was in October of 1965.  So no doubt that he was wearing an award he was not entitled to.  What is now thought of as Stolen Valor.  Of all the awards wearing a CIB when not entitled is the worst of all the Stolen Valor awards. 

Let’s now move ahead to Plumley’s time in Korea between 1972 and 1973.  Yes he was in Korean and was on the DMZ.  Once again your claim that “we will never know” is wrong on its face.  But here is the rub.  Please refer to page four (page 97 in the regulations) highlighted first in red, WWII and Plumley did not meet the criteria for the CIB as he wasn’t in the infantry.  Then in green is the Korea conflict and once again Plumley did not meet the criteria as he wasn’t in that conflict at all.    

Highlighted in purple is the time period for receiving a CIB.  That goes from 2 March 1961 to 10 March 1995.  This is all inclusive (please see page five (page 97 in the regulations) in red).  On page four (page 96 in the regulations) you in your email referenced that.  But what you didn’t do was to read the next page that states it is all inclusive (please see page five (page 97 in the regulations) in red). 

This means a soldier can only receive one CIB for the time period of the Vietnam time between 2 March 1961 to 10 March 1995.  You can only receive one CIB for all of those conflicts.  That would be the same for WWII as an example.  If someone received a CIB while in the European Theater of Operation and then went to the Pacific Theater of Operations you would only be entitled to one CIB.

So your entire email from last night (January 19, 2017) was incorrect.  It shows clearly that Plumley was entitled to one CIB for his entire career and is backed up with this thing called documentation as opposed to your vague “well we’ll never know” line.

Why people are so fixated on a fraud like Plumley I can only assume they think a movie from Hollywood is a documentary when in fact it’s just a movie.  Here is a link to the CBS Report about Ia Drang in 1966.  Why the 1st Cavalry doesn’t honor a real soldier who died there and is buried at Benning I will never know.  It’s sad that Plumley is buried in the same Cemetery as real heroes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDJwgp0vCeg

 

Brian Siddall

January 20, 2017

 The Last Nail in the Coffin of the Fake Plumley 

The Bayonet is the Fort Benning Newspaper and the front page on April 23, 1965 it shows Plumley wearing only one CIB, not two.  This clearly shows he was not in Korea during the war years.  If you look in the picture of his awards and decorations he had no Korea awards at all, none in the April 1965 picture.  The first picture is the full page, then two close-ups.  You can clearly see one CIB.  End of the story for the Plumley Lovers who believe in movies and not records.

Forget for a second Plumley wasn’t allowed to wear even the one in 1965.  Worse, in the 2010 picture taken at West Point, Plumley is wearing 3 CIBs.    How can Plumley be a hero when he was not in Korea until 1972 but wore three CIBs when he was in two wars and allowed to wear only one CIB?  All Plumley had to do when the book came out in 1992 was to say he wasn’t in the Korea war or when the movie came out and say the same thing, wasn’t in the war and never jumped into combat as a paratrooper. 

Below is a link showing another CSM who went to Ft. Leavenworth after being discovered as a fraud. Do you know the difference between Plumley and CSM Crump? Crump was still in the Army when exposed. Plumley was discovered after the fact.  That is the only difference.  If Plumley had been caught before leaving the Army he would have been convicted just like CSM Crump.

Congress in 1956 decided to protect people who committed fraud if they were lucky enough to have separated from the service before getting caught.  Once someone leaves the service (all branches) they can't investigate unless the soldier themselves gives the ok to investigate.  This is because of 10 U.S. Code § 1552 - Correction of military records that was created in 1956.  Here is the relevant sentence;

 (b)

No correction may be made under subsection (a)(1) unless the claimant (or the claimant’s heir or legal representative)

This would be like a bank robber who got away scot free but later the police found proof of the crime.  This means the police would have to ask his permission before doing any investigation. Of course in the real world that wouldn’t happen but in the Army that is exactly what has occurred. 

There was no investigation into CSM Plumley’s Awards and Decorations.  The Army can’t investigate unless the next of kin authorized it and that hasn’t happened in the Plumley case.  The Army calls them discrepancies.  That’s a nice way of saying they know he committed fraud, but they can’t review the records. 

Here is the link to the CSM Crump who was the head NCO at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C.  The position of CSM gives them access to everyone’s records in a unit at that level.  Plumley’s fake awards happened when?  Right after Plumley became the CSM of the 3rd Brigade in Vietnam.  Plumley was demoted after he left Vietnam and lost his position as a CSM at Brigade/Regimental level.  Plumley went back down to Battalion level and never rose again to Brigade Level of authority. 

Why people worship Plumley and Galloway I will never understand.  Instead of celebrating real heroes they look at Plumley and say he is what a soldier should be.  That means that Plumley lovers look to a fake hero and not to men and women who still die to this day overseas.  Why honor a real hero when you can worship an idolatry like Plumley?    

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/archives/2013/03/27/ex-walter-reed-csm-sentenced-to-6-months/78535160/

Brian Siddall
January 5, 2017

 


Contact BN Siddall @
Tel: (315) 567-4542
Airborne In Normandy Research
PO Box 3897
Ithaca, NY 14852
Send an e-mail at researcher@airborneinnormandy.com  
 
Copyright © 2002-2017 Airborne In Normandy Research - All rights reserved.
Website design by airborneinnormandy