Intelligence operations take a long time to plan, develop and execute.
Team Pedo-Bomber, in their arrogance, believes they are some sort of PSYOP/HUMINT/SIGINT gurus with a monopoly on intelligence operations. Why should we stop them from believing anything else? After all if you think you are invincible you aren’t really putting up a defense. Or as Napoleon said, “Never interrupt with your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
Bill Schmalfeldt has, quite helpfully, placed so much of his own Personal Identifiable Information (PII) out on the internet since the early 2000’s that it was shocking to see it all. The independently run honeypot operation “March Madness” was not even the tip of the iceberg in the PII that Bill has placed in public domain. Despite having associations with people who, generally speaking, are pretty good with safeguarding their own PII, metadata and staying off the grid I don’t think any of them bothered helping Bill protect himself and one or two were actually helping out the opposition.
Nice friends you have there…;D
The information that follows is NOT about “some other William Schmalfeldt,” as it was obtained using his full name, date of birth, place of birth and exact service dates (04/09/1973 – 10/04/1985) among other PII he had left strewn in public places across the internet (proof that everyone has a purpose, even if it is only to serve as a bad example; seriously people—learn from his mistakes and guard your own PII). The majority of the information received from the federal government was then corroborated by other agencies, by his own public postings on forums, blogs and twitter and when possible re-verified with specific federal agencies.
Bill Schmalfeldt has been afforded all the due diligence in fact finding and verification prior to publication that he refuses to do on his own victims.
I think Bill had an inkling of what was going to happen, but good ops take time to develop, and lulling your enemy into the belief he has dodged something throws him off balance. Bill thought his long time secret was coming out then…oh no, Bill. Not at all.
Next, let us review the DD Form 214 posted by Bill Schmalfeldt’s alias “The Jovial One” on the website www.xmfan.com:
A DD Form 214 is the paperwork given to a veteran, which acts as his proof of service and verification of certain pertinent information on the service record. A service member will sit down and review with a personnel specialist the information contained on the DD 214 such as name, date of birth, SSN, rank at discharge, dates of service, awards and any remarks. Only after verifying that the document is true and complete will a service member sign it and a personnel specialist countersign it. The service member will receive copies of the DD 214, and copies also will be filed in his personnel records, which are forwarded to the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in St. Louis for permanent storage and archiving. These records are open to public inspection and are the property of the federal government – NOT the service member.
So in the case of Bill Schmalfeldt, he would have served his first enlistment (active duty 05/30/1973 – 05/29/1977) and then at separation reviewed and signed off on his DD 214. He received a copy, and NPRC received a copy for archiving. A few years later Bill served a second enlistment (active duty 01/08/1981 – 10/04/1985) where he again reviewed and signed off on his DD 214 at separation, received his copy, and NPRC got their copy for archiving. Please keep this in the back of your mind as you read on – there will be a quiz.
On Bill’s second enlistment DD 214 (above) we are concerned with several blocks – specifically, the blocks highlighted in red which–from top to bottom–are blocks 1, 4a, 4b, 5, 7, 11, 13, 21 and 30.
- Block 1 contains his name: SCHMALFELDT, WILLIAM MATTHEW
- Block 4a contains his grade, rate or rank: JO2
- Block 4b contains his pay grade: E5
- Block 5 contains his date of birth: 04 January 1955
- Block 7 is last duty assignment or major command: in this case the USS Midway CV-41
- Block 11 contains his primary military specialty: JO – 0090/0000
- Block 13 contains his awards: Good Conduct Medal (First) 29 May 77, (Second) 07 Jan 85; National Defense Service Medal
- Block 21 contains his signature validating the document as complete and true.
- Block 30 contains his initials requesting a copy of the document.
For our purposes, the majority of these blocks validate the authenticity of the document as belonging to former JO2 William Matthew Schmalfeldt and reflecting the status of his record as of the end of his second enlistment in October 1985. However, even without this PII we can infer its authenticity because he voluntarily posted it online to prove his military service. The authenticity of this document or its contents is not in question, and they represent the facts of Bill Schmalfeldt’s military service.
However…there is a discrepancy between what appears on this document and Bill’s prior military service.
I direct your attention again to block 13 and ask you to note the awards it contains.
- Good Conduct Medal from 29 May 1977
- Good Conduct Medal from 07 Jan 1985
- National Defense Service Medal
This DD 214 accurately reflects the SUM TOTAL OF ALL AWARDS for his service from May 30, 1973 to May 29, 1977 and for January 8, 1981 to October 4, 1985. That is, in his first term of service in the 1970’s, he was awarded a single Good Conduct Medal plus the National Defense Service Medal, and in his second term of service he was awarded a second Good Conduct Medal.
Hell, even NPRC agrees by listing what awards he earned:
In fact, I had to verify with NPRC twice (and mind you, that is a 4-6 week turnaround each time) for proper due diligence and to give Bill the benefit of a doubt he absolutely does not deserve. NPRC re-verified his records and wouldn’t you know it, they found they were still right.
The National Defense Service Medal is the rock solid proof in this whole mess to show the Navy included his earlier service awards on the DD 214 for his second enlistment. The NDSM has only been awarded for FOUR PERIODS OF SERVICE and there are specific time frames defining those periods, as follows:
- Korean War period – June 27, 1950 – July 27, 1954
- Vietnam War period – January 1, 1961 – August 14, 1974
- Persian Gulf War period – August 2, 1990 – November 30, 1995
- Global War on Terrorism period – September 11, 2001 – Present Day
Service members who did not serve during the time periods listed did not receive the National Defense Service Medal – end of story. There are Marines who were wounded or killed in the Beirut barracks bombing in 1983 that were NOT ELIGIBLE for this particular medal by reason of being outside the award periods.
Bill was awarded the NDSM because he served during the Vietnam War eligibility period (January 1, 1961 through August 14, 1974) – he had enlisted on May 30, 1973. In fact Bill has mentioned in previous tweets that he claimed a 5 point veteran’s preference for federal hiring on that basis.
There is even a picture of Bill fresh from Navy boot camp in 1973 wearing his NDSM:
Why is this so important?
Because of the exclusive periods of eligibility for a NDSM, Bill COULD NOT HAVE EARNED ONE during his second enlistment from January 8, 1981 to October 4, 1985. The NDSM had not been awarded since August 1974 and would not be awarded again until August 1990 – sixteen years later!
So, how can an award that he could not have earned in the 1980’s appear on his second DD 214 along with a Good Conduct Medal from his first enlistment? The answer is that the personnel clerk typing his second DD 214 was using his first DD 214 as the source document, transferring the awards from his first enlistment to his second DD 214 – if there were awards on the first, they were included on the second, and if there were not, the clerk certainly would not have added them.
From this, we can conclude that his second DD 214 is accurate in that those are his only awards for all periods of his service!
The easiest way for Bill to prove or disprove these questions about his award would be to simply produce a copy of the DD 214 from his first enlistment, right?
Unfortunately, when pressed on this point by A.B. in February of this year, Bill claims he turned his one and only copy of that DD 214 in to the Office of Personnel Management to establish that he was in the navy during the 70’s:
- MEMORY HOLED!
- CAN’T HELP YOU!
- DON’T HAVE A COPY!
- SHILOH ATE IT!
We think it is much more likely that Bill knows what that earlier document will show – that he is entitled to only two awards: the Good Conduct Medal and the National Defense Service Medal. And that happens to jibe with the records the NPRC provided under an FOIA request of his records, and their own independent search of his records.
This leads to a very interesting question… if Bill’s official, verified, signed and countersigned, true and complete DD 214 AND the NPRC’s records both say he should only have TWO MEDALS/RIBBONS… which look like this:
Then why, at the beginning of his second enlistment, was he wearing 4 ribbons?
In this graduation photo from DINFOS School at Fort Benjamin Harrison, he was wearing the same 4 ribbons:
And he was still claiming them at the end of his enlistment in 1985:
Boy oh boy, was he wearing some extra salad in all those pictures. That looks like a Humanitarian Service Medal and a Sea Service Deployment Ribbon. The HSM was awarded to personnel for their participation in Operation FLUID DRIVE in July 1976. The SSDR is awarded to any Sailor who deploys to sea for at least 90 days away from his homeport.
Unfortunately, Bill’s records and his own statements attest to the fact that he NEVER QUALIFIED for a Sea Service Deployment Ribbon for his second enlistment. He never spent the minimum amount of time away from his homeport to qualify. But if the personnel clerk put his NDSM and Good Conduct Medal from his first enlistment on the DD 214 for his second enlistment, why didn’t they also put in the HSM or SSDR as well? And as it appears they did not include them, why didn’t Bill have them correct the form before he put his signature on it, thus verifying it as true and complete?
We know that Bill could not have earned his SSDR on his second enlistment, from his own statements. It’s not hard to understand why, considering that during his second enlistment he spent more time as a patient, under treatment, as a student, or as a transient (in between postings) than he spent aboard ships doing his job.
Here’s your quiz:
So why are two medals from his first enlistment (NDSM and Good Conduct Medal) shown on his second DD 214 but not the other medals/ribbons he was shown wearing (Humanitarian Service Medal and Sea Service Deployment Ribbon)?
We know he is entitled to at least the minimum of the Good Conduct Medal and the NDSM, or else those citations would not be on his DD 214. We also know that the the eligibility period for the NDSM is outside the time frame for his second enlistment, so he was ineligible for it at that time. Finally, we know that for a personnel specialist to place any awards on his second DD 214, that spec would need a source document (such as his first DD 214) proving he was entitled to those awards – and that document is conveniently missing.
Oh, but wait…Bill also had to verify that his DD 214 was complete and true, including his awards at each separation. When you separate, you sit down with the personnel clerk and go over every single line of your DD 214, checking for errors prior to you signing it and being discharged. It is in all parties’ interest to make sure the information is complete, true, and accurately represents your service. If there are discrepancies, you get them fixed before signing and walking out the door, because that DD 214 is now an authenticated legal document.
And leaving off two important awards that Bill earned makes for an impressive list of big goofs…it would mean the Navy personnel specialists missed it when reviewing the form with Bill in 1977 and again 1985, that Bill himself ALSO let it pass before signing off in 1977 and again in 1985, and finally, that NPRC missed it when reviewing his records in 2014 and again 2015. Six misses by three different parties, all with a heavy investment in getting it right. Talk about a hat trick!
I am sure that when we hear from Bill and his enablers/apologists, it will be all about how the Navy got it wrong, NPRC got it wrong, his records are incomplete and “How could he wear those ribbons on active duty without getting busted???”
Or…we may not hear from him at all…
Well, there are plenty of examples of ACTIVE DUTY military personnel—including high ranking ones like E-9’s and O-5’s—wearing unearned medals or badges*. Some wore those medals for YEARS before being caught. Just because Bill wasn’t caught back then doesn’t mean anything – the records are what they are and the paperwork is what it is.
I will also add that if Bill Schmalfeldt would like to contest the veracity of this research and the documents contained in the Federal Government and NPRC archives in a court of law (by trying something as foolish as filing another lawsuit), I would be only too happy to allow him a chance to perjure himself. Oh…and to enter forever and ever and ever into the public record the evidence of his stolen valor.
I will also say that in the event of such an ill-advised lawsuit, I will absolutely request (read: subpoena) any and all documents held by National Personnel Record Center in St. Louis which would not normally be releasable, as well as all records held by the Department of Veteran Affairs, looking particularly for disability claims which may have been made in less than good faith based on his military records and personal actions.
It would indeed be a shame to find out in a courtroom that he may have falsely claimed additional injury or illness from participation in certain actions, operations or campaigns for which he was later compensated by the VA. Such actions would absolutely be criminal offenses, and prosecutors would face no statute of limitations (because receipt of payment from the VA for benefits obtained by fraud resets the clock each time a payment is accepted).
Oh…he might also want to brush up on US v. Alvarez, and maybe go over to “This Ain’t Hell” and read their permanent post about stolen valor and libel/defamation claims in regards to potential cases of stolen valor: http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=39711.
STAY TUNED FOR THE NEXT INSTALLMENT:
What Really Happened In Beirut?
*These are just a few examples of service members wearing unauthorized awards on active duty, including the Command Sergeant Major of the United States Army and the Chief of Naval Operations of the Navy. Some of them had been wearing the awards for YEARS before being caught.
- (USMC) Sergeant Major Kenneth Lovell
- (US Army) Lieutenant Colonel Gerald H. Green
- (US Navy) Seaman Matthew Cotton
- (US Army) Staff Sergeant Larry Marquez
- (US Army) Command Sergeant Major Perry T. McNeill
- (US Navy) 25th Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Jeremy M. Boorda