BVA–RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

download (1)Back in the old days, we were given “the briefing”. Holy Rules of Engagement, Batman! Each locale differed radically. What was basically a free-fire zone in Kon Tum was an entirely different proposition one Country over and it changed a lot. We came to call them Romeos as a nickname. If you were a groundpounder, you got that call from 6 Actual. What to shoot. When to shoot and which direction to shoot.If you were airborne you had to make sure the truck you saw was a Zil 131 and not a water buffalo pulling a cart. We didn’t have to wait for long for strike aircraft to arrive so we had to be sure. Our only big Romeo problem was napalm. We had to get permission from  the US Ambassador himself for that. It was ostensibly delegated to the Air Attache, but Col. Curry wasn’t always available. And as often as not, one of our sorties was carrying a few gas cans of it on the outboard stations. Which brings us to the VA and Romeos.

Any devoted conversation of law would not be replete without at least a basic understanding between the (non)adversarial parties that everyone was going to play by the rules and be nice. Hence a formal Rules of Engagement for both parties to abide by would be appropriate and ensconced in the regulations. VA has complied admirably. Everything in the regulations is couched in “shall” and “must”.  We are admonished to tell the truth, the whole truth, so help us God.  We expect them to, also.

Please, sir. May I have some gas?

Please, sir. May I have some gas?

Veterans get the top drawer treatment until we hit that conjunctive “if”. “If” is like being allowed to race in the Indy 500 but when you get there, no one will sell you any gas. “If” is like being invited over to play Monopoly for the first time at your friend’s place and no one will tell you what the Chance/Community cards are for or how to get out of jail.  When filing a claim, all of a sudden you’re at the mercy of a Veterans Service Organization or forced to take a crash education in the Evelyn Wood Speed Reading Course to assimilate what you are going to need to do this. That was before the Internet.

Even today, you are going to be assured everything is okay and this is just a time-consuming project to get your benefits. What no one expects is an adversarial process that looks for all the world like a third-world dictatorship replete with arbitrary, incomprehensible denials. As I’ve preached repeatedly, if 85% of you do not get what you seek, then there are a vast quantity of frauds and mountebanks queuing up at the VA trough for a handout.  Or…. not. That is what statisticians are left with for an answer. If you do not appeal, you legally agree with VA’s decision. No Vet is prepared to wait an inordinately long time only to be handed a bogus piece of logic for the denial of a claim. Anger and frustration invariably breed a desire to blow it off. VA prays you will do so as it makes their job soooo much easier.

Rules of Engagement at the VARO are elastic and vary according to the disease. Some require the application of the Maxson v. Gober logic of “Your back and hips? Why, you injured them 40 years ago. You can’t come back now and say it’s from jumping out of airplanes in 1970. We sure wish we could find a way to hook you up to this cash cow but your claim doesn’t have legs. If you find anything else wrong, you be sure to come on back down and file again. Hear?”

I hesitate to call it a stacked deck but you can see the correlation that a denial rate that has remained static for over a hundred years on claims, with hardly an uptick in wartime, is remarkable for any number of reasons. Statistics rarely hide conundrums. They amplify them by their abundance or paucity of percentages. This is where the Romeos are the deciding factor in denials. The M-21 IMR is constructed as a denial handbook. Yes, I’ve read every page and see it couched in “If claimant has ROM of less than 90% then…” and “If the conditions are near constant and debilitating, then…” But what if you were in the Outer Limits where they control the vertical and the horizontal hold. What if doctor’s C&P manuals didn’t contain the principle quotes that permitted the higher rating?  What if an artificial influence was reducing all these findings or negating them? We often complain about the low ball effect and having to go through multiple C&P exams to get to a proper rating- many times over 10 or more years. VA constructed it this way. But why? Romeos.

In this decision, Johnny Vet’s wife has picked up the Battle Standard and is gingerly making her way pro se across the field of battle. Johnny croaked back in 2010- or about two years after he filed. Mrs. Vet is from the Great State of New Hampshire (Live Free or Die). She isn’t taking this lying down. The sad truth is she isn’t going to win, either.

VA is busy trying to convince her that Johnbo wasn’t dying of cirrhosis but rather due some lung problems. In fact, that’s what was causing all his fatigue. Poor boy couldn’t get no air. He had a 30% rating for Hepatitis under the old code (DC 7345) and they jumped it in 2009 to HCV (DC 7354) and gave him 40% for a net 10% change. He was in the process of appealing this when he suddenly turned room temperature. What you’ll find interesting is they have covered every base, filled every chink in the armor and covered any medical contingency with an airtight excuse. Old Johnbo died. On that, no one can disagree. As to what the cause of death was, the VA examiner and the medical examiner are going to fabricate some of the most innocuous words and phrases ever strung together to paint cirrhosis as nothing more than a case of the vapors. How? Romeos.

In October 2008, laboratory tests demonstrated slightly increased abnormal liver functioning compared to testing in June 2008. The Veteran’s private physician recommended a liver biopsy sometime in the next six months and noted that the Veteran’s lung issues (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and interstitial fibrosis) were a more pressing concern. In February 2009, a liver biopsy showed moderate to severe piecemeal necrosis and cirrhosis. A letter containing the results of the biopsy characterized the findings as a “mild progression in the liver scarring to the level of early cirrhosis.” Laboratory testing performed in March 2009 also showed a slight elevation in the Veteran’s liver function tests. A year later, in March 2010, the Veteran’s liver function tests were again elevated, though his doctor noted that the levels were similar to prior elevations. Thus, objective testing establishes that the Veteran experienced abnormal liver function and hepatitis C that mildly worsened during the claims period to the level of early cirrhosis.

Well boy howdy. That’s about the mildest form of death I’ve ever read about. That mean old mild cirrhosis just crept up and put the hurt on him  and he never saw it coming. Of course, if you diagram the sentence, you notice “mild progression” employs the word “mild” as an intensifier of time rather than of degree of medical involvement. VA attempts to portray it as the latter for the discussion of this whole decision and thus deprives the Johnmeister’s widow of a higher (60%)rating. They take each disease process and ascribe it to global warming and chemtrails. By the time they’re done, fatigue has nothing to do with HCV.

I teach this to every Vet on claims. Read the wording. Each word is like a cardboard box full of info. VA combines them in such a way as to later portray it as a done deal that you did not find fault with. By making light of his fatigue, they have won on two fronts. It was a) due to the lungs and b) it also could have been the sleep apnea. HCV is well known for fatigue being one of the hallmarks but somehow our New Hampshire Vet is unique and had none ascribable to his hep. At Asknod, we call that FM- the second letter standing for Magic, of course. Even though they used the fatigue to increase his rating in February 2009 (below) , they will nonetheless use it against him a year later and blame it on anything BUT HCV.

>>>The record also shows that the Veteran’s hepatitis C manifested symptoms such as daily fatigue, nausea, and an enlarged liver beginning in February 2009.

This is what supported the increase from 30% (marked liver damage) to 40% (HCV). He’s sick and getting sicker. That’s what happens to HCV when left untreated. It only gets better with faith healers in Paraguay or in Grimm’s Faery Tales. People who get HCV do not live happily ever after except in VAland. What’s more, they didn’t ask him if he’d prefer to stay under the old DC 7345 code. He could legally have been rated on the one that would grant him the most. Romeos.

>>>After the February 2009 liver biopsy, he began to complain regularly of fatigue, though the Board notes that he was also diagnosed with sleep apnea following a private sleep study in March 2009.

Yeppers. Sleep apnea will get you fatigued every time. You will notice the Board member did not state that the fatigue was due to sleep apnea. It is implied or “noted”. It is not corroborated for accuracy or any other medical sufficiency. This is listed under negative evidence in the Rules of Engagement. We cannot do it but they are free to.

While symptoms including fatigue and nausea are associated with the service-connected hepatitis C, private records of medical treatment also demonstrate that the Veteran experienced severe symptoms of other disabilities during this period that account for his decrease in function and overall health. An October 2008 chest X-ray showed interstitial lung densities, and the Veteran underwent a resection of a portion of the right upper lung lobe. He manifested a severe cough and lung infection that resulted in difficulties sleeping and breathing and was thought by his cardiothoracic physician as the partial cause of his fatigue and nausea. Additionally, while the Veteran lost weight during the claims period, the weight loss was purposeful and due to his participation in the Weight Watchers program. It was not indicative of malnutrition or anorexia due to hepatitis C. The March 2009 VA examiner also specifically found that the Veteran did not experience any incapacitating episodes in the last 12 months due to hepatitis C. His medical records document a decrease in function during this period, but these findings were related to dyspnea due to the Veteran’s lung disabilities.

So there you have it. The VA examiner is a known Psychic in good standing in the community and it was all nothing more than a bad case of dyspnea. But wait. Look again. Nowhere do you see the VA examiner has stated that the fatigue is attributable to the lungs or sleep apnea.  The discussion involves a “decrease in function” This is why he was asking for a ratings increase. Rules of Engagement–change the subject!

The Board finds that the medical evidence in this case is more persuasive than the lay statements of the Veteran and appellant concerning the actual severity of the Veteran’s hepatitis C. The Veteran and the appellant are competent to report their lay observations of symptoms, but the objective medical evidence clearly indicates that the Veteran’s severe symptoms and functional effects in the period prior to his death were due to various lung conditions.

Rules of Engagement permit the Regional Offices’ VA examiners to overrule doctors and even specialists. This is permitted until you get called on it at the CAVC or when you wake up and object to the Independent Medical Expert (IME )of the foot doctor opining on why your cancer is in no way related to Agent Orange. Lay testimony based on the Layno (five senses) doctrine has been thrown in the trash and Espiritu is pressed into service. The Vet and his spouse are acting like doctors. Every observation by the dead Vet and his living spouse is remarkable and devoid of medical content nevertheless it is discounted and held either incredible or not credible. But the most egregious mistake is the one the VA and the BVA simply cannot quit committing. That is the Colvin v. Derwinski obstacle-

…but the objective medical evidence clearly indicates that the Veteran’s severe symptoms and functional effects in the period prior to his death were due to various lung conditions.

Incorrect. One cardiothoracic surgeon “thought” that it was “as the partial cause of his fatigue and nausea.” Notice “partial cause” has now segued into the VA examiner’s profound ability to cast chicken bones and read tea leaves. But as you can see, the February 2009 rating decision granting 40% said “The record also shows that the Veteran’s hepatitis C manifested symptoms such as daily fatigue, nausea, and an enlarged liver beginning in February 2009. Ruh-oh, Rorge.

Every rule that could be broken here was. The spouse is getting rolled like a cat playing with a mouse before the inevitable end. The RO’s evidentiary standard is non-existent. No one doctor has been asked to opine what happened when and which disease process is more guilty or causative of death than another. Innuendo abounds and there were (and are) multiple etiologies. Who’s to say he didn’t die from Sleep Apnea. Did anyone look into that?

Mrs. Vet is going to be played like a “fish on” for another year on remand and will reemerge here again for the final coup de grâce. All because she doesn’t know the Romeos. The secret handshake. The Password. When you play this game, you have to know what to do. Worse. You have to anticipate your opponent is not bargaining in good faith and will resort to cheating to win his hand.

download (4)

Where’s the rules?

Posted in BvA HCV decisions, Medical News, Tips and Tricks, VA Medical Mysteries Explained, Veterans Law | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

SOVALDI GOING THROUGH THE ROOF

sovaldiThe new Gilead Sciences oral medication for HCV is headed into the stratosphere as predicted. It shot up today from last Friday’s close at $78.40 to $81.58. It’s already trading after hours at 4¢  above that at the time I write this. There’s a new click widget on the right (picture of a HCVirus) to check how insane the price per share is daily.

Posted in Sofosbuvir | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

VETERAN’S MAN CAVE

2014-01-19 14.22.04What do Veterans look for in a man cave? Well, besides the bathroom, they like a place where people don’t say weird things like: “Oh, dear. Pulease! No shoes in here. This is our gorgeous Brazilian old growthe walnut floor.” Veterans want a concrete floor you can spit on or spill your drink if necessary. A man cave à la Vet, by definition,  is one where no one is going to blow an ass gasket if you light up a smoke. This being the enlightened state of Washington, I guess that could have more than one meaning. We’ll just assume cigarettes.

2014-01-19 14.21.40Vet man caves generally smell like Hoppe’s No. 9 with just a suggestive, teasing hint of WD-40.  A place rich with old war mementos- and room for more whenever you get around to looking for them. Old Vietnam war maps of Military Region II (MR II) or what we once called Barrel Roll. The Plain of Jars.  Jokingly referred to as the “extreme western terminus of the DMZ”.

2014-01-19 14.15.41A man cave is a place to target shoot indoors out of the rainy Northwest winter weather. Anything less would be uncivilized and upset the neighbors. In sum, the perfect Super Bowl Half time entertainment area-hands down. With the VA finally paying me soon, I intend to buy the automatic electric target-fetcher so I don’t have to walk thirty feet. I prewired for it, too.

2014-01-19 14.12.152014-01-19 14.13.502014-01-19 14.16.28Of course, in order to watch the game, we all have to go inside and do so in Cupcake’s Cave where the big screen is. That’s another thing I intend to fix soon. I want my own. A man cave is naked without one.

Shooting indoors with old friends on Super Bowl Sunday without pissing off the better half? Priceless. For everything else in life there’s (advertize your Credit Card Co. here-cheap. see asknod.info for details).

2014-01-19 14.24.10

download

Posted in All about Veterans, Humor | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

SATURDAY’S FACE IT

547050_471033306251879_2075112269_nFrom none other than my cousin in Idaho. There’s only one other as sarcastic and demented as me. Thanks, Denise. Without you, life would be very boring.

Posted in FACE HUMOR | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CAVC–WALTHERS V. SHINSEKI–INFORMAL WITHDRAWALS

downloadI don’t know how many times I get emails from guys asking what will happen  if they file for the DM2 they’ve had since the first Interferon merrygoround. The universal worry seems to be an ominous feeling of instant retribution and the prospect of losing or suffering reductions of ratings they have already attained. This Vet must have felt the same sense of foreboding.

While VA is known to do this, the more frequent technique is to dole it out like salt water taffy to kids-one piece at a time. Mr. Jeffrey D. Walthers, appellant, Walthers wisely through counsel now, approaches the bench and calls Foul. Suddenly, the Secretary (in the guise of Willy Gunn 027 Office of General Counsel) has to accede that there seems to be a word missing in the informal request for withdrawal of his continuing Fenderson staged claims. Not just any word. The actual “word” word as in “I wish/seek/desire/ have formally decided to withdraw my claims for my spine and my bilateral feet that I have been fighting for nigh on to two years.

Jeffrey D. Veteran served a whopping 24 years from 1983 to 2007. That’s a lot of ground pounding.  When he retired, he marched smartly over to VA. Somehow, in that short walk/drive over he got gout that was not service -connected. Now watch the blue dates of two different claims come to a confluence and disrupt one another (in VA’s mind). Watch the Purple claim for back/feet  proceed to May 2012 and suddenly evaporate into thin air. Watch the red claim for gout appear in May 2009. Finally witness the green culmination where one claim engulfs the other. Remember always through this. When you file a claim with VA, it is an “original claim”. Anything afterwards is a continuation of that original claim and is merely another disease/ injury added to the pile. There can only be one claim. However, there can be more than one claim stream as we are going to observe. Unfortunately, the VA cannot seem to assimilate this concept.

This tale of woe begins upon discharge in January 2007. Jeff filed for his back and his feet. He got 10% right out of the gate for his back and a goose egg on the feet. The feet had numerous problems including  Achilles tendonitis named after a great Greek Veteran, I might add. Sgt. Walthers wasn’t impressed and filed a NOD for higher initial ratings.  Note that closely- for higher initial ratings. As was as predictable as the tides, VA denied and sent him his first SOC  April 2008 and an admonition to file his Form 9. He dutifully filed in time and sat down on the Group W(ait) bench for his two year nap in the outbasket.

Again, as usual, in an attempt to buy Mr. Walthers off at the last minute and test his mettle, they met him half way and issued a Supplemental SOC in late November 2008. They munificently upped his spine from 10% to 40%. The doggy bone that was going to seal the deal was a 10% biscuit for the bilateral feet. In VAspeak, bilateral means you get paid once for two of something- such as tinnitus in both ears. Call it what it is- a Onefertwo- usually found at the VA.  He probably was entitled to 10% individually for each foot, but more about that in a moment. In a sleight of hand trick, the DROs only gave Jeffrey these higher ratings as of  right now. Right now was October of 2008-sixteen months after he filed in 2007.  So, to take stock of his legal standing at this point, he is poised to do one of two things in order to keep the ball rolling. He could ignore the SSOC and let the appeal move to DC for the Board of Vet Appeals or he could submit new evidence or argument why he should not be granted higher initial ratings for these two items back to his February 2007 filing date. He chose Option #2 and fired off a VA Form 21-4138 Statement of Claim on January 2009 saying:

 “[t]he rating decision dated November 20, 2008 granted me ratings appropriate for my disabilities however the effective [date] should have been the day after my discharge from military service.”

In their timeworn old trick of See Who Blinks First, they let his claim fester. In February 2010, thirteen months later, VA sent out another SOC which should actually have been a Supplemental Supplemental SOC  confirming and continuing the denial of his request for the higher effective ratings date of January 2007. In May 2010, they sent him yet another Supplemental Supplemental Supplemental SOC asking him if there was any part of “No” he would like to have spelled out for him. But in the meantime…

Back in May of 2009, another problem was coming to a head. Mr. Walthers’ feet had gout and there was mucho evidence of it in his medical records before he parted company with Mother Army.  He filed a brand new claim (in VA’s mind) in May 2009. He relied on his current civilian foot man-Dr. Fred Bean. Dr. Bean was less than unequivocal and used the forbidden words “could” and “possibly”. That poked a bad hole in the claim. Surprise. He was denied in November 2009 so now we have two claim streams racing along in VA terms. The train wreck is inevitable.

The Jeffmeister promptly files a NOD on the gout call. He smartly races back and grabs his in-service podiatrist, Dr. Setter, and gets a nexus letter from him that is bulletproof.

Dr. Setter explained that he had treated the appellant in service, the appellant has gout, and the appellant’s “treatments for pain were ongoing and remained unresolved before  his retirement.”  Dr. Setter requested that VA “include the diagnosis of . . . gout in [the appellant’s] file” as this condition was “present during his active duty service time.” Id. In February 2011, VA issued an SOC continuing to deny service connection for right foot gout. The appellant appealed to the Board,  and subsequently testified at a Board hearing in August 2011.

The train wreck happened the following May 2012. VA bundled up this whole mess of back/spine claim and gout claim into one of the most screwed up BVA decisions you may read about for a long time ( until next month).

This is so sad as to not even be up to good Kabuki theater. The mea culpas are hollow. The tenor is flat. The sincerity is absent and the general consensus from even Judge Lance is one of disgust. That takes a lot, too.

In the appellant’s January 2009 statement in support of claim, he stated, “[t]he rating decision dated November 20, 2008 granted me ratings appropriate for my disabilities however the effective
[date] should have been the day after my discharge from military service.”  The Board determined that “[t]his statement constituted a withdrawal of the increased initial evaluations issues for the spine . . . and bilateral feet.” However, as the Secretary concedes, the appellant’s statement does not contain the word “withdraw” or any express statement indicating a desire to withdraw his appeals of the initial evaluation of his spinal and bilateral foot disabilities.  see 38 C.F.R. § 20.204(b);  Moreover, the statement does not list which issues, if any, he intended to withdraw. The Board’s decision lacks any analysis as to how the appellant’s statement constituted a withdrawal of his claims of entitlement to higher initial evaluations for his service-connected spine and bilateral foot disabilities. Absent such an analysis, the Court cannot understand the basis for the Board’s decision and the Court’s review is frustrated.

I guess I see a conspiracy and I don’t use the word lightly. They tried to blow smoke rings at this guy and when that failed, they tried the “We construed his filing to be a desire to throw all his hard work on appealing this effective date business into the trash can and pursue just the current gout issue. Surely you guys can all see that? Right? He said it was appropriate in very clear English. Nobody could screw that interpretation up.”

One thing the VA tries to strive for is that professional courtly demeanor like their Big Brothers above them. Decorum and facts are their forte. Every T must be crossed. In the summary of the Conclusions of Law, the typist stepped on the wrong key and began a conclusion about “back” and ended up with a 20% rating for a shoulder issue. This is embarrassing. It’s like looking at the menu and finding ice creme being served as the salsa dip for your taco chips. Judge Lance couldn’t let it pass either.

The OGC krewe goes even further afield in defense of the BVA decision and fails to infer that this is, and always has been, a Fenderson Staged rating seeking a higher initial rating than the 10%  for the spinal disability. They’re still out on the little branches trying to defend the October 2008 effective date of the 40%.

In fact, the same argument leads into the next part about his feet:

The appellant further argues that the Board erred by failing to articulate why Diagnostic Code (DC) 5284 for “Foot injuries, other” does not entitle him to a 10% evaluation for each foot due to the severity of his bilateral foot injuries…

The Secretary concedes that the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases as to why it denied a 10% evaluation earlier than October 27, 2008, for the appellant’s bilateral pes cavus, heel spurs, and Achilles tendonitis, and asks the Court to vacate and remand the Board’s decision on this matter.

See the problem? Jeff is saying I want 10% for each foot. VA is saying  “We need to rephrase the way we denied him  his earlier  filing date versus October 28th, 2008”. VA is deaf even in Court. They don’t get it.

Finally, the gout comes in again. Remember the gout problem? Remember now. The RO Bozos have denied and said no evidence of it in service. The Army Medical doctor has inveighed and said “au contraire, ma cher”. The civilian doctor has stepped on his nexus necktie and the BVA is reduced to denying on absence of evidence:

The Board found Dr. Bean’s statement to be “vague” as “he does not clearly assert that the [appellant] had gout that was present in service. Rather, he states that ‘the assessment of [the appellant’s] medical condition rendered on October 27, 2008 were pre-existing to his retirement.” The Board also found Dr. Setter’s memorandum to be “inconsistent with the [appellant]’s service treatment reports” and “no more than a mere conclusion.”  Ultimately, the Board determined that “to the extent that [Dr. Setters and Dr. Bean] indicate that the [appellant] had gout during service, these opinions are based on an inaccurate factual premise, and are afforded no probative value.”

Okay. Got that? He had gout before he retired from twenty four years in the Army but it pre-existed his retirement so therefore it is service connected. Except it’s not mentioned anywhere specifically so it isn’t service connected.

The Court holds that the Board improperly relied on the lack of a specific in-service diagnosis of gout while improperly discounting Dr. Setters’s and Dr. Bean’s medical opinions. The  medical evidence of record, including Dr. Setters’s memorandum and Dr. Bean’s 2010 letter, suggest that the appellant suffered from gout in service. Nevertheless, the Board relied solely on the absence of evidence in the appellant’s service treatment records to find that he did not suffer from gout in service, despite multiple examiners expressing medical opinions that gout is precisely what the appellant suffered from in service. The Board also relied on its own opinion as to whether the appellant had gout during service. However, when the Board reaches a medical conclusion, it must support that conclusion with “independent medical evidence” rather than its “own medical judgment.” Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 171, 175 (1991) (holding that the Board “may consider only independent medical evidence to support [its] findings”).

Judge Lance threw in one last dig- the Kahana panel decision he also sat on recently. Take that, you ignorant wannabe judge VLJ swine!  File this one under Implied Withdrawal.

download

Posted in CAVC Knowledge, CAVC ruling, Tips and Tricks | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

BVA-ASKNOD DOES DC AGAIN AND WINS

downloadHere’s the actual decision that gets down in the weeds and begrudgingly grants my 1994 earlier effective date. What is of note is that the BVA tries to impute that I submitted evidence after the issuance of the  January 5th 1995 SOC when their very own files show clearly that the evidence was received and filed in the C-file on December 7th, 1994. Regardless of how you try to adjudge when they received them, the seminal fact was that any receipt of new and material evidence during an appeal period requires a de novo decision all over again. This they artfully danced around for five and one half years interest free. 

This is why this site was begun. To accomplish what you see here-for all of you. VA will do their utmost to make it look as though you are at fault for any of their shortcoming. This accelerated to the point of blatant lies as to a) whether  they received it at all; b) that they actually looked at it and denied it wtihout telling me and finally  c) it was all a fig newton of my imagination and that I should just go home and get over it. Win or die Folks. All you have to lose is the black ink in your printer cartridge and some 8 1/2 X 11 paper.

Win or Die VA

Posted in BvA HCV decisions, Inspirational Veterans | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

BVA-4TH QTR DECISIONS POSTED TODAY

Hot off the presses. The imageslast of the BVA 2013 decisions (or so they claim) are up. 

Posted in BvA Decisions, vA news | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

M-21 1MR NEW GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING EVIDENCE

downloadVA has gradually been revamping their procedures for approval/denial in their M-21. It would probably behoove your to brush up on their new, improved techniques for politely denying your claim. Attached is the latest Chapter 5 list of  “How to let the Vet down gently” or “Everything you wanted to know about how to deny but were afraid to ask”. 

I downloaded it for you here. I suggest you read and heed, ladies and gentlemen. It gives you a window in to the process and how tilted it is towards fencing you out.

pt3_sp4_ch5

Posted in M-21 info, Nexus Information, Veterans Law | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

RAINBOWS IN GUAM

downloadHere’s a great site about Agent Orange. It’s unique in that some of the gentleman’s documents are not in circulation. This one is a classic example. While the site deals mostly with Guam and environs, there is some excellent source material for all of you to delve into on the six weedkillers. 

I’m quite fond of this one.

For all recommendations, the wash containing the diluted Orange, White, or Blue should, if possible, be diverted into pits or settling basins for incorporation into soil. It should not be directed into a stream or river.

It’s perfectly safe but we don’t advise brushing your teeth with it. The author of this site, Ralph Stanton, had this to say in an email below. I exercise my right to perform the Nixonian “expletive deleted” triage in order to keep the site a family one:

I just loaded up some of my best herb(icide) documents, some I haven’t loaded before. If you see anything you like, better go ahead and download them just in case. They called me and wanted me to take the site down, they said people were using the info to make up false claims. I told them to get        f —ed and hung up. I figure the safest thing I can do is get as much of the stuff out there to as many people as possible.  

P.S. the reference to the Rainbow is the six herbicides that were called the rainbow defoliants. The CHECO reports also contain a good accounting of this as well.

Posted in AO, Porphyria Cutanea Tarda, Vietnam Disease Issues | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

MARINE BOOT INSPECTION

Semper Fi[1]When this photo was first published, the ACLU was told it was nothing more than a snapshot of Marines looking down at their shoes and contemplating how dirty and unpolished they were. Later, when informed the troops were on Federal Property, on government time and actually praying for the continued well being of their military branch, they came unglued.

Said Lucius Traveler, a spokesman for the ACLU “These are federal employees,” “on federal property and on federal time. For them to pray is clearly an establishment of religion, and we must nip this in the bud immediately.” Just so, Lucius.

When asked about the ACLU’s charges, Colonel Jack Fessender, speaking for the Commandant of the Corps said (cleaned up a bit), “Screw the ACLU.” GOD Bless Our Warriors. Send the ACLU to Afghanistan !

What is the world coming to? Illegal immigrants demanding Social Security. Veterans Charities presidents charging $353 K a year to disburse their donated funds. What’s next? Socialized medicine? Oh. Nevermind.

Posted in Complaints Department, Inspirational Veterans | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments