VA Releases Newest C-123 Exposure Denials

In their most recent Internet posting, the VA's Public Health Division incorporates the results of the Air Force C-123 Agent Orange Report. In it they construct a false argument that crews weren't exposed when in fact, all scientific opinion is that we were! Three AF conclusions are cited by VA in their post and both the VA and AF have twisted scientific FACTS 180 degrees to deny the truth - aircrews WERE indeed exposed! (see their points below):

1. There indeed wasn't enough information or data to conclude how much any individual was exposed, but that cannot truthfully be used to deny that any of us were actually exposed. The lack of abundant data cannot be used to disprove a hypothesis when there is ample data indicating the certainty of exposure
2. Exposure in these aircraft was certainly more intense during Vietnam, and Ranch Hand aircrews were more greatly exposed, but this point cannot be used to create the false impression that post-Vietnam aircrews weren't also exposed - according to experts and testing data over the years, crews were exposed at a level greatly exceeding exposure by ground forces during the war
3. All evidence points to the fact that aircrews and maintenance personnel were indeed exposed to Agent Orange (TCDD) at an unsafe level, according to the CDC/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

Conclusion: VA Public Health is dedicated to preventing C-123 veterans' Agent Orange exposure claims, and to preventing any vet's case-by-case evaluation which may introduce the truth!

Here is the VA Internet post of 20 June which incorporates mistakes from the AF Report:

Some Veterans who were crew members on C-123 Provider aircraft, formerly used to spray Agent Orange during the Vietnam War, have raised health concerns about exposure to residual amounts of herbicides on the plane surfaces.

VA’s Office of Public Health thoroughly reviewed all available scientific information regarding the exposure potential. We concluded that the potential of long-term health effects for the post-Vietnam crews that flew or maintained these planes was extremely low and therefore, the risk of long-term health effects is minimal.

Testing for Agent Orange residue on planes used in Vietnam

The U.S. Air Force (USAF) collected and analyzed numerous samples from C-123 aircraft to test for Agent Orange. USAF's recent risk assessment report (April 27, 2012) (2.3 MB, PDF) found that potential exposures to Agent Orange in C-123 planes used after the Vietnam War were unlikely to have put aircrew or passengers at risk for future health problems. The report’s three conclusions:

1. There was not enough information and data to conclude how much individual persons would have been exposed to Agent Orange.

2.   It is expected that exposure to Agent Orange in these aircraft after the Vietnam War was lower than exposure during the spraying missions in Vietnam.

3.  Potential Agent Orange exposures were unlikely to have exceeded standards set by regulators or to have put people at risk for future health problems.

How Veterans may have been exposed

During the Vietnam War, the U.S. Air Force used C-123 aircraft to spray Agent Orange to clear jungles that provided enemy cover in Vietnam. At the end of the spraying campaign in 1971, the remaining C-123 planes were reassigned to reserve units in the U.S. for routine cargo and medical evacuation missions spanning the next 10 years.

Crew members aboard one of these post-Vietnam C-123 planes reported smelling strong odors, which raised concerns about Agent Orange exposure – but Agent Orange is odorless. These odors may have come from various chemicals associated with aircraft.

Health effects of Agent Orange residue

The health effects of exposure to Agent Orange residue on airplanes differ from direct contact with liquid Agent Orange. In liquid or spray form, Agent Orange can enter the body through inhalation or ingestion (such as hand-to-mouth contact or getting into food). But in the dry form – for example, adhered to a surface – Agent Orange residue cannot be inhaled or absorbed through the skin, and would be difficult to ingest.

The potential for health effects depends on the amount of Agent Orange present, as well as its ability to enter the body. After reviewing available scientific reports, VA has concluded that the exposure potential in these planes was extremely low and therefore, the risk of long-term health effects is minimal. Even if crew exposure did occur, it is unlikely that sufficient amounts of dried Agent Orange residue could have entered the body to have caused harm.

Research studies on Agent Orange

Research on the health effects of Agent Orange has been extensive and it continues. Diverse populations have been studied, including herbicide sprayers and manufacturers, other Vietnam-era Veterans, and those exposed during industrial accidents. This information helps us to determine what potential health effects may be related to different levels of exposure.

Find out more about research on health effects of Agent Orange.

VA benefits

If you have health concerns about Agent Orange, talk to your health care provider or local VA Environmental Health Coordinator.

Veterans not enrolled in the VA health care system, find out if you qualify for VA health care.

Although the risk of long-term health problems from exposure to Agent Orange residue on post-Vietnam C-123 airplanes is minimal, Veterans who believe they have exposure-related health problems may file a claim for disability compensation. These claims will be decided on a case-by-case basis.

General Mike Passes

The world became less wonderful, but Heaven rejoiced, on Saturday as retired Brigadier General Mike Walker lifted off to attend his next and most important Commander's Call. Diagnosed with prostate cancer just before Desert Shield, General Mike fought a long battle with the illness that finally claimed his life.

He was one of the best men ever to wear a blue uniform, and the Air Force was blessed to have his lifetime of dedicated service. We were blessed to know and serve with this good man. He commanded the 439th Airlift Wing during tough times, and was the kind of man we all wanted to be like if we ever grew up.

God bless.

Agent Orange & USAF Operaton Ranch Hand Net Resources

Here's a fairly complete collection of USAF Internet resources - hope it helps with your own research

A. Ranch Hand

Operation Ranch Hand (Air Ops site)

AF & Herbicides in SEA (Buckingham, excerpt)
   • Full Book (downloadable)

Herbicidal Warfare in SEA (Cecil, pdf)
   • Part 2  • Part 3

Herbiide Ops in SEA 61-67 (CHECO, 1967-pdf)

Ranch Hand Bibliography (AU ASBC)

Operation Ranch Hand History (AFHSO)  • Alt
   • Ranch Hand: Down in the Weeds (NMUSA)
   • Air Commando: 1950-1975 (USAF, excerpt)  • Alt
   • Ranch Hand (AF Mag)  • pdf
   • Global Security
   • Ranch Hand History
   • Herbicidal Warfare Prgm in Vietnam (Arison)
   • Mission: Ranch Hand (AU Review, 1970)
   • US History.com
   • Ranch Hand Spray Mission Video (0:18)

Fast Movers & Herbicidal Spray in SEA

Ranch Hand ROE (Guilmartin, pdf)
   • Abstract  • More
   • Ranch Hand History (ROE)
   • Mission: Ranch Hand (ROE; AU Review, 1970)
   • Herbicide Use in Thailand (herbicide ROE in SEA)  • pdf

RH: History & Legal Issues (cached)

Spray Activity (animated-Media Player)

Air Commando Association

Traildust Statistics

C-123 Agent Orange Contamination - 1972 to 1982

UC-123 (AF Museum)  • Photos
   • Ranch Hand & C-123 (Jeff Duford, NMUSAF lecture)
   • Pt. 2 (Patches)

C/UC-123 Aircraft Survivors

Herbicide Patterns in Vn (Traildust, pdf)
   • Cached HTML

Assessing Exposure of Grnd Troops (Guilmartin)  • pdf
   • Paper: Ginevan, Ross & Watkins, 2007

Ranch Hand Mission (discussion)

Operation Flyswatter (insect spray mission)
   • Full article  • Another
   • Discussion (scroll down)

C-123 Insect Spray Msn (photo)  • More

Operation Pink Rose (Global Security)
   • Oprn Inferno/Banish Beach

Oprn Pink Rose (final report, pdf)

Technology in Vietnam: Firestorm Projrct

Use of Helicopters in Defoliation  • More

B. Agent Orange

Agent Orange (Dept. of Vet Affairs)
   • About Agent Orange  • Exposure in Vietnam
   • What Do You Know About Agent Orange? (video)

Statistics on Agent Orange Use
   • More: By Location
   • Herbicide Use in Vietnam (stats)  • Details
   • Chemical Details  • Declassified Documents

Agent Orange FAQ

Agent Orange Talking Paper

Johnston Island & Agent Orange Storage

Agent Orange Case Study

Agent Orange Links & Studies (Hatfield Gp)  • Alt
   • Studying Effects of AO in Vietnam
   • Environmental Impact of AO
   • AO Mitigation in ALuoi (A Shau) Valley

Characterizing Vet Exposure (e-book)

AF Health Study: Ranch Hand Study
   • Study Overview (2MB pdf)

Disposition of AF Health Study

AF AO Study Commentary

Animated Map of Spray Ops ('63-'70)

Flight Records Show Contamination

Agent Orange Exposure in Vn (pdf)

Extent & Patterns of AO Use (pdf)

Notes on Herbicide Use in Vietnam

Herbicide Use in II Corps

Adm Zumwalt on Agent Orange

Residual Dioxin in Vietnam

Agent White

Alvin Young Collection on AO

US-PRVN Conf: Effects of AO  • pdf

Jt US-Vietnam Agent Orange Study

International Studies

Evaluating Works on Agent Orange (Buckingham, 1982)

Spraying Locations, 1963-70 (video)

Documentary: Ranch Hand

Battle's Poison Cloud (video review)

Spectre Orange (Guardian, 2003)

AO: Collateral Damage in Vn (book rvw)

AO: Linger Effects (Vanity Fair)

Children of Vietnam Vets Health Study (Australian)
   • COVVHS Homepage 

2012 Veterans Benefits Handbook Available

The Department of Veterans Affairs has released its 2012 VA Health Benefits Handbook. To download a copy, click here.  The handbook is designed to provide veterans and their families with the information needed to understand VA’s health-care system, including eligibility requirements, health benefits and services available to help veterans, and copays that certain veterans may be charged.

Any veterans who have questions related to their health-care benefits can contact The American Legion Veterans Affairs & Rehabilitation Division by email.

New VA Update Denies C-123 Dioxin Exposure

In their most recent Internet posting, the VA jumps onboard with the Air Force in reasserting the claims they've made that flying contaminated airplanes did not result in our exposure to the dioxin inside those airplanes!

Folks, this is not new science or new research. Instead, both the VA and the AF have merely reviewed earlier documents which themselves confirmed the "heavily contaminated" dioxin-laden C-123 fleet. Caving to political and financial pressure, the report writers labored hard to wordsmith away veterans' ability to claim Agent Orange exposure. However, every university that has investigated the situation confirms our exposure to Agent Orange. The deputy director of the CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry also confirms our exposure, opining that we flew aircraft which were 200-times more toxic than safe standards!

1. I believe the Air Force is sensitive to the fact that they failed to protect aircrews, and failed inform veterans who'd flown the C-123 once the danger was known.
2. I believe the Air Force and State Department are sensitive to the fact that the AF sold dioxin-contaminated aircraft to Thailand and South Korea before the range was known.
3. I believe the AF is sensitive to the fact that several aircraft were sold as surplus, including some to Walt Disney films, which were contaminated with dioxin.
4. I believe the VA and USAF are sensitive to the potential cost of medical care for Agent Orange-exposed aircrew and maintenance veterans.
5. I believe the AF report is flawed in many ways, including its failure to properly assess exposure via dioxin-laden dust, failure to properly assess the level of contamination and crew exposure in the years before the first tests were conducted,  and is flawed in their obvious effort to downplay the possibility of veterans' exposure below the "as likely to as not" VA threshold. This report, not even signed by the researchers, tries to whitewash the damning description made by earlier AF scientists who themselves conducted the original dioxin test on the aircraft, and under oath described the C-123 "a danger to public health."

Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. Veterans Health Administration Update: AGENT ORANGE

Agent Orange residue on C-123 planes post-Vietnam The U.S. Air Force’s recent risk assessment report (April 27, 2012) found that potential exposures to Agent Orange in C-123 airplanes used after the Vietnam War were unlikely to have put aircrew or passengers at risk for future health problems. Download the report for the full findings. (PDF) VA’s Office of Public Health also concluded in its review of all related scientific information, including the Air Force report, that the risk of herbicide exposure was very low and therefore, the risk of health problems is minimal. We will review any new scientific information that becomes available.

Senator Burr (NC) to Receive AF Briefing re: C-123K Study

Thanks to the continuing interest by North Carolina's Senator Burr and his staff, leadership of the C-123 Veterans Association has been invited to participate in a teleconference next week as the Air Force briefs the Senator on their recent C-123 Agent Orange study. That report, much to the surprise of aircrews as well as scientists in this field, generally dismissed the likelihood that aircrew, maintenance and aerial port personnel were exposed to dioxin remaining in the aircraft following Vietnam for the decade in which we flew them.

Senator Richard Burr (D-NC) Ranking Member
Senate Veterans Committee

This will be interesting. Questions abound! Questions such as:

1. Who wrote the report? It was signed by Colonel Benjamin, USAFSAM/CC but he is a physician, not the scientists who first contacted us for our input

2. Does the AF repudiate the 1979, 1994, 1996 and 2009 reports in which dioxin was identified as present aboard the C-123?

3. Does the AF admit even a possibility of aircrew exposure, such a possibility being enough to suggest that the VA gives the benefit of the doubt to our claims?

4. What role did the VA have in the report (preparation, editing, approval cycles)?

5. Why did Dr. Ron Porter, co-author of the 1996 survey of Patches, testify as an AF employee in a federal court case that the C-123 "are a danger to public health", a case in which he was called as an expert witness on behalf of the AF and the GSA?

6. Phrases in the AF report and the GSA report explain that dioxin aboard the aircraft was detected by "advanced scientific procedures many years after use." This phrasing suggests that only such advanced procedures were able to identify the TCDD, yet the initial Conway report identified "military herbicides" with standard testing procedures and equipment in 1979 and Porter/Weisman did the same in 1996. In fact, no special, advanced scientific procedures or equipment were necessary to identify the TCDD, so why the evasive wording when standard procedures were all that were needed?Why did the GSA and AF further misdirect public understanding by not allowing that TCDD concentration was likely even more intense in 1972 as we began flying the Provider than it was in later years after decades of storage in desert conditions?

Questions abound. But will the answers?

Bad VA Decision - Now a "Notice of Disagreement"

(update 20 Dec 2014: still haven't heard from VA after two and a half years waiting)

Last week's expected (yet disappointing) VA denial of the first of our veterans' Agent Orange claims gives momentum to our campaign. Rather than the issue sitting on some VA wonk's desk, it gets to the stage where a clarifying argument can be offered, and failing that, can progress to the Board of Veterans Appeals.

Here is the mechanism of this particular claim going forward (from the Vietnam Veterans of America web site). In this particular case, representation will be sought from the American Legion, given their national support and the local VSO's strengths.

How To Respond To The VA's Decision:

You do not help yourself if you simply dump a pile of loose records on the VA. Organize the records and explain their significance in a letter you and your representative prepare together. Once the VA regional office makes a decision with respect to your claim, you (and your service representative) will receive a notice of that decision which explains the reasons for the VA’s determination. Read the notice carefully and discuss it with your representative. Your appeal should address the specific reasons why the VA denied the claim or awarded a rating that is too low or an effective date that is too late.

The first step in appealing a claim is to send the VA regional office a "Notice of Disagreement " (NOD). There is no official NOD form. Generally, the NOD can be a written statement on VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim) or a letter that states that you disagree with the decision. Be sure to include in your NOD the date of the decision that you disagree with, which issues you disagree with and that you intend to appeal those issues. You have one year from the date of the VA’s notice of its decision to file your NOD with the VA regional office. If you miss this deadline, you can only reopen your claim based on new and material evidence or establishing that the VA denial was the product of clear and unmistakable error (which is very difficult to prove).

After the VA receives your NOD, you should receive a letter that acknowledges your NOD. You will be asked whether you wish to have your appeal sent to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) in Washington, D.C., or whether you wish to have your claim reviewed on a de novo basis. The latter refers to the VA’s Decision Review Officer (DRO) program. This is an informal appellate process within the regional office. The DRO has the authority to reverse or modify a VA rating board decision. We recommend that you seek DRO review before you request a BVA appeal. The DRO process is frequently successful and is generally faster than going straight to the BVA. If you do not receive a better decision from the DRO, you can still appeal to the BVA.

Once the DRO has made a decision or has received your request for BVA consideration, the VA will issue a “Statement of the Case” (SOC). This document will explain the VA’s decision(s) in detail. You have 60 days from the date of the SOC to file your substantive appeal to the BVA on VA Form 9. (VA forms can be downloaded from the VA’s “Compensation” website. You can even apply for benefits online under “Vonapp” (Veterans Online Application)). Your appeal will then be certified and forwarded to the BVA.

Oregon Director of Veterans Affairs - Avoids Helping Veterans??

In a letter from the Administrator of Oregon's Department of Veterans Affairs, Director Jim Willis reports that scientific proofs of C-123 Agent Orange exposure somehow have not moved him to add his voice to our support. I guess the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Columbia University, Oregon's own Oregon Health Sciences University and others lack the veracity he seeks to be swayed.

He refers us to others such as the VA itself which obviously cuts us off from his otherwise very effective assistance in bringing the issue before Congress, the Department of Defense, and Secretary Shinseki.

I don't know about other C-123 veterans, but I'm weary of political or administrative wonks sloughing us off to the next useless, bored and disinterested wonk. His not getting involved in our support certainly saves Director Willis (himself a Vietnam veteran) several precious minutes writing a letter or phoning someone on our behalf - I guess those minutes are more important to him than our health and welfare, but as an Oregon veteran I thought it was part of his job! I better read his department's mission statement once more.
   Wes Carter

Mission Statement

Where EVERY DAY Is Veterans Day! The Oregon Department of Veterans’ Affairs (ODVA), with the support of our citizens, recognizes and honors Oregon’s veterans and their families by providing the highest quality programs, service and benefits. "We take great pride in our role as advocates for Oregon’s veterans, their families and survivors. Oregon has a long and well-established history of respect for those who have served our state and nation with courage, dedication and honor." --Director Jim Willis

Official: VA Begins Denying Veterans' C-123 Agent Orange Claims!

June 12 - A C-123K veteran just received the VA's denial of his Agent Orange disability claim! Every ailment specified was denied with the identical wording in lockstep with the VA's Public Health posting:

"--The evidence does not show an event, disease or injury in service
 --We did not find a link between your medical condition and military service
 --The evidence does not show the location(s) of your military service, or the events you experienced therein, qualify for the presumption of service connection for your disease"

The explanation in each ailment denial was also identical, and word-for-word in line with the VA's published C-123 Agent Orange exposure denial as penned by VHA for their SOT poster display:

"We are unable to verify or document that aircrew members were exposed to Agent Orange, resulting from Agent Orange residue or dioxin contaminated aircraft or aircraft parts. Although residual TCDD, the toxic substance in Agent Orange, may be detected in C-123 aircraft by sophisticated laboratory techniques many years after its use, the Office of Public Health concluded that the existing scientific studies and reports support a low probability that TCDD was biologically available in these aircraft. Therefore, the potential for exposure to TCDD from flying or working in contaminated C-123 aircraft years after the Vietnam War is unlikely to have occurred at levels that could affect health."

So much for the VA's promise that "every C-123 veteran's claim will be considered individually." Despite the opinion of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry that exposure was likely, despite supporting opinions of four highly esteemed PhD's, despite support from the American Legion and Vietnam Veterans of America, despite their own common sense. The VA's the Portland Veterans Service Manager, timid K. Kalama, caved to political pressure and weird science to dash our hopes of justice.  The VA's "duty to assist" seems to have been restricted to providing me the address to send the claim to, and the mailing back of their denial after more than a year of "careful" consideration. 

Next step, an appeal and then the Board of Veterans Appeals, and finally federal courts. We will not let this rest!

--
    Wes Carter

American Legion Resolution - Agent Orange Benefits for C-123 Crews!

Our thanks for this support from the Nation's largest veterans organization!

   NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF

                                 THE AMERICAN LEGION
                                INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA
                                      MAY 9 – 10, 2012

Resolution No. 20: Designate United States Air Force C-123 K Transport Aircraft as Agent Orange Exposure Sites


Origin: Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission Submitted by: Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission


WHEREAS, The American Legion has long been at the forefront of advocacy for veterans exposed to the military herbicides used in Vietnam, as well as those veterans with exposures in locations outside Vietnam itself during and after the Vietnam era; and
WHEREAS, The United States Air Force (USAF) used its fleets of C-123K transport aircraft in more than 9,100 missions, for aerial application of nearly twenty million gallons of toxic herbicides between 1961 and 1971 in Vietnam; and
WHEREAS, The aircraft were returned to the United States for continued use in airlift missions by USAF squadrons at Westover Air Force Base (AFB), Massachusetts, Pittsburgh Air Reserve Station, Pennsylvania and Rickenbacker Air Reserve Base, Ohio between 1972-1982 and were then retired from service and placed in storage; and
WHEREAS, The United States Air Force (USAF) in 1979, in response to the presence of noxious fumes, conducted scientific tests on unit aircraft and identified and determined that significant levels of military herbicides and insecticides used in Vietnam still contaminated the aircraft; and
WHEREAS, Additional tests carried out again in 1994 by USAF Armstrong Laboratories still showed the presence of herbicides, and in particular, the presence of highly toxic Agent Orange contaminant dioxin; and
WHEREAS, The contamination was consideration sufficient by the USAF to require the use of HAZMAT protective equipment when carrying out tests or otherwise entering the aircraft; and WHEREAS, As late as 2009, further USAF tests conducted at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona
demonstrated continued contamination of aircraft; and
WHEREAS, USAF toxicology staff has testified in federal proceedings that toxic levels of
contamination due to the herbicides were a danger to public health; and
WHEREAS, The levels observed in the aircraft greatly exceed the Department of Defense’s
(DoD) own standards for maximum permissible exposure to any dioxin contaminating interior surfaces; and
WHEREAS, Other federal agencies have reviewed the data and concurred that exposures to personnel at levels exceeding DoD recommendations are likely to have occurred; and
WHEREAS, In response to the State of Arizona and US Environmental Protection Agency environmental concerns, the USAF withdrew the aircraft from commercial resale, quarantined them and, in April 2010, ultimately took extraordinary disposal measures and smelted the remaining fleet; and

WHEREAS, It is estimated that approximately 1,500 service members, including aircrews and maintenance personnel were exposed to military herbicide-contaminated conditions on the C-123 aircraft; and
WHEREAS, Many of these personnel, still surviving, now have health problems commonly associated with herbicide exposure and have endured lengthy legal struggles to prove these problems are service-related; and
WHEREAS, The Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs has statutory responsibility to accurately designate situations and locations that caused veterans to have been exposed to military herbicides used in Vietnam, as well as their contaminants; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, By the National Executive Committee of The American Legion in regular meeting assembled in Indianapolis, Indiana, on May 9-10, 2012, That The American Legion urges the Department of Veterans Affairs to promptly designate the C-123K aircraft, used after the Vietnam War in the United States during 1972 to 1982, as having been Agent Orange exposure sites to permit veterans who were aircrew or maintenance personnel to be eligible for Agent Orange-related benefits.

VA Reneges on Promised C-123 Agent Orange Study!

Once again breaking faith with veterans, the VA's Public Health organization caved to political pressure and brought dishonor to their organization by canceling arrangements for an Institute of Medicine study of C-123 TCDD contamination. Promised to leaders of the C-123 Veterans Organization at their April meeting hosted by Senator Burr's staff, the study was to assess the contamination of C-123 aircraft and the exposure by aircrew, maintenance and aerial port personnel.

But last week the VA's Senate Liaison Office (Mr. Carter Moore) informed senators that the study is canceled in view of the very mild conclusions reached by the recent USAF School of Aerospace Medicine study. That study claimed that, while many tests established C-123 contamination by Agent Orange, somehow veterans weren't exposed to "enough" TCDD to cause long-term health damage. This is despite tests establishing "heavily contaminated" aircraft which scientists testified were "a danger to public health."

Lucky veterans. Perhaps the VA suggests our famous Nomex green bag flight suit and BDUs, like Superman's costume, stop speeding bullets as well as dioxin contamination.

War Plans from this point:
1. FOIA the VA materials re: earlier meetings
2. FOIA the USAFSAM materials in depth to establish VA-directred false results
3. Peer review of USAFSAM report by outside experts
4. Continued individual submission of Agent Orange exposure claims by all C-123 veterans followed by BVA appeals of denied claims
5. Re-visit American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America & Disabled American Veterans leaders
6. Editorial coverage (thanks, J. Harris, for MOAA article!)
7. Congressional pressure
8. Essay in Journal of the Society of Toxicology regarding VA's phony poster display in San Francisco, and twisting of the situation to prevent veterans' claims