David Seelye – USMC Retired, Sgt, Combat Veteran, Beirut Embassy Bombing Survivor, Blog of Shame

BACKGROUND

David Francis Seelye comes to us from Jacksonville, North Carolina. He previously lived in Winsted, Connecticut. At the time of this writing, June 2024, Seelye is 62 y/o.

Having served as a Marine in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1982 and 1983, Seelye has been involved with many ceremonies honoring the military personnel who served and who died in Beirut. When he lived in Connecticut, Seelye founded and organized ceremonies honoring those who served in Beirut.

Seelye often wears the same black leather jacket with “bling” on it. By nature of wearing this jacket, Seelye makes claims of being a Combat Veteran with a Combat Action Ribbon (CAR) along with the rank of Sgt of Marines (E-5).

Articles have referred to Seelye as a Sergeant (E-5).

Seelye moved down to Jacksonville, NC and continued his work honoring the fallen in Beirut. He has instructed children in the significance of the Beirut Memorial (located in Jacksonville, NC) as well as the U.S. mission in Lebanon. The local newspaper, The Jacksonville Daily News, has covered Seelye. The article and the photo caption refer to Seelye as a “retired Marine.”

David Seelye was featured on the American Brother Foundation website under their ‘Spotlight’ section. His rank is displayed as Sergeant (E-5).

U.S. EMBASSY BOMBING – 18 APR 1983 – SURVIVAL AND INJURIES

Seelye was part of a lawsuit that successfully sued the Islamic Republic of Iran. It was “Michael Ewan v. Islamic Republic of Iran.”

It is important to distinguish between the military’s definition of ‘injuries,’ ‘wounds,’ ‘survivor,’ and ‘victim’ since they differ from a civilian legal definition. Keeping this in mind, it may initially sound foreign to read Seelye’s claim of being a ‘survivor’ of the U.S. Embassy bombing in spite of him being 1/2 mile away at the time of the explosion. The use of the terms ‘injuries’ and ‘wounds’ are not in question due to the legal nuance surrounding their use.

However, Seelye states that “his friends and fellow Marines had been injured or killed in the blast.” There was one Marine killed in the blast – security guard Cpl Robert V. McMaugh. There is no record of a Marine being wounded in the blast. Is Seelye claiming that he knew McMaugh? Seems unlikely unless they went to boot camp. Because of different job assignments, the opportunity to cross paths would have been unlikely.

Here, the court establishes that Seelye is a victim of the US Embassy bombing.

The court ruled that Seelye’s ear damage was unlikely related to the blast. This meant that there were no physical injuries that Seelye sustained related to the blast.

The court documents we have posted are only for educational purposes. We do not question the use of ‘injuries,’ ‘wounds,’ ‘survivor,’ and ‘victim’ because of accepted legal nuances in their definitions.

What we do wish to highlight regarding the lawsuit is:

1) How many Marines did Seelye know that were killed or wounded in the US Embassy Bombing in Beirut, Lebanon on 18 April 1983? Did he know Cpl McMaugh?
                                 and…
2) What is the policy status with the BVA regarding board members having been a part of a lawsuit or are currently listed on a lawsuit?

. . . . .

ACTIONS CONDUCTED BY MILITARY PHONIES

David Seelye’s military records were ordered through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. We filed with the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).

. . . . .

FOIA RESULTS

NATIONAL PERSONNEL RECORDS CENTER (NPRC)

. . . . .

OTHER RECORDS (DoD Manpower Data Center / SCRA)

. . . . .

DISCUSSION and SUMMARY

VOLUNTEER DUTY

We should point out that while we respect the time and labor David Seelye has put into remembering the military members who served in Beirut as well as the ones who never came home, good deeds do not provide one protected status. It certainly factors in, but we have been receiving complaints about Seelye for years, and we held out hope that Seelye would make necessary corrections and uphold standards expected of any honorable Marine.

RANK

The NPRC summary sheet states a final rank of Lance Corporal (E-3). There have been many claims of Sergeant (E-5) both in the newspapers as well as rank displayed on a veteran vest. Apparently, Seelye held the rank of Sergeant at one time but was reduced to Lance Corporal. So, this becomes a matter of displaying the rank a Marine held when they were discharged or the highest rank they held. It is widely accepted that Marines should go by their rank when discharged.

It is not our intent to create a huge controversy over rank because I’m sure there will be those who argue the reasoning that it is acceptable to go with the highest rank held. There are just as many, if not more, that feel it is more widely accepted to claim one’s rank at discharge.

RETIRED

There is nothing in Seelye’s records to suggest he retired from the Marine Corps. Sometimes one can get a medical retirement, but we see nothing to suggest that as well. It could have been an oversight by the journalist, but it happened more than once. Usually the Jacksonville Daily News, based in town from Camp Lejeune, would get something like this right.

ASSIGNMENTS

Seelye’s records suggest he was in Beirut, Lebanon. According to his assignments, he was an admin clerk (MOS 0151) with 32nd MAU and 22nd MAU while there. He was in Beirut during the U.S. Embassy Bombing on 18 April 1983.

COMBAT ACTION RIBBON

Seelye’s records do not support the claim that he was awarded a Combat Action Ribbon (CAR). Certainly, many servicemembers who were there at the time felt strongly that they rated such an award, but it must be in one’s record to claim such an award. The Combat Action Ribbon is perhaps the most egregious claim made by Seelye.

SUMMARY

If David Seelye has used any of these claims to gain anything of value, he could violate the Stolen Valor Act.

PHOTOS

 

SOCIAL MEDIA

FACEBOOK: [none]

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..