Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 . __ . . -*- N A M V E T -*- ____/ \_ . . ( * \ . . Managing Editor \ Quangtri . . ---------------- \_/\ \_ Hue . . G. Joseph Peck \_Ashau Phu Bai . . \_* \_ . . Editorial Assistant \ * ) . . ------------------- _/ Danang . . Pete Farias ( \_*Chu Lai . . \_ ------- \__ . . Distribution Manager \_ I Corps \ . . -------------------- \ ------- ! . . Jerry Hindle /\_____ ! . . / ! \ . . Section Editors ! !___ \ . . --------------- ! \/\____! . . AGENT ORANGE: Martin H. Kroll, Sr. ! ! . . IN-TOUCH: Ray "Frenchy" Moreau / Dak To ! . . INCARCERATED VETS: Joyce Flory / * / . . HOMELESSNESS: Lefty Frizzell ! \_ . . FEDERAL BENEFITS: Jim Hildwine ! Phu Cat\ . . GUEST CHAPLAIN: Michael Harris \ * * ) . . \ Pleiku ) . . -**- N A M V E T -**- \ \ . . / / . . "In the jungles of 'Nam, some of us ( -------- ! . . were scared and wary, but we pulled _\ II Corps ! . . one another along and were able / -------- \ . . to depend on each other. That has \ \ . . never changed. Today, free of the ! * / . . criticisms and misunderstandings _/ Nhatrang / . . many veterans have endured, _/ / . . NAM VET is a shining beacon, __/ ! . . a ray of hope, and a _ __/ \ ! . . reminder that the _____( )/ ! Camranh Bay . . lessons learned / !__ ! . . at such a high / \ / . . price shall not \ Bien Hoa \ / . . be forgotten - ! Chu Chi * \ __/ . . nor the errors \_ * --------- \ ___/ . . repeated!!!" ____ \ III Corps \ _/ . . / \_____) )_(_ --------- !__/ Duplication in . . ! ( ___/ any form permitted . . _____! \__ * ___/ for NONCOMMERCIAL . . ! Saigon/ purposes ONLY! . . \___ -------- / \/ . . \ IV Corps / For other use, contact: . . ) -------- / . . / ! G. Joseph Peck (413) 442-1660 . . / ____/ Managing Editor . . / Mekong/ . . ! Delta/ This newsletter is comprised of articles . . ! ____/ and items from individuals and other . . ! / sources. We are not responsible for the . . ! / content of this information nor are any of . . ! __/ NAM VETs contributors or Section Editors. . . \_/ gjp . . . NAM VET Newsletter Page i Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 ================================================================= T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S 1. From the Commander-In-Chief A Veterans Day Proclamation ............................. 1 2. Editorials Sign it in blood! We did! .............................. 2 Bringin' NamVet to YOUR door! ........................... 5 One Vets Feelings ....................................... 7 Old 'Nuff For The Real America? ......................... 8 3. In a country far away... "All POWs are Dead!" says US Government! ................ 9 They haven't forgutten US!!! ............................ 16 Walkin' Point ........................................... 17 4. ATTACK on the U.S.S. Liberty!!! USS Liberty: 23 Years Later ............................. 18 Reunion: USS Liberty Veterans Association ............... 24 5. In-Touch "In Touch" Unites Families, Friends and Strangers ....... 24 In-Touch: What is it??? ................................. 27 IN-TOUCH Registration/Request Form!!! ................... 30 Innocence ............................................... 32 6. The NamVet Chapel Inside the Chaplain's Heart ............................. 33 The Electronic Chapel ................................... 37 WE WERE CHILDREN ........................................ 38 7. The "Not-So-Secret-Anymore" Agent A well-earned rest! ..................................... 41 Break out the Clearasil ! ........................... 43 Should You Be Concerned About Agent Orange? ............. 44 More than ONE poison in Vietnam! ........................ 47 Zumwalt Suggests Link with 27 Diseases/Disorders! ....... 57 8. The Few but Special National Women Veterans Recognition Week ................ 58 VWMP's Sister Search .................................... 59 VWMP's Sister Search Form ............................... 60 We're Not Alone ......................................... 61 9. Don't Abandon 'em Silence and Empty Cells? ................................ 62 A visit or note once in awhile? ......................... 63 10. Hearts n' Minds War just isn't a cool topic ............................. 64 Reflecting .............................................. 66 The War No One Wants to Remember ........................ 68 11. Uncle Sam wants YOU to know Ask the Veterans' Affairs Counselor ..................... 77 12. Concentrated IVVEC/NamVet Service Vet Service Summary - USPO, Radio Shack, DAV ............ 79 Radio Shack Responds to "Misunderstanding" .............. 81 Others WILL follow ...................................... 82 13. IVVEC & NamVet - WHERE? The NamVet/IVVEC Roll Call ............................. 83 Some Gave All... ........................................ 86 NAM VET Newsletter Page ii ================================================================= F r o m t h e C o m m a n d e r - I n - C h i e f ================================================================= A Veterans Day Proclamation Veterans Day, 1990 By George Bush The President of the United States of America A PROCLAMATION The Bible tells us that no greater love has a man than this: to lay down his life for a friend. Our Nation's military veterans are brave and selfless individuals who, when duty called, were willing to put themselves in harm's way to defend the lives and liberty of others. Each November 11, we pause with solemn pride and heartfelt gratitude to honor this special group of Americans. The sacrifices they have made for our sake - and, indeed, for the sake of millions of freedom-loving men and women around the world - can never be forgotten. Their abiding patriotism and enduring devotion to the ideals on which the United States is founded can never fail to inspire us. This Nation's veterans have made their stand for freedom and democratic ideals from the Argonne Forest to the windswept Aleutian Islands, from the searing sands of North Africa to the steep hills and dense jungles of Southeast Asia. Some have defended the cause of individual liberty and self-government in more recent conflicts and less remote places, such as Grenada and Panama. They have seen comrades-in-arms fall on the field of battle, giving "the last full measure of devotion" for our country and the vision of freedom and justice we hold dear. They, too, have suffered and sacrificed, carrying on the light of liberty with efforts that have been equally selfless and heroic. It is fitting that we pause on the anniversary of "Armistice Day," a day of peace and celebration, to honor America's veterans and to express our gratitude for their courage and sacrifice. World War I, which ended with the signing of the Armistice on November 11, 1918, did not, as millions of people hoped, prove to be "The War to End All Wars." Nevertheless, we know that our wold is safer, freer, and more peaceful today thanks to the vigilance and resolve of our Armed Forces. Indeed, our Nation's veterans have helped to bring peace and freedom to regions of the world that once suffered under the shadow of hostility and oppression. The triumph of democratic ideals to Eastern Europe and other parts of the world provides powerful evidence that their sacrifices were not made in vain. Although the dramatic social and political changes we have witnessed around the world during the past year provide a resounding affirmation of the ideals our veterans have fought to uphold, current events in the Persian Gulf region underscore the need for continued strength and vigilance on the part of free nations. As veterans have so often reminded us, eternal vigilance is, indeed, the price of liberty. These great heroes who have left their own "footprints on the sands of time" know that preparedness deters aggression, and they understand the important task before those American service men and women now keeping watch along the sands and off the shores of Saudi Arabia. NAM VET Newsletter Page 1 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 On this Veterans Day, mindful of President Wilson's call to honor our Nation's war heroes with a 2-minute interval of silence at 11:00 a.m. on November 11, 1919, let us pause to remember and pray for all those men and women who have since served in the United States Armed Forces. Through special services, programs, and ceremonies held in their honor on this day, let us affirm that their singular contributions to our country are cherished and remembered. Let us also strive, each and every day of the year, to ensure that ours remains a land worthy of the great love our veterans have shown for it. In order that we may pay due tribute to those who have served in our Armed Forces, the Congress has provided (5 U.S.C. 6103(a)) that November 11 of each year shall be set aside as a legal public holiday to honor America's veterans. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Sunday, November 11, 1990, as Veterans Day. I urge all Americans to honor our veterans through appropriate public ceremonies and private prayers. I also call upon Federal, State, and local government officials to display the flag of the United States and to encourage and participate in patriotic activities in their communities. I invite civic and fraternal organizations, churches, schools, businesses, unions, and the media to support this national observance with suitable commemorative expressions and programs. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this seventeenth day of October, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and fifteenth. /s/ George Bush Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 ================================================================= E d i t o r i a l s ================================================================= Sign it in blood! We did! By: G. Joseph Peck NamVet's Managing Editor VETLink #1 - Pittsfield, Massachusetts (413) 443-6313 It's been a busy, busy month here in the northeast! With a severe shortage of funds, our Governor was forced to look at some areas where cuts in funding would have to be made. The "cuts" in funding were to have eliminated ten of the eleven Veteran Outreach Centers in our state and closed two state-funded soldiers' homes. Word quickly spread from veteran organization-to-veteran organization and soon plans for a rally were being drawn up and put into place. Initially, from our home here in Pittsfield, MA, it was to have cost the individual wishing to attend $20 but, the week before the rally we were all informed that The American Legion would foot the bill for transportation costs (THANK YOU, American Legion!). Upon arrival at Boston Common, veterans in uniform and civilian dress from throughout the state were forming up as bus after bus emptied. According to newspaper reports, eight thousand veterans attended - but it sure LOOKED like more ('course, after the first 5000, guess they'd all tend to blend into the crowd anyways!) It *WAS* a spectacular sight! When we formed up and began our march up to the Statehouse (State Capital Building), the entire street was filled, curb-to-curb, with veterans! Physically able veterans; veterans walking with canes; veterans in wheelchairs either wheeling themselves or brother/sister veterans behind them pushing. The American Legion band led the way, and the colors from the varied units immediately followed. A *STRONG* show of unity ... and it continued. It continued as speaker after speaker took the podium and stated in no uncertain terms the "unwritten" guarantees that America gives each of her soldiers as they pledge their service and allegiance; stated in no uncertain terms the determination to see that this country and this state (Massachusetts) NOT renege on its promises and pledges; stated in no uncertain terms the good that *HAS* been done for veterans by the meager funding already in place and how devastating it would be were that funding to cease. Then, as 8000+ veterans stood in near-formation near the Statehouse steps, suddenly there came before the crowd those men who were candidates for our upcoming political elections and each, in turn began speaking to us. In my humble opinion, it was *TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATE* to turn our veterans' rally into a political meeting. Where a few moments before we were being told about the needs and necessities of our brother and sister veterans and how they *WERE* being served at the Veteran Outreach Centers and how the homeless *WERE* being helped - although meagerly - by the states' Homeless veteran coordinator, we quickly found ourselves listening to campaign promises after campaign promise. Although equal time *was* given to each candidate, I personally felt that *NONE* of 'em should have been invited or allowed to speak! They *SHOULD* have just stayed by the sidelines and *LISTENED* to the *NEEDS* of the veterans of our state - *NOT* make campaign promises to win our NAM VET Newsletter Page 2 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 votes or to an audience that, for the most part, had been severely damaged by promises and actions of past politicians! Hearing the "campaign promises" of William Weld to "NOT close any Veteran Outreach Center, NOT close any Soldiers' Home, to make SURE that the Commissioner of Veterans' Affairs would BE a veteran, to continue efforts in solving the Homeless situation, I could not help but SHOUT: "SIGN IT IN BLOOD! WE DID!" (Yup... I left some of MY blood on a highway in Dawn, Virginia - and many of you out here left some of theirs in 'Nam, Korea, and so many other places where FREEDOM is constantly guarded!). Election night... and William Weld became the new governor of Massachusetts. I thought about William Weld and some of the things I've come to learn about him... A non-veteran who attended college, MIGHT have taken some ROTC classes while there, but did not serve in the military. HOW is he - how CAN he understand the real needs of the veteran population? By osmosis? By members of his administration telling him "THIS is a real need of the veteran community and you should DO something about it?" Then I remembered the statement I'd shouted during the rally. "SIGN IT IN BLOOD! WE DID!" Just because you and I and many other veterans "signed" our commitment to America with our blood doesn't always mean that we have the right to demand the same price of our fellow countrymen or that we should look to them for some equally-strong measure of THEIR commitment before we take them seriously. It is up to YOU and ME and ALL OF US to show, by the intensity and determination of OUR actions, not just our words, how deeply committed we are to those principles for which we placed our lives on-the-line! It is up to YOU and ME and ALL OF US who valued those prices we paid to continue leading, continue persisting, and continue teaching those who follow us - rather than standing on the sidelines, demanding that others prove to us the level of THEIR commitment and dedication, doing nothing but watching. A couple of days ago I sent Governor-elect Weld a letter in which I took responsibility for being the person who shouted the slogan which caused a little disruption in his presentation. I reminded him of his campaign "promises" and that many veterans are expecting him to keep them. Of course, I closed the letter with an offer to help him and his administration see to it that he keeps his promises. There's a tear or two in m' eyes as I write this final part of this month's editorial: Sign it in blood? Two of my three sons are now in the service. Neither is in Saudi Arabia - YET. But they're in the military, doin' a job I once used to do, doin' a job YOU and others used to do. Sign it in blood? I think many of us have signed our commitment to America with more than our own blood - its now our sons and daughters who follow in footprints we've left for them. They'll come back to a NAM VET Newsletter Page 3 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 country you and I have 'stayed the course' for; that you and I, dedicated, committed, and determined, have continuously tried to make better. Sign it in blood? You're darned right I did - I have - and I will!!! 'til next month ('er our Anniversary Issue) Show a brother or sister veteran That YOU care!!! Ci'ao for Ni'ao - Joe - NAM VET Newsletter Page 4 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 Bringing NamVet to YOUR door! __________ \ NamVet \ _____) Delivery)_____ _________(____(________(______(@) ) ) / O O O O O O O O O/_/| /<> O O O O O O O O O/ | /MM O O O O O O O MM/ | / ___________ / . /O (___________) O O/. (====================( From the desk of Jerry Hindle NamVet`s Distribution manager Just Mail - Stratford Heights, Tennessee (901) 683-5410 Well.... I've been away for a while I guess. I had a few problems with my system and have been in the process of reconstructing things here. Let me bring things up to date first and then I will ask for comments... I have finally gotten ALL issues of the Namvet Newsletter to reside on my system in 3 different formats. These are *.LZH, *.ARC, and for those NON-IBMers out there *.NWS (ascii text). I hope this will make it available to everyone who wants it. If I find a need for yet another format I can add them in that format also, IF I see it is warranted. Right now the files take about 13 megs of space in the formats available. I lost a lot in the disk(s) crash (yep I lost 3 drives all SCSI's and went from over 200 meg down to less then 20 in seconds (ouch!), but I am back now bigger then ever and ready to "rock n' rollllllllll". I do however need those folks who I was feeding who are NOT on the list below to contact me via netmail again. I may be reached at either 7:48/0 (AlterNet) or 1:123/4 (fidonet). This is a mail only system right now and I really have no time to devote to setting up a bbs for human callers to log on and manually DL the namvet files. I would suggest you set up binkley as a POINT system and contact me for a point number. This way I can file attach the newsletter to your "point and when you poll me using your point the newsletter will be sent to you. ALSO (BIG POINT HERE)..... Those on the below list are going to be receiving the newsletter from me instead of polling Gjoseph Peck for it. You will need to let me know if your system is a CM system (ie continous mail) and also what flavor of namvet file you want (ASCII, ARC, or LZH) from me. I can only handle a few as ascii cause the cost is prohibative. I have also placed behind some of the names the note that you will be forwarding the newsletter on to other members of your net and what their node numbers are. This is the only cost effective way of doing this and I would appreciate it if you would work out details between yourselves on this. I will not be sending the newsletter to more then 1 node per NAM VET Newsletter Page 5 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 net no matter what the circumstances. If politics (or personal gripes) are in the way of you getting it from another member of your net then I might suggest you working it out amongst yourselves also. Ok, enough of the long winded-ness. Here's the list Lefty Frizzell 1:106/449 please forward to 1:106/116 Scott McKnight: 1:389/2001 Mike Harris 1:343/26 Ray Moreau 1:109/316 Bob Currie 1:105/204 Joan Renne 1:285/662 Tom Mickus 1:250/440 Mike Nelson 1:125/20 Jim Barth 1:350/21 Bob Rudolph 1:261/628 Douglas Seavy 1:130/10 Chuck Haynes 1:308/60 please forward to 1:308/20 & 1:308/101 Sam Saulys 1:132/101 The people listed above need to let me know what flavor file you want BEFORE Veteran's Day... otherwise I shall send the LZH format to you. The ARC format is arc5.02 compatible (ie fidonet standards). Jerry Hindle 1:123/4 7:48/0 modem phone (901)683-5410 HST 9600bps PS: if your node is not an HST please let me know so I can try to find an HST in your net willing to accept the file and forward it on to you. All of this is coming out of MY POCKET, no company is footing the bills here..... NAM VET Newsletter Page 6 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 ONE VETS FEELINGS By Rod Germain VETLink #1 - Pittsfield, MA (413) 443-6313 As November rolls in so does a very important holiday. No, I'm not talking about Thanksgiving. It, too, is important, but in a different way. I am referring to Veteran's Day. This special day has been set aside to remind each of us that all of the freedoms we take for granted were made possible by those who served in our country's armed forces. These proud and brave men fought and died to preserve our way of life. Our freedoms have been bought with their blood. Let each of us honor them in some way this November 11, 1990. Fly a flag in their honor, visit a vet's cemetery, take a homeless vet to lunch, or ask your minister to pray for peace. Our country's young men are once again overseas and whether you agree or not with this conflict is irrelevant. The facts are that the Government "WE THE PEOPLE" elected have seen fit to commit lives once again. It is these and past lives I ask you to honor on this Veterans Day, not the politics. These men deserve your respect, don't let them down. They carry a part of all of us with them, that part we call American. To all of you who are Veterans in our midst, I say THANK YOU!!! If you can't tell, "Yes," I'm a Veteran. My war was Vietnam. I remember all too well the 'Welcome Home' of the protesters at the airport. It took them twenty years to realize they vented their feelings on the wrong people. When our boys come home, welcome them as the heroes they are and vent any hostilities to congress or the President for sending them there. It is our elected officials who should be held accountable for this country's politics. They WILL NOT know your feelings if you don't call or, better yet, write them, to express what you feel. I implore each and everyone of you, MAKE YOUR FEELINGS KNOWN! If your officials don't reflect your feelings, vote against them next election. Take to heart what they say, discredit it at every opportunity, to family, friends, and above all to the officials themselves. Don't give up! You may not see immediate results but YOUR opinion IS important. When speaking to my local Congressman I asked, "How many letters does it take to make something a hot issue in your office?" His answer, "Four" - and I live in the outskirts of Los Angeles, Ca. Most of us feel that one person's opinion isn't going to change anything. Every time I hear this I am reminded of an old proverb, "A journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step". Let us take that step, find out who your Congressman is, write that letter, photocopy it, send a copy to the White House. You may or may not get a response, but I guarantee you'll sleep better. Don't stop there, the next thing that official spouts that you don't agree with, RUN - don't walk - for pen and paper, and blast him again! If you have trouble motivating yourself to it, try thinking of it this way: Our fathers, brothers, sons, and friends died to give us the right to speak out. Honor their deaths by using some of the freedoms they paid for. MAY PEACE BE WITH US ALL SOON, Rod Germain NAM VET Newsletter Page 7 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 Old Enough? By: Scott Summers The Fireside BBS - Houston, Texas (713)496-6319 In a recent post - Bob Whatishisname suggested that Vietnam Veterans don't like to think. Maybe he's right - but he got me to thinking. I offer the following for consideration. You're old enough to remember the real America if you can remember when American's proudly proclaimed their patriotism. When clerks and repairmen tried to please you - or else. When you never dreamed our country could ever lose. When a Sunday drive was an adventure, not an ordeal. When you left the front door open. When you went to church and found spiritual consolation. When you could always find someone willing and able when you needed something done. When you had to be brave to fly. When people knew what the Fourth of July stood for. When riots were unthinkable. When the clergy talked about religion. When you took it for granted that women and the elderly would have their safety protected and the law would be enforced. When a girl was considered daring if she smoked in public. When Christmas was merry and Christ was kept in it. When a boy was a boy. When a girl was a girl. When they liked each other. When you didn't feel embarrassed to say that this is the best damned country in the world. When the flag was a symbol. When socialist was a dirty word. When a man who went wrong was blamed - not his mothers nursing or his father's income. When liberal wasn't. When our government stood tall anywhere in the world. When a nickel was worth five cents - could buy you a magazine or a good cigar, or a 12 oz Pepsi. When two nickels could get you into the movies with THREE pictures. When even Harvard professors knew the difference between right and wrong. When things weren't perfect, but you never expected them to be. When taxes were mearly a nuisance. When you didn't feel guilty for enjoying dialect comedy. When the poor were too proud to accept charity. When you weren't afraid to go out at night with your family. When you considered yourself lucky to have a good job. When you were proud to have one. When Protestants and Catholics thought enough of their beliefs to argue about them. When you knew that you could accomplish something. When sick meant you weren't feeling well When people expected justice. When ghettos meant neighborhoods. When you felt a little shiver of awe at the sight of a policemen. When everybody wasn't entitled to a college education. When you expected justice. When young fellah TRIED to join the Army. When college kids swallowed goldfish, not acid. When people valued what they had. When songs had a tune. When you wrote love notes. When juvenile delinquents and criminals went to jail. When you could get away from it all for a while. When you bragged about your home state or your home town. When America was the home of the free and the home of the brave. NAM VET Newsletter Page 8 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 ================================================================= I n a c o u n t r y f a r a w a y . . . ================================================================= All POWs are Dead! Submitted by Terry Hayes VETLink #1 - Pittsfield, MA (413) 443-6313 >> From Smith vs. Reagan, United States Court of Appeals, for the Fourth Circuit, No. 87-1661, April, 20, 1988, regarding the POW/MIA issue. << Introduction: One year ago, the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations assigned members of the Minority Staff to investigate the following three questions: 1.) Whether the United States Government has received and still possesses valid information concerning living prisoners of war/missing in action -- POW/MIAs -- in Southeast Asia; 2.) Whether the U.S. Government has failed to act on such information; and, 3.) Whether the U.S. Government has acted improperly to intimidate and discredit sources of such information. It is not the purpose of this investigation to determine whether any POW/MIAs remain alive today. Its purpose is only to determine whether the U.S. government has handled the question in a truthful and effective manner. The inquiry remains on-going. It is based not only on the review of thousands of classified and non-classified documents, but also upon hundreds of telephonic and face-to-face interviews with government officials and those affected by their decisions with regard to POW/MIAs. A full report will require much additional investigation and analysis. The following, however, represents an interim report at the conclusion of one year's work. It allows the presentation of some preliminary conclusions. Preliminary Conclusions: The U.S. Government states it has no evidence that POWs were left behind in Southeast Asia. The official policy asserts that it is open to investigation of all reports. For example, the official Department of Defense (DOD) POW-MIA Fact Book, issued July, 1990, states: Although we have thus far been unable to prove that Americans are still detained against their will, the information available to us precludes ruling out that possibility. Actions to investigate live sighting reports receive and will continue to receive necessary priority and resources based on the assumption that at least some Americans are still held captive. Should any report prove true, we will take appropriate action to ensure the return of those involved. Notwithstanding this professed openness to new evidence, the U.S. Government has insisted since April 12, 1973 that it has no evidence of living POWs. In fact, on that date -- at the conclusion of OPERATION HOMECOMING, which brought home 591 POWs. -- Dr. Roger Shields, then Assistant Secretary of Defense, stated that the DOD had "no evidence that there wee any more POWs still alive in all of Indochina." This assertion has been consistent. For example, last July, Col. Joseph A. Schlatter, then chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency's Special Office for POW/MIAs, was saying that "If we look NAM VET Newsletter Page 9 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 at everything we collected during the war and everything we've collected since the war, we don't find any evidence that Americans are captive." Furthermore, as late as October, 1990 an unnamed "senior State Department official" was quoted in the press as saying the U.S. Government has "no evidence" of living American prisoners in Southeast Asia. However, to say that the U.S. Government has "no evidence" is not the same as saying that no evidence exists. After all, there have been nearly 11,700 reports relating to POW/MIAs over the years, including 1,400 first-hand, live-sighting reports. The question is whether every single one of these reports can be dismissed from the category of credible evidence. The U.S. Government position makes sense only if every single one of these reports can be shown to have been fabricated, erroneous, or not relating directly to a POW/MIA -- for example, some reports may relate to Europeans in the area. In fact, DIA analysts have rejected the evidence of all these reports, except for a small pool of less than 150 still considered "unresolved." The preliminary conclusions presented by staff for review by Senators are as follows: 1. After the conclusion of OPERATION HOMECOMING in April, 1973 brought the return of the 591 POWs, official U.S. Government policy internally adopted and acted upon the presumption that all other POWs were dead, despite public assertions that the government was still open to investigating the possibility of discovering the existence of living prisoners. 2. Following the adoption of an internal policy in April, 1973 that all POW/MIAs were presumed dead, the U.S. Government convened commissions in each military service to consider each case on the POW/MIA list in order to make a statutory declaration of presumption of death. 3. While there is no reason to believe that the majority, if not most, of the declarations of presumptive death are incorrect, staff review of live-sighting report files at DIA found a disturbing pattern of arbitrary rejection of evidence that connected a sighting or to specific POW/MIA or U.S. POW/MIA in general. 4. The pattern of arbitrary rejection resulted in a declaration of presumptive finding of death for every such individual case, except one. 5. The internal policy that all POW/MIAs were presumed dead resulted in an emphasis on finding and identifying remains of dead personnel, rather than searching for living POW/MIAs. 6. The desire to identify specific sets of remains with specific names on the POW/MIA list led DOD to an exaggeration of the capabilities of forensic science, and identification based on dubious presumptions and illogical deductions rather than actual physical identification -- a process which resulted in numerous misidentifications of remains. 7. Despite adherence to internal policies and public statements after April, 1973 that "no evidence" existed of living POWs, DIA authoritatively concluded as late as April, 1974 that several hundred living POW/MIAs were still held captive in Southeast Asia. 8. Although the Pathet Lao declared on April 3, 1973 that Laotian Communist forces were holding American POWs and were prepared to give an accounting, nine days later a DOD spokesman declared that there were no more American prisoners anywhere in NAM VET Newsletter Page 10 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 Southeast Asia. No POWs held by Laotian Communist forces were ever returned. The evidence indicates that American government officials made a decision to abandon U.S. citizens still in the custody of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, at the conclusion of U.S. involvement in the Second Indochina War. 9. U.S. casualties, to include POW/MIAs in Southeast Asia, resulting from covert or cross border operation, may not be included on the list of those missing. 10. The executive branch has failed to address adequately the concerns of the family members of the POW/MIAs, and has profoundly mishandled the POW/MIA problem. Definition of POW/MIA: The subject of POW/MIAs requires some definitions. After the Second Indochina War -- popularly known as the Vietnam War, even though Thailand, Burma, Laos and Cambodia saw U.S. combat action -- hundreds of POWs returned alive, notably in OPERATION HOMECOMING, which concluded in April, 1973. Those who did not return home are classified by the Department of Defense into two categories: POW/MIAs -- that is, those for whom there is some documentation that they were captured but never repatriated; and KIA/BNRs -- that is, those believed to have been killed in action, but whose bodies were not recovered. For the latter, there is no evidence of their death except DOD's evaluation of the circumstances, even though no physical evidence of death may be available. In April, 1973, DOD reported that 2,383 personnel were unaccounted for: 1,259 POW/MIAs, and 1,124 KIA/BNRs. This study assumes that both categories of the unaccounted for deserve review. Since 1973, DOD has announced the return of 280 sets of remains, diminishing the over-all number by that amount. In addition, there could well be an equal number of military personnel missing in action from various U.S. covert actions during the war. Since DOD files on covert actions have not been opened, and the participants in such actions never publicly identified, this inquiry could not establish any number for covert POW/MIAs. However, public source books and interviews with participants suggest that the issue of covert operations adds a substantial, but unknown, dimension to the MIA question which has received no scrutiny. Review of Live-Sighting Documents: In this inquiry, staff has reviewed hundreds of U.S. Government classified, declassified, and open-source documents. In addition, Senator Grassley and Committee Minority staff were given access to, and have reviewed personally, hundreds of classified live-sighting reports (accounts by Southeast Asians of live POWs in Southeast Asia) in the files of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). According to DIA, this is the first time that either a United States Senator or any United States Congressional Committee staff have been given access to the raw intelligence contained in the 1,400 live sighting reports. Out of the 1,400 live-sighting reports, approximately 1,200 are considered by DIA to be "resolved." Each of the so-called "resolved" sightings was resolved by concluding that the live sighting report did not pertain to U.S. POWs present after April 1979. Staff felt that in some cases such a conclusion was correct, but that in many it was not supported by the facts. Staff began by first examining so-called resolved cases in order to study DIA methodology by which a conclusion of "resolution" was reached. Since the quidelines set by DIA for access to the files were extremely restrictive, the time available allowed review of only NAM VET Newsletter Page 11 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 about one-quarter of the so-called "resolved" cases, and none of those in the category of "unresolved." Nevertheless, staff concluded that a significant number of the "resolved" cases reviewed showed that the DIA methodology was faulty, or that the evidence did not support the DIA conclusion in the case, or both. The information collected and reviewed to date by the staff shows that the position held by the United States Government -- namely, that no evidence exists that Americans are still being held against their will -- cannot be supported. Rather, the information uncovered during this inquiry provides enough corroboration to cast doubt upon the veracity of the U.S. Government's conclusion. Without revealing classified information, staff believes that the review of the classified live-sighting reports reinforces that doubt. Although more information remains to be reviewed, the evidence this inquiry has thus far uncovered shows that: 1) living U.S. citizens, military and civilian, were held in Southeast Asia against their will after the U.S. Government's statement on April 13, 1973 that no prisoners remained alive; and 2) the information available to the U.S. Government does not rule out the probability that U.S. citizens are still being held in Southeast Asia. In fact, classified, declassified and unclassified information all confirm one startling fact: That DOD in April, 1974 concluded beyond a doubt that several hundred living American POWs remained in captivity in Southeast Asia. This was a full year after DOD spokesmen were saying publicly that no prisoners remained alive. Evidence uncovered in the several hundred cases reviewed thus far clearly demonstrates that, in a disturbing number of cases, DOD made significant errors in drawing conclusions about live sighting reports, the presumed deaths of individuals, or about individuals that were unaccounted for at the conclusion of the war. Although many cases were resolved correctly based upon the files, there were too many errors apparent to rule out the need to undertake and complete the review of the "unresolved" cases. Staff also concluded that DOD spent an excessive amount of effort in discrediting live-sighting reports, while exaggerating or mishandling forensic data in order to confirm a presumptive finding of death. DOD appeared to be more anxious to declare a presumptive finding of death than in following up reports of sightings with creative investigative work. Furthermore, there is evidence of insensitivity on the part of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government in providing complete and accurate information to the next-of-kin of missing American servicemen. The classified evidence in DIA files suggests a pattern by a few U.S. Government officials of misleading Congressional inquiries by concealing information, and misinterpreting or manipulating data in government files. Interested Senators and staff with proper clearances no doubt will want to review the classified files themselves and draw their own conclusions. The 1973 Policy Decision: Those who have not dealt with the POW/MIA issue may find it difficult to understand how DOD's analysis of the information could be in error. Unfortunately, staff believes that DOD has allowed its procedures to be dictated by a pre-conceived policy finding. The New York Times reported on April 12, 1973 as follows: WASHINGTON, April 12 (AP) -- The Pentagon, two months after the NAM VET Newsletter Page 12 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 first American prisoners of war began coming home, said today that it had no evidence that there were any more prisoners still alive in all of Indochina. Despite the fact that interviews with all returning prisoners are nearly complete, a Pentagon official, Dr. Roger Shields, said that none of the 1,389 Americans listed as missing were now technically considered prisoners. "We have no indication at this time that there are any Americans missing alive in Indochina," Dr. Shields said at a news conference. Dr. Shields was at that time Assistant Secretary of Defense, but he was following guidance issued on that date by the Department of State in a memorandum to DOD which stated that "There are no more prisoners in Southeast Asia. They are all dead." This directive was issued immediately after the return of the last POWs in OPERATION HOMECOMING. This finding was made despite that the fact that none of the hundreds of POW/MIAs that the Pathet Lao publicly acknowledged holding were ever returned from Laos. There were hundreds of live-sighting reports on file in 1973. Thousands of such reports have continued to be received since then. Process for "Presumption of Death": Since it was official policy, then, that all MIAs were dead, it became a bureaucratic necessity for all "unresolved" cases to be resolved in favor of a presumed finding of death. Each respective military service from time to time convenes its own special commissions to pronounce on individual cases. Such a commission has before it at least three categories of information: The first is intelligence-related information concerning the individual. The second is eyewitness accounts of the loss event. The third is the so-called "incident report" -- the official report of the loss incident. If a year passes without new information, the respective military service can convene a commission to determine whether a presumptive finding of death should be declared. The April, 1973 statement of policy was a political statement, rather than a finding according to statutory authority. As a result, the military services subsequently reviewed each individual case of those who previously had been declared dead en masse. And in every case except one, the commissions made a determination of a presumptive finding of death. Because of this procedure, the bureaucratic necessity arose for discrediting any evidence that might cast doubt on the mass presumptive finding of death of April, 1973. From the standpoint of law and military regulations, the procedure followed in each case gave a legal affirmation to the original political statement. Therefore, in order to discredit any information which might undermine the political thesis, the analysis of intelligence files fell into a systematic pattern of debunking information contrary to the thesis. This systematic debunking included discrediting of reports, possible intimidation of witnesses, dismissal of credible evidence through technicalities, and -- if all else failed -- the arbitrary disregard of evidence contrary to the thesis. DOD's Working Hypothesis: An analysis of DOD's working hypothesis for fully accounting for American MIAs is the key to understanding the discrepancies between DOD's position on the POW issue and the evidence uncovered by the staff. DOD's premise, beginning in April, 1973, has been that all MIAs are dead; the corollary, therefore, is that DOD must never find NAM VET Newsletter Page 13 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 any evidence that any MIA is alive. The best evidence, in DOD's opinion, is a set of physical remains that can be identified as a specific individual on the POW/MIA list. Once such an identification has been made, the case of that individual can be removed forever from the list. This is an easier task than to accept live-sighting reports that might point to a living POW necessitating appropriate follow-up action. It is a reasonable assumption to remove POW/MIAs from the list when remains are identified, if the identification is correct. But the fact is that such identifications have been made on the basis of inadequate physical evidence, using presumptive deductions that may or may not be true. The pressure to identify sets of remains has resulted in specific cases where caskets have been buried with full military honors as the "remains" of the individual when, in fact, the casket is empty. Therefore, DOD acts on its premise by vigorously investigating for the remains of dead MIAs. The list of MIAs presumed dead following the conclusion of the war totalled 2,383. DOD has received and claimed to have identified a total of 280 sets of remains since 1973. Any full accounting of MIAs, according to DOD's working hypothesis, would necessarily involve only those cases in which either a presumptive finding of death could be made, or else full or partial remains could be discovered. As each presumptive finding of death is declared or set of remains is identified, DIA would remove, as accounted for, the names that matched those on the original MIA list. In this respect, DOD claims that DIA has vigorously investigated and resolved hundreds of such cases. The policy of DOD is to focus attention on the cases where some evidence, no matter how small, of physical remains can be recovered. But even while DOD enthusiastically and vigorously investigates remains cases -- no matter how fragmentary -- it just as vigorously discredits live-sighting and other witness accounts. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of thousands of Asians fled Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. These refugees provided many first-hand reports, or knew by second or third-hand reports, of American prisoners being held in their respective countries. To date, over 11,700 accounts have been received by DOD; 1,400 of these are first-hand, live-sighting reports. DIA claims to have analyzed fully each of these live-sighting reports, and to have left "no stone unturned" in searching for living prisoners. After analyzing the live-sighting reports, DIA has concluded that the majority are not related to living American POWs, with the possible exception of a small percentage of reports that DIA describes as "unresolved." However, no "resolved" case has ever concluded that an American POW remains captive in Southeast Asia. In this way DIA concludes that there is no evidence of Americans currently being held captive in Southeast Asia. This contention is consistent with both the working hypothesis described above and with DIA's apparent success at removing from the MIA list names that involve only those cases in which remains are identified, or a finding of death declared. Insofar as these discrepancies relate to the 1,400 first-hand reports of living prisoners, DOD's original premise comes into question. Numerous live-sighting reports have been erroneously discredited by DIA analysts. Moreover, staff has reason to believe that DOD has misidentified the remains of scores of MIAs, and has incorrectly presumed dead many others. NAM VET Newsletter Page 14 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 This analytical bias is typical of a bureaucracy defending an established policy at all costs, even if it means denying the obvious. It is also a typical characteristic of an out-moded paradigm that can no longer explain the real world or real facts. If the original premise of DOD were that at least some of the 2,383 MIAs were alive, then the evidence collected by DOD, including the thousands of live-sighting reports, would have to be viewed as valid or potentially valid. Therefore, the evidence would have to be presumed worthy of consideration. The same could be said of problems relating to the forensic identification of remains and the presumptive finding of death: Unless convincing or conclusive evidence were known, remains cases and presumptive finding of death would not be prematurely made. Importance of the Problem: The resolution of these questions is important not only to any MIA/POWs who may be still alive, but also to the families involved. It is also important to the fate of any possible POWs in a future military action. With 200,000 U.S. troops now deployed to the Persian Gulf, the question of possible prisoners of war once again becomes an urgent matter. Moreover, the resolution of issues relating to Southeast Asia is a key priority of our nation's foreign policy. Secretary of State James A. Baker III stated recently that the POW/MIA issue is the last remaining obstacle to resumption of relations with the government of Vietnam. But if it turns out that Vietnam has been concealing the existence of POWs, then it would be a complicating factor in initiating relations with the present regime. -- From POW-MIA Fact Book, Department of Defense, July 1990: "The fullest possible accounting for the missing, the return of all Americans who may still be held in captivity, and the repatriation of all recoverable remains is required to resolve the POW/MIA issue. While the life prisoner issue remains at the forefront of our negotiation and intelligence efforts, we recognize that accountability is both a complementary goal to resolving this pressing question and vital to obtaining the answers which the POW/MIA families of our nation so richly deserve." --Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense, July 1990. "Accountability lies in oversight by Congress or in criticism from the electorate, but not in the judgement of the courts." NAM VET Newsletter Page 15 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 W W M M W W M M M M W W \ / M M M M OOOO W W W --*-- M M M IIII O O W W W W / \ M M II O O W W W W M M II O O W W M M II O O II PPPPPP O O ..... II AA PP PP OOOO . '' '' .. IIII A A PP PP ..' '.. A A PPPPPPP ..' ''. A A PP ..' '. AAAAAA PP .' ''. A A PP .' '. A A .' .:::::.. '. .' .::::::::::. ' .' .::::::::::::::. '. .' __ .::::::::::::::::;:... '. .' _- -_ .:::::::::::::::::::::::. '. .' _-_ _ _ -_ ::::::::::::::::::::::::' '. .. _- -!!___!!!-_:::::::::::::::::::::::. .. .' ==_ _- _= .:::::::::::::::::::::::: ', . =-_= _= = :::::::::::::::::::::::: . .' =-_ =_- = ::::::::::::::::::::::: '. .' = - -_ =_:::::::::::::::::::::. '. .' -_ -_- .:::::::::::::::::::;;;. '. .' _-_ ..::::::::::::::::::::::::; '. . _ _ .:;:::::::::::::::::::::;, . ' _ .:::::::::::::::::::::::::. '. Y .'.....::::::::::::::::::::::::::;' '. N ::::::::::::::::::::::::' `''' ': O `::::::::::::::::::::::: \v/ \ / :'E `:::::::::::::::::::::: =========================== :' U `:::::::::::::::::::::. /^\ \ :'T `:::::::::::::::::::: .: A `:::::::::::::::::: .:'T `::::::::::::::::::. .;' R `:::::::::::::::::. .;' T `::::::::::::::::. .;' E `:::::::::gjp::: .:' O `:::::::::::::...........'' G N O T F O R " Bring them home --- NOW !!! " NAM VET Newsletter Page 16 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 WALKIN' POINT By: Michael A. Harris Republic of Vietnam 1968-69 Walkin Point was a risky place. Sixteen on auto, ready to fire. Might see Charlie, face to face. Always watchin, where's that wire? Skin whether Black, Brown, or White. Don't mean nothin, in no man's land! The long green line, followed til night. Depending on you, to deal their hand. Point Man, Point Man, where are you? I've been lost, these last few years. Broken and bitter, depressed and blue. I've even come, to shedding some tears. Who's this Jesus, up on the trail? I want to follow, it seems a must! Upon the Cross, He did travail? He walked Point, so I could trust? Oh Glory be! Now I'm able to see! I'm made alive, His oil can anoint! It's hard to believe, He has chosen me. Now He's asking me, to walk the Point. Come along Brothers, there's healing and peace! Many, many, years, you've had to cope. Your rucksacks are heavy, you need to release. Give Him your burdens, He is your hope! Let's march again, down a different road. We're on the Point, only by His Grace. Just ask Him in, He'll take your load. Giving you strength, to start a new race! NAM VET Newsletter Page 17 ================================================================= A T T A C K o n t h e U . S . S . L i b e r t y ! ! ! ================================================================= USS LIBERTY: 23 YEARS LATER Why reinvestigate now? By: James M. Ennes, Jr. Input by: Joe Meadors SeaBat BBS - Corpus Christi, TX (512) 387-6638 Last summer marked 23 years since Israeli forces attacked the American intelligence ship USS Liberty during the Arab-Israeli Six Day War. The attack, which killed 34 Americans and wounded 171 others from a crew of 294, remains controversial even today, while the call for a serious investigation becomes more urgent with each passing year. Probably no other event in American naval history is the subject of such widespread dispute. Yet the only official inquiry ever held by the United States was a patently inadequate shipboard inquiry into little more than the performance of the crew while under fire. That limited investigation ignored its mandate to inquire into all aspects of the attack, violated U.S. Navy regulations concerning the conduct of investigations, took no evidence concerning the intentions and culpability of the attackers, and failed to answer the most pressing questions. As a result, the attack is even more controversial today than it was when it occurred. The situation cannot be allowed to continue. THE CONTROVERSY: The circumstances are clear enough. Both sides agree that the ship was strafed and bombed repeatedly by Israeli aircraft in international waters during calm, clear weather, then torpedoed. Israel ultimately apologized and paid almost $13 million for deaths, injuries, and damage to the ship. There the consensus ends. Survivors insist that the attack was deliberate and have amassed a great body of evidence to support their case. An ever-growing number of eyewitnesses and former leaders of the era agree that the attack was deliberate and that the Israelis are lying. Experts agree that the evidence is overwhelming. The problem, survivors feel, is not in proving their case but in persuading the government to listen. Israel and its many spokesmen, however, insist just as adamantly that the attack was a mistake, and they have managed for 23 years to block all attempts to review the case. As a result, Americans who ask about the attack cannot get a straight answer from Washington. Instead, "boilerplate" paragraphs repeat the same responses that were originally drafted as early as 1967. Result: stalemate. CONTRADICTORY ACCOUNTS: According to the Israelis, the ship flew no flag, operated in a war zone where she had no legitimate business, "attempted to escape when spotted," and brought the attack on herself by her NAM VET Newsletter Page 18 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 suspicious and unfriendly behavior. By this account, the Israeli aircraft circled three times at low level looking for identification and attacked only after finding none. The Israeli torpedomen launched torpedoes only after the ship "arrogantly" refused to identify herself. The attack occurred, say the Israelis, because the ship's behavior and appearance convinced them that she was a hostile Egyptian vessel. Firing stopped immediately, they claim, when the ship finally hoisted her American flag. Survivors call the Israeli story contrived and untrue. The ship was clearly identified by standard markings and a bright, clean, oversize American flag, they say. Crewmen and an American intercept station in Germany heard Israeli reconnaissance pilots reporting to their headquarters by radio that this was an American ship. The Israeli war room that ordered the attack tracked the ship on a chart by name. The Israelis, survivors say, attacked deliberately and pursued the attack long after examining the ship and American flag at very close range. According to survivors, the Israelis used sophisticated equipment to jam U.S. Navy radio frequencies used by the ship to call for help--frequencies they could not have known without knowing they were American. The ship's signalman flashed "USS LIBERTY - U S NAVY SHIP" at the approaching torpedo boats until his lamp was shot out, but the torpedomen ignored the signals. After disabling the ship with a torpedo, the Israelis ignored the ship's hull number, the oversize American flag, and the ship's name in English on her stern. For another 40 minutes they continued to fire upon firefighters and litter carriers from very close range. Finally, the boatmen drew closer and methodically machine-gunned the ship's empty liferafts waiting in the water for survivors. Then they took a deflated liferaft aboard, with its large "U S NAVY" markings, and returned toward their base - still supposedly unaware that they had been killing Americans. Even if it were possible to have misidentified the ship initially, these men insist, the Israelis could not possibly have continued to attack from close range over such an extended period without recognizing their target as American. And if it was an accident, survivors say, the Israelis should at least be able to tell a story that can be verified. But the Israelis keep changing their story, and no Israeli version agrees with the eyewitness reports of American survivors. THE QUESTIONS: Did the ship fly a flag or didn't she? Was she clearly marked or wasn't she? Did she identify herself when asked or did she refuse to do so? Did she look like an Egyptian vessel or not? Did the Israelis fire upon the ship's liferafts in the water or did they not? Did they cease firing after examining the ship and flag at close range or did they not? Are the Israelis telling the truth? Or are the Americans? Did the Israelis deliberately attack a ship they knew to be American, or did they not. These are easy questions. The answers are readily available. Yet the U.S. Navy and the Congress of the United States have been sidestepping these questions for 23 years. The time has come to face the facts. NAM VET Newsletter Page 19 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 OTHER INCIDENTS: With the single exception of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, every serious naval and maritime incident since before the bombing of the Maine has been thoroughly investigated by the United States Congress. Pearl Harbor, Tonkin Gulf, Maine, Scorpion, Thresher, Mayaguez, Pueblo, Stark, all were exhaustively probed. When the USS Stark was struck by Iraqi missiles in 1987, the circumstances were never in doubt. Missiles were launched from many miles away at night and the entire attack was over in a matter of seconds. Yet investigators probed that attack for eight months! Investigators interviewed the Iraqi pilot, reviewed Iraqi flight procedures and gunnery practices and interviewed everyone even remotely connected. Not so the USS Liberty. The Liberty affair, with bitterly disputed circumstances and a two hour coordinated attack involving Israeli air, sea, reconnaissance, intelligence and headquarters forces -- and a crew which has complained of a cover-up from the beginning -- was resolved to the satisfaction of the entire United States Government after barely four days of Navy inquiry and not a word of testimony from Israel. Crewmen were browbeaten into frightened silence. No member of Congress ever felt compelled to ask an official question. The USS Liberty Court of Inquiry violated Navy Regulations and ignored rules of evidence and procedure. The Court failed to interview bridge lookouts, gunners, signalmen, key conning officers, and the ship's surviving second-in-command, and failed to review such vital documents as the ship's deck log, weather log and quartermaster's notebook--all of which argued that the attack was deliberate. Although otherwise ignored by the Court, the ship's official deck logs were rewritten and refiled with the Navy without the knowledge or permission of the officers who actually stood the watches. Even the legal advisor for the convening authority rejected the completed Court of Inquiry report as inadequate and advised his boss, a four star admiral, not to sign it. But his advice was ignored and the report was officially approved despite its warts. That badly flawed and ambiguous report now stands as the only inquiry into the attack. No one in authority has ever wondered why rescue aircraft, dispatched from the carrier Saratoga in time to prevent the torpedo attack, were called back while the ship was still under fire. That act probably cost 25 additional American lives. Yet no one in authority has ever asked why the airplanes were recalled or bothered to ask the Saratoga's skipper a single question. This issue alone justifies an inquiry. Responsible people charge that our government ordered a hasty and ill-advised "retaliatory" raid on the Egyptian capital of Cairo. The then- American Ambassador to Cairo, among others, reports that he received official messages warning him that American aircraft were en route to bomb the city. Does no one in our government wonder about this? Survivors repeatedly ask our government to explain the official lack-of-interest in eyewitness reports that Liberty's life rafts were machine-gunned in the water--a serious violation of international law. Our government evades the questions. Survivors have twice produced Israeli citizens who claim to have observed the attack from the Israeli side and who have offered to NAM VET Newsletter Page 20 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 testify that it was deliberate. No government official has ever been willing to listen. And while the Court was still in session, the ship's Acting Commanding Officer leaked to the press a report that the attack was deliberate and the investigation a sham. The story was widely printed, but even this failed to generate questions from Washington. Clearly the facts in this case were of no interest. Washington wanted a whitewash. POWERFUL SUPPORT: Then-Secretary of State Dean Rusk now calls the attack deliberate and the Israeli excuse untrue. So does Rusk's legal advisor Carl Salans and his Assistant Secretary Lucius Battle. Then-Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board Clark Clifford is on record having told President Lyndon Johnson in a closed National Security Council meeting that the attack was deliberate; he said so again a few days later in a written report for the president. A Central Intelligence Agency official made a similar report to a committee of Congress. The committee report, however, is still withheld from the public. Then-director of the National Security Agency General Marshall Carter and his deputy Louis Tordella agree that the attack was deliberate; so does their senior aide Walter G. Deeley who prepared a still-secret in-house report. So do then-chief of the Central Intelligence Agency Richard Helms and former deputy George Carver. So does Admiral Bobby Inman who headed both intelligence agencies. So do former Under Secretary of the Navy Dr. James Johnson, former Air Force Chief of Intelligence General George Keegan and then-Senior National Security Advisor to SecDef Paul Warnke. Former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Thomas Moorer insists that the attack could not possibly have been a mistake as the Israelis claim. "Even a rag-tag Navy could not have made such a mistake," he says. That beloved patriarch of the modern Navy, Admiral Arleigh "31 knot" Burke, agrees. Lyndon Johnson's press secretary George Christian reports that "no one in the White House" believed the Israeli excuse or believed that the attack was accidental. Even Ronald Reagan once cited the Liberty to his staff as an example of Israeli untrustworthiness. These are responsible people whose views deserve respect. Yet none of that select group was able or willing to speak out publicly in 1967 when that could have made a difference. And no one in government since Dean Rusk has ever challenged the Israeli version of events. Even Rusk did so only under the cloak of top secret diplomatic communications. These views are important. Eyewitness reports of survivors deserve attention. Israeli military officers who offer to describe the attack as seen from the Israeli side should arouse some curiosity in Washington. Yet, any examination of these views and the reasons for them is blocked by spokesmen for the very people who attacked the ship. Except for some brief and highly- classified exceptions, no Member of Congress and no senior government official has ever shown the slightest official curiosity about this affair. Americans should wonder why their government seems not to care. POLICY OF EVASION: NAM VET Newsletter Page 21 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 For 23 years, survivors and other concerned Americans have been asking their government to examine this subject seriously, and for all of that time they have received short shrift. The stock answer, no matter what question or to whom it is addressed, is, "Israel apologized and paid damages. The matter was investigated by the Navy. There is no evidence to support charges that the attack was deliberate." Recently, in attempts to evade the boilerplate, survivors have been asking very specific questions. "Why were rescue aircraft recalled while my ship was still under attack?" "Why did the Court of Inquiry ignore the machine-gunning of our life-rafts?" "Why did the Court of Inquiry report that the flag hung limp at the mast when logs and testimony say otherwise?" "Why were so many key witnesses not interrogated by the court?" Such questions bring more boilerplate, if they are answered at all. "There is no evidence to support charges. . ." the Navy says. Early this year survivors wrote directly to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy, Rear Admiral J. H. Campbell. "If your records lack evidence," they wrote, "it is because the Navy has for more than twenty years refused to accept the evidence that has been offered. We can provide eyewitness testimony by survivors, sworn statements by eyewitnesses on and off the ship, and official U.S. Government files. To whom should we send our evidence?" "Israel apologized and paid damages," a staff officer replied. "The USS Liberty matter is closed." Occasionally, briefly, we get to peek behind the boilerplate. A few days ago, for instance, a senior aide to a California congressman called to say, "My Congressman agrees with what you say, and he would like to help. But what can he do? Any support for Liberty survivors would just bring the wrath of the pro-Israel Lobby and my congressman would be out of office at the next election. Better just to keep quiet." Patrick Henry would have wept. DEAD CREWMEN ARE DISHONORED: Men who are sent to die for their country deserve their country's support in battle. If they give their lives, they and their families deserve their country's honor and respect and an honest accounting of how they died. That has not been the case with the USS Liberty. The USS Liberty was abandoned by her country while under fire, and has been treated disgracefully ever since. Recently, for instance, the mother of a dead shipmate told me she feels, because of our country's attitude toward the attack, as if her son died, not in honorable combat for his country, but in shame. That should not be. This mother should at least temper her loss with the knowledge that her son died proudly for his country. But she has been denied even that. Meanwhile, the cover-up continues. Every year, more vital records mysteriously vanish. Memories fade. Key witnesses die. Every year the truth becomes more elusive. And every year our country's refusal to face the facts of the USS Liberty becomes a larger blot on American honor and on the historical integrity of what passes for American naval history. COVER-UP KEEPS THE ISSUE ALIVE: NAM VET Newsletter Page 22 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 The issue remains alive today because spokesmen for Israel have managed for 23 years to persuade our leaders that any examination of the circumstances might become a platform for political attacks on Israel. That may be true. But domestic crimes don't go unreported for fear of damage to the accused's reputation and this one shouldn't either. In 1990, after 23 years of official cover-up, it is time for forces on both sides of this controversial issue to join together in calling on the Congress for a complete, thorough, no-holds- barred investigation of what really happened to the USS Liberty during the Six Day War. If Israel is innocent, as her supporters maintain, then they have nothing to fear. Israel will be vindicated and the controversy will end. If they believe in Israel's innocence as strongly as they claim, they should insist upon this inquiry to clear her name. If Israel is guilty, as survivors and others maintain, then, too, the matter will finally be laid to rest. If it is not resolved, the controversy will haunt us forever. I was present in 1980 when then-senator Adlai Stevenson III explained to his Senate staff why he had decided to call for an investigation into the Liberty attack. "Because the American people deserve to know the truth," the senator said. To Adlai Stevenson, that was reason enough. Years later, that is still reason enough. --++END++-- BIO: James Ennes retired from the Navy in 1978 as a lieutenant commander after 27 years of enlisted and commissioned service. He was a lieutenant on the bridge of the USS Liberty when the ship was attacked. His book on the subject, Assault on the Liberty (Random House, 1980; Ballantine, 1987), is a "Notable Naval Book" selection of the U.S. Naval Institute and was "editors choice" when reviewed in The Washington Post. SIDE BAR: IN THEIR MEMORY Several government bodies have remembered the men who died in the USS Liberty by proclaiming June 8 "USS Liberty Memorial Day." Those include such major population centers as St. Louis, Boulder, Omaha, Lincoln, Washington, D.C.; Grafton and Milwaukee, Wisconsin; the town of Greece and the county of Monroe, in New York; and the States of Colorado, Nebraska, New York, Washington and Wyoming. Citizens in other cities have arranged to install in public places small monuments in memory of the men who died. Such monuments are now installed or under construction in Sheridan, Wyoming; Bay City and Flint, Michigan; Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; and Hicksville, New York. A major memorial is planned for the Naval and Maritime Museum, Patriot's Point, South Carolina. U.S. Navy buildings in Japan, Florida, California and West Virginia have been named after men who died in the ship. And a public library has been constructed in Grafton, Wisconsin, and named, "The USS Liberty Memorial Public Library." At their 1987 national convention, the Veterans of Foreign Wars passed a resolution calling upon the United States to construct a NAM VET Newsletter Page 23 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 national monument in memory of these men. THE AMERICAN LEGION STONEWALLS: Numerous attempts at getting a resolution through The American Legion have proven unsuccessful. There is currently an appeal being made to the Department of New York to determine the correctness of the procedure followed by one Post (China Post One, Slidell, LA). In rejecting the resolution, China Post One's Board of Directors (two of whom are not qualified for membership in The American Legion) decided to unilaterally reject the resolution without submitting it to the membership for a vote. The effect of that action was to confer upon non-qualified members a voice in establishing The American Legion's National Agenda while denying that same right to qualified members. The appeal was made five years ago and repeated calls and letters to the Department have proven unsuccessful in obtaining a ruling from them. ================================================================= USS LIBERTY VETERANS ASSOCIATION REUNION By: Joe Meadors SeaBat BBS - Corpus Christi, TX (512) 387-6638 Time: June 7-9, 1991 Place: Embassy Suites, Washington, DC For Info, Contact: Bob Hrankowski Airport Systems Travel One Airport Systems Way Suite 100 Rochester International Airport Rochester, New York 14624 Phone: (716)328-8747 (Call Collect) Fax: (716)328-4058 For more information on the USS Liberty incident, contact: USS Liberty Veterans Association 3 Burns Avenue New York, New York 11801 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 ================================================================= I n - T o u c h ================================================================= "In Touch" Unites Families, Friends and Strangers Input by: Ray "Frenchy" Moreau NamVet's IN-TOUCH Section Editor Herndon Byte eXchange - Herndon, VA (703) 471-8010 "We deeply loved our son... but until we met and spoke with his friends and fellow veterans, we did not realize what an impact his short life had made." These words of Frances Rufty, mother of Joe Herne Rufty, were spoken when she and Joe's dad, Archie Rufty, participated with Joe's fellow veterans, Bob Evans and Ken Strafer, in placing a wreath near panel 14 West of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. This panel bears the names of Joe and many of his fellow officers who were killed in an intense battle on January 29, 1970. Bob Evans remembers that day in 1970 only too well. He and Joe were 1st Lieutenants and platoon leaders who had met the previous Christmas Day. Bob liked Joe's warmth his sense of humor. "He helped us laugh when there was nothing to laugh about", Bob recalls. And when he (Joe) was hit, 37 men from Bob's platoon offered to risk their own lives to attempt to rescue Joe. "That's how much they thought of him. They were willing to die to try and save him." For years, Bob wanted to contact Joe's family. Thus, he became one of the first participants in the Friends "In Touch" locator program designed to help families, friends and fellow veterans of those lost in Vietnam to find each other. After "In Touch" located the Rufty family, Bob called them to share his memories of Joe. Bob says that he had mixed feelings about contacting the Rufty's. He was afraid that he might cause them more pain. But once he heard the receptiveness in Archie Rufty's voice, he was very glad he had called. Another connection that "In Touch": made for Bob and the Rufty's was that of Lt. Col. Ken Strafer who served with Joe in basic training, OCS, and Vietnam. In their first phone conversation, the Rufty's told Bob that Ken had written to them, but that they had lost contact with him. They believed that Ken was in the Army and could be in the Washington, DC area. After Ken was located, he invited Bob and the Rufty's to his retirement ceremony scheduled for June 28th. The Rufty's flew in from Las Vegas to attend Lt. Col. Strafer's retirement ceremony *and* to join their son's friends in placing a wreath at the Memorial. Other vets who served with Joe were also present for this tribute. As the wreath was placed, a group gathered to watch and listen, to smile and to cry -- family, friends, and strangers, united by a common bond of gratitude for a young man whose life and death continues to be remembered. NAM VET Newsletter Page 24 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 This tribute to Joe Rufty was filmed by *Reunions*, a newly syndicated television program which will feature this "In Touch" story in one of its premiere episodes this Fall. *Reunions* is also working on another "In Touch" story about Layna McConkey, daughter of Army Capt. Wayne McConkey who was killed in Vietnam, September 17, 1970. Layna's mother died in July, 1989. When Layna was going through her mother's papers, she discovered tapes that her father had sent from Vietnam. On these tapes, Wayne McConkey spoke with fondness of some of his fellow veterans. Layna would like to find these veterans, and *Reunions* is going to help "In Touch" in this search. "In Touch" *IS* AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME. As expected, Al Santoli's moving article, "We Never Knew Our Fathers" which ran in Parade magazine on Memorial Day week-end, resulted in over 1,000 calls, letters, pleas for help, and offers of assistance. An especially nice benefit is the fact that all four of the young adults featured in the article, Tony Cordero, Michelle Mitchel, Sharrie Downing and Wende Ruffin, have been contacted by persons who knew their fathers. Danielle Sanville, another daughter for whom "In Touch" has made a connection, learned that her dad had printed her name and those of her mother and sister on his helmet. He said, "Here I am with the names of three girls on my helmet. The guys must think I'm quite a lover, and I am because I sure do love my girls." Danielle wrote us, "I sat on the floor and cried. To me, it was my dad's way of telling me he loved me. Only I didn't hear it for 22 years." The *Parade* article has also produced a positive response to Sons and Daughters In Touch, a network to facilitate support and communication among children of men who died in Vietnam. Hundreds of letters express gratitude to Tony Cordero who founded the network and initiated the *Parade* article. Lynn Welch Davis, daughter of SFC. Donald Walter Welch, killed in Duc Lap on August 23, 1968, Wrote: "All my life I grew up wondering if there were other children like me. None of my friends had lost their fathers, and I found it difficult to talk with them about my feelings. I had always prayed that someday I would find others like me, someone who could understand how I felt... When I read your story I broke into tears because at long last my prayers had been answered... I hardly know anything about my father and would like to find anyone who might have served with him... I have nowhere else to turn for help in my search." AN UNEXPECTED BONUS OF THE PUBLICITY ABOUT "IN TOUCH" AND SONS AND DAUGHTERS IN TOUCH HAS BEEN THE FORMATION OF ADDITIONAL NETWORKS. Siblings In Touch is being coordinated by Melinda Knapp and JoAnn Seyfried whose brothers died in Vietnam. A Vietnam Widows Research Project has been initiated by Peggy Borsey, Ph.D., whose husband died in Vietnam, and Jacki M. Beatty, MSN, RN, sister of a Vietnam Veteran. They want to hear from any Vietnam widows (whether or not they have remarried) and will, in turn, furnish their participants with printed summaries of their research. NAM VET Newsletter Page 25 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 Also, sons and daughters of veterans lost in World War II and Korea have written that they, too, have longed for a support network as well as a means of finding persons who knew their fathers. The World War II Orphans network is being coordinated by Ann Bennet Mix, daughter of Sidney Bennet, KIA, April 19, 1945. "In Touch" has been likened to a tree with the locator program, Sons and Daughters In Touch, the Vietnam Widows Project, Siblings In Touch, and even sons and daughters of persons killed in Korea and World War II, being branches of the "In Touch" tree. If you are a leaf on one of these branches and would like to participate in any of these programs, please write to "In Touch" c/o FVVM 1224 M St. NW Washington D.C. 20005. Your letter will be forwarded to the appropriate coordinator. The tremendous response to "In Touch" would not have been as overwhelming had it not been for some special groups. Electronic Data Systems (EDS) has designed the data management system. Zenith Data Systems, Hewlett-Packard, Borland International, Quarterdeck Office Systems and Fastcomm Communications have contributed computer equipment and peripherals. EDS and Zenith employees have volunteered to help with publicity and data entry. These contributions really make the difference for "In Touch". Many people write or call to ask how they can help. We suggest that they spread the word to friends, churches, and local news media. This will do two things. First, the more participants in the locator program, the more "matches" we will have, that is, the more people who will locate those persons with whom they need to be "In Touch". Secondly, we need funding to operate this program. If you help us tell people about "In Touch", please emphasize that there is no charge to participate, but that so far "In Touch" has received no government or corporate funds. For this reason donations are needed. If you would like to help with "In Touch", please write or call. If you live in the Washington D.C. metro area, we need volunteers in the office. And wherever you live, you can help by spreading the word. NAM VET Newsletter Page 26 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 In-Touch. What is it ??? Input by: Ray "Frenchy" Moreau NAM VETs IN-TOUCH Section Editor Herndon Byte eXchange - Herndon, VA (703) 471-8010 ================================================================= |+++++++++++++++++++++++++ IN TOUCH ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++| | There are some 43 million people in the United States whose | | lives were directly and irrevocably touched by the Vietnam | | War. | | | | Almost four million people served in Vietnam -- the longest, | | and perhaps most difficult, war in our history. More than a | | quarter of a million were seriously wounded. 58,175 are dead | | or missing. | | | | Each of those who returned recognizes the true cost of war. | | But so too do the families and friends, wives and lovers of | | those listed on the Wall. They too paid a tremendous price, | | not always recognized... many still do. | | | | Though twenty years have passed, it seems that is the period | | people have needed to get the distance necessary to begin to | | address the unresolved, deeply personal issues that have | | been haunting them since the war. Perhaps that is a measure | | of the pain. | | | | But, the "healing of a nation" that was intended by the | | building of the Memorial, has begun. | | | | In the office of the Friends of the Vietnam Veterans | | Memorial, we hear them on the other end of the phone on | | any given day, and far into the night, they call from all | | corners of the country. | | | | "If only I could find out..." | | "I need to find his family so I can keep my promise..." | | "I just want to talk to someone who was with him... " | | "Please, can you help...?" | | | | At the Wall, we find them every day. Veterans who have not | | spoken of their experiences even to their most intimate | | family members are now beginning, tentatively, to seek a | | responsive ear. | | | | Brothers and sisters, parents and even wives who were simply | | never allowed full expression of their grief because of the | | fierce pressures of the time, are now coming forward, | | looking for someone who can help with their healing. | | | | We hear from children, now 15 - 25 years old, who are | | searching for bits and pieces of information they can | | assemble to help fill that empty place in their lives that | | is the father they never knew well, if at all. And they want | | to talk to each other, to share their special needs and the | | unique experience of growing up with a father on the Wall. | | They understand each other all too well. | NAM VET Newsletter Page 27 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 | | | Millions of Americans need to meet and talk because of the | | Wall, and only the Friends can help them. | | | | Initial discussions with many other national organizations | | whose work brings them into contact with Vietnam veterans | | and their loved ones have attested to the need for IN TOUCH | | and their willingness to help. | | | | Simply put, the Friends will draw on its special work at the | | Memorial, its acquired and available data bases and | | programs designed and integrated by Electronic Data Systems | | (EDS), and the commitment and concern of its volunteers to | | place people with a common association to a name on the Wall | | to be in voluntary communication with each other. | | | | From there, we will let human nature take its good course. | | And let the healing begin. | | | | The starting point for the data base will be the more than | | twenty thousand names of people who have requested name | | rubbings from our volunteers in Washington. Each will be | | contacted and given the opportunity to participate by being | | listed in the IN TOUCH central data base file. | | | | Confidentiality is the keyword to cooperation and IN TOUCH | | will respect the integrity of all lists and records. Lists | | will be unavailable for public use and will not be | | distributed for any commercial purpose. | | | | By its nature, IN TOUCH must reach far beyond the veterans | | community in order to be successful. With professional | | guidance, the Friends will develop a program of on-going | | articles and other coverage in major media markets, high- | | lighting the personal experiences of people as they are put | | "in touch." The International Vietnam Veterans Echo | | Conference via the Herndon Byte eXchange 1:109/316 node as | | the enter point for gathering and disseminating information | | will be used. Aside from bringing the program into public | | awareness, these articles and stories will serve as a val- | | uable tool for public education on a wealth of matters | | relating to the Vietnam era. | | | | As a preliminary test of the IN TOUCH project, the Friends | | has implemented a pilot project to test the design and | | demands of such a program. Several hundred requests with | | full background information have been entered into a system | | designed to match requestor data with the existing Memorial | | data. Even with such a small sample, limited data and a | | fairly unsophisticated cross-indexing system, matches have | | been made and IN TOUCH has produced its first real | | connections. The results have been as profoundly moving for | | the participants as expected. And as gratifying for the | | Friends. | | | | But it was clear that the information management system and | | the supporting hardware system would have to be more power- | | ful and more complex in order to handle thousands, perhaps | | hundreds of thousands, of requests. Confidentiality of the | NAM VET Newsletter Page 28 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 | system and information must be paramount. | | | | With well over 2,000 Vietnam veterans, Electronic Data | | Systems (EDS) became involved and has been generous in its | | assistance with designing the data management systems which | | will be critical to a successful program. The Friends have | | reached a three-year working agreement with EDS which | | promises continuity and maximum potential for success in | | building an information bank that can truly help people in | | their search for others who knew a loved one. | | | | The Friends are delighted that Bob Hope has agreed to make | | a public service announcement which we can use on radio and | | television to help get the word out to the public on the | | availability of the service. | | | | The Friends are also pleased to note that Hewlett Packard, | | Zenith Data Systems, Borland International, FASTCOMM | | Communications Corporation and the First National Bank of | | Chicago have all contributed computer equipment, computer | | software, and office equipment to the project, so they are | | beginning to feel fully functional. | | | | The Friends hear from people who have long been living with | | the pain of loss and looking for a way to heal. For | | instance, the Friends recently received a letter from a | | woman who wrote: | | | | Dear Friends: | | For quite some time I have been searching for a | | way to know my brother. It seems hopeless at times. | | I was 12 when he was killed... I had waited for the | | day he would come back to us. He never did. A part | | of me will always be 12 and continue to wait. | | Thank you for giving me hope that there may be | | a way to find him and bring him home to my heart..." | | | | + + + | | | | The Friends of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial | | Electronic Data Systems | | Herndon Byte eXchange TCOMMnet BBS 1:109/316 | | | |+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++| NAM VET Newsletter Page 29 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 IN-TOUCH Registration/Request Form Input by: Ray "Frenchy" Moreau NAM VETs IN-TOUCH Section Editor Herndon Byte eXchange - Herndon, VA (703) 471-8010 THIS FORM REQUIRES SIGNATURE FOR CONFIDENTIALITY RELEASE PLEASE READ BELOW ------------------------------------------------------------------ I wish to be IN TOUCH with (Please circle and/or comment) Family, Friends and/or Fellow Veterans of the following: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ ----------- PERSON WHO DID NOT COME BACK FROM VIETNAM ------------ First Name_____________ Middle Name___________ Last Name__________ Relationship to You and/or Reason for Request (Answer as fully as possible)_____________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ ================================================================== -------- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT HIM/HER - IF KNOWN --------- Rank_______ Birth Date ______________ Soc. Sec. # ________________ Tour Date of Birth _______________ Where Buried __________________ Branch of Service: AR__ NA__ AF__ MC__ CG__ RC__ CIV__ (Fill in his/her equivalent unit designations in the spaces below) Division ____________ Brigade ___________ Battalion ______________ Regiment ____________ Company ___________ Ship ___________________ Battles:__________________________________________________________ Locations:________________________________________________________ Nicknames:________________________________________________________ Hometown (while in Nam): ____________________ Home State: ________ ================================================================== ---------------------- INFORMATION ABOUT YOU --------------------- Title___ First Name ____________ Middle/Maiden Name _____________ Last Name ____________________ Address___________________________________________________________ City __________________________________ State ____ Zip: _____-____ Your Home Phone ( ) ____________ Work Phone: ( ) ____________ ---------------- IF YOU ARE A VIETNAM-ERA VETERAN ---------------- Tour date _______________________________ Rank __________________ Branch of Service: AR__ NA __ AF __ MC __ CG __ RC __ CIV __ Fill in your equivalent unit designations in the spaces below Division: __________ Brigade: ___________ Battalion: ___________ Regiment: __________ Company: ___________ Ship: ________________ Battles: _________________________________________________________ Locations: _______________________________________________________ Nicknames: _______________________________________________________ Hometown (when in VN) _______________________ Home State: ________ Comments: ________________________________________________________ NAM VET Newsletter Page 30 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT _____ I give permission to the Friends of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial to release my name, address, phone number and relationship to other participants in the IN TOUCH project seeking information on the individual above (strike out phone number if you do not want it released). OR _____ I would like to have the names, addresses, and phone numbers of persons who knew my friend or relative, but prefer NOT to have my name, address, and phone number released. I hereby release the Friends of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial from any and all liability that may arise from the operation of the IN TOUCH project. Signature ____________________________________ Date _____________ NOTE: Do not electronically transmit this form, instead mail to: Friends of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 1350 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 ----------------------------------------------------------------- NAM VET Newsletter Page 31 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 INNOCENCE By: Michael A. Harris Republic of Vietnam 1968-69 We left this soil, trained to kill. Men and women, so young at heart. The ravages of war, quickly changed our will. It was so very obvious, from the start. Our innocence seared, we struggled and fought. Confused and weary, we saw many die. Who is this God, so many have sought? He seems so distant, can He hear our cry? As the war raged on, we grew so hard. Losing our youth, we stumbled and fell. Curses put on us, we were broken and charred. Where are you God, in this living hell? Finally it ceased, going home at last. Never to worry, welcomed for our deeds. We found out soon, it wasn't as the past. Our nation changed, it didn't see our needs. There was a new war, upon our arrival. Instead of comfort, came rejection and pain. We retreated within, for our own survival. Dreams and ambitions, never renewed again. Growing ever so bitter, we kept asking "Why?". Did God forsake us, when we needed Him most? We cried out in battle, watching many die. Where is this God, the Lord of Host? He knows every sparrow, that falls from the sky? And every single hair, that is upon our head? Why did He leave us, in those fields to die? He could have intervened, and saved instead. Years have passed, I have begun to heal. My defenses relenting, I want what's true. Tired of hiding, I seek what is real. It's good to be cheerful, not being so blue. The reports are coming, He was there after all. They seem to be credible, as I begin to look. The hardness is softening, as I hear Him call. I see He is Almighty, as I search His book. What about our Brothers, who fell at our side? This I've given to Him, He knows what's best. His arms are outstretched, His gates open wide. What a peace to give all, and dwell in His rest! NAM VET Newsletter Page 32 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 ================================================================= T h e N a m V e t C h a p e l ================================================================= ???BORN AGAIN??? What Does it Mean? By: Mike Harris NamVet Guest Chaplain AFIMS - Everett, WA (206) 486-0609 Subject A Subject B --------- --------- Alcoholic Non-drinker Drug user Drug free Sexually promiscuous Faithful or celibate Lonely Many friends Angry At peace Financial instability Able employee Guilt ridden Free from Guilt Hard hearted Able to love Suicidal High esteem Bad Dreams Restful nights Lack of trust Freedom to trust Relational suicide Solid relationships Without hope Full of hope If you had a choice to be in the shoes of one of these two individuals which would you prefer? If you are honest with yourself, you would most likely say "Subject B". How many of us have experienced or are still experiencing many of "Subject A's" characteristics? You may not have all, but do share some. Many of you have seen my posts on the Vietnam Echo from time to time. I truly enjoy being a part of such an Echo. As soon as I get home from the days work I usually rush to my little laptop and try to get on the board. If it is busy I continue until I get through. When I miss a few days I can't wait to get back in to see what I have been missing. Being on an Echo is an interesting means of communication. You very seldom see the other person face to face. Perhaps some will say in private what they would never say to another in person. You get used to "regular users" and begin to understand how they think. Just when you think you have them figured out they fool you with a response. New users come and go. Clicks seem to form. No yelling. No screaming. No crying. No laughing. Out loud that is! The silence is broken only by the clicking of the keys of your computer. Silently you share other peoples lives. The Vietnam Echo is special to us former soldiers. We are able to share our pasts as well as our futures. Our victories as well as our defeats. Our concerns as well as our opinions. This article reveals much about its writer. You see, I used to be "Subject A". His attributes were drawn from my past. I am willing to expose my past to reveal to you my present and future. I have been transformed to "Subject B" over these last nine years. I used to live in misery but now I live with hope in my heart. Old NAM VET Newsletter Page 33 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 things are passing away and new things happen in my life daily. It has not been an easy road, but I would not trade if for anything! We have all heard of being "Born Again". Some of us have never gone beyond hearing the phrase. Others have heard it but have never understood what it means. Even christians reading this may not quite understand it. It carries a stigma and has had many interpretations through the centuries. Some make it sound like a "hard" thing to attain. Others feel they can never attain to it. Why? I submit to you that it is simple and can be attained very easily. It is man that makes it seem so elusive! Being Born Again can be likened to our natural birth. After we are born we are totally dependent upon our parents. We can do nothing functional of ourselves. Mom and Dad even have to hold our heads up for us. As we grow, we learn how to crawl and then to walk. To talk and reason. Life is a continual learning process. As we grow, we grow in wisdom, knowledge, and understanding. Then death comes and we go the way of all mankind. What is our hope beyond death? Do we really know what to expect? Man is made up of Spirit, Soul, and Body. In the Garden, Adam and Eve were complete in God. They communed with Him daily in obedience. God had told them never to partake of the fruit of the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". If they did, then He said, "Thou shalt surely die". He had His reasons. Then the serpent beguiled Eve and man fell out of the grace of God. They died and thus we die still today. What hope do we have then? If we will search with our hearts, the greatest hope we could ever obtain is waiting for us. The bible says, "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine HEART that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." (Romans 10:9) Does this seem difficult? It was for me for many years. In January of 1981 I was sorely distraught because I had tried and tried to quit marijuana and speed. In 1976 I had quit alcohol and replaced it with drugs. Just prior to that winter day I had gone without drugs for 40 days. Victory seemed within reach when a friend stopped by and I fell one more time. In frustration I angrily yelled at God. "If you are real, then make yourself real to me!" I begged. Nothing happened. Three days later, while sitting in my kitchen alone, God spoke to me in a way no one had ever spoken before. I know now that it was in my spirit. He said, "Flush your drugs down the toilet!" I was shocked! In response I said, "What about Randy, he uses them too?" He came right back with, "He doesn't need them either, flush them down the toilet!" I went to the freezer, got my bags of marijuana and pills, and flushed them down the toilet in obedience. It wasn't hard. It was easy! I knew He was serious. It felt good! That day I accepted Him with my HEART. He was faithful and made Himself real to me. I have not used drugs in almost ten years. He has healed me! NAM VET Newsletter Page 34 Volume 4, Number 11 November 10, 1990 Something special happened that day. My spirit came alive. Without Him, it was dead. He quickened me and planted His ETERNAL SEED within me. I want you to know that that SEED is Jesus Christ! (Galatians 3:16) He died upon the cross for you and I and the Father raised Him from the dead. We can now have victory over death. Eternal life entered my being that day in 81. What is eternal cannot die! God's Holy Spirit came to dwell within me. I will never look back! Jesus, while talking to the Pharisee Nicodemus, stated that, "Except a man be Born Again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3) He was speaking of being born "of the Spirit." This happens by believing upon Him with our HEART, not our head. He went on to tell Nicodemus that, "God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have EVERLASTING LIFE." (John 3:16) On that day in 1981 I knew that God was real and my life had changed. That SEED within me began to be nourished and grow. I was like natural baby. I could not even crawl. God had to hold my head up. He began feeding me through home bible studies at first and gave me another single brother to study the bible most nights with. We ate popcorn and the Word of God night after night. He flooded us to overflowing! He showed us His Word was penned by man but inspired by Himself. I tried in vain to prove it wrong. He showed me the Trinity and how to give my burdens to Him. In the Summer of 81 He spoke to me again. This time it was even more powerful. I was driving down a country road by myself when out of nowhere He said, "You can deal with multitudes of people!" Goosebumps rose up all over my body and my hair stood on end. The God of the universe was speaking to me again! He hesitated, then added, "But... you must deal with YOURSELF first!" My mind reeled as I tried to fathom what He meant. Silence. That was all He had to say. As I continued to study His Word, it began to take on a new perspective. He began showing me who I really was. It was not pretty. From that point on I began lightening my rucksack by giving Him the dross in my soul. A lot of things were hard to give over because I felt I couldn't do without them. Every time I went to Him in true repentance, He would give me the GRACE to overcome in another area. I wouldn't trade it for anything! You see, that SEED of Christ is continuing to grow in me. The Holy Spirit lives within me and is cleansing my soul so the Father and Son can come and dwell with me and in me as They did with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. (John 14:23) When I was first born, I was born of a corruptible seed. But now I am "Born Again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." (1 Peter 1:23) I do not know exactly where I am at in His plan for me. I may still be crawling and drinking milk. On the other hand, I may be waddling and eating solids. One thing I do know. I am no longer "Subject A"! You can also partake of the SEED of Christ Brothe