File under: 'Omission Accomplished' (Ann Coulter exposes truth about Sen. Cleland, answers critics)

WND.com ^ | February 18, 2004 | Ann Coulter

[perfect stranger]

Liberals are hopping mad about last week's column. Amid angry insinuations that I "lied" about Sen. Max Cleland, I was attacked on the Senate floor by Sen. Jack Reed, Molly Ivins called my column "error-ridden," and Al Hunt called it a "lie." Joe Klein said I was the reason liberals were being hysterical about George Bush's National Guard service.

I would have left it at one column, but apparently Democrats want to go another round. With their Clintonesque formulations, my detractors make it a little difficult to know what "lie" I'm supposed to be contesting, but they are clearly implying – without stating – that Cleland lost his limbs in combat.

It is simply a fact that Max Cleland was not injured by enemy fire in Vietnam. He was not in combat, he was not – as Al Hunt claimed – on a reconnaissance mission, and he was not in the battle of Khe Sanh, as many others have implied. He picked up an American grenade on a routine noncombat mission and the grenade exploded.

In Cleland's own words: "I didn't see any heroism in all that. It wasn't an act of heroism. I didn't know the grenade was live. It was an act of fate." That is why Cleland didn't win a Purple Heart, which is given to those wounded in combat. Liberals are not angry because I "lied"; they're angry because I told the truth.

I wouldn't press the point except that Democrats have deliberately "sexed up" the circumstances of Cleland's accident in the service of slandering the people of Georgia, the National Guard and George Bush. Cleland has questioned Bush's fitness for office because he served in the National Guard but did not go to Vietnam.

And yet the poignant truth of Cleland's own accident demonstrates the commitment and bravery of all members of the military who come into contact with ordnance. Cleland's injury was of the routine variety that occurs whenever young men and weapons are put in close proximity – including in the National Guard.

But it is a vastly more glorious story to claim that Cleland was injured by enemy fire rather than in a freak accident. So after Saxby Chambliss beat Cleland in the 2002 Georgia Senate race, liberals set to work developing a carefully crafted myth about Cleland's accident. Among many other examples, last November, Eric Boehlert wrote in Salon: "[D]uring the siege of Khe Sanh, Cleland lost both his legs and his right hand to a Viet Cong grenade."

Sadly for them, dozens and dozens of newspapers have already printed the truth. Liberals simply can't grasp the problem Lexis-Nexis poses to their incessant lying. They ought to stick to their specialty – hysterical overreaction. The truth is not their forte.

One of the most detailed accounts of Cleland's life was written by Jill Zuckman in a lengthy piece for the Boston Globe Sunday magazine on Aug. 3, 1997:

Finally, the battle at Khe Sanh was over. Cleland, 25 years old, and two members of his team were now ordered to set up a radio relay station at the division assembly area, 15 miles away. The three gathered antennas, radios and a generator and made the 15-minute helicopter trip east. After unloading the equipment, Cleland climbed back into the helicopter for the ride back. But at the last minute, he decided to stay and have a beer with some friends. As the helicopter was lifting off, he shouted to the pilot that he was staying behind and jumped several feet to the ground.

Cleland hunched over to avoid the whirring blades and ran. Turning to face the helicopter, he caught sight of a grenade on the ground where the chopper had perched. It must be mine, he thought, moving toward it. He reached for it with his right arm just as it exploded, slamming him back and irreparably altering his plans for a bright, shining future.

Interestingly, all news accounts told the exact same story for 30 years – including that Cleland had stopped to have beer with friends when the accident occurred (a fact that particularly irked Al Hunt).

"He told the pilot he was going to stay awhile. Maybe have a few beers with friends. ... Then Cleland looked down and saw a grenade. Where'd that come from? He walked toward it, bent down, and crossed the line between before and after." (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Dec. 5, 1999)

"[Cleland] didn't step on a land mine. He wasn't wounded in a firefight. He couldn't blame the Viet Cong or friendly fire. The Silver Star and Bronze Star medals he received only embarrassed him. He was no hero. He blew himself up." (Baltimore Sun, Oct. 24, 1999)

"Cleland was no war hero, but his sacrifice was great. ... Democratic Senate candidate Max Cleland is a victim of war, not a casualty of combat. He lost three limbs on a long-forgotten hill near Khe Sanh because of some American's mistake ..." (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Sept. 29, 1996)

The story started to change only last year when the Democrats began citing Cleland's lost Senate seat as proof that Republicans hate war heroes. Indeed, until the myth of Republicans attacking Cleland for his lack of "patriotism" became central to the Democrats' narrative against George Bush, Cleland spoke only honorably and humbly about his accident. "How did I become a war hero?" he said to the Boston Globe reporter in 1997. "Simple. The grenade went off."

Cleland even admitted that, but for his accident, he would have "probably been some frustrated history teacher, teaching American government at some junior college." (OK, I got that wrong: I said he'd probably be a pharmacist.)

Cleland's true heroism came after the war, when he went on to build a productive life for himself. That is a story of inspiration and courage. He shouldn't let the Democrats tarnish an admirable life by "sexing up" his record in order to better attack George Bush.

[an amused spectator]

And Joe Conason strikes out again! What an idiot he is!

Oh, how delicious! Joey Conningsome's little head exploded over Ann's original column!

When you read his latest effort, you can see him picking carefully through the "minefield" (pardon the war pun) that Coulter left for her ravening pursuers. Positively Clintonian, but Conason suckled at the crotch of the master himself.

At least Joe knew there what the peanut butter on the beer can was for, you have to give him that much. ;-)

[Bonaparte]

Ann is too kind. Since the democrats started morphing Cleland's injury into a "combat wound," he has done nothing to set the record straight. His silence is deafening.

[SevenDaysInMay]

You're missing THE point.

From the age of 28, Max became a DNC apparatchik and a refuge from elected office and appointed gravy.

For the current slander of X43, Max allowed his record to be grossly shamefully misrepresented in the national media.

I suspect that Max's medals were sexed up by Westmoreland's political machinery in the first place, but Max is clearly culpable in his current service as a DNC political hitman.

Max is a cripple, but now his his character is crippled.

Max volunteered for this free-fire zone.

For his pasrt in the Bush slander, Max just picked up his second grenade.

From now on, Max will be just another pathetic hack.

[T'wit]

>> At least Joe knew there what the peanut butter on the beer can was for, you have to give him that much. ;-)

I don't. Can you explain? Freepmail if necessary :-)

[T'wit]

>> Her previous title, "Cleland drops a political grenade", was offensive.

It may not have been her title. Typically a syndicated column is sent out with a suggested title, but the publications where it appears may reserve rights to do their own titles, shorten the column, etc.

I have no information whether this is her title or someone else's. It doesn't bother me at all.

[an amused spectator]

In certain remote parts of the country, a mouse or vermin trap is constructed as "the gift that keeps on giving", to wit [pardon the pun, T'wit]:

A five gallon bucket, a straightened coat hanger, a beer can with a hole in either end, a wooden ramp, peanut butter, and lastly, a quart or two of antifreeze for those oh-so-cold winters.

The beer can is suspended (so that it spins freely) over the five gallon bucket with the coat hanger, and is "liberally" [**snicker**] smeared with peanut butter. The antifreeze serves as the 5 million lap Olympic pool.

The vermin scampers up the wooden ramp, and cannot help itself as it seeks to secure the delicious peanut butter on the innocuous beer can. A short jump, a quick "whirrrrr", and the vermin begins the marathon Olympic swimming competition.

Never seen one win yet. ;-)

[T'wit]

>> Conason suckled at the crotch of the master himself.

Delicately put :-)

Funny. Paula Jones took one look and said no way, that thing's all crooked! She was miles ahead of all those 'Rat writers in knee pads.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[T'wit]

LOL! War brings out some ingenius sports. If you put two vermin traps side by side, you could hold races and place bets.

Thanks for that vivid description :-)

Did you ever see the WWII Bill Mauldin cartoon of Willie aiming a '45 at a rat from a range of about 4 inches and Joe saying, "Aim between the eyes. Sometimes they charge if they're wounded."

[an amused spectator]

Oh, yeah.

My Mauldin library is extensive. ;-)

[King Prout]

Cleland's true heroism came after the war, when he went on to build a productive life for himself.

At least she has something nice to say rather than the earlier "he drops a grenade, har de har har!" title she had for the other column.

she said almost exactly the same thing about Cleland's post-war successful life in her first article.

[optimistically_conservative]

I'm glad Ann wrote this column.

Max Cleland is not a war hero because of what happened on 8 April, he is a war hero for his actions leading up to that and his distinguished heroism on 4 April. He is heroic, as Ann says, for putting his life back together and accomplishing what he has. IMNSHO, his bitterness and loss of humility since losing the election has tarnished him. His willingness to belittle the service of another and let others conflate his service, is disreputable.

The libs that "sex up" or lie about what happened on 8 April are no better than the "conservatives" that belittle Cleland's service or lie about it.

Some interesting contrasts:

Then:

There was no bravery involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight.

Now:

And yet the poignant truth of Cleland's own accident demonstrates the commitment and bravery of all members of the military who come into contact with ordnance.

In the previous article, she restated the "dropped a grenade on himself" twice.

FWIW, I think she still has her facts twisted on Khe Sanh.

Then:

But he didn't "give his limbs for his country," or leave them "on the battlefield."

Now:

... and he was not in the battle of Khe Sanh ...

He picked up an American grenade on a routine noncombat mission and the grenade exploded.

Let's be clear about this. He was in the battle of Khe Sanh, Operation Pegasus, in which combat operations were on-going when Cleland earned his Silver Star, and later when he was injured. He was not injured in combat.

The Free World Counteroffensive

At 0800 on 8 April, the relief of the Khe Sanh Combat Base wasaccomplished as the 3d Brigade airlifted its command post into the base and assumed the mission of securing the position. The 2d Battalion, 7th Cavalry, cleared Route 9 to the base and linked up with the marines.

By this time it was apparent that the enemy had chosen to flee rather than face the highly mobile Americans. Vast amounts of new equipment were abandoned in place by the North Vietnamese as they hastily retreated.

Nevertheless, the enemy maintained some order in his withdrawal. At 0350 on 8 April, an element of the Vietnamese Army Airborne Task Force near the command post of the 3d Vietnamese Airborne Battalion was attacked. For over four hours the clash continued before the enemy withdrew leaving almost 75 dead behind. Later that afternoon, the 3d, 6th, and 8th Vietnamese Army Airborne Task Force closed in at Landing Zone SNAKE and began operations along Route 9 to the west.

The final battle of the operation took place on Easter Sunday, 14 April. The location was ironically between Hills 881 S and 881 N where the battle for Khe Sanh had started on 20 January. The 3d Battalion, 26th Marines, attacked from Hill 881 S to seize Hill 881 N and met heavy resistance. The marines prevailed, and the enemy withdrew leaving over 100 dead behind.

Using Ann's criteria, there have been 100s of soldiers that have died in Iraq the past year on routine non-combat missions since March 2002. They have been ambushed. Most famously the 507th Maintenance Company, not a unit we send on combat missions. They have been killed by IEDs. And they have been killed in all kinds of accidents.

There are obviously still some inconsistencies in the story on what happened on 8 April 1968. The story he got back on and then jumped off doesn't jive with the 2000 account from Lloyd here and here.

[js1138]

Ann is never PC. that is not her job. But the dems are lying about this. She is merely politically incorrect. It sometimes takes shock to call attention to factual lies.

[js1138]

it was stupid

I'm wondering about this. Was it his own grenade? Who carries prepared grenades on a helicopter? Sorry, but I really don't know the answer to this.

what we are talking about is a grenade with the pin partially pulled, the safety off, so to speak. The pin is split like a cotter pin, and normally spread so it can't fall out. The reason for this is obvious from the evidence of this accident.

[T'wit]

I just made a lengthy search for it. No luck. A couple of dozen other specimens available online (from UP FRONT), but not that one.

[T'wit]

I think what you're looking at is slightly ambiguous wording, not a misstatement of facts.

Ann prefaced her Khe Sanh comment with this >>> It is simply a fact that Max Cleland was not injured by enemy fire in Vietnam.

Iow, she was talking about where and when he got his injury and she denies that it was in combat or on patrol or in that battle. In context, her comment is not to be read as a factual misstatement. She knows he was in the the fight at Khe Sanh four days earlier, but her point is, that's not where he was wounded. She is simply refuting the Democrat myth about him having combat wounds.

[Slings and Arrows]

Sure, she has brains and beauty. But looking at that picture, I sense a certain emptiness in Ms. Coulter ... a missing element ... a longing that only spodeflySlings and Arrows can fill.

You should proofread before you post.

[optimistically_conservative]

I think what you're looking at is slightly ambiguous wording, not a misstatement of facts.

It is simply a fact that Max Cleland was not injured by enemy fire in Vietnam.

This is true, a fact.

He was not in combat, he was he was not – as Al Hunt claimed – on a reconnaissance mission, and he was not in the battle of Khe Sanh, as many others have implied.

He was not in combat at the time he was injured. Cleland was part of the combat operation to retake Khe Sahn, Operation Pegasus, earning the Silver Star for his actions during ACTIVE ENEMY hostilities on 4 April. His mission on 8 April was part of that continuing combat operation.

Maybe I'm just confused about which operations during Operation Pagasus were a "routine noncombat mission" and which ones were not.

Finally, the battle at Khe Sanh was over.

I consider this to be false, factually incorrect and unambiguously so. You may disagree, in that the Khe Sanh Combat Base that had been under siege was relieved at 0800 on the day Cleland was injured. However, that was not the battle of/for Khe Sanh. The battle for Khe Sahn began at Hilltops 881N/S on 20 January and ended there on 14 April.

If Ann can be excused for getting this wrong because Jill Zuckman wrote in the Boston Globe Sunday magazine 30 years later, "Finally, the battle at Khe Sanh was over.", then I guess I'll have to shed my cynicism of "journalists" in accurately reporting current events much less historical ones.

[optimistically_conservative]

Correction to second paragraph:

and he was not in the battle of Khe Sanh

I consider this to be false, factually incorrect and unambiguously so. You may disagree, in that the Khe Sanh Combat Base that had been under siege was relieved at 0800 on the day Cleland was injured. However, that was not the battle of/for Khe Sanh. The battle for Khe Sahn began at Hilltops 881N/S on 20 January and ended there on 14 April. If Ann can be excused for getting this wrong because Jill Zuckman wrote in the Boston Globe Sunday magazine 30 years later, "Finally, the battle at Khe Sanh was over.", then I guess I'll have to shed my cynicism of "journalists" in accurately reporting current events much less historical ones.

[lowbridge]

bump