Posted on 05/28/2007 6:23:37 PM PDT by kellynla
Unless you are prepared to learn how your government callously abandoned hundreds of your fellow Americans to decades of continued imprisonment at the hands of their brutal captors and jailers in Vietnam and Laos, you may prefer to ignore America's shame and avoid reading this shocking book.
Read it you must, however.
America needs to know about one of the sorriest chapters in our history, and what has to be done to make amends.
"An Enormous Crime The Definitive Account of American POWS Abandoned in Southeast Asia" is a bone-chilling account of one of those crimes that call to heaven for vengeance. It is an incredibly well-researched documentary that spells out in frightening detail how a nation that prides itself on its compassion for others turned its back on hundreds of its own. [Editor's Note: to get your copy of "An Enormous Crime The Definitive Account of American POWS Abandoned in Southeast Asia, Click Here Now.]
For the past 25 years, authors Bill Hendon and Elizabeth Stewart doggedly pursued the mystery of what happened to hundreds of American POWs missing in Vietnam and Laos in the wake of the Vietnam war.
Shockingly, their research has revealed that they were simply abandoned by the United States government. Then, the government devoted 30 years to keeping the fate of these men secret, according to Hendon and Stewart.
Captives Held for Ransom
In a forward to the book, the authors explain that while hundreds of Americans were captured, imprisoned and released at war's end at the so-called " Operation Homecoming,' hundreds more were similarly captured and imprisoned but were held back by the communists at Homecoming to ensure payment of billions of dollars in postwar reconstruction aid promised them by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger.
Watergate intervened, the aid was not paid, and these prisoners have never never been released."
While the federal government continued to deny that any POWs have been unaccounted for, Hendon and Stewart provide convincing evidence that hundreds of them have remained captive long after the end of the war. They provide evidence of hundreds of post war sightings and intelligence reports revealing that Americans were being held throughout Vietnam and Laos, yet Washington did nothing about their plight.
There were numerous secret military signals and codes which were sent by the desperate POWs themselves, yet the Pentagon still did not act. As late as 1988 a U.S. spy satellite passing over Sam Neua Province in Laos, spotted the 12-foot-tall letters "U.S.A." and immediately beneath them a huge highly classified Vietnam war-era I SAF/USN "escape and invasion" code in a rice paddy in a narrow mountain Valley.
As the authors say, tragically, the brave men who constructed these codes have yet to come home.
Among the horrifying revelations in this book:
Acting on advice of the Fidel Castro, the North Vietnamese from the very beginning of the war set out to capture American servicemen with the intent of ransoming them for postwar reconstruction aid, just as Castro had ransomed the Bay of Pigs prisoners. According to the authors, classified evidence shows that just as Castro did with the Bay of Pigs prisoners, the Vietnamese by late 1972 held more than 1,200 American Prisoners.
The U.S. pledged in accords and a secret presidential letter at the January 1973 Paris peace negotiations to pay the North Vietnamese a staggering $4.5 billion dollars to rebuild their war-damaged country. In return, the North Vietnamese promised to free all the American POWs they held. It was only after those accords were signed later that month that the North Vietnamese stated they only intended to set 577 Americans free during Operation Homecoming. Say the authors, U.S. officials privately agreed that the enemy had only released about half of all the prisoners they were holding.
One of the most shocking disclosures was that Nixon and Kissinger set out to make the promised multibillion dollar payments and obtain the release of the remaining POWs but in March of 1973 the Watergate scandal broke, rocked the Nixon White House, and the deal to get the remaining prisoners released collapsed, and Richard Nixon swept the whole thing under the rug when he blithely pronounced that the remaining POWs were dead.
For the next 15 years, the question of the fate of the remaining POWs sparked continued debate, fueled, as the authors say, by government intelligence reports about hundreds of U.S. prisoners remaining in captivity. In early 1991, the chief of the Pentagon POW-MIA office charged that the first Bush administration was covering up the whole matter. On the heels of that development, a Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmed the former chief's charges. Then in August of 1991, the Senate created a select committee to investigate the matter of the missing POWs.
At the time, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. David Boren, D-Okla., told reporters: "I think we are going to see a lot more prisoners were left in Laos. I simply think that it has been true in administrations in both parties when the peace agreements were made I think there were people involved that didn't want all the questions raised at that time . . . once they decided not to disclose that at the time of the agreement the next year they decided it was too embarrassing.
"The longer it went, the more embarrassing it got to be . . . piecemeal decisions came over a 10-year period of time. They always thought well I [will] hand this on to the next guy to admit we really made a big mess.' Those who knew the truth kept handing it on. There are people, obviously in the military and otherwise, in the foreign policy establishment who are going to be embarrassed if this comes out and so they keep it secret. It has to come out, and it will."
Truth Not Be Told
Tragically, the truth did not come out, thanks, the authors charge, to two of the Committee's most powerful members, Chairman John Kerry and ex-POW Sen. John McCain. Both, the authors explain, were intent on "ending the war" and normalizing relations with Vietnam. They chose to perpetuate the cover-up rather than expose it.
Say the authors "in the end they crafted a final committee report that declared (1) the postwar intelligence on live POWs was meaningless and that (2) no POWs remained alive and (3) that there had been no government cover-up. In a lengthy chapter entitled "The Fragging" the authors examine some of that intelligence and explain in detail extraordinary measures taken by Kerry and McCain to discredit it.
Former President Clinton gets his lumps at book's end when, ignoring what the authors call "the most compelling evidence ever received by the U.S. government that hundred of POWs were never released, he went ahead and normalized relations with their jailers in North Vietnam.
Disturbing Accounts
None of this is pleasant reading, but no history of the war in Vietnam is complete without including what the authors have revealed about this sorry chapter in America's history.
That war, the authors write, will never end until all the remaining POWs are returned safely to their homeland, or all possible avenues for their release have been explored forthrightly, honestly, and thoroughly by what would be by any measure, the most powerful and knowledgeable U.S. negotiating team ever assembled.
That, they say is when the Vietnam War will end for many Americans and not a minute sooner.
President George W. Bush alone can make it happen they conclude. But he must act now before, God forbid, the tapping from deep inside the wreckage of Indochina finally stops.
We must act so America once again can hold its head up.
If this is true (and I damn sure hope it isn’t), than it’s very unlikely that any of them are still alive.
I never thought highly of Nixon.
Memorandum for: Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Prisoners of War and Missing in Action
From: John F. McCreary
Subject: Possible Violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, by the Select Committee and Possible Ethical Misconduct by Staff Attorneys.
1. Continuing analysis of relevant laws and further review of the events between 8 April and 16 April 1992 connected with the destruction of the Investigators' Intelligence Briefing Text strongly indicate that the order to destroy all copies of that briefing text on 9 April and the actual destruction of copies of the briefing texts plus the purging of computer files might constitute violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, which imposes criminal penalties for unlawful document destruction. Even absent a finding of criminal misconduct, statements, actions, and failures to act by the senior Staff attorneys following the 9 April briefing might constitute serious breaches of ethical standards of conduct for attorneys, in addition to violations of Senate and Select Committee rules. The potential consequences of these possible misdeeds are such that they should be brought to the attention of all members of the Select Committee, plus all Designees and Staff members who were present at the 9 April briefing.
2. The relevant section of Title 18, U.S.C., states in pertinent part: Section 2071. Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally (a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 795)
3. The facts as the undersigned and others present at the briefing recall them are presented in the attached Memorandum for the Record. A summary of those facts - and others that have been established since that Memorandum was written - follows.
a. On 8 April 1992, the Investigators' Intelligence Briefing Text was presented to Senior Staff members and Designees for whom copies were available prior to beginning the briefing. Objections to the text by the Designees prompted the Staff Director to order all persons present to leave their copies of the briefing text in Room SRB078. Subsequent events indicated that two copies had been removed without authorization.
b. On 9 April 1992, at the beginning of the meeting of the Select Committee and prior to the scheduled investigators' briefing, Senator McCain produced a copy of the intelligence briefing text, with whose contents he strongly disagreed. He charged that the briefing text had already been leaked to a POW/MIA activist, but was reassured by the Chairman that such was not the case. He replied that he was certain it would be leaked. Whereupon, the Chairman assured Senator McCain that there would be no leaks because all copies would be gathered and destroyed, and he gave orders to that effect. No senior staff member or attorney present cautioned against a possible violation of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, or of Senate or Select Committee Rules.
c. Following the briefing on 9 April, the Staff Director, Ms. Frances Zwenig, restated to the intelligence investigators the order to destroy the intelligence briefing text and took measures to ensure execution of the destruction order. (See paragraph 3 of the attachment.) During one telephone conversation with the undersigned, she stated that she was "acting under orders."
d. The undersigned also was instructed to delete all computer files, which Mr. Barry Valentine witnessed on 9 April.
e. In a meeting on 15 April 1992, the Staff's Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha, was advised by intelligence investigators of their concerns about the possibility that they had committed a crime by participating in the destruction of the briefing text. Mr. Codinha minimized the significance of the documents and of their destruction. He admonished the investigators for "making a mountain out of a molehill."
f. When investigators repeated their concern that the order to destroy the documents might lead to criminal charges, Mr. Codinha replied "Who's the injured party." He was told, "The 2,494 families of the unaccounted for US Servicemen, among others." Mr. Codinha then said, "Who's gonna tell them. It's classified." At that point the meeting erupted. The undersigned stated that the measure of merit was the law and what's right, not avoidance of getting caught. To which Mr. Codinha made no reply. At no time during the meeting did Mr. Codinha give any indication that any copies of the intelligence briefing text existed.
g. Investigators, thereupon, repeatedly requested actions by the Committee to clear them of any wrongdoing, such as provision of legal counsel. Mr. Codinha admitted that he was not familiar with the law and promised to look into it. He invited a memorandum from the investigators stating what they wanted. Given Mr. Codinha's statements and reactions to the possibility of criminal liability, the investigators concluded they must request appointment of an independent counsel. A memorandum making such a request and signed by all six intelligence investigators was delivered to Mr. Codinha on 16 April.
h. At 2130 on 16 April, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, convened a meeting with the intelligence investigators, who told him personally of their concern that they might have committed a crime by participating in the destruction of the briefing texts at the order of the Staff Director. Senator Kerry stated that he gave the order to destroy the documents, not the Staff Director, and that none of the Senators present at the meeting had objected. He also stated that the issue of document destruction was "moot" because the original briefing text had been deposited with the Office of Senate Security "all along." Both the Staff Director and the Chief Counsel supported this assertion by the Chairman.
i. Senator Kerry's remarks prompted follow-up investigations (See paragraphs 4 through 9 of the attachment) and inquiries that established that a copy of the text was not deposited in the Office of Senate Security until the afternoon of 16 April. The Staff Director has admitted that on the afternoon of 16 April, after receiving a copy of a memorandum from Senator Bob Smith to Senator Kerry in which Senator Smith outlined his concerns about the destruction of documents, she obtained a copy of the intelligence briefing text from the office of Senator McCain and took it to the Office of Senate Security. Office of Senate Security personnel confirmed that the Staff Director gave them an envelope, marked "Eyes Only," to be placed in her personal file. The Staff Director has admitted that the envelope contained the copy of the intelligence briefing text that she obtained from the office of Senator McCain.
3. The facts of the destruction of the intelligence briefing text would seem to fall inside the prescriptions of the Statute, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, so as to justify their referral for investigation to a competent law enforcement authority. The applicability of that Statute was debated in United States v. Poindexter, D.D.C. 1989, 725 F. Supp. 13, in connection with the Iran Contra investigation. The District Court ruled, inter alia, that the National Security Council is a public office within the meaning of the Statute and, thus, that its records and documents fell within the protection of the Statute. In light of that ruling, the Statute would seem to apply to this Senate Select Committee and its Staff. The continued existence of a "bootleg" copy of the intelligence briefing text - i.e., a copy that is not one of those made by the investigators for the purpose of briefing the Select Committee - would seem to be irrelevant to the issues of intent to destroy and willfulness; as well as to the issue of responsibility for the order to destroy all copies of the briefing text, for the attempt to carry out that order, and for the destruction that actually was accomplished in execution of that order.
4. As for the issue of misconduct by Staff attorneys, all member of the Bar swear to uphold the law. That oath may be violated by acts of omission and commission. Even without a violation of the Federal criminal statute, the actions and failures to act by senior Staff attorneys in the sequence of events connected with the destruction of the briefing text might constitute violations
of ethical standards for members of the Bar and of both Senate and Select Committee rules. The statements, actions and failures to act during and after the meeting on 15 April, when the investigators gave notice of their concern about possible criminal liability for document destruction, would seem to reflect disregard for the law and for the rules of the United States Senate.
John F. McCreary
Memorandum for: Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Prisoners of War and Missing in Action
From: John F. McCreary
Subject: Legal Misconduct and Possible Malpractice in the Select Committee
1. As a member of the Virginia State Bar, I am obliged by Disciplinary Rule DR-1-103(a) to report knowledge of misconduct by an attorney "to a tribunal or other authority empowered to investigate or act upon such violations." Under Rule IV, Paragraph 13, of the Rules for the integration of the Virginia State Bar, this obligation follows me as a member of the Bar, regardless of the location of my employment, for as long as I remain a member of the Virginia State Bar. Therefore, I am obliged, as a matter of law and under pain of discipline by the Virginia State Bar, to report to you my knowledge of misconduct and possible prima facie malpractice by attorneys on the Select Committee in ordering the destruction of Staff documents containing Staff intelligence findings on 9 April 1992 and in statements in meetings on 15 and 16 April to justify the destruction.
2. The attached Memoranda For the Record, one by myself and another by Mr. Jon D. Holstine, describe the relevant facts, which I summarize herein:
a. On 9 April 1992, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, in response to a protest by other members of the Select Committee, told the Select Committee members that "all copies" would be destroyed. This statement was made in the presence of the undersigned and of the Staff Chief Counsel who offered no protest.
b. Later on 9 April 1992, the Staff Director, Frances Zwenig, an attorney, repeated and insured the execution of Senator Kerry's order for the destruction of the Staff intelligence briefing text. I personally delivered to Mr. Barry Valentine, the Security Manager for SRB-78, the original printed version of the intelligence briefing text. I also verified that the original was destroyed by shredding in the Office of Senate Security on 10 April 1992, along with 14 copies.
c. On 15 April 1992, the Staff Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha of Massachusetts, when advised by members if the Staff about their concerns over the possible criminal consequences of destroying documents, minimized the significance of the act of destruction; ridiculed the Staff members for expressing their concerns; and replied, in response to questions about the potential consequences, "Who's the injured party," and "How are they going to find out because its classified." Mr. Codinha repeatedly defended the destruction of the documents and gave no assurances or indications that any copies of the intelligence briefing text existed.
d. On 16 April, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry, stated that he gave the order to destroy "extraneous copies of the documents" and that no one objected. Moreover, he stated that the issue was "moot" because the original remained in the Office of Senate Security "all along."
e. I subsequently learned that the Staff Director had deposited a copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security at 1307 on 16 April.
3. The foregoing facts establish potentially a prima facie violation of criminal law and a pattern of violations of legal ethics by attorneys in acts of commission and omission.
a. It is hornbook law that an attorney may not direct the commission of a crime. In this incident two attorneys, one by his own admission, ordered the destruction of documents, which could be violation of criminal law.
b. Neither the Staff Chief Counsel nor any member of the Select Committee made a protest or uttered words of caution against the destruction of documents, by admission of the Chairman, Senator Kerry. The Chief Counsel has an affirmative duty to advise the Staff about the legality of its actions, and, in fact, had earlier issued the general prohibition to the Staff against document destruction.
c. The Chief Counsel's statements during the 15 April meeting to discuss the document destruction showed no regard for the legality of the action and displayed to the Staff only a concern about getting caught. By his words and actions, he presented to the Staff investigators an interpretation of the confidentiality and security rules that the rules of the Select Committee may be used to cover-up potentially unethical or illegal activity.
d. The Staff Director's action in placing an unaccounted for copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security on 16 April constitutes an act to cover-up the destruction. Throughout the 16 April meeting, all three attorneys persisted in stating that the document had been on file since 9 April. This is simply not true.
4. I believe that the foregoing facts establish a pattern of grave legal misconduct - possibly including orders to commit a crime, followed by acts to justify and then to cover-up that crime. Even absent criminal liability, the behavioral pattern of the attorneys involved plays fast and loose with the Canons of Legal Ethics and establishes that one or more of the attorneys on the Select Committee are unfit to practice law. I am obliged to recommend that this report be filed with the appropriate disciplinary authorities of the State Bars in which these attorneys are members.
John F. McCreary, Esquire
Memorandum for the Record
From: John F. McCreary
Subject: Obstruction of the Investigation
1. I am concerned that recent lines of investigation have been seriously compromised by leaks of sensitive information by the Committee Staff Director to the Department of Defense. Leaks to the Department of Defense or other agencies of the Executive Branch of my Memoranda for the Record are interfering with follow-up discussions with useful witnesses. Moreover, they are endangering the lives and livelihood of two witnesses.
Leak of Information on Jan Sejna
2. Irrespective of leaks outside the government, Bill LeGro, attended a meeting of the US-Russia Joint Commission group in Washington on 28 October 1992 at the Department of State. The discussion featured information provided by Sejna. LeGro stated that Ambassador Malcolm Toon called for his dismissal. DIA personnel defended Sejna as to his expertise on Central Europe, but not as to his information on other areas, particularly POW related.
3. Irrespective of leaks outside the government, Bill LeGro attended a meeting of the US-Russia Joint Commission group in Washington on 28 October 1992 at the Department of State. The discussion featured information provided by Sejna. LeGro stated tat Ambassador Malcolm Toon call for his dismissal. DIA personnel defended Sejna as to his expertise on Central Europe, but not as to his information on others areas, particularly POW related.
4. On 30 October 1992, I learned from Bill LeGro that he was directed to read a letter from the Central Intelligence Agency to the Select Committee that discredits Sejna's information. The letter reportedly indicates that Sejna's information has been checked and not been confirmed by his former government. At the time this letter was received, the Staff had decided to take Sejna's deposition but had not yet scheduled a deposition of Sejna. In addition, my MFR was written from memory, and did not do justice to all that Sejna stated, either in detail or in context. As of this writing, we do not know what Sejna knows or will say under oath, yet his testimony has already been written off. This anticipatory discrediting of a Select Committee potential witness is tantamount to tampering with the evidence.
Suspected Leak of Information on Le Quang Khai
5. The second issue of suspected misconduct concerns witness Le Quang Khai. Although Le made a public statement concerning POWs on 12 September 1992, no agency of the US government contacted him concerning his POW information. He told me on 26 October that some men who represented themselves as FBI agents contacted him to attempts to recruit him to return to Vietnam as a US intelligence agent for six months. After which his request for asylum would be favorably considered.
6. On 30 October, Mr. Robert Egan of Hackensack, New Jersey, who is a close friend of Mr. Le and the intermediary whereby the Committee Staff met Mr. Le, informed McCreary and LeGro that the FBI had again contacted Mr. Le. A person representing himself as an FBI person called on 30 October to set up a meeting with Le to discuss Le's working as an intelligence agent for the FBI's POW/MIA office.
7. So far informal checks indicate there is no such office. Secondly, this contact occurred three days after my return from taking Le's deposition in Hackensack on 26 October. I observed a copy of the MFR with apparent routing designators written in the top margin on the desk of Frances Zwenig on 28 October.
8. The contact with Le two days after preparation of my MFR, despite the passage of a month since his public declarations, is highly suspicious and more than coincidental. The circumstances of both contacts in which persons identifying themselves as FBI without showing credentials or other evidence of authenticity or authority and also making a pitch to recruit Le are also highly suspicious.
9. An internal Department of Defense Memorandum identifies Frances Zwenig as the conduit to the Department of Defense for the acquisition of sensitive and restricted information from this Committee. Based on the above sequences of events, I must conclude that Frances Zwenig continues to leak all of my papers to the Defense Department. Her flagrant disregard of the rules of the Senate and her oath of office are now jeopardizing the livelihood, if not the safety, of
Senate witnesses. In addition, the Department of Defense's continuing access to sensitive Committee Staff papers is resulting in obstruction of the investigations by the Senate Select Committee by various agencies of the Executive Branch.
John F. McCreary
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1209454/posts
Vets refuse to forgive Kerry for antiwar acts
There is one running in 2008.
It’s a wonder this country can send soldiers into combat with a straight face anymore after the disgraceful episode in our history known as the Vietnam War.
We also left POWs behind in Korea and the cold war. Many of them were murdered by the KGB.
http://video.google.com/url?docid=5642970078951006531&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=Stolen+Honor&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D5642970078951006531%26q%3DStolen%2BHonor%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H20Qe3COQDNidpnRgjYJUyvab7HlIA
Stolen Honor - “John Kerry’s Record of Betrayal” - COMPLETE - Viet...42 min
The first two Communist North Vietnamese Regular POW's of the Battle of IA DRANG fresh from LZ X-RAY are escorted from Helicopter to Helicopter at LZ FALCON by members of the HHC, 1/7 Cav. Associated Press Photographer is running to the right to get in front of them to take the picture that is in 'WE WERE SOLDIERS ONCE....AND YOUNG.' Shadow of me taking this picture is at lower left. I consider this Picture one of the best. Notice M-16 POW wounded knee on one of the POW's in the middle of the picture. |
” of his fellow Marines “
Kerry was in the Naval Reserve.
When I was in my early teens I bought a POW bracelet. A few years ago, I was looking up information on my POW and came across a website with quite a bit of information on POW’s and MIA’s. This site is the National Alliance of Families. The link is http://www.nationalalliance.org/. Some of you may want to check it out.
I made a tribute page for my guy, Fred Howell McMurray, Jr. He piloted a “Possum” and was shot down. His body wasn’t found, but one boot print, his chest protector and helmet were. He has never been accounted for. My page for this great man is at http://moonpie.home.att.net/fred.htm.
I hope to update it soon. I have heard from a few folks that knew him and served with him and had nothing but wonderful words to say. He was a fine man. It’s a shame that he has been lost to us.
I wish some of those old links at FR showed up on google. I remember reading a bunch of posts, and doing a lot of independent research on the issue. This article covers some of what I remember:
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/stock/040123
Senator Kerry can often be heard making the statement that the Bush Administration is controlled solely by ‘’special interests.’’ Of course, he is untouched by this disease that he says permeates the Republican Party.
The senator was the head of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs in 1992. He pushed vigorously to normalize relations with Vietnam. He visited Vietnam and praised them for being open and reported he was convinced they were not holding American POWs. Many families didn’t believe him then and don’t believe him now. But why would he be so anxious to normalize relations with the former enemy?
The answer is special interests and money. Collier’s International, based in Boston, was immediately awarded the exclusive contract to rebuild Vietnam’s infrastructure by the Vietnamese government. They made tens of millions of dollars from the contract. The chief executive officer of Collier’s International was a man named C. Stewart Forbes. Interestingly, Senator Kerry’s middle name is Forbes. There is a reason for that. C. Stewart Forbes is John Kerry’s cousin.
The New Yorker Magazine touted Kerry as the senator who defeated the ‘’mendacious POW lobby.’’ Yes, Kerry helped defeat those tenacious family members who wanted to know what happened to their missing loved ones. His strange bedfellow in this battle against POW families was none other than fellow Senator and former POW John McCain.
This committee’s final report in 1993 was chilling. It determined that American POWs were left alive in Viet Nam after the war but felt none were still alive. It makes no attempt to identify those left behind, how they died, who killed them, and where their remains are located. They were abandoned in life and death.
Yes. that came out during his run for Pres but got little attention. It was a Forbes cousin.
Is C. Stewart Forbes related to Malcolm Forbes?
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0408,schanberg,51276,1.html
When John Kerry’s Courage Went M.I.A.
Senator covered up evidence of P.O.W.’s left behind
February 24th, 2004
Senator John Kerry, a decorated battle veteran, was courageous as a navy lieutenant in the Vietnam War. But he was not so courageous more than two decades later, when he covered up voluminous evidence that a significant number of live American prisonersperhaps hundredswere never acknowledged or returned after the war-ending treaty was signed in January 1973.
The Massachusetts senator, now seeking the presidency, carried out this subterfuge a little over a decade ago shredding documents, suppressing testimony, and sanitizing the committee’s final reportwhen he was chairman of the Senate Select Committee on P.O.W./ M.I.A. Affairs.
Over the years, an abundance of evidence had come to light that the North Vietnamese, while returning 591 U.S. prisoners of war after the treaty signing, had held back many others as future bargaining chips for the $4 billion or more in war reparations that the Nixon administration had pledged. Hanoi didn’t trust Washington to fulfill its pro-mise without pressure. Similarly, Washington didn’t trust Hanoi to return all the prisoners and carry out all the treaty provisions. The mistrust on both sides was merited. Hanoi held back prisoners and the U.S. provided no reconstruction funds.
(snip)
From Advocacy & Intelligence Index for POW-MIAs, Inc.
(”an education organization, dedicated to the issue of
Prisoners of War and Missing in Action, from ALL wars”):
http://www.aiipowmia.com/ssc/ssctest.html
Senate Select Committee - Testimony, Statements & Depositions
AII POW-MIA Archive Menu
This story came out during Kerrys run for President. Kerry had a cousin, a Forbes, that wanted to do business with Viet Nam. The fact that POWS/MIAS were still there was known and Kerry shut down the hearings and his Cuz got his business in Nam ok’d. It was posted here but the Swiftboat Vets were getting most of the press.
bump for tomorrow
Great posts, Cal!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.