info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
WINTER SOLDIER FACTS
4 views
Skip to first unread message
DGVREIMAN
Jan 21, 2012, 2:40:09 AM1/21/12
to
WINTER SOLDIER FACTS
Doug Says: I believe America should be above all that happened in Viet
Nam war. No doubt War is hell, but still, it has rules. Humanity and
morality dictates those rules.
Are we to emulate the Roman Legions and massacre all enemies, man
woman and child simply because we can? Or should we answer to a higher
voice and a higher morality?
War crime charges imposed on lower ranks for crimes they were ordered
to perpetrate by the higher "untouchable" ranks is not a foundation in
which to build an effective, efficient and honorable military.
Yet Abu Ghrab comes to mind, and I must wonder if all this ordering to
commit crimes then finding scapegoats to stand trial for those crimes
is still going on? From what we read below, it certainly was going on
during the Viet Nam war.
Fraud, in any respect, lying about after action reports, or lying
about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
happening again.
I know we hamstring our military when it comes to forcing them to
fight wars honorably while our enemies fight them dishonorably.
Nevertheless, we have the best trained and most honorable military in
the world - and of course we should hold them to a higher standard
than our enemies.
As a case in point I remember when I was assigned to Can Tho (which
housed one of the largest POW camps in Viet Nam) how I often read in
interrogation transcripts of POW's (we were VERY interested in POW
interrogations in the Headquarters I was assigned to at the time) how
the NVA and Cong prisoners were amazed at the excellent medical
treatment they received from American doctors and nurses. The POW's
were treated no different that wounded GI's - which was something
they never expected.
That kind of humane treatment was not what Ho Chi Minh had told them
they would receive.
It didn't take the POW's long to realize they had been fed a truck
load of propaganda about the American Army. (I know - I know - our
resident con man has claimed I was never in Can Tho, and I never ever
never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and I
will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone is
interested).
We need to strive to be better than our enemies. Period. End of
story.
More facts about the Winter Soldier testimony is listed below:
http://tinyurl.com/54skf Winter Soldier Investigation:
Key Excerpts from the link above:
Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
"Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their testimonies
were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
produced.[10]
"We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we
have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country; we
could be quiet; we could hold our silence; we could not tell what went
on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, the
fact that the crimes threaten it, not reds, and not redcoats but the
crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak
out.
1. complete transcript was later entered into the Congressional
Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations.
The program consisted primarily of testimony, with 109 Vietnam
veterans to appear on panels arranged by unit so they could
corroborate each other's reports. Grouping these veterans by unit
would also help to establish that events and practices to which they
testified were unit-wide policy, and not just random and rare
occurrences.
Organizers also investigated the legal implications of veterans
publicly admitting to criminal acts which they had witnessed or
participated in. With legal advice from the 1. Center for
Constitutional Rights, the organizers were assured that the armed
forces could not charge or try veterans for crimes committed while
they were on active duty.[16] The veterans giving testimony were also
instructed not to reveal the specific names of others involved in war
crimes. The goal of these hearings was not to indict individual
soldiers, but instead to expose the frequency of criminal behavior and
its relationship to U.S. war policy.[17]
Verifying the participants
1. The organizers of the Winter Soldier Investigation took several
steps to guarantee the validity of the participants. Each veteran's
authenticity was checked before the hearings by the investigation
event organizers, and subsequently by reporters and Pentagon
officials. In addition, they also gave specific details about their
units and the locations where the events had occurred. Those who
wanted to testify were carefully screened by the officers of VVAW, and
care was taken to verify the service records and testimony of the
veterans.
The identifying military affiliation of each veteran testifying,
including in almost all cases, the dates of service, appears on the
roster for each panel that was included with the testimony in the
Congressional Record.
According to Army reports compiled by the Criminal Investigation
Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified, 31
of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
subsequently confirmed his story.
Nixon attempted to discredit the testimony:
Seven years after the hearings, writer 1. Guenter Lewy claimed in his
book, America in Vietnam, that allegations against Marines were
investigated by the Naval Investigative Service. Lewy wrote that the
report stated that some veterans contacted by the NIS said they did
not attend the WSI hearing in Detroit or had never been to Detroit,
and many refused to be interviewed. However, government officials have
no record of the report, and no other historian has seen it.[10] Lewy
later said that he could not recall if he had actually seen the
alleged report or simply been told of its contents.[
Fritz Efaw, a Chapter Representative of VVAW, stated: "The claims that
the WSI hearings contained falsified testimony from men who were not
veterans is an old one, and it's definitely false.
The testimony was startling even at the time it took place: startling
to the general public, startling to the military and the Nixon
administration, and startling to those who participated because each
of them knew a piece of the story, but the hearings brought a great
many of them together for the first time and provided a venue in which
they could be heard for the first time. It's hardly surprising that
those on the other side would set out almost immediately to discredit
them."
The U.S. participation in the Vietnam War was the source of much
deeply divided sentiment among Americans. The Winter Soldier
Investigation produced a conglomerate of testimony resulting in the
implication and indictment of American leadership in criminal conduct,
and thereby further drove a wedge between proponents and opponents of
the war."
End excerpts:
Doug Says:
"Indictment of American leadership in criminal conduct. . ." I know I
witnessed some of it, and I doubt if any real combat Vet would say
otherwise. I grow weary of all the BS claims that officers did not
pander for medals, nor helped to write up their own after action
reports that gained them those medals based upon their fraudulent
reports, of course they did - we all KNOW they did!
Doug Grant (Tm)
Doug Says: I believe America should be above all that happened in Viet
Nam war. No doubt War is hell, but still, it has rules. Humanity and
morality dictates those rules.
Are we to emulate the Roman Legions and massacre all enemies, man
woman and child simply because we can? Or should we answer to a higher
voice and a higher morality?
War crime charges imposed on lower ranks for crimes they were ordered
to perpetrate by the higher "untouchable" ranks is not a foundation in
which to build an effective, efficient and honorable military.
Yet Abu Ghrab comes to mind, and I must wonder if all this ordering to
commit crimes then finding scapegoats to stand trial for those crimes
is still going on? From what we read below, it certainly was going on
during the Viet Nam war.
Fraud, in any respect, lying about after action reports, or lying
about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
happening again.
I know we hamstring our military when it comes to forcing them to
fight wars honorably while our enemies fight them dishonorably.
Nevertheless, we have the best trained and most honorable military in
the world - and of course we should hold them to a higher standard
than our enemies.
As a case in point I remember when I was assigned to Can Tho (which
housed one of the largest POW camps in Viet Nam) how I often read in
interrogation transcripts of POW's (we were VERY interested in POW
interrogations in the Headquarters I was assigned to at the time) how
the NVA and Cong prisoners were amazed at the excellent medical
treatment they received from American doctors and nurses. The POW's
were treated no different that wounded GI's - which was something
they never expected.
That kind of humane treatment was not what Ho Chi Minh had told them
they would receive.
It didn't take the POW's long to realize they had been fed a truck
load of propaganda about the American Army. (I know - I know - our
resident con man has claimed I was never in Can Tho, and I never ever
never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and I
will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone is
interested).
We need to strive to be better than our enemies. Period. End of
story.
More facts about the Winter Soldier testimony is listed below:
http://tinyurl.com/54skf Winter Soldier Investigation:
Key Excerpts from the link above:
Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
"Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their testimonies
were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
produced.[10]
"We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we
have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country; we
could be quiet; we could hold our silence; we could not tell what went
on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, the
fact that the crimes threaten it, not reds, and not redcoats but the
crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak
out.
1. complete transcript was later entered into the Congressional
Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations.
The program consisted primarily of testimony, with 109 Vietnam
veterans to appear on panels arranged by unit so they could
corroborate each other's reports. Grouping these veterans by unit
would also help to establish that events and practices to which they
testified were unit-wide policy, and not just random and rare
occurrences.
Organizers also investigated the legal implications of veterans
publicly admitting to criminal acts which they had witnessed or
participated in. With legal advice from the 1. Center for
Constitutional Rights, the organizers were assured that the armed
forces could not charge or try veterans for crimes committed while
they were on active duty.[16] The veterans giving testimony were also
instructed not to reveal the specific names of others involved in war
crimes. The goal of these hearings was not to indict individual
soldiers, but instead to expose the frequency of criminal behavior and
its relationship to U.S. war policy.[17]
Verifying the participants
1. The organizers of the Winter Soldier Investigation took several
steps to guarantee the validity of the participants. Each veteran's
authenticity was checked before the hearings by the investigation
event organizers, and subsequently by reporters and Pentagon
officials. In addition, they also gave specific details about their
units and the locations where the events had occurred. Those who
wanted to testify were carefully screened by the officers of VVAW, and
care was taken to verify the service records and testimony of the
veterans.
The identifying military affiliation of each veteran testifying,
including in almost all cases, the dates of service, appears on the
roster for each panel that was included with the testimony in the
Congressional Record.
According to Army reports compiled by the Criminal Investigation
Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified, 31
of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
subsequently confirmed his story.
Nixon attempted to discredit the testimony:
Seven years after the hearings, writer 1. Guenter Lewy claimed in his
book, America in Vietnam, that allegations against Marines were
investigated by the Naval Investigative Service. Lewy wrote that the
report stated that some veterans contacted by the NIS said they did
not attend the WSI hearing in Detroit or had never been to Detroit,
and many refused to be interviewed. However, government officials have
no record of the report, and no other historian has seen it.[10] Lewy
later said that he could not recall if he had actually seen the
alleged report or simply been told of its contents.[
Fritz Efaw, a Chapter Representative of VVAW, stated: "The claims that
the WSI hearings contained falsified testimony from men who were not
veterans is an old one, and it's definitely false.
The testimony was startling even at the time it took place: startling
to the general public, startling to the military and the Nixon
administration, and startling to those who participated because each
of them knew a piece of the story, but the hearings brought a great
many of them together for the first time and provided a venue in which
they could be heard for the first time. It's hardly surprising that
those on the other side would set out almost immediately to discredit
them."
The U.S. participation in the Vietnam War was the source of much
deeply divided sentiment among Americans. The Winter Soldier
Investigation produced a conglomerate of testimony resulting in the
implication and indictment of American leadership in criminal conduct,
and thereby further drove a wedge between proponents and opponents of
the war."
End excerpts:
Doug Says:
"Indictment of American leadership in criminal conduct. . ." I know I
witnessed some of it, and I doubt if any real combat Vet would say
otherwise. I grow weary of all the BS claims that officers did not
pander for medals, nor helped to write up their own after action
reports that gained them those medals based upon their fraudulent
reports, of course they did - we all KNOW they did!
Doug Grant (Tm)
!Jones
Jan 21, 2012, 9:44:27 AM1/21/12
to
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 23:40:09 -0800, in alt.war.vietnam "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Are we to emulate the Roman Legions and massacre all enemies, man
>woman and child simply because we can? Or should we answer to a higher
>voice and a higher morality?
Once we eliminate that faggot with the "higher voice" we'll take our
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Are we to emulate the Roman Legions and massacre all enemies, man
>woman and child simply because we can? Or should we answer to a higher
>voice and a higher morality?
rightful place, I say!
Jones
Dai Uy
Jan 21, 2012, 2:14:47 PM1/21/12
to
On Jan 20, 9:40 pm, "DGVREIMAN" <dgvrei...@comcast.net> wrote:
> WINTER SOLDIER FACTS
> Fraud, in any respect, lying about after action reports, or lying
> about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
> happening again.
Regarding lying about war crimes and atrocities, see URL:
http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=CID
> (I know - I know - our
> resident con man has claimed I was never in Can Tho, and I never ever
> never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
> records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and I
> will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone is
> interested).
I don't recall anyone saying that you weren't in Can Tho. Is
that yet another fabrication?
You've been promising to release the declassified records of your
exploits for years. Why don't you post them just to see if anyone is
interested?
> More facts about the Winter Soldier testimony is listed below:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/54skf Winter Soldier Investigation:
>
> Key Excerpts from the link above:
>
> Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
> "Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
> since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
> least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
> Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
> told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their testimonies
> were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
> fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
> produced.[10]
Square the above assertions with these official investigation
records regarding fraudulent testimony: http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=CID
> 1. complete transcript was later entered into the Congressional
> Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
> Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
> Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
> Relations.
On January 18, you wrote: "I have amassed quite a bit of
information on the Winter Soldier testimony which was sworn by Viet
Nam vets in front of Congress. I will publish some of it later."
Was this it? Your "Revelations?" A Wikipedia article? I keep
looking for the part where anyone presented sworn testimony. Have
you found it yet?
> According to Army reports compiled by the Criminal Investigation
> Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
> declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
> at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
> reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified, 31
> of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
> One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
> described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
> subsequently confirmed his story.
To help you understand what you've just cited...
The Army found that 46 of the allegations were of criminal
acts. Their investigations found one (1) WSI witness, Jamie Henry,
to be credible. They were unable to locate five of the witnesses nor
any evidence that their testimony had been credible.
***
> WINTER SOLDIER FACTS
> Fraud, in any respect, lying about after action reports, or lying
> about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
> happening again.
http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=CID
> (I know - I know - our
> resident con man has claimed I was never in Can Tho, and I never ever
> never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
> records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and I
> will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone is
> interested).
that yet another fabrication?
You've been promising to release the declassified records of your
exploits for years. Why don't you post them just to see if anyone is
interested?
> More facts about the Winter Soldier testimony is listed below:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/54skf Winter Soldier Investigation:
>
> Key Excerpts from the link above:
>
> Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
> "Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
> since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
> least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
> Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
> told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their testimonies
> were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
> fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
> produced.[10]
records regarding fraudulent testimony: http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=CID
> 1. complete transcript was later entered into the Congressional
> Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
> Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
> Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
> Relations.
information on the Winter Soldier testimony which was sworn by Viet
Nam vets in front of Congress. I will publish some of it later."
Was this it? Your "Revelations?" A Wikipedia article? I keep
looking for the part where anyone presented sworn testimony. Have
you found it yet?
> According to Army reports compiled by the Criminal Investigation
> Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
> declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
> at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
> reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified, 31
> of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
> One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
> described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
> subsequently confirmed his story.
The Army found that 46 of the allegations were of criminal
acts. Their investigations found one (1) WSI witness, Jamie Henry,
to be credible. They were unable to locate five of the witnesses nor
any evidence that their testimony had been credible.
***
DGVREIMAN
Jan 24, 2012, 6:04:27 AM1/24/12
to
WINTER SOLDIER FACTS
Doug Says: I believe America should be above all that happened in Viet
Nam war. No doubt War is hell, but still, it has rules. Humanity and
morality dictates those rules.
Are we to emulate the Roman Legions and massacre all enemies, man
woman and child simply because we can? Or should we answer to a higher
voice and a higher morality?
War crime charges imposed on lower ranks for crimes they were ordered
to perpetrate by the higher "untouchable" ranks is not a foundation in
which to build an effective, efficient and honorable military.
Yet Abu Ghrab comes to mind, and I must wonder if all this ordering to
commit crimes then finding scapegoats to stand trial for those crimes
is still going on? From what we read below, it certainly was going on
during the Viet Nam war.
Doug Says: I believe America should be above all that happened in Viet
Nam war. No doubt War is hell, but still, it has rules. Humanity and
morality dictates those rules.
Are we to emulate the Roman Legions and massacre all enemies, man
woman and child simply because we can? Or should we answer to a higher
voice and a higher morality?
War crime charges imposed on lower ranks for crimes they were ordered
to perpetrate by the higher "untouchable" ranks is not a foundation in
which to build an effective, efficient and honorable military.
Yet Abu Ghrab comes to mind, and I must wonder if all this ordering to
commit crimes then finding scapegoats to stand trial for those crimes
is still going on? From what we read below, it certainly was going on
during the Viet Nam war.
Fraud, in any respect, lying about after action reports, or lying
about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
happening again.
about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
happening again.
I know we hamstring our military when it comes to forcing them to
fight wars honorably while our enemies fight them dishonorably.
Nevertheless, we have the best trained and most honorable military in
the world - and of course we should hold them to a higher standard
than our enemies.
As a case in point I remember when I was assigned to Can Tho (which
housed one of the largest POW camps in Viet Nam) how I often read in
interrogation transcripts of POW's (we were VERY interested in POW
interrogations in the Headquarters I was assigned to at the time) how
the NVA and Cong prisoners were amazed at the excellent medical
treatment they received from American doctors and nurses. The POW's
were treated no different that wounded GI's - which was something
they never expected.
That kind of humane treatment was not what Ho Chi Minh had told them
they would receive.
It didn't take the POW's long to realize they had been fed a truck
load of propaganda about the American Army. (I know - I know - our
fight wars honorably while our enemies fight them dishonorably.
Nevertheless, we have the best trained and most honorable military in
the world - and of course we should hold them to a higher standard
than our enemies.
As a case in point I remember when I was assigned to Can Tho (which
housed one of the largest POW camps in Viet Nam) how I often read in
interrogation transcripts of POW's (we were VERY interested in POW
interrogations in the Headquarters I was assigned to at the time) how
the NVA and Cong prisoners were amazed at the excellent medical
treatment they received from American doctors and nurses. The POW's
were treated no different that wounded GI's - which was something
they never expected.
That kind of humane treatment was not what Ho Chi Minh had told them
they would receive.
It didn't take the POW's long to realize they had been fed a truck
resident con man has claimed I was never in Can Tho, and I never ever
never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and I
will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone is
interested).
never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and I
will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone is
interested).
We need to strive to be better than our enemies. Period. End of
story.
story.
More facts about the Winter Soldier testimony is listed below:
http://tinyurl.com/54skf Winter Soldier Investigation:
Key Excerpts from the link above:
Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
"Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their testimonies
were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
produced.[10]
http://tinyurl.com/54skf Winter Soldier Investigation:
Key Excerpts from the link above:
Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
"Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their testimonies
were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
produced.[10]
"We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we
have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country; we
could be quiet; we could hold our silence; we could not tell what went
on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, the
fact that the crimes threaten it, not reds, and not redcoats but the
crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak
out.
have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country; we
could be quiet; we could hold our silence; we could not tell what went
on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, the
fact that the crimes threaten it, not reds, and not redcoats but the
crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak
out.
1. complete transcript was later entered into the Congressional
Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations.
Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations.
According to Army reports compiled by the Criminal Investigation
Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified, 31
of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
subsequently confirmed his story.
Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified, 31
of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
subsequently confirmed his story.
news:d724c29d-f342-43ba...@k10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 20, 9:40 pm, "DGVREIMAN" <dgvrei...@comcast.net> wrote:
> WINTER SOLDIER FACTS
> Fraud, in any respect, lying about after action reports, or lying
> about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
> happening again.
> WINTER SOLDIER FACTS
> Fraud, in any respect, lying about after action reports, or lying
> about war crimes, needs to be exposed and thereby stopped from
> happening again.
> (I know - I know - our
> resident con man has claimed I was never in Can Tho, and I never
> ever
> never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
> records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and
> I
> will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone
> is
> interested).
I don't recall anyone saying that you weren't in Can Tho. Is
that yet another fabrication?
Mr. Rau, you claimed I dodged Viet Nam altogether! Then you lied
> resident con man has claimed I was never in Can Tho, and I never
> ever
> never was involved with POW interrogations - but then my military
> records prove that con man is the serial liar I know him to be, and
> I
> will be glad to prove every word I said about this issue if anyone
> is
> interested).
I don't recall anyone saying that you weren't in Can Tho. Is
that yet another fabrication?
about me not being in Combat. Then you lied about me not being
promoted to SFC E-7 when I was in Viet Nam - but even with those
outright lies about me, you still do not qualify for our "resident con
man" that befalls the idiots that claimed I was not in Can Tho when I
said I was when the January 1969 attack occurred. If I was there I
would have HAD to witness the attack as our BEQ went on full alert and
all of our gun positions had to be manned.
You've been promising to release the declassified records of your
exploits for years. Why don't you post them just to see if anyone is
interested?
evidence that I was in Can Tho when I said I was, then send me an
email and request it. You claimed you had seen my military records,
so you already know my "so called" exploits are true. If you want to
know specifics, read the results of my Polygraph test. BTW, when are
you going to agree to take the same Polygraph? Why duck the Polygraph
since I am willing to pay for it if it confirms you are telling the
truth about me???
> More facts about the Winter Soldier testimony is listed below:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/54skf Winter Soldier Investigation:
>
> Key Excerpts from the link above:
>
> Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
> "Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
> since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
> least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
> Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
> told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their
> testimonies
> were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
> fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
> produced.[10]
Square the above assertions with these official investigation
records regarding fraudulent testimony:
http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=CID
desperate to discredit the testimony of these men. "The Insufficent
evidence" bull was a ruse. The men testified to what they did and
witnessed. And if you do not know about Free Fire Zones, then I must
wonder about your lack of combat experiences.
Here is what an INDEPENDENT SOURCE concluded about their testimony:
Credibility of the veterans and their testimony
> "Since the first day of the WSI event and for more than thirty years
> since, individuals and organizations have sought to discredit or at
> least minimize the painful revelations brought forth at that event.
> Critics have claimed that participants were frauds; that they were
> told to not cooperate with later investigators; that their
> testimonies
> were inaccurate or just plain fabricated.[18] To date, no records of
> fraudulent participants or fraudulent testimony have been
> produced.[10]
> 1. complete transcript was later entered into the Congressional
> Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
> Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
> Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
> Relations.
On January 18, you wrote: "I have amassed quite a bit of
information on the Winter Soldier testimony which was sworn by Viet
Nam vets in front of Congress. I will publish some of it later."
Was this it? Your "Revelations?" A Wikipedia article? I keep
looking for the part where anyone presented sworn testimony. Have
you found it yet?
Mr. Rau, the Wikipedia article is the only one that is up to date as
> Record by Senator Mark Hatfield, and discussed in the Fulbright
> Hearings in April and May 1971, convened by Senator J. William
> Fulbright, chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign
> Relations.
On January 18, you wrote: "I have amassed quite a bit of
information on the Winter Soldier testimony which was sworn by Viet
Nam vets in front of Congress. I will publish some of it later."
Was this it? Your "Revelations?" A Wikipedia article? I keep
looking for the part where anyone presented sworn testimony. Have
you found it yet?
this issued was investigated further in 2009. When many of the
individuals were interviewed later by various investigative
authorities, directed by Congress to do so, ALL of their testimony was
sworn. When you speak to an FBI agent, as an example, or an
investigator appointed by Congress, your testimony is under oath. You
need to file FOIA requests to obtain ALL of the testimony. Would you
like for me to post some of their SWORN testimony?
> According to Army reports compiled by the Criminal Investigation
> Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
> declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
> at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
> reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified,
> 31
> of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
> One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
> described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
> subsequently confirmed his story.
To help you understand what you've just cited...
The Army found that 46 of the allegations were of criminal
acts. Their investigations found one (1) WSI witness, Jamie Henry,
to be credible. They were unable to locate five of the witnesses nor
any evidence that their testimony had been credible.
***
back up their testimony? Also, are you aware that some Vietnamese
have also confirmed their testimony? Below is what I posted, and if
you want more then just ask:
The fact the US Army CONFIRMED the testimony of some of the
witnessesses is the salient point, not that the US Army could not find
five of the 46 witnessess. BTW, this issue was investigated again as
late as 2009. Many reports from the Vietnamese goverment directly
supports the precise information many of these men provided.
If you had made the Tet offensive instead of guarding lonely borders
like you said you did, you might have known about Free Fire Zones -
which was a large part of what these men were describing.
According to Army reports compiled by the Criminal Investigation
> Command (1. CID) and later reported by the Village Voice following
> declassification, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans
> at the hearings to merit further inquiry. As of March 1972, the CID
> reported successfully locating 36 of the people who had testified,
> 31
> of whom submitted to interviews.[20]
> One WSI participant, Jamie Henry, had reported the massacre he
> described at the hearings [21] to the Army, which investigated and
> subsequently confirmed his story.
DGVREIMAN
Jan 28, 2012, 9:12:41 PM1/28/12
to
WINTER SOLDIER SWORN AND
NIGEL BROOKS FRAUD/ CON PERSONAL ATTACK REBUTTAL
If you have not already read my extended disclaimer, please read my
disclaimer
at http://groups.google.com/group/alt.war.vietnam/msg/378d2eb3d
55bf6a8?hl=en or at http://tinyurl.com/mggo9k
My standard and extended disclaimer both apply to this rebuttal, and
all past, present and future rebuttals and posts. If you are going to
read any of my posts you are de facto admitting that you have read the
terms of my disclaimers.
End disclaimer.
WINTER SOLDIER SWORN
http://tinyurl.com/7wxy3er
The above URL links to Winter Soldier Testimony sworn before the
Senate Foreign Relations committee:
Note that a Free Fire Zone (Viet Nam jargon) is now known as a "
Free Fire Area(FFA) and is described as follows:
free fire area (FFA) -- A specific designated area into which any
weapon system may fire without additional coordination with the
establishing headquarters. Normally, it is established on identifiable
terrain by division or higher headquarters. (See also fire support
coordination and rules of engagement (ROE).) See FM 6-20 series.
"We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that
moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of
orientals.
We watched the U.S. falsification of body counts, in fact the
glorification of body counts...."
Doug Asks: How many officers do you suppose received medals due to a
completely false enemy body count report?
Since most of the accounts were false, then I would argue that any
officer that received a medal due to a false report, ANY false report,
should be exposed for the fraud and liar he is.
If these con men are not exposed, the how can we expect those that
actually deserved medals to be honored? Isn't this the same fraud as
someone falsely claiming he won two Victoria Crosses in Vietnam,
murdered people in Texas he did not agree with, or fought in the
infamous Tet Offensive when his records show he was released from
active duty weeks before that infamous battle even started? It
appears these con men run in packs, and I believe they should be
exposed for what they are.
So how many "officers" have come forward and admitted they received
medals due to false reports, or reports they helped to write? Don't
make me laugh - none of course.
I certainly do not agree with everything said during this sworn Winter
Soldier testimony - but some I did recognize as true - especially the
false reporting issues and the Free Fire Zones. Both of these events
existed, and the false action reports, body count reports, and false
news accounts have been confirmed by the very officers that were
ordered to lie in those reports.
As long as the fraud, false reporting and "good ol boy" officer club
network exists in the US Military - the officers will continue to
receive false medals, undeserved promotions, and the enlisted men will
continue to die.
In my opinion we need honor, integrity and leadership in our officer
corps, and NOT fraud, false accusations, con man smears, serial
lying, self-acclamations and false reporting like we saw rampant in
Viet Nam and from some that are members of a smear gang that operates
on this forum.
Doug's Rebuttal to Nigel Brooks latest Con about me:
Apparently Nigel Brooks did not like the fact I disagreed with him
about the Winter Soldier Testimony. Consequently, Nigel Brooks
started publishing his typical fraud cons about me again in a
desperate attempt to stop me from posting facts about the Winter
Soldier issue. (This is a typical method of censorship con men and
hate gangs use to shut up those that dare to disagree with them).
Brooks excerpted a "framed" paragraph out of an exchange I was having
with someone in which the phrase "(as a SFC) was out of place in the
paragraph. Of course this was a typo as all the evidence proves, and
it was stated as a typo, and was of course corrected. But did that
stop Nigel Brooks from publishing yet another (he has posted dozens)
con about this issue? Nope - con men are clearly not interested in
facts, only to find a way to lie and con so they can smear those they
disagree with:
As just one of many examples of Nigel Brooks outright cons, smears
and fraud, recently published an excerpt from an old post of mine that
he knew in advance was an admitted typo, and error. Yet, Brooks, in
his typical "con man style" he hid the true context of the post, hid
the beginning of the post which directly contradicted his con stating
I was claiming a commission as I had already told the person I was
speaking with I was a NCO, and once again, counting at least more
than a dozen times, he published the known typo error while claiming
it said something he KNEW it was not intended to say, and he published
this latest con although he already knew the "framed" typo had been
long corrected. Moreover, con man Nigel Brooks further maliciously
did not mention and hid all of the dozens of my other posts that
directly contradicted his fraudulent claim about what I said and
meant. . . can anyone be more dishonest, more of a con man, and more
fraudulent than that?
(Nigel Brooks tried to claim I was somehow falsely claiming I had a
commission in Viet Nam, yet during exchanges with the same person the
"framed typo" was excerpted from, I repeated often that I was a NCO.
No wonder Brooks hid the entire post, and all of the other exchanges
and other posts in which I said I was a NCO as well. He could not
sell his fraud and con about this issue without his typical " con man
key omissions."
I Took A Polygraph - and Passed it completely - while Nigel Brooks
hides from Google and the Same Polygraph!
I recently completed a Polygraph conducted by former *real* Federal
Agents, in connection with the same Polygraph company that was
selected to conduct some of the most famous Polygraph examinations in
the world, (Sandra Levy Case, Columbine, Tyson, just to name a few the
Polygraph company that conducted my Polygraph was previously selected
to conduct) and ALL of my answers were confirmed to be ALL TRUE!
You can read my questions and answers below - note the ones about my
military service prove Nigel Brooks is a con man, and further prove he
has been lying about me all along.
http://tinyurl.com/3k6m7wx KEY FACTS ABOUT MY POLYGRAPH TEST
The US Supreme Court upholds the use and validity of Polygraphs!
1. "The Court noted that between 1981 and 1997, the Department of
Defense
conducted over 400,000 polygraph examinations to resolve issues
arising in counterintelligence, security, and criminal
investigations."
2. (Nigel Brooks and his hate gang members run and hide from my offer
for them to take the same test even at my expense!) You be the Judge
why.
Nigel Brooks Hides From Google Challenge!
In addition to Nigel Brooks obvious cons and fraud he regularly
publishes about me, when Nigel Brooks was recently confronted by
Google to either "confirm under oath" his statements about my military
service, or remove them from his web site, Nigel Brooks ran and hid
and removed his statements about me immediately from his web site.
(Con man Nigel Brooks knew that if he confirmed his cons under oath
the shit would hit the fan as he knew he was lying, and he knew I
could easily prove him a con man and a liar in that regard - it
appears to me that no way Brooks is going to risk perjury to continue
his cons - better to have some of his gang members do that, which is
now going to happen since Brooks obviously is not going to stop his
smear and con man attacks against me). It also appears to me Nigel
Brooks will egg on his pathetic gang members to take the fall, while
he "ducks and runs" anytime he is challenged to back up his cons and
fraud.
Could this clown be any more cowardly than to run and hide from a
simple Google copyright challenge? Not only do I believe Nigel Brooks
is an obvious con man, he also appears to me to be a coward when it
comes to backing up his cons and fraud in any legal manner.
I should also mention that I offered Nigel Brooks and any of his smear
gang members the opportunity to take the same Polygraph I took, from
the same company, AT MY EXPENSE if the Polygraph indicated they were
telling the truth. . . Brooks ran and hid from that offer as well. Of
course we all know the reason why. . .
Regardless of the fact that I have asked Nigel Brooks to cease and
desist his smear and hate campaign against me several times, and
informed him that his outrageous cons and fraud are causing me and my
family extreme emotional harm, Nigel Brooks continues to maliciously
publish his obvious cons, fraud and false accusations whenever I
disagree with his goofy child like conclusions about issues. It
appears to me that this con man cannot even debate without fraud,
cons and personal attacks based upon his own dishonesty and unethical
tactics.
It appears to me the only way to stop these con men from publishing
their personal attacks and fraud is through our legal system. I was
trying my best not to go that route, but it appears I have little
choice.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Tankfixer" <paul.c...@gmail.c00m> wrote in message
news:MPG.298e357e...@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <3nm0i7heoqdmvb0fm...@4ax.com>, - !Jones
> hsoi...@kjipu.com spouted !
>> On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:03:03 -0600, in alt.war.vietnam "Nigel
>> Brooks"
>> <nbr...@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>> >But In 2004, Reiman was opining differently on Winter Soldier:
>>
>> It's true; however, you're wasting your time, Nigel.
>>
>> Go torture a jellyfish.
>>
>
NIGEL BROOKS FRAUD/ CON PERSONAL ATTACK REBUTTAL
If you have not already read my extended disclaimer, please read my
disclaimer
at http://groups.google.com/group/alt.war.vietnam/msg/378d2eb3d
55bf6a8?hl=en or at http://tinyurl.com/mggo9k
My standard and extended disclaimer both apply to this rebuttal, and
all past, present and future rebuttals and posts. If you are going to
read any of my posts you are de facto admitting that you have read the
terms of my disclaimers.
End disclaimer.
WINTER SOLDIER SWORN
http://tinyurl.com/7wxy3er
The above URL links to Winter Soldier Testimony sworn before the
Senate Foreign Relations committee:
Note that a Free Fire Zone (Viet Nam jargon) is now known as a "
Free Fire Area(FFA) and is described as follows:
free fire area (FFA) -- A specific designated area into which any
weapon system may fire without additional coordination with the
establishing headquarters. Normally, it is established on identifiable
terrain by division or higher headquarters. (See also fire support
coordination and rules of engagement (ROE).) See FM 6-20 series.
"We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that
moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of
orientals.
We watched the U.S. falsification of body counts, in fact the
glorification of body counts...."
Doug Asks: How many officers do you suppose received medals due to a
completely false enemy body count report?
Since most of the accounts were false, then I would argue that any
officer that received a medal due to a false report, ANY false report,
should be exposed for the fraud and liar he is.
If these con men are not exposed, the how can we expect those that
actually deserved medals to be honored? Isn't this the same fraud as
someone falsely claiming he won two Victoria Crosses in Vietnam,
murdered people in Texas he did not agree with, or fought in the
infamous Tet Offensive when his records show he was released from
active duty weeks before that infamous battle even started? It
appears these con men run in packs, and I believe they should be
exposed for what they are.
So how many "officers" have come forward and admitted they received
medals due to false reports, or reports they helped to write? Don't
make me laugh - none of course.
I certainly do not agree with everything said during this sworn Winter
Soldier testimony - but some I did recognize as true - especially the
false reporting issues and the Free Fire Zones. Both of these events
existed, and the false action reports, body count reports, and false
news accounts have been confirmed by the very officers that were
ordered to lie in those reports.
As long as the fraud, false reporting and "good ol boy" officer club
network exists in the US Military - the officers will continue to
receive false medals, undeserved promotions, and the enlisted men will
continue to die.
In my opinion we need honor, integrity and leadership in our officer
corps, and NOT fraud, false accusations, con man smears, serial
lying, self-acclamations and false reporting like we saw rampant in
Viet Nam and from some that are members of a smear gang that operates
on this forum.
Doug's Rebuttal to Nigel Brooks latest Con about me:
Apparently Nigel Brooks did not like the fact I disagreed with him
about the Winter Soldier Testimony. Consequently, Nigel Brooks
started publishing his typical fraud cons about me again in a
desperate attempt to stop me from posting facts about the Winter
Soldier issue. (This is a typical method of censorship con men and
hate gangs use to shut up those that dare to disagree with them).
Brooks excerpted a "framed" paragraph out of an exchange I was having
with someone in which the phrase "(as a SFC) was out of place in the
paragraph. Of course this was a typo as all the evidence proves, and
it was stated as a typo, and was of course corrected. But did that
stop Nigel Brooks from publishing yet another (he has posted dozens)
con about this issue? Nope - con men are clearly not interested in
facts, only to find a way to lie and con so they can smear those they
disagree with:
As just one of many examples of Nigel Brooks outright cons, smears
and fraud, recently published an excerpt from an old post of mine that
he knew in advance was an admitted typo, and error. Yet, Brooks, in
his typical "con man style" he hid the true context of the post, hid
the beginning of the post which directly contradicted his con stating
I was claiming a commission as I had already told the person I was
speaking with I was a NCO, and once again, counting at least more
than a dozen times, he published the known typo error while claiming
it said something he KNEW it was not intended to say, and he published
this latest con although he already knew the "framed" typo had been
long corrected. Moreover, con man Nigel Brooks further maliciously
did not mention and hid all of the dozens of my other posts that
directly contradicted his fraudulent claim about what I said and
meant. . . can anyone be more dishonest, more of a con man, and more
fraudulent than that?
(Nigel Brooks tried to claim I was somehow falsely claiming I had a
commission in Viet Nam, yet during exchanges with the same person the
"framed typo" was excerpted from, I repeated often that I was a NCO.
No wonder Brooks hid the entire post, and all of the other exchanges
and other posts in which I said I was a NCO as well. He could not
sell his fraud and con about this issue without his typical " con man
key omissions."
I Took A Polygraph - and Passed it completely - while Nigel Brooks
hides from Google and the Same Polygraph!
I recently completed a Polygraph conducted by former *real* Federal
Agents, in connection with the same Polygraph company that was
selected to conduct some of the most famous Polygraph examinations in
the world, (Sandra Levy Case, Columbine, Tyson, just to name a few the
Polygraph company that conducted my Polygraph was previously selected
to conduct) and ALL of my answers were confirmed to be ALL TRUE!
You can read my questions and answers below - note the ones about my
military service prove Nigel Brooks is a con man, and further prove he
has been lying about me all along.
http://tinyurl.com/3k6m7wx KEY FACTS ABOUT MY POLYGRAPH TEST
The US Supreme Court upholds the use and validity of Polygraphs!
1. "The Court noted that between 1981 and 1997, the Department of
Defense
conducted over 400,000 polygraph examinations to resolve issues
arising in counterintelligence, security, and criminal
investigations."
2. (Nigel Brooks and his hate gang members run and hide from my offer
for them to take the same test even at my expense!) You be the Judge
why.
Nigel Brooks Hides From Google Challenge!
In addition to Nigel Brooks obvious cons and fraud he regularly
publishes about me, when Nigel Brooks was recently confronted by
Google to either "confirm under oath" his statements about my military
service, or remove them from his web site, Nigel Brooks ran and hid
and removed his statements about me immediately from his web site.
(Con man Nigel Brooks knew that if he confirmed his cons under oath
the shit would hit the fan as he knew he was lying, and he knew I
could easily prove him a con man and a liar in that regard - it
appears to me that no way Brooks is going to risk perjury to continue
his cons - better to have some of his gang members do that, which is
now going to happen since Brooks obviously is not going to stop his
smear and con man attacks against me). It also appears to me Nigel
Brooks will egg on his pathetic gang members to take the fall, while
he "ducks and runs" anytime he is challenged to back up his cons and
fraud.
Could this clown be any more cowardly than to run and hide from a
simple Google copyright challenge? Not only do I believe Nigel Brooks
is an obvious con man, he also appears to me to be a coward when it
comes to backing up his cons and fraud in any legal manner.
I should also mention that I offered Nigel Brooks and any of his smear
gang members the opportunity to take the same Polygraph I took, from
the same company, AT MY EXPENSE if the Polygraph indicated they were
telling the truth. . . Brooks ran and hid from that offer as well. Of
course we all know the reason why. . .
Regardless of the fact that I have asked Nigel Brooks to cease and
desist his smear and hate campaign against me several times, and
informed him that his outrageous cons and fraud are causing me and my
family extreme emotional harm, Nigel Brooks continues to maliciously
publish his obvious cons, fraud and false accusations whenever I
disagree with his goofy child like conclusions about issues. It
appears to me that this con man cannot even debate without fraud,
cons and personal attacks based upon his own dishonesty and unethical
tactics.
It appears to me the only way to stop these con men from publishing
their personal attacks and fraud is through our legal system. I was
trying my best not to go that route, but it appears I have little
choice.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Tankfixer" <paul.c...@gmail.c00m> wrote in message
news:MPG.298e357e...@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <3nm0i7heoqdmvb0fm...@4ax.com>, - !Jones
> hsoi...@kjipu.com spouted !
>> On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:03:03 -0600, in alt.war.vietnam "Nigel
>> Brooks"
>> <nbr...@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>> >But In 2004, Reiman was opining differently on Winter Soldier:
>>
>> It's true; however, you're wasting your time, Nigel.
>>
>> Go torture a jellyfish.
>>
>
Tankfixer
Jan 28, 2012, 9:38:46 PM1/28/12
to
In article <buCdndk9FL2ANrnS...@giganews.com>, - DGVREIMAN
dgvr...@comcast.net spouted !
>
> "Tankfixer" <paul.c...@gmail.c00m> wrote in message
> news:MPG.298e357e...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > [quoted text muted]
dgvr...@comcast.net spouted !
>
> It appears to me the only way to stop these con men from publishing
> their personal attacks and fraud is through our legal system. I was
> trying my best not to go that route, but it appears I have little
> choice.
>
> Doug Grant (Tm)
I wasn't talking you dumbass.
> It appears to me the only way to stop these con men from publishing
> their personal attacks and fraud is through our legal system. I was
> trying my best not to go that route, but it appears I have little
> choice.
>
> Doug Grant (Tm)
>
> "Tankfixer" <paul.c...@gmail.c00m> wrote in message
> news:MPG.298e357e...@news.eternal-september.org...
Mac
Jan 29, 2012, 12:56:19 AM1/29/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:12:41 -0800, DGVREIMAN wrote:
> WINTER SOLDIER SWORN AND
>
> NIGEL BROOKS FRAUD/ CON PERSONAL ATTACK REBUTTAL
-------- SNIP ---------
> WINTER SOLDIER SWORN AND
>
> NIGEL BROOKS FRAUD/ CON PERSONAL ATTACK REBUTTAL
Draw your own conclusions about this critter calling itself "Doug
Reiman".
He claims that the so-called "veterans" of "Winter Soldier" testified
before Congress.
He was challenged.
Several veterans posted that tose "veterans" did NOT testify before
Congress following taking an oath --- several veterans posted where they
met in a hotel facility provided by Jane Fonda --- NOT Congress.
IN ADDITION, to help that Doug Reiman person several veterans provided
explicit URL's to help him verify that.
Draw your own conclusions regarding his continued antics...
This Doug Reiman critter also claims that that the "veterans" who
"testified" related stories ----- he apparently prefers to ignore that,
once an Oregon Senator read the bullshit into the Congress, that an
investigation began.
The result?
As was provided to this Doug Reiman critter, it turns out that many of
those "testifying" were NOT the "veterans" they claimed to be; they
used the names of real "veterans"; they had not served in South
Vietnam; or they were never in combat situations...
The investigation did find ONE PERSON whose testimony might have had some
acquaintance with Reality.
This Doug Reiman critter was, again, provided with the specific URL
documenting the above that he might verify such.
Draw your own conclusion regarding his antics.
Rather than address the comments DAI UY made in response to "free-fire
zones", this Doug Reiman critter sidestepped the matter, quoted a
definition of the term, and hurriedly made his usual statement about
officers receiving medals from alleged "false enemy body count reports".
Apparently it must still rankle that this Doug Reiman critter, according
to his own statement, left a unit to go to OCS and returned as a
"butterbar" -------- HOWEVER, at OCS, within weeks, he was emplaced in
a CAUSAL COMPANY and on his way to Europe.
Apparently he has some deep-rooted issues with not being an officer...
-Mac, the Medic
Mac
Jan 29, 2012, 12:59:54 AM1/29/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:12:41 -0800, DGVREIMAN wrote:
> WINTER SOLDIER SWORN
====================================
> WINTER SOLDIER SWORN
So, where is the Sworn Testimony" you claim to have ??? ???
Has it already been weeks and you still have NOT posted what you
claim to have/
Gee, sounds awfully familiar...
-Mac, the Medic
0 new messages