<font size=4>Rood Counters Swiftvets But Qualifies 250 Other Witnesses
As Mickey Kaus noted yesterday, Chicago Tribune editor William Rood broke 35 years of silence in order to counter one of the attacks in Unfit for Command, the Swiftvet book that has sold out seven printings around the country. Rood claims that the Swiftvet version of Kerry's Silver Star engagement is wrong, and Kerry's is correct:
<font color=blue>
In February 1969, Rood was a lieutenant junior grade commanding PCF-23, one of the three 50-foot aluminum swift boats that carried troops up the Dong Cung, a tributary of the Bay Hap River. Kerry commanded another boat, PCF-94 and Lt. j.g. Donald Droz, who was killed in action six weeks later, commanded PCF-43. Ambushes from Viet Cong fighters were common because the noise from boats, powered by twin diesel engines, practically invited gunfire. Ambushes, Rood said, "were a virtual certainty." ...
<font color=black>
In the book, O'Neill and Corsi said Kerry chased down a <font color=green>"young Viet Cong in a loincloth … clutching a grenade launcher which may or may not have been loaded."<font color=black>
Rood recalled the fleeing Viet Cong was <font color=blue>"a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore."<font color=black> There were other attackers as well, he said, and his boat and Kerry's boat took significant fire.
After the attack, the task force commanding officer, then-Capt. Roy Hoffmann, sent a message of congratulations to the three swift boats, saying their charge of the ambushers was a <font color=blue>"shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy"<font color=black> and that it <font color=blue>"may be the most efficacious [method] of dealing with small numbers of ambushers,"<font color=black> Rood said."
I don't have a problem with Rood's testimony, mostly because I believe this was the one battle the Swiftvets should have skipped, at least in terms of Kerry's engagement of the VC. If he shot at the boat, I wouldn't care if he were running away or in circles when Kerry shot him, or whether he wore a loincloth or an Armani tuxedo. Beaching a PCF appears to me to be a tremendously foolish tactical decision, as speed was its only defense and the angle leaves the gunner exposed without giving him full range to return fire -- but in this case it worked. And as Rood explains, it was not a hasty decision but one that the three other PCF officers planned in advance amongst themselves.
<font color=green>
However, using Rood to counter -- factually, finally --
one of the Swiftvet's contentions points out that these
boats worked together as a unit and that witnesses to
engagements do not lose their stature merely because they
happened to be on a different PCF during the engagement.
If Rood's testimony is valid, and I have no doubt he means
well, then that makes all of the other Swiftvets'
testimony just as valid.
Besides, as Beldar notes, Rood's description of the events only challenges two assertions made by the Swiftvets: that the VC killed was dressed in a loincloth., and that the beaching of the PCF was an impulsive and foolish tactical move that amounted to grandstanding. Points noted. They still question the awarding of a Silver Star to an engagement that killed one fleeing enemy, which deserved recognition for bravery but probably in normal conditions wouldn't be considered Silver Star material. I'd chalk that up to Pentagon brass looking for good motivational stories than Kerry's legendary talent for self-aggrandisement, even if he did go out the next day to re-create the engagement for his home movie camera.
<font color=red>
Rood and the Chicago Tribune has done nothing to put Kerry in Cambodia, or explain why he says Kerry experienced <font color=blue>"intense combat"<font color=red> on 2 December while writing on 11 December that he had not yet been shot at, or any of a number of elisions, exaggerations, or outright prevarications that we have documented at Captain's Quarters and elsehwere.
<font color=black><font size=3>
Posted by Captain Ed |
