| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"DGVREIMAN" |
| Date: |
05 Mar 2005 09:35:30 AM |
| Object: |
NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR
Brooks first claimed that Doug Reese did not lie about John Kerry's
action in Vietnam. Brooks of course was caught lying about his
chum Kerry, as the following post below (DOUG REESE'S CLAIMS
DEBUNKED" proves irrefutably.
Then Brook's claimed that because I was assigned to the 53rd
General Support Group on an early extension request (which was
suddenly approved after I started complaining about tunnels
underneath the Cu Chi Base Camp) that I had to be in "supply or
logistics." But Brooks was so stupid he did not know that all
those that extended for Vung Tau had to be assigned to the 53rd
General Support Group unless they were Military Police. The 53rd
had so many different MOS's running around they did not know what
to do with them due to so many wise Vietnam Vets extending their
tours and requesting Vung Tau as their next assignment. I ended
up in Can Tho as an example, and I have never worked in supply or
logistics in my life, in the military or out. But regardless,
this Nigel Brooks character keeps trying to lie about my military
service regardless of the fact I have offered him proof of my
Vietnam service not less than TEN times!
Books then tried to claim that I said I went on classified
missions in Vietnam, but when you read what I said, I did not
specify the country nor the time in my military career some of my
missions were classified. Brooks simply lied about that and he
was caught doing so. (I have Honorable Discharges from both the
US Marine Corps and the US Army, and I spent a long time in the
military).
Then Brooks tried to claim that because one of my men did not die
at Cu Chi when he was wounded on a mission I was on, then I was
lying about that wound and his death. But here is precisely what
I said:
"Sp4 Olson received a mortal wound in his liver that night, and
Sp4 Nelson was wounded in the arm. "
I said he received a "mortal wound" and not that he was killed on
the spot like Nigel Brooks is trying to lie about. I visited
Olsen (could be Olson) in the Hospital and he had received a
wound in his liver. He was swollen and his skin was yellow. I was
told by the Doctors he was going to be medevaced and he would
probably not make it due to the Liver wound. Much later, I had a
few beers with Nelson later on a Vung Tau beach when we were both
on R&R and Nelson also was under the impression that Olsen died
of his wounds. But because Brooks could not find a record of
Olsen's death at Cu Chi, Brooks tried to denigrate this true
story. Olsen was medevacted out like all soldiers with extremely
serious wounds were. I don't know where they sent him, but
probably to Long Binh, Japan or to the States.
I do not know if those that post on Alt.war.Vietnam hold Nigel
Brooks as a moderator or some authority on Vietnam. But I have
found him to be dishonest, self serving in his "interpretations"
of military service in Vietnam (especially mine). When we were in
Vietnam many of us were unfortunate to encounter "civilians"
working for the US Military or the ARVN. Some were CIA of course
(the Air America crowd) but many were just dregs that could not
keep a job in the States, married some Vietnamese *****, and were
nothing more than Village Rats. I am not saying this is Nigel
Brooks, simply because I don't know the man nor will he prove his
identity. But I am saying he does NOT represent true military
personnel that served in Vietnam - Brooks was a civilian, NOT a
solider.
In fact Brooks is so incredibly uninformed he said the only way
you could experience Combat in Vietnam is if you had an
Infantryman's MOS - does that sound like someone that your
newsgroup should hold up as an authority on Vietnam service?
To put all this to rest I hereby offer any Veteran that contacts
me and proves his identity the following:
1. Proof of my Vietnam Service directly from the Military Record
Corrections documents, along with signatures and verification
symbols.
2. Proof of the Olsen mission incident that Brooks is trying to
question. (I have contacted some of the 25th Historians and they
tell me they can get copies of the Morning Reports for that
period, and the incident I described, along with lists of
casualties will be listed in those reports. There may be other
ways to obtain evidence of the mission I described, if anyone has
any ideas let me know via email).
I never lie on these Newsgroups, and I can prove everything I say
to people I know are not masquerading as Vietnam Vets. I offered
Nigel Brooks TEN TIMES the opportunity to contact me, prove who
he was, and then I would provide irrefutable proof of my Vietnam
service, and in fact, the Olsen mission he is trying his best to
distort. (Brooks lied about what I said about that mission and I
have the original post, and much more information on the incident
I described in which Olsen and Nelson were hit).
Yet Brooks is afraid to contact me, and he keeps refusing to
receive the proof I have offered. Now isn't that strange? Here is
a man that wants to libel me, lie about my Vietnam service
(probably because I exposed his chum Doug Reese as a liar about
John Kerry -see below for evidence) yet *when I offer to provide
irrefutable proof Brooks is wrong, Nigel Brook refuses to even
look at the proof! My only conclusion is that Nigel Brooks has an
ulterior motive, and that motive is clearly malicious libel.
Brooks also lied and said that anyone can receive a copy of a
serviceman's basic record without the permission of the
Serviceman via Email. I found that misrepresentation to be false
as well - not unless I am missing something on the Web Site which
I doubt. Why would Brooks lie about that if he was not trying to
hide something?
Consequently, I hereby offer my telephone number to any and all
Veterans that post on this Newsgroup to contact me so we can
exchange proof of our identifies and our Vietnam service, and I
will further prove irrefutably that Nigel Brooks is lying, and
further, if anyone knows where Mr. Brooks can be contacted please
advise. It appears that I will need to serve Mr. Brooks with
legal documents before this is over, and then Mr. Brooks will be
forced to review the proof I have offered only in a court of law
at his expense.
(Note that John Kerry used dozens of "fake veterans" during his
winter soldier debacle to testify to false missions and actions
in Vietnam that were nothing more than lies and attacks on all
Vietnam Vets. When dozens of Vietnam veteran's named in the
Winter Soldier press release were later interviewed by the Army
and by the Press, they said they had never testified before Kerry
nor Fonda, and that clearly some "fake veterans" were
fraudulently using their names. I don't know for sure if this
applies to what is going on in AWV, but the fact that Brooks
keeps lying about me, and he and Reese were staunch Kerry
supporters, and the fact that Brooks refuses to review the proof
of his lies I have offered him not less than ten times, and he
further refuses to prove his identity, is making me suspicious of
his true identity).
Please contact me at 509-389-1776 or email me. If you have
trouble getting through to my number please keep trying and email
me if you do have trouble. I intend to set the record straight on
this issue once and for all, and further prove that at least two
of your fellow NG posters clearly are lying or at least
distorting the truth to a point it is not only dishonorable but
clearly libelous.
We all know that proof of service is easy to prove, and can be
confirmed. Please contact me directly if you want to know the
truth in respect to this issue.
The following proves irrefutably that Doug Reese lied about John
Kerry's service in Vietnam.
DOUG REESE'S CLAIMS DEBUNKED
Doug Reese said that Kerry never killed Civilians in Vietnam -
and that Kerry never admitted to killing civilians in Vietnam -
Reese lied. Here are just a few of Kerry's own admissions that he
killed civilians in Vietnam:
"Mr. Kerry, you said at one time or another that you think our
policies in Vietnam are tantamount to genocide and that the
responsibility lies at all chains of command over there. Do you
consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed
atrocities in Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this
country?
-- Crosby Noyes, Washington Evening Star
Kerry:
"There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that,
yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of
other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in
free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I
used 50 caliber machine guns, which we were granted and ordered
to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in
search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of
this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary
to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter
of written established policy by the government of the United
States from the top down.
-- John Kerry, on NBC's "Meet the Press" April 18, 1971
We were sent to Vietnam to kill Communism. But we found instead
that we were killing women and children.
-- John Kerry, in "The New Soldier"
"We established an American presence in most cases by showing the
flag and firing at sampans and villages along the banks. Those
were our instructions, but they seemed so out of line that we
finally began to go ashore, against our orders, and investigate
the villages that were supposed to be our targets. We discovered
we were butchering a lot of innocent people, and morale became so
low among the officers on those 'swift boats' that we were called
back to Saigon for special instructions from Gen. Abrams. He told
us we were doing the right thing. He said our efforts would help
win the war in the long run."
-- John Kerry in the Washington Star, June 6, 1971
(Note that Doug Reese said that Kerry was never ordered not to
abandon his boat and go ashore, but according to Kerry's own
statement above, he was ordered not to go ashore - Doug Reese
clearly is lying).
Kerry wrote in his book *The New Soldier* about how he killed
innocent Vietnamese civilians:
Excerpt from CNN:
"The New Soldier reveals Kerry's direct criticism of American
soldiers, including charges that they committed atrocities
against the Vietnamese while on patrol.
In the book, Kerry said he "saw Vietnam ravaged equally by
American bombs and search-and-destroy missions, as well as by
Viet Cong terrorism..." He added that his combat duty in Vietnam
irrevocably transformed his outlook on the military.
"Because of all that I saw in Vietnam, the treatment of
civilians, the ravaging of their countryside, the needless,
useless deaths, the deception and duplicity of our policy, I
changed," Kerry wrote.
Some excerpts extracted from Douglas Brinkly's Kerry Bio, "
During a patrol in the Mekong Delta in 1969 Kerry's crew caught
sight of a Vietnamese Sampan. So without checking the Sampan, who
was on board, or even if the Sampans were Viet Cong or just
civilian fishing boats, Kerry gave the signal for his crew to
open fire on the defenseless fishermen. Kerry later described the
fishermen as "running away like gazelles."
Doug Says: Doug Reese also tried to claim that none of Kerry's
Crew ever said they killed civilians - but here are some direct
excerpts from the Douglas Brinkly Bio on Kerry:
"In Kerry's so-called "second encounter with the enemy" Lt. Kerry
spots yet another two unarmed Sampans, and Kerry ordered his boat
to follow these unarmed Sampans into a small fishing village.
Kerry later claimed that his boat "took some sniper fire" from
the Village, but his boat was not hit, nor do any members of
Kerry's crew remember receiving that mysterious sniper fire, and
of course the village later turned out to be a friendly village
which housed several of our allies - members of the South
Vietnamese Army. Regardless, according to Kerry, he ordered his
machine gunner, Mr. James Wasser, to open fire on the Sampans and
the village. Yet Wasser told Brinkly that the only "enemy" that
Kerry ordered him to fire upon was "an old man leading a water
buffalo."
""I am haunted by that old man's face," said Mr. Wasser. "He was
just doing his daily farming, hurting nobody, yet he got hit in
the chest with a M60 machine gun.""
Doug Says: Even Kerry's Commanding Officer, Admiral Zumwalt, said
that Kerry was murdering civilians:
'To sum up Lt. Kerry's Vietnam service, all one needs to do is
repeat what Assistant Secretary of Defense and Professor W. Scott
Thompson said Admiral Zumwalt told him about Lt. John Kerry: .
Mr. Thompson said, "Adm. Elmo Zumwalt told me that young Kerry
had created great problems for him and the other top brass by
killing so many noncombatants civilians and going after other
nonmilitary targets, 'We had to virtually straitjacket him to
keep him under control,' the admiral said."
(Note that Doug Reese wants Admiral Zumwalt to return from the
grave and repeat what he had already told Professor W. Scott
Thompson - yet the above information was related by Professor
Thompson long before Kerry ran for the Presidency. Doug Reese. of
course, has no basis nor information to refute nor challenge what
this extremely prominent and respected statesman wrote in respect
to conversations he had with the late Admiral Zumwalt).
Doug Reese also claimed the only day that SwitBoats and Kerry
ever ferried Special Forces personnel was on March 13, 1969. That
claim is so false it is hilarious! One of the main duties of the
SwiftBoats was to "ferry troops" and they ferried Special Forces
troops at least "hundreds of times" according to Swift Boat
commanders.
Reese went on to claim that on March 13, 1969 Kerry did not kill
any civilians. But how would Reese know that for sure? Kerry
ordered his men to open fire, and did Reese inspect every
Vietnamese that might have been wounded or killed? No, of course
not. Was Reese with Kerry every second of the day, no, of course
not. Yet regardless of what might have happened on March 13,
1969, Kerry and at least one of his men have confirmed they in
fact did kill innocent civilians during their tour of duty in
Vietnam- and that makes Doug Reese a liar.
Moreover, it is hard to believe anything Reese has said based
upon the lies I have already caught him spewing, and because
there are still conflicting accounts on what happened on March
13, 1969 as is indicated by the article below:
Doug says: Note that Doug Reese's account of the scratch Kerry
received directly contradicts Kerry's own Commanding Officer's
version - and then later Reese admits that he was not even with
Kerry on that date. Moreover, although Doug Reese claimed he
"served right along side Kerry" he now admits that he was NEVER
even in Kerry's boat as a crew member nor as a passenger, and he
was only involved in a minor mission on one single day that is
still in question in respect to Kerry actions I should also
mention that Mr; Reese's account of what happened on that date
*directly contradicts* what Hanoi John Kerry wrote about what he
did on that date. According to Reese, it was Reese that deserved
all the medals and not Kerry - so I really do not know what Reese's
true agenda is, but I sure as hell know it is not the truth.
Doug Grant (Tm)
.
|
|
| User: "Nigel Brooks" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
05 Mar 2005 11:51:48 AM |
|
|
"DGVREIMAN" <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote in message
news:LridnRxodswtTLTfRVn-3A@comcast.com...
NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR
Brooks first claimed that Doug Reese did not lie about John Kerry's action
in Vietnam. Brooks of course was caught lying about his chum Kerry, as the
following post below (DOUG REESE'S CLAIMS DEBUNKED" proves irrefutably.
Then Brook's claimed that because I was assigned to the 53rd General
Support Group on an early extension request (which was suddenly approved
after I started complaining about tunnels underneath the Cu Chi Base Camp)
that I had to be in "supply or logistics." But Brooks was so stupid he did
not know that all those that extended for Vung Tau had to be assigned to
the 53rd General Support Group unless they were Military Police. The 53rd
had so many different MOS's running around they did not know what to do
with them due to so many wise Vietnam Vets extending their tours and
requesting Vung Tau as their next assignment. I ended up in Can Tho as an
example, and I have never worked in supply or logistics in my life, in the
military or out. But regardless, this Nigel Brooks character keeps trying
to lie about my military service regardless of the fact I have offered him
proof of my Vietnam service not less than TEN times!
Books then tried to claim that I said I went on classified missions in
Vietnam, but when you read what I said, I did not specify the country nor
the time in my military career some of my missions were classified. Brooks
simply lied about that and he was caught doing so. (I have Honorable
Discharges from both the US Marine Corps and the US Army, and I spent a
long time in the military).
Then Brooks tried to claim that because one of my men did not die at Cu
Chi when he was wounded on a mission I was on, then I was lying about that
wound and his death. But here is precisely what I said:
"Sp4 Olson received a mortal wound in his liver that night, and Sp4 Nelson
was wounded in the arm. "
I said he received a "mortal wound" and not that he was killed on the spot
like Nigel Brooks is trying to lie about. I visited Olsen (could be Olson)
in the Hospital and he had received a wound in his liver. He was swollen
and his skin was yellow. I was told by the Doctors he was going to be
medevaced and he would probably not make it due to the Liver wound. Much
later, I had a few beers with Nelson later on a Vung Tau beach when we
were both on R&R and Nelson also was under the impression that Olsen died
of his wounds. But because Brooks could not find a record of Olsen's death
at Cu Chi, Brooks tried to denigrate this true story. Olsen was medevacted
out like all soldiers with extremely serious wounds were. I don't know
where they sent him, but probably to Long Binh, Japan or to the States.
I do not know if those that post on Alt.war.Vietnam hold Nigel Brooks as a
moderator or some authority on Vietnam. But I have found him to be
dishonest, self serving in his "interpretations" of military service in
Vietnam (especially mine). When we were in Vietnam many of us were
unfortunate to encounter "civilians" working for the US Military or the
ARVN. Some were CIA of course (the Air America crowd) but many were just
dregs that could not keep a job in the States, married some Vietnamese
*****, and were nothing more than Village Rats. I am not saying this is
Nigel Brooks, simply because I don't know the man nor will he prove his
identity. But I am saying he does NOT represent true military personnel
that served in Vietnam - Brooks was a civilian, NOT a solider.
In fact Brooks is so incredibly uninformed he said the only way you could
experience Combat in Vietnam is if you had an Infantryman's MOS - does
that sound like someone that your newsgroup should hold up as an authority
on Vietnam service?
To put all this to rest I hereby offer any Veteran that contacts me and
proves his identity the following:
1. Proof of my Vietnam Service directly from the Military Record
Corrections documents, along with signatures and verification symbols.
2. Proof of the Olsen mission incident that Brooks is trying to question.
(I have contacted some of the 25th Historians and they tell me they can
get copies of the Morning Reports for that period, and the incident I
described, along with lists of casualties will be listed in those reports.
There may be other ways to obtain evidence of the mission I described, if
anyone has any ideas let me know via email).
I never lie on these Newsgroups, and I can prove everything I say to
people I know are not masquerading as Vietnam Vets. I offered Nigel Brooks
TEN TIMES the opportunity to contact me, prove who he was, and then I
would provide irrefutable proof of my Vietnam service, and in fact, the
Olsen mission he is trying his best to distort. (Brooks lied about what I
said about that mission and I have the original post, and much more
information on the incident I described in which Olsen and Nelson were
hit).
Yet Brooks is afraid to contact me, and he keeps refusing to receive the
proof I have offered. Now isn't that strange? Here is a man that wants to
libel me, lie about my Vietnam service (probably because I exposed his
chum Doug Reese as a liar about John Kerry -see below for evidence) yet
*when I offer to provide irrefutable proof Brooks is wrong, Nigel Brook
refuses to even look at the proof! My only conclusion is that Nigel Brooks
has an ulterior motive, and that motive is clearly malicious libel.
Brooks also lied and said that anyone can receive a copy of a serviceman's
basic record without the permission of the Serviceman via Email. I found
that misrepresentation to be false as well - not unless I am missing
something on the Web Site which I doubt. Why would Brooks lie about that
if he was not trying to hide something?
Consequently, I hereby offer my telephone number to any and all Veterans
that post on this Newsgroup to contact me so we can exchange proof of our
identifies and our Vietnam service, and I will further prove irrefutably
that Nigel Brooks is lying, and further, if anyone knows where Mr. Brooks
can be contacted please advise. It appears that I will need to serve Mr.
Brooks with legal documents before this is over, and then Mr. Brooks will
be forced to review the proof I have offered only in a court of law at his
expense.
(Note that John Kerry used dozens of "fake veterans" during his winter
soldier debacle to testify to false missions and actions in Vietnam that
were nothing more than lies and attacks on all Vietnam Vets. When dozens
of Vietnam veteran's named in the Winter Soldier press release were later
interviewed by the Army and by the Press, they said they had never
testified before Kerry nor Fonda, and that clearly some "fake veterans"
were fraudulently using their names. I don't know for sure if this applies
to what is going on in AWV, but the fact that Brooks keeps lying about me,
and he and Reese were staunch Kerry supporters, and the fact that Brooks
refuses to review the proof of his lies I have offered him not less than
ten times, and he further refuses to prove his identity, is making me
suspicious of his true identity).
Please contact me at 509-389-1776 or email me. If you have trouble getting
through to my number please keep trying and email me if you do have
trouble. I intend to set the record straight on this issue once and for
all, and further prove that at least two of your fellow NG posters clearly
are lying or at least distorting the truth to a point it is not only
dishonorable but clearly libelous.
We all know that proof of service is easy to prove, and can be confirmed.
Please contact me directly if you want to know the truth in respect to
this issue.
The following proves irrefutably that Doug Reese lied about John Kerry's
service in Vietnam.
Thanks for the headline.
This is usenet - you can be all you want to be.
Just don't expect everyone to believe you. (I do believe Doug Reese
however)
a. With regards to your post that your "2nd (extension) Tour was with a LSA
unit operating out of Can Tho" - if LSA does not stand for Logistics Support
Activity - what does it stand for?
b. This is what you said about an action during June of 1968 that occurred
inside the Cu Chi base perimeter "This event took place in June 1968, at the
25th Infantry Division's Cu Chi Base Camp, Republic of Vietnam...........You
then go on to recount gathering at the 1st of the 5th are and move toward
the camp bunker line - coming under attack inside the perimeter - you go on
to say ......................We suffered dozens of casualties, two of which
were men assigned to my team. Sp4 Olson received a mortal wound in his liver
that night, and Sp4 Nelson was wounded in the arm. (Nelson if you are
reading this by chance email me). " You have subsequently elaborated by
stating that Olson was medevaced and died elsewhere.
The Cu Chi base camp was in Gia Dinh province - If you are correct, SP4
Olson was wounded at the CuChi base base camp in Gia Dinh province. The
CACCF lists the province where the casualty occurred - for example a person
could suffer a mortal wound in the Delta and be medevaced to the 3d Field
Hospital in Saigon, dying at that location. The record would show that the
mortal wound was suffered in the Delta Province and not Saigon.
The fact is that the CACCF does not list a SP4 Olson as having been killed
during June 1968 in Gia Dinh Province - in fact you might be interested to
know that there were no Olson's or Olsen's (I notice that you are now
spelling the name with a "e") listed as having been casualties in Gia Dinh
province during the entire calendar year of 1968
If you can provide SP4 Olson's first name - it will be relatively easy to
determine whether or not the CACCF is mistaken.
c. Let me put you obvious inability to understand how the records center in
St Louis works to rest. I have never said that individual records can be
obtained in any other fashion than by either going directly to the center
and making applicaton, or by United States Mail. Anyone can MAIL (you know
put a stamp on a letter) an SF 180 or simply a letter to the center and they
can get the publicly releasable information on a veteran without his
approval. Got it?
d. I have previously told you I served in the US Army in Vietnam and
subsequently got out of the service In Country during the Tet Offensive of
1968. Just drop the St Louis records center a line and they will release
that information to you. It will include the total length of service,
awards, etc.
e. I have never stated that the only way someone could claim to have been
in combat is for them to have been an infantry man. What I said is that
"Commanding a bunker line is analagous to running an EM club because those
troops who were assigned none direct combat duties such as clerks, cooks,
personnel folks, etc manned towers and bunkers on a rotating basis. I did
it - I never ever considered that my service equated to that of an
infantryman."
f. I have no idea where you got the idea I supported John Kerry - Although
I do consider Doug Reese as being a chum (as you describe it) I went to DC
last year to protest his sorry *****.
g. Regarding "It appears that I will need to serve Mr. Brooks with legal
documents before this is over, and then Mr. Brooks will be forced to review
the proof I have offered only in a court of law at his expense." - Feel
free to serve me with legal documents - you may have your attorney subpoena
my ISP (MSN) - they will provide you with the necessary information in order
that you may have a process server contact me at my residence.
h. I still find it intriguing that you had the ability to just march into
25th Infantry Division Commanding General's office to advise him of your
suspicions concerning tunnels under CuChi base camp.
I guess I just leave the reader to evaluate this particular conversation
--
Nigel Brooks
.
|
|
|
| User: "DGVREIMAN" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
05 Mar 2005 12:58:48 PM |
|
|
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38u9tpF5rucvjU1@individual.net...
"DGVREIMAN" <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote in message
news:LridnRxodswtTLTfRVn-3A@comcast.com...
NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR
Brooks first claimed that Doug Reese did not lie about John
Kerry's action in Vietnam. Brooks of course was caught lying
about his chum Kerry, as the following post below (DOUG
REESE'S CLAIMS DEBUNKED" proves irrefutably.
Then Brook's claimed that because I was assigned to the 53rd
General Support Group on an early extension request (which was
suddenly approved after I started complaining about tunnels
underneath the Cu Chi Base Camp) that I had to be in "supply
or logistics." But Brooks was so stupid he did not know that
all those that extended for Vung Tau had to be assigned to the
53rd General Support Group unless they were Military Police.
The 53rd had so many different MOS's running around they did
not know what to do with them due to so many wise Vietnam Vets
extending their tours and requesting Vung Tau as their next
assignment. I ended up in Can Tho as an example, and I have
never worked in supply or logistics in my life, in the
military or out. But regardless, this Nigel Brooks character
keeps trying to lie about my military service regardless of
the fact I have offered him proof of my Vietnam service not
less than TEN times!
Books then tried to claim that I said I went on classified
missions in Vietnam, but when you read what I said, I did not
specify the country nor the time in my military career some of
my missions were classified. Brooks simply lied about that and
he was caught doing so. (I have Honorable Discharges from both
the US Marine Corps and the US Army, and I spent a long time
in the military).
Then Brooks tried to claim that because one of my men did not
die at Cu Chi when he was wounded on a mission I was on, then
I was lying about that wound and his death. But here is
precisely what I said:
"Sp4 Olson received a mortal wound in his liver that night,
and Sp4 Nelson was wounded in the arm. "
I said he received a "mortal wound" and not that he was killed
on the spot like Nigel Brooks is trying to lie about. I
visited Olsen (could be Olson) in the Hospital and he had
received a wound in his liver. He was swollen and his skin was
yellow. I was told by the Doctors he was going to be medevaced
and he would probably not make it due to the Liver wound. Much
later, I had a few beers with Nelson later on a Vung Tau beach
when we were both on R&R and Nelson also was under the
impression that Olsen died of his wounds. But because Brooks
could not find a record of Olsen's death at Cu Chi, Brooks
tried to denigrate this true story. Olsen was medevacted out
like all soldiers with extremely serious wounds were. I don't
know where they sent him, but probably to Long Binh, Japan or
to the States.
I do not know if those that post on Alt.war.Vietnam hold Nigel
Brooks as a moderator or some authority on Vietnam. But I have
found him to be dishonest, self serving in his
"interpretations" of military service in Vietnam (especially
mine). When we were in Vietnam many of us were unfortunate to
encounter "civilians" working for the US Military or the ARVN.
Some were CIA of course (the Air America crowd) but many were
just dregs that could not keep a job in the States, married
some Vietnamese *****, and were nothing more than Village
Rats. I am not saying this is Nigel Brooks, simply because I
don't know the man nor will he prove his identity. But I am
saying he does NOT represent true military personnel that
served in Vietnam - Brooks was a civilian, NOT a solider.
In fact Brooks is so incredibly uninformed he said the only
way you could experience Combat in Vietnam is if you had an
Infantryman's MOS - does that sound like someone that your
newsgroup should hold up as an authority on Vietnam service?
To put all this to rest I hereby offer any Veteran that
contacts me and proves his identity the following:
1. Proof of my Vietnam Service directly from the Military
Record Corrections documents, along with signatures and
verification symbols.
2. Proof of the Olsen mission incident that Brooks is trying
to question. (I have contacted some of the 25th Historians and
they tell me they can get copies of the Morning Reports for
that period, and the incident I described, along with lists of
casualties will be listed in those reports. There may be other
ways to obtain evidence of the mission I described, if anyone
has any ideas let me know via email).
I never lie on these Newsgroups, and I can prove everything I
say to people I know are not masquerading as Vietnam Vets. I
offered Nigel Brooks TEN TIMES the opportunity to contact me,
prove who he was, and then I would provide irrefutable proof
of my Vietnam service, and in fact, the Olsen mission he is
trying his best to distort. (Brooks lied about what I said
about that mission and I have the original post, and much more
information on the incident I described in which Olsen and
Nelson were hit).
Yet Brooks is afraid to contact me, and he keeps refusing to
receive the proof I have offered. Now isn't that strange? Here
is a man that wants to libel me, lie about my Vietnam service
(probably because I exposed his chum Doug Reese as a liar
about John Kerry -see below for evidence) yet *when I offer to
provide irrefutable proof Brooks is wrong, Nigel Brook refuses
to even look at the proof! My only conclusion is that Nigel
Brooks has an ulterior motive, and that motive is clearly
malicious libel.
Brooks also lied and said that anyone can receive a copy of a
serviceman's basic record without the permission of the
Serviceman via Email. I found that misrepresentation to be
false as well - not unless I am missing something on the Web
Site which I doubt. Why would Brooks lie about that if he was
not trying to hide something?
Consequently, I hereby offer my telephone number to any and
all Veterans that post on this Newsgroup to contact me so we
can exchange proof of our identifies and our Vietnam service,
and I will further prove irrefutably that Nigel Brooks is
lying, and further, if anyone knows where Mr. Brooks can be
contacted please advise. It appears that I will need to serve
Mr. Brooks with legal documents before this is over, and then
Mr. Brooks will be forced to review the proof I have offered
only in a court of law at his expense.
(Note that John Kerry used dozens of "fake veterans" during
his winter soldier debacle to testify to false missions and
actions in Vietnam that were nothing more than lies and
attacks on all Vietnam Vets. When dozens of Vietnam veteran's
named in the Winter Soldier press release were later
interviewed by the Army and by the Press, they said they had
never testified before Kerry nor Fonda, and that clearly some
"fake veterans" were fraudulently using their names. I don't
know for sure if this applies to what is going on in AWV, but
the fact that Brooks keeps lying about me, and he and Reese
were staunch Kerry supporters, and the fact that Brooks
refuses to review the proof of his lies I have offered him not
less than ten times, and he further refuses to prove his
identity, is making me suspicious of his true identity).
Please contact me at 509-389-1776 or email me. If you have
trouble getting through to my number please keep trying and
email me if you do have trouble. I intend to set the record
straight on this issue once and for all, and further prove
that at least two of your fellow NG posters clearly are lying
or at least distorting the truth to a point it is not only
dishonorable but clearly libelous.
We all know that proof of service is easy to prove, and can be
confirmed. Please contact me directly if you want to know the
truth in respect to this issue.
The following proves irrefutably that Doug Reese lied about
John Kerry's service in Vietnam.
Thanks for the headline.
This is usenet - you can be all you want to be.
Just don't expect everyone to believe you. (I do believe Doug
Reese however)
Doug Says: Reese was proved a liar by Kerry's own admissions -
and you are so stupid and dogmatic you still believe him?
a. With regards to your post that your "2nd (extension) Tour
was with a LSA unit operating out of Can Tho" - if LSA does not
stand for Logistics Support Activity - what does it stand for?
Doug Says: Considering I already said it stands for Logistical
Support Activity, what exactly is your question? You are no so
stupid to believe that everyone that is assigned to a support
activity works in logistics or supply do you? Is that the same
goofball conclusion that you came to about everyone that was
assigned to the 53rd General Support Group working in supply or
logistics? How about someone that was assigned to an Armor unit
(such as I was once in Ft. Hood) does that mean I had to be a
Tank Driver? You cannot be that stupid Brooks, can you? I told
you I have never worked in logistics nor supply in my life, in
the military or out. I offered to prove my Vietnam service if
you contacted me, even by email, but you are afraid to do so. It
appears that you are an alias of a real Veteran that is
masquerading as a Vet - I have never met a Vet that was not
willing to prove his identity - why are you hiding?
b. This is what you said about an action during June of 1968
that occurred inside the Cu Chi base perimeter "This event took
place in June 1968, at the 25th Infantry Division's Cu Chi Base
Camp, Republic of Vietnam...........You then go on to recount
gathering at the 1st of the 5th are and move toward the camp
bunker line - coming under attack inside the perimeter - you go
on to say ......................We suffered dozens of
casualties, two of which were men assigned to my team. Sp4
Olson received a mortal wound in his liver that night, and Sp4
Nelson was wounded in the arm. (Nelson if you are reading this
by chance email me). " You have subsequently elaborated by
stating that Olson was medevaced and died elsewhere.
The Cu Chi base camp was in Gia Dinh province - If you are
correct, SP4 Olson was wounded at the CuChi base base camp in
Gia Dinh province. The CACCF lists the province where the
casualty occurred - for example a person could suffer a mortal
wound in the Delta and be medevaced to the 3d Field Hospital in
Saigon, dying at that location. The record would show that the
mortal wound was suffered in the Delta Province and not Saigon.
Doug Says: You are lying Nigel - the record shows where the
solider died, not where he first suffered the mortal wound.
Moreover, you need to post your "record" a link will do. Also,
I need to search but I believe your conclusion that Cu Chi was in
Gioa Dinh province is also a lie. I believe that Cu Chi had its
own district, and I do not know how the casuality reports dipict
information, but I will soon find out. Did you search for a
"Nelson" as well? Considering the fact that I was there when
this happen, and both of those men were assigned to me, I know
what I said is true, it is just a matter of shifting through all
of your obvious distortions, libel and lies to prove it.
Moreover, I have some other information on this issue that I will
be glad to share with you when you contact me and prove you are
not faking your name, which would be the only reason not to at
least email me.
Saigon in 1956 to 1975
There was much change during 20 years (1955 - 1975). Since 1956,
Saigon - Cho Lon became capital of the South Viet Nam regime,
called Do Thanh Saigon. In 1959, the city divided by 8
administrative districts and each district divided by smaller
unit as 'xa' (ward). December of 1966, the First District was
added two new wards from 'xa' An Khanh of Gia Dinh province. In
January 1967, these two wards were separated again to set up
Ninth District. In July 1969, there were two new districts
established: Districts Tenth and Eleventh. Since then, Saigon had
11 districts.
Before the Liberation Day on April 30th, 1975, geography area of
Ho Chi Minh City now was sited on land of 11 districts of Do
Thanh Saigon, Gia Dinh province, Cu Chi district (Hau Nghia) and
Phu Hoa district (of Binh Duong).
Doug Says: Note how often these districts were switched around,
and in January 1967, a new district was set up. I don't know why
you keep distorting facts into lies Nigel, but I assure you I am
going to get to the bottom of this.
Doug Says: You are the one that is lying Nigel, and you know it
c. Let me put you obvious inability to understand how the
records center in St Louis works to rest. I have never said
that individual records can be obtained in any other fashion
than by either going directly to the center and making
applicaton, or by United States Mail. Anyone can MAIL (you know
put a stamp on a letter) an SF 180 or simply a letter to the
center and they can get the publicly releasable information on
a veteran without his approval. Got it?
Doug Says: Now you are changing your tune again Nigel, first you
said anyone could gain information on a Veteran that was not
considered personal, now you have backpedaled to now say
"publicly releasable information" - which will not include
specifics of his service! Also, please provide the cite that
you claim provides this information. You said you provided it
before, but everyone seems to have missed it including me. So
post it again if you are not lying.
d. I have previously told you I served in the US Army in
Vietnam and subsequently got out of the service In Country
during the Tet Offensive of 1968. Just drop the St Louis
records center a line and they will release that information to
you. It will include the total length of service, awards, etc.
Doug Says: You also said you worked as a civilian, and most of
the time you spent in Vietnam was as a civilian, obviously, you
know very little about the military.
e. I have never stated that the only way someone could claim
to have been in combat is for them to have been an infantry
man. What I said is that "Commanding a bunker line is
analagous to running an EM club because those troops who were
assigned none direct combat duties such as clerks, cooks,
personnel folks, etc manned towers and bunkers on a rotating
basis. I did it - I never ever considered that my service
equated to that of an infantryman."
Doug Says: Nigel, that is precisely what you said. You claimed
that those that did not have an infantryman's MOS were not
considered in "Combat Assignments" now you are backpedaling and
lying about your own statements! Whew! Do you do this often? A
"Combat Assignment" is an assignment of combat duty to anyone of
any MOS Nigel, and if he experienced Combat, that particular
mission or duty was considered a "Combat Assignment." Your
claims that no one in Vietnam was assigned to combat duty unless
they had an infantryman's MOS is ludicrous and indicates to me
you are not who you claim to be.
f. I have no idea where you got the idea I supported John
Kerry - Although I do consider Doug Reese as being a chum (as
you describe it) I went to DC last year to protest his sorry
*****.
Doug Says: Then stop claiming he is not a liar, I proved he was,
and stop snipping out the proof.
g. Regarding "It appears that I will need to serve Mr. Brooks
with legal documents before this is over, and then Mr. Brooks
will be forced to review the proof I have offered only in a
court of law at his expense." - Feel free to serve me with
legal documents - you may have your attorney subpoena my ISP
(MSN) - they will provide you with the necessary information in
order that you may have a process server contact me at my
residence.
h. I still find it intriguing that you had the ability to just
march into 25th Infantry Division Commanding General's office
to advise him of your suspicions concerning tunnels under CuChi
base camp.
I guess I just leave the reader to evaluate this particular
conversation
Doug Says: I marched into nowhere, and when you find out who I
am and what I was doing you will understand how and why I had
access to the Division Commander. Moreover, his Chief of Staff
allowed me to do it. I did not "bust into" his office like you
are trying to again lie and distort. Here is the bottom line
Nigel, based upon your lies and distortions I do not believe you
are who you say you are.
In my past I have met many a Vietnam Vet, and the *real* ones
are even eager to prove their service and their identity.
Considering how Reece's friends (those that supported Kerry) and
con men on the internet were using the names of real veterans
fraudulently (last count was the TonyC alias and his friends
used not less than 180 aliases) I always request that any Veteran
contact me personally and reveal their true identity before I
trade personal information with him. NO ONE has ever refused
that request that was not lying about their service, and since I
also offered to provide you proof of my service, the names of
witnesses to the actions I described, and even more information
about my service than you have even requested, yet you still
cower and hide from even emailing me, I must consider everything
you have claimed and said about Vietnam to be a lie since you
clearly are not the person you claim to be. I could be wrong,
but unless you provide me with some reason why you are so afraid
to contact me directly and prove your service and claims, and
receive proof of mine, then you seem to be sending the message
that you are a faker and not a real veteran. Call me at
509-389-1776 or email me and we can put this issue to rest once
and for all.
Doug Grant (Tm)
--
Nigel Brooks
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nigel Brooks" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
05 Mar 2005 01:29:16 PM |
|
|
"DGVREIMAN" <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote in message
news:OaKdnRS1j6nGnLffRVn-ow@comcast.com...
Doug Says: Reese was proved a liar by Kerry's own admissions - and you
are so stupid and dogmatic you still believe him?
Nigel Says: Doug Reese is an honorable man - he does not lie.
a. With regards to your post that your "2nd (extension) Tour was with a
LSA unit operating out of Can Tho" - if LSA does not stand for Logistics
Support Activity - what does it stand for?
Doug Says: Considering I already said it stands for Logistical Support
Activity, what exactly is your question? You are no so stupid to believe
that everyone that is assigned to a support activity works in logistics or
supply do you? Is that the same goofball conclusion that you came to
about everyone that was assigned to the 53rd General Support Group working
in supply or logistics? How about someone that was assigned to an Armor
unit (such as I was once in Ft. Hood) does that mean I had to be a Tank
Driver? You cannot be that stupid Brooks, can you? I told you I have
never worked in logistics nor supply in my life, in the military or out.
I offered to prove my Vietnam service if you contacted me, even by email,
but you are afraid to do so. It appears that you are an alias of a real
Veteran that is masquerading as a Vet - I have never met a Vet that was
not willing to prove his identity - why are you hiding?
b. This is what you said about an action during June of 1968 that
occurred inside the Cu Chi base perimeter "This event took place in June
1968, at the 25th Infantry Division's Cu Chi Base Camp, Republic of
Vietnam...........You then go on to recount gathering at the 1st of the
5th are and move toward the camp bunker line - coming under attack inside
the perimeter - you go on to say ......................We suffered dozens
of casualties, two of which were men assigned to my team. Sp4 Olson
received a mortal wound in his liver that night, and Sp4 Nelson was
wounded in the arm. (Nelson if you are reading this by chance email me).
" You have subsequently elaborated by stating that Olson was medevaced
and died elsewhere.
The Cu Chi base camp was in Gia Dinh province - If you are correct, SP4
Olson was wounded at the CuChi base base camp in Gia Dinh province. The
CACCF lists the province where the casualty occurred - for example a
person could suffer a mortal wound in the Delta and be medevaced to the
3d Field Hospital in Saigon, dying at that location. The record would
show that the mortal wound was suffered in the Delta Province and not
Saigon.
Doug Says: You are lying Nigel - the record shows where the solider died,
not where he first suffered the mortal wound.
Nigel Says: The CACCF shows the Province of Casualty - the province where
the casualty occurred.
http://www.archives.gov/research_room/research_topics/vietnam_war_casualty_lists/descriptive_handout/caccf_descriptive_handout.html
The variables potentially available in each final casualty record include:
Military Service Branch, Country of Casualty, Type of Casualty, File
Reference Number, Name of Casualty, [record] Processing Date, Service or
Social Security Number, Military Grade, Pay Grade, Date of Death, Home of
Record (city and state), Military Occupation Code, Birth Date, Reason (cause
of casualty), Aircraft Involvement (air/non-air casualty), Race, Religion,
Length of Service, Marital Status, Sex, Citizenship Status, Posthumous
Promotion, Date Southeast Asian Tour Began (Date Missing or Captured in some
records), Final Record Code, Body Status, Service Component, a 31-character
comments field, and Province (of casualty).
Moreover, you need to post your "record" a link will do. Also, I need to
search but I believe your conclusion that Cu Chi was in Gioa Dinh province
is also a lie. I believe that Cu Chi had its own district, and I do not
know how the casuality reports dipict information, but I will soon find
out.
Nigel Says: Cu Chu did indeed have it's own district - it is located in
Gia Dinh Province whether you like it or not - that is a fact.
Did you search for a "Nelson" as well?
Nigel Says: Why would I search for a Nelson - the CACCF contains the
records of those who died. You indicated that Nelson was not dead.
Considering the fact that I was there when this happen, and both of those
men were assigned to me, I know what I said is true, it is just a matter
of shifting through all of your obvious distortions, libel and lies to
prove it. Moreover, I have some other information on this issue that I
will be glad to share with you when you contact me and prove you are not
faking your name, which would be the only reason not to at least email me.
Nigel Says: Then the easiest way to sort this out is for you to provide the
first name of Olsen or Olson. It will then be a relatively easy thing to
determine if the CACCF is in error. But as it stands right now - NO Olsens
or Olsons were listed as being killed in Gia Dinh province during the entire
year of 1968. Just give us the first name. You claimed he was "assigned" to
you - surely you remember his first name.
Saigon in 1956 to 1975
There was much change during 20 years (1955 - 1975). Since 1956, Saigon -
Cho Lon became capital of the South Viet Nam regime, called Do Thanh
Saigon. In 1959, the city divided by 8 administrative districts and each
district divided by smaller unit as 'xa' (ward). December of 1966, the
First District was added two new wards from 'xa' An Khanh of Gia Dinh
province. In January 1967, these two wards were separated again to set up
Ninth District. In July 1969, there were two new districts established:
Districts Tenth and Eleventh. Since then, Saigon had 11 districts.
Before the Liberation Day on April 30th, 1975, geography area of Ho Chi
Minh City now was sited on land of 11 districts of Do Thanh Saigon, Gia
Dinh province, Cu Chi district (Hau Nghia) and Phu Hoa district (of Binh
Duong).
Doug Says: Note how often these districts were switched around, and in
January 1967, a new district was set up. I don't know why you keep
distorting facts into lies Nigel, but I assure you I am going to get to
the bottom of this.
Note that Districts are still part of Provinces just as wards are part of
Counties in the United States. Cu Chi base was in Cu Chi District part of
the Province of Gia Dinh. It still is.
Doug Says: You are the one that is lying Nigel, and you know it
c. Let me put you obvious inability to understand how the records center
in St Louis works to rest. I have never said that individual records can
be obtained in any other fashion than by either going directly to the
center and making applicaton, or by United States Mail. Anyone can MAIL
(you know put a stamp on a letter) an SF 180 or simply a letter to the
center and they can get the publicly releasable information on a veteran
without his approval. Got it?
Doug Says: Now you are changing your tune again Nigel, first you said
anyone could gain information on a Veteran that was not considered
personal, now you have backpedaled to now say "publicly releasable
information" - which will not include specifics of his service! Also,
please provide the cite that you claim provides this information. You
said you provided it before, but everyone seems to have missed it
including me. So post it again if you are not lying.
Publicly releasable includes specifics of service - it does not include such
things as home of record, social security number or anything that could be
considered a violation of the individuals privacy -. You want a link - look
it up NARA - Military records St Louis.
d. I have previously told you I served in the US Army in Vietnam and
subsequently got out of the service In Country during the Tet Offensive
of 1968. Just drop the St Louis records center a line and they will
release that information to you. It will include the total length of
service, awards, etc.
Doug Says: You also said you worked as a civilian, and most of the time
you spent in Vietnam was as a civilian, obviously, you know very little
about the military.
e. I have never stated that the only way someone could claim to have
been in combat is for them to have been an infantry man. What I said is
that "Commanding a bunker line is analagous to running an EM club because
those troops who were assigned none direct combat duties such as clerks,
cooks, personnel folks, etc manned towers and bunkers on a rotating
basis. I did it - I never ever considered that my service equated to
that of an infantryman."
Doug Says: Nigel, that is precisely what you said. You claimed that
those that did not have an infantryman's MOS were not considered in
"Combat Assignments" now you are backpedaling and lying about your own
statements! Whew! Do you do this often? A "Combat Assignment" is an
assignment of combat duty to anyone of any MOS Nigel, and if he
experienced Combat, that particular mission or duty was considered a
"Combat Assignment." Your claims that no one in Vietnam was assigned to
combat duty unless they had an infantryman's MOS is ludicrous and
indicates to me you are not who you claim to be.
f. I have no idea where you got the idea I supported John Kerry -
Although I do consider Doug Reese as being a chum (as you describe it) I
went to DC last year to protest his sorry *****.
Doug Says: Then stop claiming he is not a liar, I proved he was, and stop
snipping out the proof.
g. Regarding "It appears that I will need to serve Mr. Brooks with
legal documents before this is over, and then Mr. Brooks will be forced
to review the proof I have offered only in a court of law at his
expense." - Feel free to serve me with legal documents - you may have
your attorney subpoena my ISP (MSN) - they will provide you with the
necessary information in order that you may have a process server contact
me at my residence.
h. I still find it intriguing that you had the ability to just march
into 25th Infantry Division Commanding General's office to advise him of
your suspicions concerning tunnels under CuChi base camp.
I guess I just leave the reader to evaluate this particular conversation
Doug Says: I marched into nowhere, and when you find out who I am and
what I was doing you will understand how and why I had access to the
Division Commander. Moreover, his Chief of Staff allowed me to do it. I
did not "bust into" his office like you are trying to again lie and
distort. Here is the bottom line Nigel, based upon your lies and
distortions I do not believe you are who you say you are.
I don't care what you believe about me. I think I know who you are and what
you are - it is pretty evident from your postings
In my past I have met many a Vietnam Vet, and the *real* ones are even
eager to prove their service and their identity. Considering how Reece's
friends (those that supported Kerry) and con men on the internet were
using the names of real veterans fraudulently (last count was the TonyC
alias and his friends used not less than 180 aliases) I always request
that any Veteran contact me personally and reveal their true identity
before I trade personal information with him. NO ONE has ever refused
that request that was not lying about their service, and since I also
offered to provide you proof of my service, the names of witnesses to the
actions I described, and even more information about my service than you
have even requested, yet you still cower and hide from even emailing me, I
must consider everything you have claimed and said about Vietnam to be a
lie since you clearly are not the person you claim to be. I could be
wrong, but unless you provide me with some reason why you are so afraid to
contact me directly and prove your service and claims, and receive proof
of mine, then you seem to be sending the message that you are a faker and
not a real veteran. Call me at 509-389-1776 or email me and we can put
this issue to rest once and for all.
Feel free to contact the NARA Military Personnel Records Center in St
Louis - and get a copy of my service record.
Nigel Brooks
.
|
|
|
| User: "DGVREIMAN" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
06 Mar 2005 07:42:45 AM |
|
|
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38ufkhF5raf2rU1@individual.net...
"DGVREIMAN" <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote in message
news:OaKdnRS1j6nGnLffRVn-ow@comcast.com...
Doug Says: Reese was proved a liar by Kerry's own
admissions - and you are so stupid and dogmatic you still
believe him?
Nigel Says: Doug Reese is an honorable man - he does not lie.
Doug Says: I proved he lied. Do you have a reading
comprehension problem? Read my post: " Doug Reese's Claims
Debunked."
a. With regards to your post that your "2nd (extension) Tour
was with a LSA unit operating out of Can Tho" - if LSA does
not stand for Logistics Support Activity - what does it stand
for?
Doug Says: Considering I already said it stands for
Logistical Support Activity, what exactly is your question?
You are no so stupid to believe that everyone that is assigned
to a support activity works in logistics or supply do you? Is
that the same goofball conclusion that you came to about
everyone that was assigned to the 53rd General Support Group
working in supply or logistics? How about someone that was
assigned to an Armor unit (such as I was once in Ft. Hood)
does that mean I had to be a Tank Driver? You cannot be that
stupid Brooks, can you? I told you I have never worked in
logistics nor supply in my life, in the military or out. I
offered to prove my Vietnam service if you contacted me, even
by email, but you are afraid to do so. It appears that you
are an alias of a real Veteran that is masquerading as a Vet -
I have never met a Vet that was not willing to prove his
identity - why are you hiding?
b. This is what you said about an action during June of 1968
that occurred inside the Cu Chi base perimeter "This event
took place in June 1968, at the 25th Infantry Division's Cu
Chi Base Camp, Republic of Vietnam...........You then go on
to recount gathering at the 1st of the 5th are and move
toward the camp bunker line - coming under attack inside the
perimeter - you go on to say ......................We
suffered dozens of casualties, two of which were men assigned
to my team. Sp4 Olson received a mortal wound in his liver
that night, and Sp4 Nelson was wounded in the arm. (Nelson if
you are reading this by chance email me). " You have
subsequently elaborated by stating that Olson was medevaced
and died elsewhere.
The Cu Chi base camp was in Gia Dinh province - If you are
correct, SP4 Olson was wounded at the CuChi base base camp in
Gia Dinh province. The CACCF lists the province where the
casualty occurred - for example a person could suffer a
mortal wound in the Delta and be medevaced to the 3d Field
Hospital in Saigon, dying at that location. The record would
show that the mortal wound was suffered in the Delta Province
and not Saigon.
Doug Says: You are lying Nigel - the record shows where the
solider died, not where he first suffered the mortal wound.
Nigel Says: The CACCF shows the Province of Casualty - the
province where the casualty occurred.
http://www.archives.gov/research_room/research_topics/vietnam_war_casualty_lists/descriptive_handout/caccf_descriptive_handout.html
The variables potentially available in each final casualty
record include:
Military Service Branch, Country of Casualty, Type of Casualty,
File Reference Number, Name of Casualty, [record] Processing
Date, Service or Social Security Number, Military Grade, Pay
Grade, Date of Death, Home of Record (city and state), Military
Occupation Code, Birth Date, Reason (cause of casualty),
Aircraft Involvement (air/non-air casualty), Race, Religion,
Length of Service, Marital Status, Sex, Citizenship Status,
Posthumous Promotion, Date Southeast Asian Tour Began (Date
Missing or Captured in some records), Final Record Code, Body
Status, Service Component, a 31-character comments field, and
Province (of casualty).
Moreover, you need to post your "record" a link will do.
Also, I need to search but I believe your conclusion that Cu
Chi was in Gioa Dinh province is also a lie. I believe that
Cu Chi had its own district, and I do not know how the
casuality reports dipict information, but I will soon find
out.
Nigel Says: Cu Chu did indeed have it's own district - it is
located in Gia Dinh Province whether you like it or not - that
is a fact.
Doug Says: That might be true Nigel, but your search is flawed
and I suspect you already know it, you are just hiding how it is
flawed.
Did you search for a "Nelson" as well?
Nigel Says: Why would I search for a Nelson - the CACCF
contains the records of those who died. You indicated that
Nelson was not dead.
Doug Says: In your previous post you said NO Casualties
occurred, not deaths. We all know that is false Nigel, and if
you searched for Nelson you might have found the date of his
wound which would help our search for Oslen. I was told Olsen
died, he might have lived long enough to become some other
statistic other than a combat causality, I don't know the details
of how each causality is reported before or after they die of
wounds. But I do know one thing, your information is incorrect,
and in fact, I hope you are not just lying about American
casualties because nothing I can think of would be more
dishonorable than that. I was there, Nigel, Olsen and Nelson
were both hit that night, and I was told that Olsen died of his
wounds. I also know they both received Purple Hearts, and I am
in the process of trying to get a copy of the Morning Report that
will list that incident - there is also a slight chance, due to
the time involved, that my dates could be *slightly* incorrect by
one or two months - but I don't think so, and I assure you I will
get to the bottom of this.
Considering the fact that I was there when this happen, and
both of those men were assigned to me, I know what I said is
true, it is just a matter of shifting through all of your
obvious distortions, libel and lies to prove it. Moreover, I
have some other information on this issue that I will be glad
to share with you when you contact me and prove you are not
faking your name, which would be the only reason not to at
least email me.
Nigel Says: Then the easiest way to sort this out is for you
to provide the first name of Olsen or Olson. It will then be
a relatively easy thing to determine if the CACCF is in error.
But as it stands right now - NO Olsens or Olsons were listed as
being killed in Gia Dinh province during the entire year of
1968. Just give us the first name. You claimed he was
"assigned" to you - surely you remember his first name.
Doug Says: No, unfortunately, I do not remember his first name.
His first name to me was either PFC or SP4, no doubt I knew it
once, but that was almost 37 years ago. (I don't even remember
Nelson's first name). The best way to find out more about this
incident is to request a copy of the historical records of the
25th Infantry Division - specificity the Morning Reports. I have
already checked some of the Division's Newspaper accounts, and
they bleed several actions into one around the same dates, so I
did not find the specificity I was looking for. It is possible
the action was listed as a continuation of another action in a
different province, but I will not know for sure until I see the
Morning Reports.
Saigon in 1956 to 1975
There was much change during 20 years (1955 - 1975). Since
1956, Saigon - Cho Lon became capital of the South Viet Nam
regime, called Do Thanh Saigon. In 1959, the city divided by 8
administrative districts and each district divided by smaller
unit as 'xa' (ward). December of 1966, the First District was
added two new wards from 'xa' An Khanh of Gia Dinh province.
In January 1967, these two wards were separated again to set
up Ninth District. In July 1969, there were two new districts
established: Districts Tenth and Eleventh. Since then, Saigon
had 11 districts.
Before the Liberation Day on April 30th, 1975, geography area
of Ho Chi Minh City now was sited on land of 11 districts of
Do Thanh Saigon, Gia Dinh province, Cu Chi district (Hau
Nghia) and Phu Hoa district (of Binh Duong).
Doug Says: Note how often these districts were switched
around, and in January 1967, a new district was set up. I
don't know why you keep distorting facts into lies Nigel, but
I assure you I am going to get to the bottom of this.
Note that Districts are still part of Provinces just as wards
are part of Counties in the United States. Cu Chi base was in
Cu Chi District part of the Province of Gia Dinh. It still is.
Doug Says: You might be right about that Nigel, but that still
does not explain your search error. I know the incident
happened, I was there, and I certainly know that two of my men
were hit, and they both received Purple Hearts, and I was later
told the one I saw in the 25th Med Evac, swollen and yellow, died
later of his wounds. How much later and where I don't know, but
you can bet I am going to find out. Something is wrong with your
searches, your data, Nigel, search again.
Doug Says: You are the one that is lying Nigel, and you know
it
c. Let me put you obvious inability to understand how the
records center in St Louis works to rest. I have never said
that individual records can be obtained in any other fashion
than by either going directly to the center and making
applicaton, or by United States Mail. Anyone can MAIL (you
know put a stamp on a letter) an SF 180 or simply a letter to
the center and they can get the publicly releasable
information on a veteran without his approval. Got it?
Doug Says: Now you are changing your tune again Nigel, first
you said anyone could gain information on a Veteran that was
not considered personal, now you have backpedaled to now say
"publicly releasable information" - which will not include
specifics of his service! Also, please provide the cite that
you claim provides this information. You said you provided it
before, but everyone seems to have missed it including me. So
post it again if you are not lying.
Publicly releasable includes specifics of service - it does not
include such things as home of record, social security number
or anything that could be considered a violation of the
individuals privacy -. You want a link - look it up NARA -
Military records St Louis.
Doug Says: If you had completed the searches you claimed Nigel,
you would have provided the link, but anyway, I will look it up.
d. I have previously told you I served in the US Army in
Vietnam and subsequently got out of the service In Country
during the Tet Offensive of 1968. Just drop the St Louis
records center a line and they will release that information
to you. It will include the total length of service, awards,
etc.
Doug Says: You also said you worked as a civilian, and most
of the time you spent in Vietnam was as a civilian, obviously,
you know very little about the military.
e. I have never stated that the only way someone could claim
to have been in combat is for them to have been an infantry
man. What I said is that "Commanding a bunker line is
analagous to running an EM club because those troops who were
assigned none direct combat duties such as clerks, cooks,
personnel folks, etc manned towers and bunkers on a rotating
basis. I did it - I never ever considered that my service
equated to that of an infantryman."
Doug Says: Nigel, that is precisely what you said. You
claimed that those that did not have an infantryman's MOS were
not considered in "Combat Assignments" now you are
backpedaling and lying about your own statements! Whew! Do
you do this often? A "Combat Assignment" is an assignment of
combat duty to anyone of any MOS Nigel, and if he experienced
Combat, that particular mission or duty was considered a
"Combat Assignment." Your claims that no one in Vietnam was
assigned to combat duty unless they had an infantryman's MOS
is ludicrous and indicates to me you are not who you claim to
be.
f. I have no idea where you got the idea I supported John
Kerry - Although I do consider Doug Reese as being a chum (as
you describe it) I went to DC last year to protest his sorry
*****.
Doug Says: Then stop claiming he is not a liar, I proved he
was, and stop snipping out the proof.
g. Regarding "It appears that I will need to serve Mr.
Brooks with legal documents before this is over, and then Mr.
Brooks will be forced to review the proof I have offered
only in a court of law at his expense." - Feel free to serve
me with legal documents - you may have your attorney subpoena
my ISP (MSN) - they will provide you with the necessary
information in order that you may have a process server
contact me at my residence.
h. I still find it intriguing that you had the ability to
just march into 25th Infantry Division Commanding General's
office to advise him of your suspicions concerning tunnels
under CuChi base camp.
I guess I just leave the reader to evaluate this particular
conversation
Doug Says: I marched into nowhere, and when you find out who
I am and what I was doing you will understand how and why I
had access to the Division Commander. Moreover, his Chief of
Staff allowed me to do it. I did not "bust into" his office
like you are trying to again lie and distort. Here is the
bottom line Nigel, based upon your lies and distortions I do
not believe you are who you say you are.
I don't care what you believe about me. I think I know who you
are and what you are - it is pretty evident from your postings
Doug Says: Well, you are one up on me Nigel. I think I know
what you are from your posts, but I don't know for sure "who" you
are because you are afraid to reveal your true identity. You
will not email me nor even call me to prove your identity, and we
both know that TonyC has just been caught using fake Veterans to
try and discredit me. You need to contact me directly and prove
your identity if you want the readers to believe your military
history and the results of your "searches." Why are you afraid
to even email me Nigel if you are telling the truth?
In my past I have met many a Vietnam Vet, and the *real* ones
are even eager to prove their service and their identity.
Considering how Reece's friends (those that supported Kerry)
and con men on the internet were using the names of real
veterans fraudulently (last count was the TonyC alias and his
friends used not less than 180 aliases) I always request that
any Veteran contact me personally and reveal their true
identity before I trade personal information with him. NO ONE
has ever refused that request that was not lying about their
service, and since I also offered to provide you proof of my
service, the names of witnesses to the actions I described,
and even more information about my service than you have even
requested, yet you still cower and hide from even emailing me,
I must consider everything you have claimed and said about
Vietnam to be a lie since you clearly are not the person you
claim to be. I could be wrong, but unless you provide me with
some reason why you are so afraid to contact me directly and
prove your service and claims, and receive proof of mine, then
you seem to be sending the message that you are a faker and
not a real veteran. Call me at 509-389-1776 or email me and
we can put this issue to rest once and for all.
Feel free to contact the NARA Military Personnel Records Center
in St Louis - and get a copy of my service record.
Doug Says: TonyC used the service record of a dead Veteran to
try to promote a fraudulent Veteran on this newsgroup. How do we
know you are not doing the same? You did not appear until TonyC
started questioning my Vietnam service, and I have never before
posted on alt.war.Vietnam? You need to prove your true
identity Nigel - you clearly are hiding from that simple request.
So unless we are sure of your true identity checking the NARA
Records is meaningless - and you know it and that is probably why
you are still hiding from contacting me. My telephone number is
509-389-1776 if you have forgotten.
Doug Grant (Tm)
Nigel Brooks
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nigel Brooks" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
05 Mar 2005 01:49:21 PM |
|
|
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38ufkhF5raf2rU1@individual.net...
"DGVREIMAN" <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote in message
news:OaKdnRS1j6nGnLffRVn-ow@comcast.com...
Doug Says: Reese was proved a liar by Kerry's own admissions - and you
are so stupid and dogmatic you still believe him?
Nigel Says: Doug Reese is an honorable man - he does not lie.
a. With regards to your post that your "2nd (extension) Tour was with a
LSA unit operating out of Can Tho" - if LSA does not stand for Logistics
Support Activity - what does it stand for?
Doug Says: Considering I already said it stands for Logistical Support
Activity, what exactly is your question? You are no so stupid to believe
that everyone that is assigned to a support activity works in logistics
or supply do you? Is that the same goofball conclusion that you came to
about everyone that was assigned to the 53rd General Support Group
working in supply or logistics? How about someone that was assigned to
an Armor unit (such as I was once in Ft. Hood) does that mean I had to be
a Tank Driver? You cannot be that stupid Brooks, can you? I told you I
have never worked in logistics nor supply in my life, in the military or
out. I offered to prove my Vietnam service if you contacted me, even by
email, but you are afraid to do so. It appears that you are an alias of
a real Veteran that is masquerading as a Vet - I have never met a Vet
that was not willing to prove his identity - why are you hiding?
b. This is what you said about an action during June of 1968 that
occurred inside the Cu Chi base perimeter "This event took place in June
1968, at the 25th Infantry Division's Cu Chi Base Camp, Republic of
Vietnam...........You then go on to recount gathering at the 1st of the
5th are and move toward the camp bunker line - coming under attack
inside the perimeter - you go on to say ......................We
suffered dozens of casualties, two of which were men assigned to my
team. Sp4 Olson received a mortal wound in his liver that night, and Sp4
Nelson was wounded in the arm. (Nelson if you are reading this by chance
email me). " You have subsequently elaborated by stating that Olson was
medevaced and died elsewhere.
The Cu Chi base camp was in Gia Dinh province - If you are correct, SP4
Olson was wounded at the CuChi base base camp in Gia Dinh province. The
CACCF lists the province where the casualty occurred - for example a
person could suffer a mortal wound in the Delta and be medevaced to the
3d Field Hospital in Saigon, dying at that location. The record would
show that the mortal wound was suffered in the Delta Province and not
Saigon.
Doug Says: You are lying Nigel - the record shows where the solider
died, not where he first suffered the mortal wound.
Nigel Says: The CACCF shows the Province of Casualty - the province where
the casualty occurred.
http://www.archives.gov/research_room/research_topics/vietnam_war_casualty_lists/descriptive_handout/caccf_descriptive_handout.html
The variables potentially available in each final casualty record include:
Military Service Branch, Country of Casualty, Type of Casualty, File
Reference Number, Name of Casualty, [record] Processing Date, Service or
Social Security Number, Military Grade, Pay Grade, Date of Death, Home of
Record (city and state), Military Occupation Code, Birth Date, Reason
(cause of casualty), Aircraft Involvement (air/non-air casualty), Race,
Religion, Length of Service, Marital Status, Sex, Citizenship Status,
Posthumous Promotion, Date Southeast Asian Tour Began (Date Missing or
Captured in some records), Final Record Code, Body Status, Service
Component, a 31-character comments field, and Province (of casualty).
Moreover, you need to post your "record" a link will do. Also, I need
to search but I believe your conclusion that Cu Chi was in Gioa Dinh
province is also a lie. I believe that Cu Chi had its own district, and
I do not know how the casuality reports dipict information, but I will
soon find out.
Nigel Says: Cu Chu did indeed have it's own district - it is located in
Gia Dinh Province whether you like it or not - that is a fact.
Nigel Says: Is it possible that the action you describe took place in Binh
Duong Province?
Nigel Brooks
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don T" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
05 Mar 2005 05:52:54 PM |
|
|
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38ugq7F5nogfpU1@individual.net...
Nigel Says: Is it possible that the action you describe took place in
Binh Duong Province?
Nigel Brooks
Nigel,
The lying piece of ***** claims that Sp Olse(o)n sustained a mortal wound to
his liver. Given the state of emergency medicine in the field in 1968 the
man would have bled out before he could even get on the medevac bird.
Unless, of course, the wound was not a "mortal" one.
Have you noticed that he hasn't replied to my question under the thread
"Fox News - destroy Social Security" when I asked him about his assertion
that he has an honorable discharge from the Marines? Simple question too. I
only asked him what units he served with in the Marine Corps and the time
frame.
--
Don Thompson
Remmy sez,
Count de Monet.
Unless, of course, you are Baroque.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nigel Brooks" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
05 Mar 2005 06:26:14 PM |
|
|
Don T" <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:qDrWd.1798$oO4.1736@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38ugq7F5nogfpU1@individual.net...
Nigel Says: Is it possible that the action you describe took place in
Binh Duong Province?
Nigel Brooks
Nigel,
The lying piece of ***** claims that Sp Olse(o)n sustained a mortal wound
to his liver. Given the state of emergency medicine in the field in 1968
the man would have bled out before he could even get on the medevac bird.
Unless, of course, the wound was not a "mortal" one.
Have you noticed that he hasn't replied to my question under the thread
"Fox News - destroy Social Security" when I asked him about his assertion
that he has an honorable discharge from the Marines? Simple question too.
I only asked him what units he served with in the Marine Corps and the
time frame.
--
Well the Manchus have an account of most of their activity during their time
in Vietnam at the website.
The PFC Olson who died on June 19, 1968 was a Manchu - he was a member of
Charlie Company which was operating in the Hoc Mon District and not at CU
Chi base camp.
http://www.manchu.org/country/
No other Olson's come close to meeting his criteria.
And if he decides that was the incident he talking about - well it'll be
intersting - cause his name doesn't appear on the Company roster either.
--
Nigel Brooks
.
|
|
|
| User: "DGVREIMAN" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
06 Mar 2005 08:48:19 AM |
|
|
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38v11bF5s07e7U1@individual.net...
Don T" <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:qDrWd.1798$oO4.1736@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38ugq7F5nogfpU1@individual.net...
Nigel Says: Is it possible that the action you describe took
place in Binh Duong Province?
Nigel Brooks
Nigel,
The lying piece of ***** claims that Sp Olse(o)n sustained a
mortal wound to his liver. Given the state of emergency
medicine in the field in 1968 the man would have bled out
before he could even get on the medevac bird. Unless, of
course, the wound was not a "mortal" one.
--
Well the Manchus have an account of most of their activity
during their time in Vietnam at the website.
The PFC Olson who died on June 19, 1968 was a Manchu - he was a
member of Charlie Company which was operating in the Hoc Mon
District and not at CU Chi base camp.
http://www.manchu.org/country/
No other Olson's come close to meeting his criteria.
And if he decides that was the incident he talking about - well
it'll be intersting - cause his name doesn't appear on the
Company roster either.
--
Nigel Brooks
Doug Says: I do not "decide" anything Nigel, the incident
happened as I described, whether it was involved in the incident
report above I don't know yet. Moreover, I would not be listed
on that Company's roster regardless of the fact Olsen might have
been. You have no idea what you are talking about Nigel, and
your "conjecture" that everyone that participates in a "combined
action" must be listed on the same company roster is about as
idiotic as it gets. I had several men that operated under me
that were assigned to several different companies for rations and
quarters and therefore were listed on a different Company's
roster you blithering moron! You clearly know very little about
how the US Army works Nigel and I am becoming very suspicious of
your true identity-especially since you are so afraid to contact
me even with an email! Moreover, I have offered to exchange
military information with any real Vet that calls me at
509-389-1776 or emails me and is willing to prove his identity
and wants to exchange documents. Fake Vets need not apply, and
the so-called "Vet" above that seems to have obtained his
medical degree from a latrine room floor has not contacted me
either. TonyC is running all kinds of fake vets on this
newsgroup, and one real vet is even complaining about someone
(TonyC of course) using his name. So the con game from TonyC is
in full force, and if anyone proposes to be a Veteran then they
should have no qualms about proving that fact with a direct
contact with me.
If not, then I must consider them just more fake Vet names like
TonyC has been caught trying to use.
Doug Grant (Tm)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nigel Brooks" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
06 Mar 2005 11:25:44 AM |
|
|
"DGVREIMAN" <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote in message
news:Eq2dnfRqy_W8hbbfRVn-jw@comcast.com...
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38v11bF5s07e7U1@individual.net...
Don T" <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:qDrWd.1798$oO4.1736@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:38ugq7F5nogfpU1@individual.net...
Nigel Says: Is it possible that the action you describe took place in
Binh Duong Province?
Nigel Brooks
Nigel,
The lying piece of ***** claims that Sp Olse(o)n sustained a mortal wound
to his liver. Given the state of emergency medicine in the field in 1968
the man would have bled out before he could even get on the medevac
bird. Unless, of course, the wound was not a "mortal" one.
--
Well the Manchus have an account of most of their activity during their
time in Vietnam at the website.
The PFC Olson who died on June 19, 1968 was a Manchu - he was a member of
Charlie Company which was operating in the Hoc Mon District and not at CU
Chi base camp.
http://www.manchu.org/country/
No other Olson's come close to meeting his criteria.
And if he decides that was the incident he talking about - well it'll be
intersting - cause his name doesn't appear on the Company roster either.
--
Nigel Brooks
Doug Says: I do not "decide" anything Nigel, the incident happened as I
described, whether it was involved in the incident report above I don't
know yet. Moreover, I would not be listed on that Company's roster
regardless of the fact Olsen might have been. You have no idea what you
are talking about Nigel, and your "conjecture" that everyone that
participates in a "combined action" must be listed on the same company
roster is about as idiotic as it gets. I had several men that operated
under me that were assigned to several different companies for rations and
quarters and therefore were listed on a different Company's roster you
blithering moron! You clearly know very little about how the US Army
works Nigel and I am becoming very suspicious of your true
identity-especially since you are so afraid to contact me even with an
email!
I'll send it to your secretary.
The record shows that the only Olson who meets the criteria which you
describe (being a member of the 25th Infantry Division) was PFC Larry Olson.
Are you claiming that this is the Olson you are referring to? You might
have not remembered his name - but you surely would remember his unit of
assignment - the Manchus.
The fact is that the Manchus operated out of Mole City and not CuChi - the
fact is that Olson was killed in the vicinity of HocMon on June 19th, 1968 -
not at Cu Chi base.
It surely is a tangled web.
--
Nigel Brooks
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DGVREIMAN" |
|
| Title: Re: NIGEL BROOK'S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR |
06 Mar 2005 07:59:33 AM |
|
|
NIGEL BROOK’S DISTORTIONS -SO FAR
Brooks first claimed that Doug Reese did not lie about John Kerry’s
action in Vietnam. Brooks of course was caught lying about his
chum Kerry, as the following post below (DOUG REESE’S CLAIMS
DEBUNKED" proves irrefutably.
Then Brook’s claimed that because I was assigned to the 53rd
General Support Group on an early extension request (which was
suddenly approved after I started complaining about tunnels
underneath the Cu Chi Base Camp) that I had to be in "supply or
logistics." But Brooks was so stupid he did not know that all
those that extended for Vung Tau had to be assigned to the 53rd
General Support Group unless they were Military Police. The 53rd
had so many different MOS’s running around they did not know what
to do with them due to so many wise Vietnam Vets extending their
tours and requesting Vung Tau as their next assignment. I ended
up in Can Tho as an example, and I have never worked in supply or
logistics in my life, in the military or out. But regardless,
this Nigel Brooks character keeps trying to lie about my military
service regardless of the fact I have offered him proof of my
Vietnam service not less than TEN times!
Books then tried to claim that I said I went on classified
missions in Vietnam, but when you read what I said, I did not
specify the country nor the time in my military career some of my
missions were classified. Brooks simply lied about that and he
was caught doing so. (I have Honorable Discharges from both the
US Marine Corps and the US Army, and I spent a long time in the
military).
Then Brooks tried to claim that because one of my men did not die
at Cu Chi when he was wounded on a mission I was on, then I was
lying about that wound and his death. But here is precisely what
I said:
"Sp4 Olson received a mortal wound in his liver that night, and
Sp4 Nelson was wounded in the arm. "
I said he received a "mortal wound" and not that he was killed on
the spot like Nigel Brooks is trying to lie about. I visited
Olsen (could be Olson) in the Hospital and he had received a
wound in his liver. He was swollen and his skin was yellow. I was
told by the Doctors he was going to be medevaced and he would
probably not make it due to the Liver wound. Much later, I had a
few beers with Nelson later on a Vung Tau beach when we were both
on R&R and Nelson also was under the impression that Olsen died
of his wounds. But because Brooks could not find a record of
Olsen’s death at Cu Chi, Brooks tried to denigrate this true
story. Olsen was medevacted out like all soldiers with extremely
serious wounds were. I don’t know where they sent him, but
probably to Long Binh, Japan or to the States.
I do not know if those that post on Alt.war.Vietnam hold Nigel
Brooks as a moderator or some authority on Vietnam. But I have
found him to be dishonest, self serving in his "interpretations"
of military service in Vietnam (especially mine). When we were in
Vietnam many of us were unfortunate to encounter "civilians"
working for the US Military or the ARVN. Some were CIA of course
(the Air America crowd) but many were just dregs that could not
keep a job in the States, married some Vietnamese *****, and were
nothing more than Village Rats. I am not saying this is Nigel
Brooks, simply because I don’t know the man nor will he prove his
identity. But I am saying he does NOT represent true military
personnel that served in Vietnam - Brooks was a civilian, NOT a
solider.
In fact Brooks is so incredibly uninformed he said the only way
you could experience Combat in Vietnam is if you had an
Infantryman’s MOS - does that sound like someone that your
newsgroup should hold up as an authority on Vietnam service?
To put all this to rest I hereby offer any Veteran that contacts
me and proves his identity the following:
1. Proof of my Vietnam Service directly from the Military Record
Corrections documents, along with signatures and verification
symbols.
2. Proof of the Olsen mission incident that Brooks is trying to
question. (I have contacted some of the 25th Historians and they
tell me they can get copies of the Morning Reports for that
period, and the incident I described, along with lists of
casualties will be listed in those reports. There may be other
ways to obtain evidence of the mission I described, if anyone has
any ideas let me know via email).
I never lie on these Newsgroups, and I can prove everything I say
to people I know are not masquerading as Vietnam Vets. I offered
Nigel Brooks TEN TIMES the opportunity to contact me, prove who
he was, and then I would provide irrefutable proof of my Vietnam
service, and in fact, the Olsen mission he is trying his best to
distort. (Brooks lied about what I said about that mission and I
have the original post, and much more information on the incident
I described in which Olsen and Nelson were hit).
Yet Brooks is afraid to contact me, and he keeps refusing to
receive the proof I have offered. Now isn’t that strange? Here is
a man that wants to libel me, lie about my Vietnam service
(probably because I exposed his chum Doug Reese as a liar about
John Kerry -see below for evidence) yet *when I offer to provide
irrefutable proof Brooks is wrong, Nigel Brook refuses to even
look at the proof! My only conclusion is that Nigel Brooks has an
ulterior motive, and that motive is clearly malicious libel.
Brooks also lied and said that anyone can receive a copy of a
serviceman’s basic record without the permission of the
Serviceman via Email. I found that misrepresentation to be false
as well - not unless I am missing something on the Web Site which
I doubt. Why would Brooks lie about that if he was not trying to
hide something?
Consequently, I hereby offer my telephone number to any and all
Veterans that post on this Newsgroup to contact me so we can
exchange proof of our identifies and our Vietnam service, and I
will further prove irrefutably that Nigel Brooks is lying, and
further, if anyone knows where Mr. Brooks can be contacted please
advise. It appears that I will need to serve Mr. Brooks with
legal documents before this is over, and then Mr. Brooks will be
forced to review the proof I have offered only in a court of law
at his expense.
(Note that John Kerry used dozens of "fake veterans" during his
winter soldier debacle to testify to false missions and actions
in Vietnam that were nothing more than lies and attacks on all
Vietnam Vets. When dozens of Vietnam veteran’s named in the
Winter Soldier press release were later interviewed by the Army
and by the Press, they said they had never testified before Kerry
nor Fonda, and that clearly some "fake veterans" were
fraudulently using their names. I don’t know for sure if this
applies to what is going on in AWV, but the fact that Brooks
keeps lying about me, and he and Reese were staunch Kerry
supporters, and the fact that Brooks refuses to review the proof
of his lies I have offered him not less than ten times, and he
further refuses to prove his identity, is making me suspicious of
his true identity).
Please contact me at 509-389-1776 or email me. If you have
trouble getting through to my number please keep trying and email
me if you do have trouble. I intend to set the record straight on
this issue once and for all, and further prove that at least two
of your fellow NG posters clearly are lying or at least
distorting the truth to a point it is not only dishonorable but
clearly libelous.
We all know that proof of service is easy to prove, and can be
confirmed. Please contact me directly if you want to know the
truth in respect to this issue.
The following proves irrefutably that Doug Reese lied about John
Kerry’s service in Vietnam.
DOUG REESE’S CLAIMS DEBUNKED
Doug Reese said that Kerry never killed Civilians in Vietnam -
and that Kerry never admitted to killing civilians in Vietnam -
Reese lied. Here are just a few of Kerry’s own admissions that he
killed civilians in Vietnam:
"Mr. Kerry, you said at one time or another that you think our
policies in Vietnam are tantamount to genocide and that the
responsibility lies at all chains of command over there. Do you
consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed
atrocities in Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this
country?
-- Crosby Noyes, Washington Evening Star
Kerry:
"There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that,
yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of | | | | | | |
