Accounting -
Left BehindMoorer
09/24/92...I think that for all practical
purposes we really lost the war,
particularly from a political point
of view, because we couldn't get in
an airplane and go to each point of
contact where we thought there might
be a POW confined and held against
his will.Accounting -
Left BehindMoorer
09/24/92...the question arises now whether
you would be willing to detain those
boys who thought they were coming
home while we went through another
long discussion and negotiation with
North Vietnam.  So my position was,
let's get those we have home and
continue to press to find out whether
there are any more.Accounting -
Left BehindMurphy
09/24/92...in my personal view there were no
confirmed reports of live U.S.
military personnel left behind in
Vietnam or Laos.  I do not recall
seeing any such reports, and I would
have been very upset, as you would
be, if you had to read such a report
in that position.Accounting -
Comptroller's
RecordsMurphy
09/24/92It would seem to me, somebody in the
comptroller's office would have to
testify to just how they were using
these numbers. I will admit that it
says current captured, is a real
number going down to 67 by the end of
this period.Accounting -
Left BehindNagy
12/01/92There certainly was a change in
attitude on the part of the Reagan
administration that was evident
during the 1980's.  That certainly
let, and I believe throughout the
period of the seventies and eighties
that it was basically a continuation
inside of DIA, and that was that
there remained the possibility that
there were still live Americans
present in Southeast Asia remaining
after the departure of the United
States from that area.Accounting -
Left BehindOksenberg
06/25/92Sen. McCain:  Did you see any hard
evidence or any evidence that
Americans were alive?

Mr. Oksenberg:  I saw no hard
evidence that Americans were alive.
Obviously, with the upsurge of
refugees came increasing reports of
live sightings.Accounting -
Left BehindOksenberg
06/25/92I can assure you, Senator, that at no
point during my time on the watch did
we come to the conclusion that there
were certainly no live Americans in
Indochina.Accounting -
Left BehindOtis
12/03/92In spite of the high visibility of
Commander Dodge's case, the North
Vietnamese chose to deny any
knowledge of him.  Commander Dodge
was not repatriated in 1973.

I was extremely concerned about the
media reports that proclaimed all
POWs returned.  I received letters
from President Nixon, Vice Admiral
David Bagley, Chief of Naval
Personnel, and Roger Shields, Office
of the Assistant Secretary of
Defense, all assuring me of their
commitment to securing the fullest
possible accounting.

The only letter that even mentioned
live Americans was that of Dr.
Shields, who stated, quote, there is
no specific knowledge of any live
Americans left, unquote.  In other
words, fullest possible accounting
meant search for remains.

There was no public challenge of the
Vietnamese by the United States that
captured servicemen were left behind.
There seemed to be a naivete that all
prisoners had been returned and that
remains would be forthcoming.  I was
shocked and bewildered, but I could
not believe that the missing were
already abandoned by our own
Government, press, and public.Accounting -
Shields
StatementPerot
08/11/92...[the Vietnamese] said, your own
Government declared these men dead in
1973.   Why should we think your
Government wants them back?Accounting -
Shields
StatementPerot
08/11/92I said Roger, I'm surprised that you
declared all the men dead in April
1973.  He said, I was ordered to do
it.  And he said he was ordered to do
it by the Deputy Secretary of
Defense, William Clements. Then he
said words to the effect that he
protested, because just two weeks
earlier these memos were going
around.Accounting -
Left BehindRichardson
09/24/92Chairman Kerry: Looking through this,
obviously retrospectively, but
looking at it as we're trying to look
at it and looking at it as the
American people are looking at it 20
years later, unfortunately, would you
say that the record suggests that the
American people and certainly the
families were not leveled with
respect to this?

Richardson:  I would say that
information on the face of it was
withheld from them, and one would
have to use some rationale for doing
that -- that is, for withholding it.Accounting -
Nixon StatementRichardson
09/24/92Well, I tried to call attention to
the distinction of the degree of
certainty with which a given
proposition can be stated.  For
purposes of our best estimates as to
the number of current captured, the
intelligence resources of the
Government would put together all the
bits and pieces they had and come up
with a number which represented the
weight of that evidence, and I
suppose that is what this number
reflects.

The President's statement would
presumably be tilted in a direction
designed, as I suggested earlier, not
to raise false hopes and so on,
whatever may have been the
considerations.  Somebody could
rationalize the distinction between
the basis for this number and the
basis for his statement.

But how it actually came about, for
all I know he deliberately chose to
lie.   But I don't -- I try to give
him the benefit of the doubt, I would
say that he -- what he meant was that
every prisoner as to whom we have
definitive information.Accounting -
KIA/BNRS. Stockdale
12/03/92I don't think we're as close to it as
some might like to believe, but I
think that there will come a point in
time when you have to take the
responsibility to make the judgment
that some people are never -- no
remains -- nothing is ever going to
be returned.  And that's your job.AccountingS. Stockdale
12/03/92I can see why they are that
convinced, because of the long
history of the deception.  And maybe
a lack of recognition that there are
always some people in war who are
lost.  There will never, in my
opinion, be a satisfactory
accounting.  In our League's list of
objectives we said that we wanted to
get the fullest possible accounting.

When you lose a war, you don't get to
go in and account for your people.
Even if you win the war, you don't
find everybody.Accounting -
Left BehindSchlesinger
09/21/92Chairman Kerry:  I think I want to
start by asking a very simple
question.  In your view did we leave
men behind?

Schlesinger: I think that, as of now,
that I can come to no other
conclusion, Senator.  That does not
say that there are any alive today,
mind you.  But in 1973, some were
left behind.Accounting -
Left BehindSchlesinger
09/21/92Despite the Paris agreement, there
was no reason, in my judgement, to
assume that the North Vietnamese
would release everybody.AccountingSchweitzer
12/04/92Why has it taken 19 years for us to
get to this starting point, is
probably the most important of these
three questions... First, the U.S.
emphasis has been on live-sighting
reports, and much of the POW/MIA
community simply wasn't interested in
researching existing proof that these
men were dead.  This lack of vision
has cost us years in the search for
answers.Accounting -
Left BehindSecord
09/24/92Sen. Kassebaum: It seems to me one of
the major debates after Operation
Homecoming was how to rate the
intelligence.  You made the comment
earlier that creditable evidence, I
believe, led you to argue that there
were Americans still Laos.  Is that
correct?

Secord:  Yes, Senator, that's right.Accounting -
Left BehindSecord
09/24/92Sen. Grassley: I would like to have
you describe for the committee how
confident you were in the data, and
how specific it was.  And just give
us some examples.

Secord:  I think a lot of the data
was flaky, but there is a law of
large numbers that comes into play
here.  And we had a lot of case
studies on each and every one of
these downings, or nearly every one
of them.  Some of them were just
gone, and we had nothing, but many,
many hundreds of downings.  We had
all kinds of operational data,
including some that I described
earlier -- everything from good
beeper, good chute, good beeper on
the ground, transmitting on the
survival radio.Accounting -
Left BehindSecord
09/24/92Sen. Grassley: In your view, were
there prisoners left behind in Laos
after Homecoming?

Secord:  Yes, sir.

Sen. Grassley:  Were the number of
prisoners significant enough to
warrant military action?

Secord:  We believed so.AccountingSheetz
06/25/92Sen. McCain:  Why is it that it took
20 years to get one list, in your
view?

Sheetz:  20 years to get one list?
We always had access to the files of
the JCRC in paper files.  What's been
difficult is every time a team goes
out into the field in one of these
joint iterations we learn something
that we didn't know before, and that
information causes you to then
reevaluate what you know about a
particular case, and our databases
are always sort of chasing after one
other as new information comes in.
This is not -- these numbers are not
static numbers.  They are always in
fluidity.Accounting -
KIA/BNRSheetz
08/04/92...some of the KIA cases, the
descriptions that you read, are more
compelling than others, but having
reviewed each and every one of them,
we do not find that there are fatal
flaws in the documentation and the
judgments that were reached by the
field commanders who were responsible
for reporting the status of their
lost men.AccountingSheetz
12/04/92Chairman Kerry:  Let me understand.
You have 196 discrepancy cases?...

Sheetz:  Fate has been determined on
61 of those.  So, when you subtract
that out, that gets you down to the
135 figure.  The 196 is the actual
cases that existed, and we've been
able to get answers on the fate on 61
of those.  So, 135 are still to be
determined; fate to be determined.

Chairman Kerry:  And 90 in Laos?  How
many fate determined in Laos?

Sheetz:  None, sir.  But I might add,
again, from prior sessions we have
explained that 85 percent of the
losses that took place in Laos that
are still unaccounted for took place
in the Eastern-most provinces, right
along the Ho Chi Minh Trail area, and
only 9 of those 90 discrepancy cases
are cases in which they took place
clearly in areas of Pathet Lao
control.

So, essentially, 80 to 81 of those
cases are in the border, Vietnamese-
controlled areas where we are going
to be working in the tripartite arena
with the Vietnamese and the Lao to
try to get answers on those cases.Accounting -
KIA/BNRSheetz
08/04/92Chairman Kerry: ...And the person is
listed as KIA in that particular
category based on first-hand reports
from people within a unit or
aircraft, or whatever, is that
correct?... So what I am saying is
that in the case of almost 100
percent of those 1,095, there are
sufficient multiple reports of the
incident to permit you to draw the
conclusion you've drawn, are there
not?

Sheetz:  Yes, sir...

Chairman Kerry:  So I ask you again
the same question I asked you a
moment ago.  Is it not fair to say,
and even more appropriate to say,
that there ought to be, maybe, a new
category that in the case of those
1,095, while their body has not been
returned, in some cases based on the
report it is clear, is it not, that a
body will never be returned?

Sheetz:  That is true, sir...

Chairman Kerry:  So that person is in
effect accounted for.  The family has
accepted the accounting, and in point
of fact it does not belong on a
POW/MIA list.  It is not POW, it is
not MIA, it is KIA, body not
recoverable.Accounting -
KIA/BNRSheetz
08/04/92Chairman Kerry:  Now, if you are
saying that 1,095 were KIA, well,
they have not been returned.  Are
they not accounted for?

Mr. Sheetz:  The fullest possible
accounting has three levels of
evidence, if you will.  [Level] 1,
the most ideal outcome would be the
return of a live American prisoner.
Level 2 would be... recovering their
remains and repatriating those
remains to the United States.  The
third level of outcome is for those
who perished, where remains cannot be
recovered, to develop sufficient
documentation as to confirm the fate
of the individual...

Chairman Kerry:  These 1,095 fall
into the third category, correct?

Mr. Sheetz:  At the present time,
they do.Accounting -
Nixon StatementShields
09/24/92Chairman Kerry:  Why did not the
President of the United States stand
up and say, the prisoners are not
back?  Why did not the Secretary of
Defense say, I stood up a few months
ago and I had 14 people I said did
not come back and, by God, they are
still not back, and why will
Americans not care about it?Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
09/24/92Chairman Kerry:  Now look at the
cause and effect.  Here are the
papers coming off your press
conference. [Headline] "POW unit
boss: no living GIs left in
Indochina."  Here, [Headline]:
"Rumors that there were hundreds of
U.S. servicemen still left in Laotian
prison camps do the families of the
missing a disservice."  Headline:
"All U.S. POWs free Pentagon
maintains."  Headline: "Unreturned
GIs are feared dead..."

Shields:  I never said that the men
were all dead.  I never said that.
I've never said that to this day.

Chairman Kerry:  No indication that
any of the missing are alive in
Indochina.  We went through this last
time; there were indications.

Shields:  Senator, I don't believe
that I could tell Mrs. Hrdlicka or
Mrs. Van Dyke or the Van Dyke parents
or anyone else that I had indications
at that time that their loved ones
were alive.Accounting -
Nixon StatementShields
09/24/92Vice Chairman Smith:  But from March
28th to April 12th a heck of a lot of
things have happened here that
reversed all information that we had
in the pipeline on prisoners of war,
in Laos especially.  And in 2 weeks
we went from a memorandum to the
President of the United States via
the National Security Advisor from
the Secretary of Defense saying there
are POWs in Laos.  Not alleged, there
are POWs in Laos, and we had better
do something in terms of getting them
out before we get out of here. Now
that is essentially what the
memorandum said.  We went from that
to a press conference by the
President of the United States the
next day which says all POWs are
coming home.  There are no more
living Americans in Indochina, you
then said on April 12th.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92Shields:  Senator, there is a
difference in saying people are alive
and in captivity and saying we don't
have indications now that they are.

Chairman Kerry:  That is the
disingenuous piece of this.

Shields:  It is not disingenuous,
Senator.  This was and still is a
very serious issue.  I read in the
newspaper yesterday that your
committee has information that an
American was alive in Indochina in
captivity in 1989.

Chairman Kerry:  No, no, no.  That is
wrong.

Shields:  It was reported in the
paper, Senator.

Chairman Kerry:  Let me just make it
very clear.  Senator Smith has an
opinion personally as to that.  I
will tell you I personally do not
share a judgment on that or that
opinion, nor do I think has the rest
of the committee come to any
conclusion whatsoever as to anyone in
1989, and I will tell you that this
committee has no evidence today of
any specific individual in any
specific place being alive now.

Shields:  And that's exactly what I
said, Senator.

Chairman Kerry:  But it's not.

Shields:  And the information you
have on an individual in 1989 is more
recent than a lot of the information
that I was dealing with, and that's
exactly why I did not say they were
all alive nor did I say they were all
dead. I did not know that.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92...we really did not have proof
positive, at that time, of current
information that would allow us to go
back. I'm sure that had we known at
that time of the evidence of people,
had Senator McCain or some of his
comrades said, we left a man in this
camp, I'm sure we would have done
something about it. There were three
foreign nationals and we did.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92... we had no hard, specific current
information at that time. And I think
we had done enough of our debriefings
at that time, because we had asked
men immediately if they knew about
living Americans.Accounting -
Shields
Statement Shields
09/24/92Chairman Kerry:  I am not challenging
your honor.  I am trying to determine
whether or not you do not see what
America saw out of your statement.
Not your fault, maybe, but what
America saw out of your statement
were the headlines that I read.  You
may not have willed that, but that is
what happened.

Shields: ...I have given that
statement to innumerable people since
we met last time.  And they have
looked at this statement; no one has
come up with the impression that the
said all the men dead.

Chairman Kerry:  But do you not see
that when you say that there is no
indication that anyone is alive--

Vice Chairman Smith:  What is the
difference between that and they are
all dead?

Chairman Kerry:  You are basically
taking somebody in POW status, and
you wrote that, and saying we no
longer believe that person is a POW.Accounting -
Returned POWsShields
06/25/92We hoped that our returnees would be
able to provide us with substantial
information about the missing, but
relatively few cases were cleared up
on the basis of returnees
information.Accounting -
Nixon StatementShields
06/25/92Sen. McCain:  How do you account for
the President of the United States
saying all POWs are home?

Dr. Shields:  Senator, I don't
control the statements of the
President of the United States. I did
not at that time. I was as dismayed
at that statement as anyone else was.Accounting -
Left BehindShields
06/25/92Shields:  We did raise those issues,
and we raised them with a great deal
of vigor.

Chairman Kerry:  You recall that
being a sort of publicly perceived
grievance that was expressed, or you
raised them in private channels?  I
do not recall this Nation being in
turmoil over the notion that we
thought Vietnam might be holding
people.

Shields:  I think, Senator Kerry,
that the Nation was probably ecstatic
that the conflict was over, and that
we were not adding to those POW/MIA
lists.Accounting -
Left BehindShields
06/25/92You are aware of the efforts that
were expended on behalf of Chi Chan
Harnaby, Lieutenant Dodd, and so
forth.  They were men that you and
your comrades said had been left
behind.  And even though they were
not Americans, we left no stone
unturned to bring them home.  And in
fact, they did return home to their
loved ones.  In the case of Emmet
Kay, we knew he was a  prisoner, and
we pursued that and he was returned.

In the cases of Charles Dean and Neal
Sharman, we knew that they had been
captured.  That was not a secret.  We
made that evidence available to
anyone, and we acknowledged that.  We
did not bring them home.  We were not
able to do that.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92Chairman Kerry:  No one on the
committee is suggesting that the 1973
policy should have suggested that you
say yes, they are all alive.

Shields:  What is the difference
between saying they are alive and we
have no indications now that they are
alive?

Chairman Kerry:  We did have
indications that some people were
alive.  We had absolute intelligence.
You in your own deposition,... you
agreed that recent information could
go back 6 months, 12 months.  And we
had recent information 6 months and
12 months that so and so was seen
alive or so and so was alive.

Shields:  I'm not aware of that,
Senator.  Within 6 months?  Recent
information specifically relating to
a man? I'm not aware of that
information.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92Shields:  Senator, people were asking
if we knew whether we had left anyone
behind, and the answer was we do not
have indications at this time.

Chairman Kerry:  That has been the
official line... But the questions is
what did we know in 1973 and what did
we do?

Shields:  We know that men had been
alive in captivity at one time... And
those that returned did not know of
men who had been left.

Chairman Kerry:  To say all prisoners
had returned as the President
announced on the 29th of March, a
week before your press conference,
was wrong. He knew it was wrong. Let
me tell you why. You recall going to
see Secretary of Defense William
Clements in his office in early
April, a week before your April
conference, correct?

Shields:  That's correct.

Chairman Kerry:  And you heard him
tell you, all the American POWs are
dead. And you said to him, "You
cannot say that."

Shields:  That's correct.

Chairman Kerry:  And he repeated to
you, "You did not hear me. They are
all dead."

Shields:  That's essentially correct.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92At the termination of Homecoming we
had no current hard evidence that
Americans were still held prisoner in
Southeast Asia... None of those who
returned had any indication that
anyone had been left behind. We knew
that there was a possibility that
defectors were alive in enemy-
controlled areas, but had no firm
evidence to confirm this either.

Robert Garwood was an example of an
American whom we felt might be alive
and in an enemy-controlled area, But
according to the returnees who saw
him last, he was not being held as a
prisoner.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
09/24/92[Describing 1975 testimony] Then the
famous question, do you think that
there are still POWs alive and well
somewhere in either Laos of Cambodia.
And this is the statement with which
you have had such great trouble.  We
have no indications at this time that
there are any Americans alive in
Indochina.  What the people at the
hearing did not hear, and what was
never reported in the press were
these words, as I said, "we do not
consider the list of men that we
received from Laos, the recovery of
10 individuals, nine of whom were
American and seven military, to be a
complete accounting for all Americans
who were lost in Laos.   Nor do we
consider it to be a complete
statement of our information known to
the Pathet Lao in Laos.  With regard
to Cambodia, we have a number of men
who are missing in action there.
Some that we carried as captive."
Again, the statement of people who
were carried as prisoner who did not
return.  "We intend to pursue that,
too... even though we have no
indication that there are any
Americans still alive, we are going
to pursue our efforts in the process
of accounting for the missing...  we
anticipate that if any Americans are
yet alive...that we would be able to
ascertain that through this
process..."Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92Admiral McCain... repeatedly asserted
that he felt a small number of
American were still alive in
Indochina. When asked how many, he
opined that perhaps 20 to 30 were
alive.  When asked whether he had any
evidence at all that there is anybody
alive, he admitted he did not.AccountingShields
06/25/92...the practical impact of lists
relating to status was always
limited... it had a mixed impact on
family members, depending on what
status a man had. It appears also to
have had a limited impact on
prisoners and missing. Ronald
Ridgeway was classified as killed in
action, but that did not prevent his
repatriation. Frank Cius was carried
as missing in action in Laos, but he
also returned home to his loved ones.
David Demmon was carried as a
prisoner in South Vietnam, but to
this day, he remains unaccounted for.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92Chairman Kerry: ... we have uncovered
some 244 people... were carried by
DoD as POW, prisoner of war. You did
not know until after the debriefs
that 111 of them died in captivity.
When you made this statement, those
debriefs had not been completed, had
they?

Shields:  No, they had not.Accounting -
Left BehindShields
06/25/92The only individuals whom hard, and
at that time current, information
indicated were in captivity and for
whom no accounting has yet been
received were two civilians; an
American, Charles Dean, and Neil
Sharman, an Australian, who were
captured in 1974. They were
unquestionably in the hands of the
Pathet Lao when the events that led
to the fall of Saigon and Vientiane
in mid-year 1975 occurred. Our
intelligence capability and our
ability to track them in captivity
ended with the collapse of the
friendly governments.
It is unlikely, I believe, that an
accounting is obtainable now which
will resolve the doubts of many
families about the status of their
loved ones missing in Southeast Asia.
The record has become too convoluted
and distorted for that to happen.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
06/25/92Sen. Robb:  Why was not some effort
made, either institutionally or
individually, to say hey, we have
information that is simply at odds,
at variance with the information that
you have just announced or
articulated through either policy
papers or official pronouncements,
whatever the case may be?  Why was
there not some critical questioning
or skepticism that can be raised at
that time, and why was there a
passive acceptance?

Shields:  Senator, there are
statements by General Walters at the
CIA.  I don't know him well, but my
understanding is he doesn't accept
much passively at all... I don't
think that the United States
Government possessed the kind of
information that you are speaking of.AccountingShields
06/25/92There has been some concern, I
believe, over the fact that DIA
carried some men in classification,
in particular the prisoner category,
which differed from those of the
services. The reason for this is
simple, and I believe valid.Accounting -
Status ChangesShields
06/25/92By law, only the service secretaries
have the legal authority to determine
an individual's status, and the law
was observed in this regard during my
tenure in the Department of Defense.AccountingShields
06/25/92The facts regarding individual cases
were not in dispute. If a man listed
by the Navy as missing was carried by
DIA as captured and that led to
better correlation of intelligence
reports, then our own efforts were
improved.Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
09/24/92Chairman Kerry:  [citing Shields'
comments] "We do not consider the
list to be a complete accounting",
then you went into MIA and some who
were listed as captive.  That is not
a phrase that grabs me in any way as
if you believe somebody is still a
prisoner...Accounting -
Shields
StatementShields
09/24/92Vice Chairman Smith:  I want you to
tell me about the Nixon meeting.
That is where we are now, April 11th.
I want you to lead me into that
meeting.  Did anybody say anything to
you?  I just want you to give me some
very specific answers, and I want a
long discourse.  Did anybody say
anything to you prior to that
meeting, at any time, about what you
should or should not say to the
President of the United States, yes,
or no?

Shields:  Absolutely nothing...AccountingShields
06/25/92We understood long before we received
the DRV-PRG list in Paris in January
1973 that Operation Homecoming would
only be one phase of our work. It was
evident that the process of
accounting for those who did not
return would be long, arduous, and
complicated under even the best of
circumstances.Accounting -
Left BehindSieverts
06/25/92Sen. McCain: ... if Mr. Shields said
-- in his memorandum, he says DoD had
no specific knowledge, that is
different in my view than no
indications.  That is a very
different use of language.  I think,
frankly, that in your memorandum no
specific knowledge is a defensible
position.  No indications, I think,
is not.

I think what I am trying to get at
here is what was the thrust of the
belief?  Is it that the President of
the United States said there are no
more Americans alive in Southeast
Asia and we closed the book until the
agitation on the part of families and
other Americans brought this back to
the attention of the American people?
Or has there been a good-faith
effort?  Or is it somewhere in
between, in the view of many of us,
that during the 1970's the issue was
ignored to a certain degree because
of the desire of the American people
and the American Government to put
this issue behind us, which could
have led us to some failed
opportunities to return some
Americans who may have been held
alive.

I know that is very difficult, but I
think it is a philosophical question
that is important to be cleared up,
and maybe we could begin with you,
Mr. Sieverts.

Mr. Sieverts:  The root question is
whether there were any opportunities
to achieve the return of living
Americans. That's the sole question.
And no, I don't think there were
any.  I don't think we had any
indications of Americans in
captivity.  Some of my testimony is
intended to bear on that question,
because of our past experience, of
the lengths to which Americans would
go -- we're talking about POWs held Accounting -
Left BehindSieverts
06/25/92The root question is whether there
were any opportunities to achieve the
return of living Americans.  That's
the sole question.  And no, I don't
think there were any.  I don't think
we had any indications of Americans
in captivity... the lengths to which
Americans would go-- we're talking
about POWs held against their will in
captivity-- the lengths they would
go, one way or another, to let us
know of this.  It bears on the
photographs, for example.  The idea
of Americans cheerfully being
photographed and not using the
opportunity to somehow convey who
they are and what the circumstances
are is beyond my imagination.

But it's beyond my experience, more
importantly, of being responsible for
this subject during the long time
when we really did have Americans in
captivity and we did get indications
which were quite solid.AccountingSieverts
06/25/92Sen. McCain:  Mr. Sieverts, was that
the policy on your watch, that we did
not know whether they were alive or
dead?  Or was it that we assumed they
were all dead, or what?

Sieverts: ...Our approach during that
entire period was to present
information in a positive spirit
through the channels that were
available pursuant to the Paris
agreement and, to the extent that it
was possible, and it was not at all
easy, to do so in Laos, as well.  At
every opportunity, we would shade the
interpretation of cases and lists in
a favorable direction... In the
direction of saying we know you have
more information... Over a period of
time, we broadened those lists.  We
added to them, we gave specific case
records, detailed case records.

The difficulty was that at the same
time if you overstated that
assumption for a domestic audience
you would create what was clearly
exaggerated and possibly an entirely
false hope among families.Accounting -
Shields
StatementSmith
09/24/92Dr. Shields, all I am saying to you
is based on the documents that I have
read -- not on my opinion, the
documents that I have read, the
depositions we have taken, the
witnesses we have talked to, the
information that I have been able to
glean from whatever I have been able
to see, that is not what went into
the pipeline prior to March 28th.  It
was not gut feeling, it was not
visceral, it was simply -- it was so
factual and at least so definitive
that the Secretary of Defense made a
recommendation to resume the war and
risk bringing home the last group of
American POWs. And that changed, that
changed.

So my question to you is what is the
point of a press conference after the
President speaks and says all the
POWs are home?..You had a private
meeting with the President of the
United States and you come out of
that meeting and you hold another
press conference.  And you say, in
addition to what the President
already said, there are not any more
living Americans.Accounting -
Nixon StatementSmith
06/25/92...the point is that we continued
operations in a third country that we
were not supposed to be at war with,
and we were losing people while we
were bringing home American POWs from
Vietnam. We were still losing people
and still standing up saying that
there are no prisoners when we had no
idea what happened to them. And
somebody has to be accountable for
that.Accounting -
Nixon StatementSmith
09/24/92...the document says on June 30th
that we are listing and
distinguishing between missing and
POWs.  We now are listing 67 hostile
captured people as prisoners of war
on June 30th, when in fact the
official position as announced by the
President and others is that there
are not any more POWs.  Am I correct?

Sen. Grassley:  Yes.  President Nixon
made his statement on March the 29th,
and Dr. Shields made his statement on
April the 14th.
Vice Chairman Smith:  And this is
June 30th, listing 67 people as
prisoners?

Sen. Grassley:  Yes.Accounting -
Nixon StatementSmith
06/25/92... on January 27th and 28th there
were lists exchanged and provided.
But we still were flying missions
over Laos after those lists were
exchanged. We were losing Americans
in Laos in a secret war... So when
you say on April 12th that you do not
have any information on live
Americans, that is simply not true.Accounting -
Nixon StatementSmith
09/21/92...Actually, there were two policies,
one right after the other, with the
same data base...the first policy was
full accountability.  Then there was
a statement when the President said
all the POWs are home.

The policy then changed to everybody
is home, all the POWs were home.  But
the data base, the intelligence
information that you had, did not
support that claim, as you have all
as you have all said.Accounting -
Nixon StatementSmith
09/24/92...as to why this data base was
apparently looked at differently as
we came down to this period of March
28th through April 15th, in that
period of time when President Nixon
made his statement, Mr. Shields made
his statement?

What happened differently?  Was there
something there that we are missing
that caused this change in analysis
of the intelligence?  Or do you
believe that there were people there
after Operation Homecoming, based on
what you knew?

General Secord:  Well, yes, of course
I believe there were people after
Operation Homecoming.  This
memorandum was written
contemporaneously.Accounting -
Nixon StatementSmith
09/24/92...I am just trying to say to you
that you had a tabulation; it was a
running tab, it was coming into you
by the week. Nothing changed in the
way it was reported, nothing changed
in the documents that went into the
pipeline, the information that went
into the pipeline.  Nothing changed.
On the contrary, it was reported to
the Secretary of Defense that it was
valid information.  The only thing
that changed is you guys made an
announcement, or the President made
an announcement on March 29th which
was totally at odds with all of that
data...Accounting -
Nixon StatementSmith
09/24/92...II A has provided U.S. delegation
folders with background information
on about 80 persons in the category
of POW, and then even today, here is
a list that we have just received
from -- the committee received on the
20th of March, 1992, from Margaret R.
Munson, director, DoD, POW-MIA
Central Documentation Office.  It
lists 50 people who are in Category I
survival code in Laos.

I mean, there is just no way that any
reasonable person can conclude based
on the documents and the information
that this committee has received,
that you could make the kind of
statement that the President made and
know that it was correct.  And I will
tell you, to speak for myself, this
one Senator just does not accept it.
AccountingSungenis
06/25/92Sungenis:  The first casualty
reporting requirement from the
services was in 1963, and that was a
numerical report only.  In March of
1973 the requirement was made that
the services provide us with
individual casualty reports.  And
what they did in '73 was provide us
with a DD form 1300 for each
individual and a punched card with
that information.  Since that day we
have maintained the file.  But as you
know, this was after Homecoming when
we got into the business.AccountingSungenis
06/24/92To the best of my knowledge, at no
time did this office engage or
participate in any policy
determination or jurisdictional
matter concerning the reporting
criteria used by the respective
military services.AccountingSungenis
06/24/92...at the time the official file was
transferred to the Archives, the
back-up materials, such as the hard
copy DD Forms 1300 and other
supporting documentation, we
discarded.Accounting -
Left BehindTrowbridge
06/25/92That we had no current information at
the time where we could go and put
our hands on some individual that was
alive at that time.Accounting -
Left BehindTrowbridge
06/24/92Some [names] were written on the
walls.  No one ever saw these
individuals in a prison environment.Accounting -
Left BehindTrowbridge
06/24/92
Sen. Kerrey: Do you have any
recollection of ever having anybody
say to you during that period of time
in 1973, after Operation Homecoming,
that we should just let this matter
rest?

Trowbridge: No sir.

Sen. Kerrey: Were you ever told by
somebody, the war is over, let us not
drag this our any further with energy
expanded in areas that are not apt to
be terribly useful?

Trowbridge: No sir, never.Accounting -
Left BehindTrowbridge
06/24/92... the U.S. Government carried 97
individuals listed as prisoners of
war that did not return.  This is at
the completion of Operation
Homecoming.Accounting -
Left BehindTrowbridge
06/24/92...When I said 97, or to use your
term 80, actually at the completion
of Operation Homecoming our agency
held 115 individuals in a prisoner
status who did not return home.Accounting -
Left BehindTrowbridge
06/24/92
Sen. Kerrey: Do you not think it fair
to say there was an attitude in 1973
that we were indeed glad the war was
over and that we wanted very little
further discussion of anything in
regards to the war, including the
status of our prisoners.

Trowbridge: Oh, I think that there
may have been some very well
individuals that thought that way,
but I think the moral fiber that runs
through the American citizen is a, we
don't leave our unaccounted for.  We
go get them.Accounting -
Left BehindTrowbridge
06/24/92We are left with slightly less than
100 men who are officially listed by
the service as POWs... in no instance
did we have current intelligence to
indicate that these men were
currently held in captivity.Accounting -
Shields
StatementTrowbridge/
Shields
06/25/92Vice Chairman Smith: Is there
evidence or is there not evidence
that Americans remained alive as
prisoners of war, taking out Garwood,
from 1973 to 1989?  That is a simple
yes or no question.  Is there or is
there not, based on your opinion?

Trowbridge:  Based on my opinion and
what I have seen, we have nothing
that would indicate that an American
prisoner -- confirmed information or
evidence, firm evidence, or
convincing evidence, that an American
prisoner was being held against his
will.

Vice Chairman Smith:  Do you agree
with that Dr. Shields?

Shields:  Senator, the second
definition -- indications.  We
certainly knew that people were alive
at one time.  I do not have anything
that would allow me to make the
judgment, which you suggested is the
first definition, that would allow me
to make the judgment that those
Americans were still alive, and say
that to a family member, for example.
And say, I am confident that based on
the information I have your husband
is alive.  I could not have said
that.AccountingTrowbridge
06/24/92That was our responsibility,
correlating information to somebody
who may be missing.  But, until
somebody told us he was missing, he
was not on our roll.AccountingTrowbridge
06/24/92In some cases, we had very good
information that the individuals had
been held but had died there.  In
many other cases, there was no
information beyond the original loss
data.  There were also a few cases
where the services listed men as
prisoners of war based on data which
they later learned was erroneous in
that it correlated to a different
man. Much of this we learned through
debriefing all of the returnees, who
also told us of men who had died
before entering the prison system.AccountingTrowbridge
06/24/92...the war years within DIA, our
office was the focal point for
POW/MIA information.AccountingTrowbridge
06/24/92...the agency's position at the time
was that we held no information that
individuals at that time were being
held against their will.AccountingTrowbridge
06/24/92DIA thought it possible that a man
was a POW, yet the services carried
him as missing in action.  The status
the service assigned was always their
legal status.AccountingTrowbridge
06/24/92DIA did not and does not determine
the legal status of a serviceman.
That is the sole responsibility of
each of the military service
secretaries.AccountingTrowbridge
06/24/92 We had a very close relationship.
Our agency supported Dr. Shields with
intelligence information.

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.quux.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.