[OFB Cafe] The TRUTH about John McCain

[Donald R Spoon]

See my inserts.   You might want to actually read the excerpts from his 
book "Faith of my Fathers" that have been misconstrued into the false 
statements you list. Here is a link to photocopies of the relevant 
passages from his book:

http://www.miafacts.org/interviews.htm

Read the one called "http://www.miafacts.org/pages_191_200.htm" and the 
one called "http://www.miafacts.org/pages_304_5.htm". 
You also might be interested in the other links, two of which I have 
already given to you in my first message.

-Don Spoon-

Fred Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:34 PM, Donald R Spoon <drspoon at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>   
>>> My conclusion - John was tortured - period - end of discussion.
>>>       
>> Getting thirsty yet??
>>     
>
> Still doesn't change the fact that McCain admits to:
>
> 1) Receiving preferential treatment while a "POW", due to the
> information he shared and who his father was.
>   
Answered in the first link above.  McCain expresses regret that he 
probably was treated better than some other POWs.  The fact is that he 
was almost killed by neglect!  He also was treated worse than MANY other 
POWs.  None of us would want to have gone through what McCain did.   All 
the POWs I know think McCain did just fine in this area.  Only people 
who were not up there make this charge, and it is entirely bogus!  This 
is a calculated smear!

Important point... a POW can't know what is "preferential treatment" 
until he has something to compare it with.  The only comparison "going 
in" is the Geneva Conventions.  The "V" didn't observe the Geneva 
Conventions and told us so from day one.  This means the only way to get 
a baseline on treatment is to at least get into contact with other 
POWs.  McCain was kept isolated for about 2 months before he saw his 
first American!  If you read his account, you cannot say he got 
"preferential treatment" during that time.  His treatment during the 
first 2 months was horrible, against the Geneva Conventions, and against 
all norms of humanity!  McCain expressed his regret only AFTER getting 
into contact with other Americans and hearing about their travails.  
Like most people, other peoples stories usually seem worse than your 
own.  It is a natural psychological survival technique that keeps you 
from going crazy.
> 2) Giving truthful, secret information during his interrogation, in
> breach of the U.S. Code of
> Conduct
>   
Again answered in the first link on page 191 of his book.  This 
accusation is B.S.!  Which Article of the Code of Conduct did he 
breech?  Here is a link to the Code of Conduct so you can read it.  
http://www.vetshome.com/military_code_of_conduct.htm 

You will probably tell me he breeched Article 5.

"Article 5.  When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am 
required to give
only name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering
further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or
written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to
their cause."

Note that it doesn't require a person to DIE to avoid giving further 
information.  McCain was on the verge of death when he finally gave any 
further information, and he was still evasive.  I challenge you to find 
fault with what he did in good faith.   The man was about dead, going in 
and out of consciousness and he lasted for 4 days.   He did good... much 
better than  many others. 

What truthful, SECRET information did he give up?  At the bottom of page 
193 and the top of page 194 you have your answer.  What was considered 
"secret"?  Was the names of the Greenbay Packers considered a military 
secret"  Was the names of previously bombed targets a military 
"secret"?  The name of his carrier??  They knew he had to be off one of 
two in the Gulf at that time.  The "V" had a list of call signs that 
mapped to bases and carriers.  Monitoring the radio traffic readily 
identified where he was from.  His airplane parts including his ejection 
seat, etc will identify the unit.  This is NOT a military "secret".  
(This was the enemy behavior that Robin Olds used in Bolo to trick the 
Migs into coming up to attack what they thought were F-105 bombers.  The 
F-4s used the Thud callsigns to fake them out.)

An important point...  Every one of us were "broken" and had to give up 
information we didn't want to give.  I doubt seriously you know what 
"broken" means.  We soon found out that having a derby on who could take 
the most torture was meaningless.  Just like waterboarding, the 
interrogator WILL get the information they want!  Death or 
unconsciousness was NOT an option.  Contrary to popular belief, pain is 
a terrific stimulant!  If you "pass out from pain" something else is 
going on, like hypovolemic shock.  What we found important was how you 
recovered and continued resisting giving information.  The "V" soon lost 
interest in anybody they had to "punish" (torture) to get anything out 
of them.  They couldn't trust them for propaganda purposes.  McCain did 
outstanding in this regard. 

> 3) Being offered early release after about 6 months, but choosing to
> say for an additional 5 years.
>   
What's wrong with this?  This is Article 3 of the Code of Conduct!   
Those that took early release were the ones that violated the Code of 
Conduct.  Shucks, I turned down early release too!  Most of us did!
> Unless you think McCain is an unstable wingnut of the first order, and
> his statements can't be trusted?
>   
McCain isn't the unstable wingnut here.  The people who were not there, 
who have twisted his words, made up things totally un-substantiated by 
any true records about McCain,  and refuse to believe the testimony of 
this roommates and fellow POWs are the real wingnuts.  The genesis of 
ALL these "charges" can be traced back to Ted Sampley, John 
LeBoutellier, Earl Hopper, Colonel, US Army Reserve (retired), and Jerry 
Kiley all mentioned in the links I gave you on my very first post. 

I have personal experience with Ted Samply.  Several years ago, I 
Googled my name and got several interesting "hits" that claimed I had 
made a statement about another POW, who died in captivity.   The QUOTE 
was referenced to an article written by Ted Sampley, who I had never met 
or spoken to up to that time.  I did NOT say what I was quoted as 
saying, and wrote him an EMail letter asking for a correction.  I 
explained that I had never had contact with that particular POW and 
couldn't have said the things he attributed to me.  At that time I 
believed him to be an honest and honorable man.  His reply to me?  "I 
will have to check this out with my sources".  What better "source" than 
me?  He had made the quote up!  The guy is a dipstick and a scoundrel 
and a wingnut!

-Don Spoon-