From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Subject: 'NamVet Newsletter, Vol.5, no.1 (3/7)
Followup-To: soc.veterans
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 11:17:11 GMT




     =================================================================
         B r e a k   o u t   t h e   C l e a r a s i l   < t m > !
     =================================================================

              Criminal Investigation of Monsanto Corporation
                    Input by Terry Hayes - Waterloo, NY
                        VETLink #1 - Pittsfield, MA
                              (413) 443-6313
     
                    [Text downloaded from POW Network]
     
               UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                          WASHINGTON D.C.  20460
     
                                                  OFFICE OF
                                     SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
     
       MEMORANDUM
     
       DATE:       November I5, 1990
     
       SUBJECT:    Criminal Investigation of Monsanto Corporation
                   - Cover-up of Dioxin Contamination in Products
                   - Falsification of Dioxin Health Studies
     
       FROM:       Cate Jenkins, Ph.D., Chemist
                   Regulatory Development Branch (OS 332)
                   Characterization and Assessment Division
     
       TO:         John West, Special Agent in Charge
                   Office of Criminal Investigations
                   National Enforcement Investigations Center
                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                   Building 53, Box 25227 (303) 236-5100
                   Denver, Colorado 80225
     
                   Kevin Guarino, Special Agent
                   Office of Criminal Investigations
                   National Enforcement Investigations Center, EPA
     
       As  per  our  meeting yesterday,  I am  summarizing  information 
     available  to me supporting allegations of a long pattern of fraud 
     by Monsanto Corporation.
       The  fraud  concerns  2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin  (dioxin) 
     contamination of a wide range of Monsanto Corporation products, as 
     well as health studies of Monsanto's dioxin-exposed workers.   You 
     indicated  that  you  would  contact  me  regarding  the  specific 
     documents which would be useful to your investigation.
     
     SIGNIFICANCE OF MONSANTO'S DIOXIN FRAUD
       You stated that pursuing a criminal prosecution against Monsanto 
     would  require  a prior determination of the significance  of  the 
     fraud. In order for proceedings to be initiated by EPA,  the fraud 
     would  need  to  have affected the regulatory process at  EPA  and 
     Monsanto  would need to have knowing submitted the falsified  data 
     and  health  studies  to  EPA in order to  affect  the  regulatory 
     process.
     
       Monsanto  has  in fact submitted false information to EPA  which 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 30
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     directly  resulted  in weakened regulations under RCRA  and  FIFRA 
     since  these regulations do not take into account tetrachlorinated 
     dioxin contamination in tri-, tetra-,  and pentachlorophenols,  as 
     well  as  2,4-dichlorophenol  and its phenoxy  acetate  (2,4-D,  a 
     currently  used  herbicide).  In addition,  Monsanto's failure  to 
     report  dioxin  contamination  of the disinfectant  in  Lysol  has 
     prevented  any  ban  or other alleviation of  human  exposures  to 
     dioxins in this product.
     
       The  Monsanto human health studies have been submitted to EPA by 
     Monsanto  as part of public comments on proposed dioxin rules  and 
     Agency-wide  dioxin risk assessments by the Office of Research and 
     Development.  These Monsanto health studies are continually relied 
     upon  by  all  offices of EPA to conclude that  dioxins  have  not 
     caused  cancer or other health effects (other than  chloracne)  in 
     humans.  Thus,   dioxin  has  been  given  a  lesser  carcinogenic 
     potential  ranking,  which  continues  to  be the  basis  of  less 
     stringent   regulations   and  lesser  degrees  of   environmental 
     controls.  The  Monsanto studies in question have also been a  key 
     basis  for  denying  compensation to Vietnam Veterans  exposed  to 
     Agent  Orange and their children suffering birth defects from such 
     parental  exposures.  (1)  Monsanto would not be able to support a 
     claim  that  independent  researchers  were  responsible  for  the 
     falsifications,  because  Monsanto  personnel  compiled  all  data 
     utilized by these researchers.  In addition the National Institute 
     of  Environmental  Health  Sciences partially funded  one  of  the 
     Monsanto  studies in question providing a basis for charges of the 
     fraudulent use of governmental funds.
     
     DIOXIN CONTAMINATION OF MONSANTO PRODUCTS
       Monsanto  covered-up the dioxin contamination of a wide range of 
     its  products.  Monsanto  either failed to  report  contamination, 
     substituted  false information purporting to show no contamination 
     or submitted samples to the government for analysis which had been 
     specially prepared so that dioxin contamination did not exist.
     
       The  earliest  known  effort  by  Monsanto  to  cover-up  dioxin 
     contamination  of  its  products involved the  herbicide  used  in 
     Vietnam  Agent Orange (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy  acetate,  2,4,5-T). 
     Available  internal Monsanto correspondence in the 1960's shows  a 
     knowledge  of  this  contamination and the fact  that  the  dioxin 
     contaminant  was responsible for kidney and liver damage,  as well 
     as the skin condition chloracne."
     
       Early internal Monsanto documents reveal that samples of 2,4,5-T 
     and  other  chlorinated herbicides and chlorophenols submitted  to 
     the  U.S.  Department of Agriculture in the 1970s were "doctored."  
     In other words,  highly contaminated samples were not submitted to 
     the  government,  and  Monsanto  samples of  penta  tetra-,  tri-, 
     dichlorophenol,   and   associated   herbicides  never   contained 
     tetrachlorinated dioxins. These analyses were subsequently adopted 
     by  EPA in a 1980 publication and were used without any data  from 
     other  sources as the basis for 1984 regulations under RCRA.  As a 
     result,  these regulations do not control the chlorophenol/phenoxy 
     acetate  products as acutely hazardous due to their  contamination 
     of tetrachlorinated dioxins.
     
       Monsanto also submitted assertions to EPA that process chemistry 
     would  preclude  the formation of tetrachlorinated dioxins in  any 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 31
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     chlorophenolic  product other that 2,4,5-tetrachlorophenol or  its 
     phenoxy acetate. Evidence from the Kemner v.  Monsanto proceedings 
     revealed  that  the process chemistry claimed by Monsanto was  not 
     always used. In fact,  off-specification dichlorophenol,  known to 
     be contaminated with tetrachlorinated dioxin,  was being used as a 
     feedstock   to   make  pentachlorophenol  and  other   chlorinated 
     products.  The  result  of this alternate synthesis route  is  the 
     introduction  of  dioxins as a contaminants.  EPA also  relied  on 
     these "process chemistry" arguments by Monsanto as a basis for not 
     regulating most chlorophenols and 2,4-D for their tetrachlorinated 
     dioxin content.
     
       Another  Monsanto  document introduced as evidence in the  above 
     proceedings  shows  cross-contamination  of a  range  of  Monsanto 
     products with tetrachlorinated dioxins by the following mechanism: 
     The  same  production equipment is used without cleaning  for  all 
     chlorinated phenolic products.
       In  1984,  when promulgating the dioxin regulations under  RCRA, 
     EPA was only  made aware of the cross contamination problem in the 
     event  that  2,4-D was made on equipment previously used  to  make 
     2,4,5-T. Thus,  EPA again was subverted from promulgating adequate 
     regulations  for  products  other  than  2,4-D  that  were  cross-
     contaminated with dioxins.
     
       Members   of   the   Canadian   Parliament   recently   directed 
     investigations by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and government 
     scientist  into the dioxin contamination of disinfectants such  as 
     Lysol  containing Monsanto's Santophen (ortho-dichloro-para-phenyl 
     phenol), and directed laboratory analyses of existing stocks. This 
     disinfectant uses the ortho-dichlorophenol, discussed above,  as a 
     feedstock,  which  would  introduce any dioxins present  into  the 
     disinfectant.  In  a  1984  letter  to  the  Canadian  government, 
     Monsanto  asserted  that their disinfectant contained  no  dioxin. 
     This was later refuted by testimony by Monsanto's chemist.
     
     FRAUDULENT DIOXIN HEALTH STUDIES
       As  you  indicated today,  demonstrating criminal fraud  in  the 
     epidemiological  studies  performed  by Monsanto  on  its  dioxin-
     exposed  workers would necessitate bringing in appropriate  groups 
     in  EPA  capable of performing scientific  study  audits.(3)   You 
     indicated,  however,  that  NEIC  did not believe this would be  a 
     barrier  to  the  investigation.  The  following  are  a  few  key 
     instances where obvious fraud was utilized in the conduct of these
     studies:
     
       Dr. Raymond Suskind at the University of Cincinnati was hired by 
     Monsanto  to study the workers at Monsanto's Nitro,  West Virginia 
     plant.  Dr.  Suskind  stated in published studies in question that 
     chloracne,  a skin condition was the prime indicator of high human 
     dioxin exposures, and no other health effects would be observed in 
     the  absence  of this condition.  Unpublished studies by  Suskind, 
     however, indicate the fallacy of this statement. No workers except 
     those  having chloracne were ever examined by Suskind or  included 
     in his study. In other words, if no workers without chloracne were 
     ever  examined  for other health effects,  there is no  basis  for 
     asserting   that   chloracne   was   "the   hallmark   of   dioxin 
     intoxication."   (4)    These  conclusions  have  been  repeatedly 
     utilized by EPA,  the Veterans Administration,  etc.,  to deny any 
     causation  by  dioxin of health effects of  exposed  citizens,  if 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 32
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     these persons did not exhibit chloracne.
     
       The  results of Dr.  Suskind's studies also were diluted by  the 
     fact  that the exposed group contained not only individuals having 
     chloracne (a genuine, but not the only effect of dioxin exposure), 
     but  also all workers having any type of skin condition such as  a 
     chemical rash.  The workers could have had no or negligible dioxin 
     exposures,  but  they  were included in the study as part  of  the 
     heavily exposed group.  This fact was revealed only by the careful 
     reading of the published Suskind study.(5)  Further,  Dr.  Suskind 
     utilized  statistics on the skin conditions of workers compiled by 
     a    Monsanto   clerical   worker,    without   any    independent 
     verification.(6)
     
       Dr.  Suskind  also covered-up the documented neurological damage 
     from dioxin exposures.  At Workers Compensation hearings,  Suskind 
     denied  that  the  workers  experienced  any  neurological  health 
     effects. In the Kemnmer, et al v.  Monsanto proceedings,  however, 
     it  was  revealed that Suskind had in his possession at  the  time 
     examinations of the workers by Monsanto's physician, Dr.  Nestman, 
     documenting  neurological health effects.   In his later published 
     study,  Dr.  Suskind denied the continuing documented neurological 
     health  effects  suffered  by the workers,  falsely  stating  that 
     symptoms "had cleared."
     
       All  of  the Monsanto dioxin studies also suffer  another  fatal 
     flaw. The purported "dioxin unexposed"  control group was selected 
     from  other workers at the same Monsanto plant.   An earlier court 
     settlement  revealed  not  only that  these  supposedly  unexposed 
     workers  were exposed to dioxins,  but also to other  carcinogens, 
     One  of  these  carcinogens,  para-amino biphenyl,  was  known  by 
     Monsanto  to  be  a human carcinogen and it was  also  known  that 
     workers were heavily exposed.
     
       Another Monsanto study involved independent medical examinations 
     of  surviving  employees by Monsanto physicians.  Several  hundred 
     former Monsanto employees were too ill to travel to participate in 
     the  study.  Monsanto  refused  to use  the  attending  physicians 
     reports  of  the illness as part of their study,  saying  that  it 
     would introduce inconsistencies. Thus,  any critically ill dioxin-
     exposed   workers  with  cancers  such  as  Non-Hodgkins  lymphoma 
     (associated  with  dioxin exposures),  were conveniently  excluded 
     from the Monsanto study.
     
       There  are numerous other flaws in the Monsanto health  studies. 
     Each  of these misrepresentations and falsifications always served 
     to  negate any conclusions of adverse health effects from dioxins.  
     A   careful  audit  of  these  studies  by  EPA's  epidemiological 
     scientists should be obtained as part of your investigation.
     
       The  false  conclusions contained in the Monsanto  studies  have 
     recently  been  refuted by the findings of a recent study  by  the 
     National Institute of Occupation Safety and Health (NIOSH).   This 
     NIOSH  study,  recently  circulated by Dr.  Marilyn Fingerhut  for 
     review,  found  a statistically significant increase in cancers at 
     all sites in the Monsanto workers,  when dioxin exposed workers at 
     Monsanto  and  other  industrial  locations were  examined  as  an 
     aggregate group.(7)
     
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 33
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

       Please  do  not  hesitate to contact me regarding  documents  to 
     support   your   investigation,   which  include   testimony   and 
     evidentiary   documents  from  the  ongoing  Kemner  v.   Monsanto 
     litigation,  earlier  litigation  in West Virginia brought by  the 
     Monsanto   workers,   ongoing   investigations  by  the   Canadian 
     government  internal Monsanto documents,  as well as documentation 
     of  the submission of the fraudulent data and studies by  Monsanto 
     to  support  the  rulemaking  process under  RCRA  and  other  EPA 
     authorities.
     
       CC:   Admiral E. Zumwalt
             Senator Thomas Daschel
             Congressman Ted Weiss
             American Legion
             National Vietnam Veteran's Coalition
             Oklahoma Agent Orange Foundation
             Independent International Agent Orange Network
             Vietnam Veterans of New Zealand
             Greenpeace, U.S.A
             Earth First
             Natural Resources Defense Council
             Environmental Defense Fund
             Lennart Hardell, M.D., Ph.D.
             Mikael Eriksson, M.D.
             Olaf Axelson M.D.
             Friedaman Rohleder, M.D.
             Mike Petruska Chief, Regulatory Development Branch
             Carrol G. Wills, Acting Director, NEIC, EPA/Denver
     
     ------------------------
       (1)  The  American  Medical  Association,  concerned  about  the 
     veracity  of one of the Monsanto studies published in its journal, 
     stated  that a reassessment would be undertaken if the outcome  of 
     appeal  of the Kenmer v.  Monsanto litigation did not reverse  the 
     verdict impugning the credibility of the Monsanto studies.
     
       (2)  You  indicated  that  NEIC  would be  reticent  to  receive 
     documents  of this nature suspected to be under a court protective 
     order, but assured me that you would pursue legal routes to obtain 
     them independently.
     
       (3)  You should be cautioned regarding any consultation with Dr. 
     Renate  Kimbrough  at  EPA regarding the review  of  the  Monsanto 
     studies. Dr. Kimbrough was contacted by Monsanto during the Kenmer 
     v.  Monsanto  litigation and provided expert testimony,  while  an 
     employee  of  the  Centers  for  Disease  Control,  on  behalf  of 
     Monsanto.   Dr.  Kimbrough has provided expert testimony on behalf 
     of  other defendant corporations responsible for dioxin  pollution 
     even coauthoring papers with these defendants.
     
       (4)  Suskind  examined  only one worker without  chloracne  (Mr. 
     Kiley), and dismissed this individual's health complaints as being 
     those of a complainer.
     
       (5)  Later  studies  by  the Centers for  Disease  Control  have 
     demonstrated  that any manifestation of chloracne in humans is not 
     correlated   with  the  blood  dioxin  levels.   In  other  words, 
     individuals  with lower blood dioxin have been observed to develop 
     chloracne, those with higher blood levels did not.
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 34
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     
       (6)  The  deposition of Ms.  Jan Young of  Monsanto,  previously 
     under a protective order, is in the process of release pursuant to 
     a motion by Greenpeace, USA
     
       (7)  This NIOSH study does have an inherent design weakness that 
     would diminish the capability of detecting excess cancers. This is 
     because  Monsanto  and the other dioxin-producing  companies  were 
     allowed  to  independently  select  the  group  of  dioxin-exposed 
     workers to be studied by NIOSH.
     
     ---------------------------
               UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                          WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
     
                         ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL
                         ------------------------
     OCT 23 I990
                                                 OFFICE OF
                                     SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
     
     
     MEMORANDUM
     
     SUBJECT:         Providing Information to NEIC
     
     FROM:            Michael J. Petruska Chief
                      Regulatory Development Branch
     
     TO:              Cate Jenkins, Chemist
                      Regulatory Development Branch
     
          It  has  come to my attention that you are in  possession  of 
     information   concerning  certain  health  studies  performed   by 
     Monsanto Corporation on dioxins. Accordingly,  I am directing you, 
     as part of your assigned duties,  to meet with Special Agent Kevin 
     Guarino  of  NEIC to describe the information in your  possession, 
     and  if  Special  Agent Guarino thinks the  information  would  be 
     helpful, to provide the information including copies of documents, 
     etc.,  to  him.  Please let me know how much time will be involved 
     after you have met.
     
     CC:  David Bussard
          Kevin Guarino, NEIC
     














     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 35
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

          
          
                       _     ______   _______  __    _  _______
                      /\\    H    M   H        H\\   H  HHHHHHH
                     /  \\   H        H        H \\  H     H
                    /====\\  H   HHH  HHH      H  \\ H     H
                   /      \\ H_____H  H______  H   \\H     H
              ______    ______      _     __    _  ______   _______
              H     H  H     /)    /\\    H\\   H  H    M   H
              H     H  H____//    /  \\   H \\  H  H        H
              H     H  H   \\    /====\\  H  \\ H  H   HHH  HHH
              H_____H  H    \\  /      \\ H   \\H  H_____M  H______
          
                                .  _  .  _  .  .
                            -.- . -   .   - . -. -  .
                         - -  -   - . -   -  -    -  .-
                        -   .   .           .    -  -  -.
                      - .            . .  .    .   .  . -.
                    -.    .  .     .   U   S .  -        -.
                   -     .      .     .  .  -    .  . -   -.
                  -  .        .   .  -  -   .         .   -.
                  - .  .. V I E T N A M  V E T E R A N  . _ -
                 -   .   .    .    _ _   _ . _-_ .    -     -
                 - .            - -   -_- -_-xxx _ -.  . - .-.
                  - . .  .  .  - XXXXXxxXXXXXXXXXXXx -. - .- .
                  -    .  . XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX-.  .--.
                  - .-   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX -.- -
                   -.-  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX -.  -.
                    -. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx .g -.
                     -. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX .- j.
                     .- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  .  p
                    .-.  XXXXXXXX   ]XXXXXXXXX  ]XXXXXXXX  .-  -
                     -.   XXXXXX       XXXXX      XXXXXX    -.- -
                    --      XXXXXX     XXXXXX    XXXXXX     --
                    -         XXXXXXXXX X'`XXX XXXXXXX      Y
                    Y          XXXXXXXXX    XXXXX XXX
                                XXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXX
                                 XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXX
                                 XXX XX X XXX XX XX
                                 XXXX            XX
                                  XXX XX XX XX XXXX
                                  XXX]XXXXXXXXXXXX
                                   XXX[ XX XX XXX
                                     XXXXXXXXXX
          
               "  I t ' s    o n l y    t e e n a g e    a c n e !  "
                                                   -Robert Nimmo-
          
          
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     


     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 36
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991



     =================================================================
       F r o m   A z t e c   S h o r e   t o   A r c t i c   Z o n e
     =================================================================

        COAST GUARD PORT SECURITY UNITS JOIN MIDDLE EAST OPERATIONS
                 Article from the December, 1990 issue of
                           "RETIREE NEWSLETTER"
                       US COAST GUARD HEADQUARTERS.
              Story by Photojournalist 1st Class  Mike Price  &
                   Photojournalist 2nd Class  Steve Blando
           Input by: Jack Hawkins SCPO, US Coast Guard (Retired)
                        VETLINK #1 - PITTSFIELD, MA
                              (413) 443-6313
     
       Six  weeks  after multinational troops began pouring into  Saudi 
     Arabia,  Coast  Guard  Reservists were called to action  with  the 
     deployment  of  two Port Security Units (PSU)  from the 9th  Coast 
     Guard District.   (NOTE:  the 9th Coast Guard District encompasses 
     the  Great  Lakes areas of  New  York,  Ohio,  Michigan,  Indiana, 
     Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.)
       In mid-September,  the first unit,  a 117 person detachment from 
     Reserve Group Milwaukee, deployed from Toledo,  Ohio.   A few days 
     later,  another  PSU  from  Reserve Group Buffalo  followed  suit. 
     Stateside,  the third and final PSU from Cleveland was standing by 
     for orders to ship out.
       To  date,  more  than 700 Reservists have been called up in  the 
     first  involuntary  overseas mobilization of Coast  Guard  Reserve 
     units in their 50 year history.
     
       An  important  factor in the decision to call up these  citizen-
     sailors  was  the confidence in the PSU's ability to do  the  job. 
     This  unit's  high level of competence in the result of about  six 
     years  of very specialized training,  the most recent of which was 
     at Camp Perry, a National Guard base on Lake Erie, near Toledo,
     Ohio.
     
       The training at Camp Perry was conducted in two one-week periods 
     during  August  and September and involved PSU's from  both  Group 
     Milwaukee and Group Buffalo.
       CAPT  Carmond Fitzgerald,  the 9th District's Chief of Readiness 
     and Reserve,  held an all-hands briefing to provide the Reservists 
     with  some idea of what they could expect in the next few weeks of 
     training.
       The  tone  of the briefing was very frank.   "The  training  you 
     receive  here at Camp Perry may be the toughest you've ever had in 
     the  Coast  Guard,"   he  said.   "And  then  shortly  thereafter, 
     everyone may be going on a trip to the Middle East."
     
       The  training  at  Camp Perry covered  many  subjects.   It  was 
     administered by a handpicked group of Coast Guard instructors from 
     the  Coast  Guard  Reserve Training Center  Yorktown,  Va.  and  a 
     special team of instructors from the Ohio National Guard.
       The  team  from Yorktown put the Reservists through their  paces 
     with  extensive  instruction in boat  operations.   This  training 
     including  several  hours of practice on how to protect a  secured 
     area from hostile traffic.
       While the boat crews were busy on the water, other Reservists on 
     shore   were  receiving  some  special  instructions  in  maritime 
     security.   With  full  combat  regalia  -   M-16s,   helmets  and 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 37
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     camouflaged  uniforms  -  they  looked more like  combat  infantry 
     troops  than  members of the nation's oldest  continuous  seagoing 
     service.
       While  all the training at Camp Perry was important,  there  was 
     one subject that was mandatory and critical for everyone to learn: 
     CBR  -  chemical,  biological,  and  radiological  -   instruction 
     detailed  the use of special clothing and gas masks,  in the event 
     of a chemical warfare attack.
       Under  the  guidance of CBR specialists from the  Ohio  National 
     Guard,  the  Reservists  were  given a full day  of  comprehensive 
     instruction  in the many dangers of various chemical  agents,  and 
     the proper use of equipment required for protection.
       More  training  followed on how to properly wear  the  charcoal-
     lines  protective suit and the CBR mask.   This meant learning how 
     to  properly  clear the mask of any possible toxic  agents,  while 
     also ensuring that there was an airtight seal around the face. All 
     this had to be accomplished in a period of 15 seconds. 
       Suit  training turned into a sweaty ordeal.   After getting into 
     the  suit,  the instructors took the class for a walk,  which also 
     included a 50 yard sprint on the beach.   With temperatures in the 
     mid-80's -  and with very high humidity -  CBR training was not at 
     all enjoyable,  but was viewed by everyone as something that could 
     mean the difference between life and death.
       On September 14, all speculation was over.  The word spread like 
     wildfire and in a matter of minutes,  everyone knew that Milwaukee 
     had been called up.
       On  the  last  day of training at Camp Perry,  the  troops  were 
     visited  by  RADM Fred Golove,  the Senior Reserve Officer in  the 
     Coast  Guard.   RADM  Golove  was intrigued by the wide  array  of 
     personalities before him.  After querying some Reservists on their 
     background,  he  discovered the myriad of talents that made up the 
     Reserve force.  He found plumbers, electricians, doctors, lawyers, 
     college professors, teachers, TV reporters, photographers, nurses, 
     salesmen, police officers, and firefighters - just to name a few.
     
       He found what he already knew.   They were people from all walks 
     of  life,  brought  together under circumstances that seemed  both 
     impossible and improbable just a few short months ago.
     




















     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 38
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

       U.S. Coast Guard in South East Asia/Vietnam Conflict;  Part 2
             By: Jack Hawkins, USCG (Ret) - Staten Island, NY
                        VETLink #1 - Pittsfield, MA
                              (413) 443-6313
     
                   -------------------------------------
                      From Aztec Shore to Arctic Zone
                          To Europe and Far East
                      Our Flag is carried by Our Ships
                          In Time of War and Peace
     
                        Verse from "SEMPER PARATUS"
                                 The Coast Guard Marching Song
                   -------------------------------------
     In  Part 1 of Coast Guard Operations in South East Asia during the 
     Vietnam  War,(NAMVET NEWSLETTER,  VOLUME 4 EDITION 12)  we saw the 
     establishment   and  operations of the inner barrier patrols  with 
     Coast Guard Squadron 1 and 2, consisting of 82 ft patrol boats. In 
     Part 2, we will see the operations of the Outer Barrier units, the 
     seagoing cutters of Coast Guardron Three, and the Coast Guard Port 
     Security and Waterways detail.
     
                   -------------------------------------
                     Aye we been always ready
                         to do to fight or die
                     To write glory to the shield we wear
                         in letters in the sky
                                                       "SEMPER PARATUS"
                    -------------------------------------
     
     AND A STORY OF THIRTY
       Early in 1967, the Navy forces assigned to Market Time and other 
     operations  were  being stretched thin.   As a  result,  the  Navy 
     requested that the Coast Guard provide five High Endurance Cutters 
     (WHEC)  for duty with the Coast Surveillance Forces.   On 24 April 
     1967, Coast Guard Squadron Three was formed at Pearl Harbor.   Two 
     days later the squadron sailed from Pearl Harbor arriving at Subic 
     Bay on 10 May.
       The  Cutter BARATARIA left Subic Bay a few days later and on the 
     22nd  of  May fired the first WHEC Naval Gunfire  Support  Mission 
     (NGFS)  mission  of the war.   The HEC's continued their peacetime 
     duties  with the Cutter HALF MOON acting as On Scene Commander  in 
     the search for survivors from the sunken ship SHINAGAWA MARU.  The 
     YAKUTAT took a young girl aboard for inpatient treatment after she 
     sustained  a  gun shot wound in the leg.   Almost immediately  the 
     cutters started conducting MEDCAPS, but these will be discussed in 
     a later chapter.
       On 1 October 1967, Commander, Task Unit (CTU)  70.8.6 (RONTHREE) 
     consolidated with CTU 70.8.5 (Navy Escort Squadron).  The new unit 
     was  designated  CTU 70.8.5,  commanded by the senior Coast  Guard 
     officer,  and  given the additional duty as  "Commander,  Cruiser-
     Destroyer Group Seventh Fleet Representative, Subic."  Besides the 
     normal squadron administrative duties,  CTU 70.8.5 was also tasked 
     with  scheduling,  equipment pools,  boarding  briefings,  message 
     handling,   yeoman  and  storekeeper  services,   casualty  report 
     control, material expediting,  personnel routing,  and so on.   An 
     almost  immediate result of this consolidation was the decision to 
     include  RONTHREE  cutters  in the Senior Officer  Present  Alfoat 
     Administrative (SOPA ADMIN)  HONG KONG rotation.  Vessels assigned 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 39
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     as  SOPA  ADMIN  provided administrative support for  other  naval 
     units   visiting   Hong  Kong  including  coordinating   arrivals, 
     departures,  services and activities,  liaison with the Royal Navy 
     authorities,  the  American Consulate,  and SOPA HONG  KONG.   The 
     BERING STRAIT was the first cutter to perform these duties.
       Due  to  their shallow draft the cutters of Squadron Three  were 
     primarily assigned to the Gulf of Thailand.   Not long after their 
     arrival  they  started  to provide  5"/38  gunfire  support.   The 
     primary NGFS aid was given to the village of Song Ong Doc near the 
     Ca Mau peninsula.   Song Ong Doc had a small United States Special 
     Forces base and was located in the middle of a VC controlled area.  
     The village was practically adopted by the Coast Guard as we shall 
     see later.  Another support measure provided by the high endurance 
     cutters  was to supply logistic support to the WPB's and PCF's  on 
     patrol.   The  PCF is a rough riding boat with few amenities.   To 
     allow  the PCF to remain on patrol for extended periods two  crews 
     were  assigned,  with  the off-duty crew living aboard  the  outer 
     barrier cutter.  Frequently personnel from the cutter replaced the 
     sick, wounded or tired personnel of the PCF.
       In order for the high endurance cutters to resupply, they had to 
     either  load at one of the support bases or receive it from one of 
     the oilers, ammunition ships, food and stores ships transiting the 
     coastal  waters.   The  latter  proved the most feasible  and  the 
     cutters embarked on a new way of life.  Besides,  the supply ships 
     also carried mail from home.
       On 29 February 1968, the cutters WINONA and ANDROSCOGGIN engaged 
     enemy  infiltrating  trawlers and destroyed them with the  aid  of 
     WPB's and Navy units.  The MINNETONKA turned back another.   These 
     engagements have been previously described in the WPB story.
       Providing  medical treatment for other military personnel was  a 
     constant  activity.   Wounded  U.S.  Navy and Army personnel  were 
     treated  aboard the cutters,  along with other  friendlies.   USN, 
     USCG,  and  VNN vessels who knew that the cutters carried  medical 
     officers  would transfer their sick to the cutters for  treatment. 
     The  ANDROSCOGGIN's medical officer performed four hours of  major 
     surgery on a Vietnamese soldier wounded by a grenade.
       Spring  and early summer of 1968 provided action for the cutters 
     CAMPBELL  and ANDROSCOGGIN.   The ANDROSCOGGIN participated in  an 
     amphibious operation conducted by ARVN troops,  with other cutters 
     participating  in similar operations at later dates.   The  cutter 
     CAMPBELL  was  on patrol near the DMZ and came across  a  derelict 
     junk  which she blew up so it would not be a hazard to navigation.   
     A  few days later,  the PCF 19 which was attached to CAMPBELL  was 
     sunk  near  the Cua Viet river by friendly  aircraft.  The  cutter 
     POINT DUME recovered the only two survivors.  ANDROSCOGGIN a month 
     later  provided emergency damage control assistance to a PCF while 
     ANDROSCOGGIN was providing NGFS.  The OWASCO,  a few months later, 
     saved a PCF from sinking after it had been hit by enemy fire.
       In June 1969,  the ANDROSCOGGIN conducted hydrographic survey of 
     previously uncharted area.   This type of operation became routine 
     with the cutters charting the proper position of lights,  islands, 
     and so forth.   The Cutter MORGENTHAU frequently transmitted chart 
     corrections and even located an uncharted pinnacle when she struck 
     it.   The  INGHAM  provided  a similar chart correction  when  she 
     grounded.
       The  Song Ong Doc area was in a constant state of battle and  as 
     was  mentioned  before,  frequent  assistance  was  given  by  the 
     cutters.   This  being  repeated to accentuate the gravity of  the 
     situation and the amount of support given.  Eventually, due to the 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 40
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     extreme  situation  a  cutter  was assigned  almost  full-time  to 
     support  of  Song  Ong Doc especially with  NGFS.   WINNEBAGO  and 
     DALLAS deserve special recognition for all their support. Services 
     were  also  provided  to PCF's making sorties into  VC  controlled 
     areas.  The cutter would provide NGFS, logistics,  damage control, 
     and medical support.
       At  the other end of Vietnam the cutters patrolling near the DMZ 
     had  the  additional  mission  of  preventing  lost  vessels  from 
     straying over the 17th parallel.   Gunfire support was not a prime 
     duty  in this area,  but on one occasion when an Army post was  in 
     danger  of  being overrun the cutter OWASCO provided  illumination 
     while the USS NEW JERSEY provided destructive fire.
       On 16 May 1969, the Navy personnel of CTU 70.8.5 were withdrawn. 
     as  the duties were only slightly lessened,  the Navy provided one 
     officer and six enlisted on TAD to fill in the gap. A month later, 
     the  RONTHREE staff worked nearly full-time on salvaging gear from 
     the stricken USS FRANK E. EVANS.
       July 1969 proved exciting for the cutter SPENCER when she caught 
     fire in Sasebo, Japan.   The fire damage was not extensive and she 
     was soon underway.   The same month SEBAGO extracted 5 ARVN's from 
     an  enemy controlled area using a landing party accompanied by the 
     ship's  doctor.   One  hour after extracting the five ARVN's  they 
     returned  to  rescue  the spotter pilot who was shot down  in  the 
     rescue attempt.
       The  cutters of RONTHREE consisted of pre-World War II and World 
     War II vintage cutters.   Though their performance was outstanding 
     they were handicapped by age, partial obsolescence, and relatively 
     low speed.  On 1 October 1969 the Cutter HAMILTON arrived in Subic 
     Bay.   She  was  the  first  of a class  of  Coast  Guard  cutters 
     (commissioned  1967)  endowed  with high speed,  improved  gunfire 
     control,  habitability,  and a large flight deck.  The flight deck 
     made  the  cutter extremely versatile allowing helicopters to  use 
     the  ship  for  refueling,  transferring  supplies,   transporting 
     personnel,  and  evacuating  wounded.   Less than one month  after 
     arriving,  the  HAMILTON  landed  a large twin  rotor  helicopter.  
     These  new  cutters felt they were being underutilized  and  after 
     holding briefings ashore had a substantial jump in activity.
       In  March  of  1970  the SS COLUMBIA EAGLE  was  taken  over  by 
     mutineers, the crew set adrift,  and the ship taken into Cambodia.  
     The  Cutters  MELLON  and  CHASE participated  in  the  successful 
     resolving  situation,  with the CHASE providing transportation for 
     the crew to return.
       The  Coast Guard cutters appeared to be the constant keepers  of 
     the  Gulf of Thailand and so gathered considerable knowledge about 
     the  area which they would impart to arriving Navy ships when  not 
     engaged in NGFS, MEDCAPS, patrol or other duties.   As the cutters 
     would  normally  return  to the area after an R  &  R  port,  they 
     frequently  took  in-country  personnel with them  on  these  port 
     visits  which  proved  to be a tremendous morale booster  for  in-
     country troops.   Vietnamese naval personnel were also taken,  and 
     on some trips it was SRO.
       We have now returned to the Gulf of Thailand and April 1970 when 
     an  ARVN unit was in danger of being overrun.   The cutter  DALLAS 
     responded  with  NGFS providing a path for the ARVN's and  routing 
     the  enemy.   The  DALLAS'  medical officer treated eight  wounded 
     Vietnamese  soldiers  on board until they could be evacuated to  a 
     hospital.   During  the operation,  DALLAS covered the landing and 
     the subsequent extraction of the troops.
       It  was  determined  that  the  Vietnamese  Navy  should  obtain 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 41
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     offshore  patrol  units and the Cutters BERING STRAIT and  YAKUTAT 
     were  selected.   They  arrived in Subic Bay in June 1970  with  a 
     small  cadre  of  Vietnamese aboard,  which  was  supplemented  by 
     another  contingent at Subic.   The VNN personnel were taught  the 
     operations  of the ship and soon took over important positions  in 
     CIC, Boarding parties,  NGFS details,  and repair crews.   The VNN 
     also  performed  the external functions of  the  ship,  especially 
     boarding.   The  VNN  officers  soon became underway  and  in-port 
     OOD's.  Teams assumed full responsibility for engineering watches.  
     did the navigation and piloting,  and provided all the control and 
     most  other  positions in the NGFS teams.   Their training  became 
     apparent when a combined USCG/VNN rescue and assistance party from 
     the  YAKUTAT  extinguished a serious fire and performed  post-fire 
     support on a USN landing ship.
       Rumors  had  been circulating that Song Ong Doc was going to  be 
     overrun and in October 1970 the village and the base were hit hard 
     by the VC and most of the base destroyed.   In November,  the base 
     and  village moved inland to New Song Ong Doc and the Coast  Guard 
     support requirements lessened.  However,  a month later the Cutter 
     RUSH  and  an  Australian destroyer  conducted  emergency  gunfire 
     support for New Song Ong Doc killing 64 of the attackers.
       A  trawler attempted to infiltrate on the 21st of November 1970. 
     After  being  hailed to stop,  she resisted and was  destroyed  by 
     gunfire from the Cutters RUSH and SHERMAN, and USN units.
       November  1970  saw the BERING STRAIT and YAKUTAT in  Subic  Bay 
     being  painted  gray  except for the  Coast  Guard  identification 
     markings.   In December,  the cutters underwent refresher training 
     with  nearly  an  all Vietnamese crew.   After completion  of  the 
     training,  the ships departed for Saigon.   There they were turned 
     over  to  the Vietnamese on 1 January 1971 in a colorful  ceremony 
     where  the  invocation  was  given  by a  Navy  chaplain  and  the 
     benediction by a Buddhist monk.
       On  28  February 1971,  after dropping of a  MEDCAP  party,  the 
     Cutter MORGENTHAU struck an uncharted rock pinnacle in the Gulf of 
     Thailand  causing extensive underwater damage.   After being towed 
     to  Subic  Bay.   The  Ship  Repair Facility  had  the  MORGENTHAU 
     repaired and underway in record time.
       The  night  of  11-12  April 1971 found  the  Cutters  RUSH  and 
     MORGENTHAU  teamed up with Navy and VNN units to destroy an  enemy 
     trawler  trying to infiltrate supplies into South Vietnam near the 
     Cau Mau peninsula.
       The  Cutters CASTLE ROCK and COOK INLET arrived in Subic Bay  in 
     July  1971  for  eventual turnover to the  Vietnamese  Navy.   The 
     training progressed rapidly, with dual ship exercises taking place 
     in  November.   To  display  his confidence in the high  state  of 
     training  the  Commodore of RONTHREE transferred between  the  two 
     ships on a highline.
       December  1971 saw the COOK INLET as the last Coast Guard cutter 
     on  a  combat  patrol  in  Vietnamese  waters,  with  a  primarily 
     Vietnamese  crew.   On the 21st of December the final two ships of 
     Coast Guard Squadron Three were transferred to the Vietnamese Navy 
     in Saigon.  These two ships then proceeded to Subic Bay in January 
     for refresher training conducted by RONTHREE and Navy personnel.
       Coast  Guard  Squadron Three was disestablished on  31  January, 
     1971 ending another chapter of Coast Guard history.
     
     PORT SECURITY AND WATERWAYS DETAIL
       One  of  the  missions of the Coast Guard is  Port  Security  in 
     United States ports.   The Coast Guard is also responsible for the 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 42
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     safe loading and unloading of dangerous cargo.   It was recognized 
     early  in the course of the war in Vietnam that some sort of  port 
     security  and  dangerous  cargo safety was needed.   The  port  of 
     Saigon  was just a big disaster waiting to happen.   On 4  August, 
     1965,  COMUSMACV  initiated  a  request  for a  Coast  Guard  Port 
     Security Officer to be assigned on a TAD to the Commander, Capitol 
     Military  District  for the Port of Saigon.   The Chief  of  Naval 
     Operations  concurred and forwarded the request to the  Commandant 
     of  the Coast Guard.   The success of the Coast Guard officer sent 
     to   Saigon  initiated  a  request  from  CHNAVADVGRP  to  CINCPAC 
     requesting the billet be made permanent.
       The  need  for experienced explosives handling personnel  became 
     more  obvious after the demonstrated ability of the Port  Security 
     officer.  On 17 February 1966, COMUSMACV requested CINCPAC ask the 
     Commandant  for  two Explosives Loading Detachments consisting  of 
     one officer and seven enlisted each.   The ELD's were to be highly 
     trained  in  explosives handling,  port security,  and be able  to 
     instruct others in these duties.  CINCPAC forwarded the request to 
     JCS  and  they in turn had CNO request the Coast Guard to  provide 
     them.   The  Commandant  replied in the affirmative on the 8th  of 
     March.   The  two ELD's were sent,  with ELD #1 located Nha Be and 
     ELD #2 at Cam Ranh Bay.
        After  several months of operation RONONE asked that the senior 
     enlisted  be upgraded to either a senior or master chief.   It was 
     considered   important  as  the  chief  petty  officer  ran   into 
     difficulty  with senior Army enlisted personnel and frequently was 
     dealing  directly on important matters with senior Army  officers. 
     The  problem was accentuated in that ELD's could stop any US  flag 
     vessel from loading or unloading and basically had "carte blanche" 
     to do what they had to in order to enforce regulations.
        The  ELD's  were  somewhat lacking in equipment  as  they  were 
     assigned  away  from  the Coast Guard and attached to  the  Army's 
     First  Logistics  Command.   However,  in the finest  Coast  Guard 
     traditions  they  made do with what they had and what  they  could 
     borrow from the Army.   Much of their ability to borrow was due to 
     the  high esteem in which they were regarded.   Once the word  was 
     out  that  ELD's  were in-country,  masters  of  vessels  carrying 
     dangerous  cargos  asked for them.   Hairy situations  were  quite 
     common  with  US  and Vietnamese stevedores due  to  carelessness, 
     drinking,  and smoking,  among ours.   At Duc Pho one-third of the 
     ammunition  was  lost  due  to sloppy procedures and  it  was  not 
     uncommon to have ammunition barges with Vietnamese families living 
     aboard cooking with open fires.
        Most  recommendations  of the ELD's were followed  including  a 
     recommendation of ELD #1 to move operations from Nha Be to Cat Lai 
     in  May 1967.   In August Nha Be was hit extremely hard by the  VC 
     and  had  ammunition  still been being unloaded there  a  disaster 
     could have occurred.
        A common problem in the handling of ammunition was smoking. The 
     Army military policeman assigned for security were the most common 
     violators  though  the merchant seamen were not  far  behind.  One 
     Coast  Guardsman  was assaulted be seamen who did not  like  being 
     told about not smoking on deck.
        In the Port of Da Nang,  Division Twelve provided an inspection 
     and  advisory  team  for  dangerous cargo handling  on  a  not-to-
     interfere basis with normal duties.   Though extremely useful they 
     could  not provide necessary service and in August 1967  Commander 
     Naval  Support Activities Da Nang requested a full time ELD  team. 
     In  October a similar request was made by the port authorities  in 
     
     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 43
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991

     Qui  Nhon  in the aftermath of a potentially disastrous  incident. 
     The  latter request was generated when a bomb dropped into am  LCM 
     killing the coxwain and one other man.   The subsequent explosions 
     would have caused the greatest disaster of the war had not the LCM 
     drifted away from the ammunition ship.
        February 1968 provided considerable activity at Cat Lai for ELD 
     #1.   An  unloading  merchant ship took nine rounds of  recoilless 
     rifle  fire and started to burn.   The ELD team charged the  hoses 
     and  put  water  on  the  deck,  manned  the  winches  and  stowed 
     ammunition  located  on  deck,  and  finally  got  the  Vietnamese 
     stevedores  to cover the hatches.   A second incident a direct hit 
     on an ammunition barge loaded with 81mm mortar rounds.   The barge 
     started  to  burn and the 1st class engineman assigned to the  ELD 
     boarded the barge.  Finding that the fire hoses would not reach he 
     commenced  fighting  the fire using his bare hands and buckets  of 
     water.   Six  pallets of mortar shells were burned before the fire 
     was extinguished.
        The  ELD's for Da Nang and Qui Nhon were provided and not  long 
     thereafter  the  Port  Security  officer called on  the  new  port 
     commander of Qui Nhon to discuss extremely hazardous conditions at 
     Vung  Ro Bay which were noted by the officer-in-charge of ELD  #3. 
     Immediate  corrective  action was taken and several Army  officers 
     relieved on the spot.   A TAD unit was set up for the Port of Vung 
     Tau  made  up of personnel from the other ELD's and so there  were 
     now 5 ELD's in-country.
        The ELD's were active in teaching as well as supervising.  They 
     taught U.S. Army and Vietnamese boat coxswains how to handle small 
     boats and perform maintenance of outboard motors.   The ELD's gave 
     instructions  in  port fire fighting and pier  inspections.   They 
     instructed   Vietnamese  army  stevedores  in  the  techniques  of 
     blocking and bracing cargo.
        In  January 1971 the Coast Guard proceeded to train  Vietnamese 
     personnel  in  the safe handling of ammunition.   The first  eight 
     ARVN  officers completed on-the-job training in September.   These 
     officers  were  distributed among the various ELD's to  assist  in 
     further  training  of  ARVN  personnel.   The  Vietnamese  learned 
     quickly  and soon took over the bulk of supervising the offloading 
     of  ammunition  under the supportive eye of ELD  personnel.   Some 
     masters offered some objections to the arrangement, but these died 
     with the obvious competence of the Vietnamese ELD Teams.  Training 
     continued and the Senior Coast Guard Officer Vietnam presided as a 
     graduation  ceremony  in Cat Lai for twelve  Vietnamese  explosive 
     loading specialists in which graduation certificates were provided 
     and  a lavish buffet prepared by the wives and girl friends of the 
     graduates.
        In  early  February 1973,  the final retrograde was  backloaded 
     thus  effectively ending the role of the Coast Guard Port Security 
     and Waterways Detail.
     
      -->> STAY TUNED FOR PART THREE  COAST GUARD in SEA/VIETNAM <<--
     








     NAM VET Newsletter                                        Page 44
     Volume  5, Number  1                             January 21, 1991



     =================================================================
                              I n - T o u c h
     =================================================================

                         In-Touch.  What is it ???
     
                       Input by: Ray "Frenchy" Moreau
                      NAM VETs IN-TOUCH Section Editor
                     Herndon Byte eXchange - Herndon, VA
                               (703) 471-8010
     =================================================================
     
     |+++++++++++++++++++++++++ IN TOUCH ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++|
     |  There are some 43 million people in the United States whose  |
     |  lives were directly and irrevocably touched by the Vietnam   |
     |  War.                                                         |
     |                                                               |
     |  Almost four million people served in Vietnam -- the longest, |
     |  and perhaps most difficult, war in our history.  More than a |
     |  quarter of a million were seriously wounded. 58,175 are dead |
     |  or missing.                                                  |
     |                                                               |
     |  Each of those who returned recognizes the true cost of war.  |
     |  But so too do the families and friends, wives and lovers of  |
     |  those listed on the Wall.  They too paid a tremendous price, |
     |  not always recognized... many still do.                      |
     |                                                               |
     |  Though twenty years have passed, it seems that is the period |
     |  people have needed to get the distance necessary to begin to |
     |  address the unresolved, deeply personal issues that have     |
     |  been haunting them since the war.  Perhaps that is a measure |
     |  of the pain.                                                 |
     |                                                               |
     |  But, the "healing of a nation" that was intended by the      |
     |  building of the Memorial, has begun.                         |
     |                                                               |
     |  In the office of the Friends of the Vietnam Veterans         |
     |  Memorial, we hear them on the other end of the phone on      |
     |  any given day, and far into the night, they call from all    |
     |  corners of the country.                                      |
     |                                                               |
     |  "If only I could find out..."                                |
     |  "I need to find his family so I can keep my promise..."      |
     |  "I just want to talk to someone who was with him... "        |
     |  "Please, can you help...?"                                   |
     |                                                               |
     |  At the Wall, we find them every day. Veterans who have not   |
     |  spoken of their experiences even to their most intimate      |
     |  family members are now beginning, tentatively, to seek a     |
     |  responsive ear.                                              |
     |                                                               |
     |  Brothers and sisters, parents and even wives who were simply |
     |  never allowed full expression of their grief because of the  |
-- 
#L.W. Jewell Moderator at the Veterans Information Site (veteran@cc.purdue.edu)#
#& WWII-L Listowner: "Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange,#
#sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all   #
#phases of life." "Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41  #
Newsgroups: soc.veterans,soc.men,soc.history,alt.war.vietnam,alt.war