"

Observation duly noted, with this response...

It isn't just that ""elements"" of French's affidavit is based on other people's stories,  the fact is he swore that ""all facts and statements contained in this affidavit are true and correct.""  And that included second and third-hand gossip about Kerry's military record in Vietnam.  This guy is  an officer of the court; I find it hard to believe he didn't know what he was doing. 

As to his claim about Kerry lying on MTP in 1971 about his unit being engaged in ""atrocities,"" let's consider what Kerry actually said:

 SEN. KERRY: There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that  I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages.  All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.   

Those sorts of things took place, and were documented as taking place - and in fact were mostly SOP. Even SBVT member William Garlow found  Hoffmann's tactics distasteful . French is not being truthful, or is at best being disingenuous if he simply doesn't think these things should be referred to as ""atrocities,"" a term that Kerry was quite clear in qualifying. 

And compare French's description of Kerry's ""mutiny"" remark with what he actually said:

 The fact of the matter is that the members of Coastal Division 11 and Coastal Division 13 when I was in Vietnam were fighting the policy very, very hard, to the point that many of the members were refusing to carry out orders on some of their missions; to the point where the crews started to in fact mutiny, say, ""I would not go back on the rivers again"" ... 

A little different from claiming that he said ""crews at An Thoi were involved in amutiny,"" isn't it?  We know for a fact that there was plenty of disgruntlement over SEALORDS policies (read Brinkley, for instance), and officers did refuse to carry out some of Hoffmann's orders .  Is Al French prepared to say no crewmembers ever refused to go back up certain rivers or on particularly foolhardy missions?  We know for a fact the lack of air support was so bad that RF/PF forces  refused to go on patrols without helicopter support.   French is knocking down his own strawman.

I think there's plenty to question in the other affidavits, especially Elliott's and Letson's, but again, I have no problem including them alongside all the other interviews and accountings in the reference section.   "