Dean's World

Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.

Interview With Swift Boat Vet Van Odell

Photo of Van Odell's swift boat on patrol** Dean's World Exclusive **

** Must Credit Dean's World **

I've been trying for some time to obtain an interview with one of the members of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. I most wanted to talked to one of the enlisted men who served personally with Kerry, and after much trying, I finally managed to get a phone interview late last week with Van Odell, who served as a gunner's mate in the same unit as John Kerry and who served with him longer than anyone else did in Viet Nam.

Van runs his own small business in Texas as a professional woodworker, making custom furniture and speciality jewelry boxes. He also does some work for the Boy Scouts of America. He has no professional or formal background in politics. We spoke last week, and then exchanged a few emails for clarification, whereupon he sent me the above photo of his swift boat on patrol in Viet Nam. That's him in the gun tub (click on the image to see the full size photo).

As I spoke to Mr. Odell, I decided to ask him the most blunt questions I could think of, wondering at times if he might become offended. He never did. He is a soft-spoken man with a mild demeanor, and displayed an easy temper and a gentle sense of humor throughout.

I spoke to him via telephone on Wednesday:

Dean's World: Thanks for talking to me, Mr. Odell. Can you tell me when and where you served in Viet Nam?

Van Odell: I served from January 1969 to January 1970. I was in Coastal Division 11 which was the hottest division in Viet Nam at that time. I served along with John Kerry for the short 3 months he was there. He had a month of training in Viet Nam and then he transferred about a week before I did and we served together in the combat zone after that.

Coastal Division 111 Patch

DW: Are you receiving any sort of compensation for your campaigning against John Kerry?

VO: No compensation. My expenses are covered by Swift Boat Veterans For Truth. If I have travel or out of pocket expenses they pick that up. If I fly out to Washington or need to stay in a hotel or need to spend some money on my Swift Boat Vets for Truth activities they will reimburse me for that, but nothing personal and no compensation.

DW: Have you had any contact with Karl Rove or members of the Bush campaign, for advice or other support?

VO: None whatsoever.

DW: A couple of your group's members claim to have had their statements distorted by papers such as the Boston Globe. Have you experienced anything like that with any press you've talked to?

VO: The distortion that I have seen is that they say that my claims are unsubstantiated, specifically to the March 13th incident, even though we've got 10 other eyewitnesses who tell the same story I do.

I have also been taken to task as a liar by the New York Times and the Washington Post by journalists who've never talked to me.

DW: But no direct distortions of your words by reporters?

VO: I haven't read them all so I can't say for sure but the main thing seems to be that most of the reporters who have not talked to me from Washington Post and the New York Times have called me a liar without ever having talked to me. After anything I say they always have a disclaimer that these are unsubstantiated allegations, even though everything I say is substantiated by multiple eyewitnesses on different boats.

DW: What do you say to those who say that because you were not on Lt. Kerry's boat, you did not serve with him?

VO: I say two things: right now they're trotting out a guy named Rich McCann who didn't serve on Kerry's boat, they appear to feel what he has to say is valid.

But really, our boats served in combat together, we went on missions together, we knew each other intimately and fought together. This is like saying Major Reno and Captain Benteen did not serve with General Custer because they did not ride on the same horse with him.

DW: The impression I get from news reports is that Kerry's actual crew are standing by him, while those criticising him are other Swift Boat skippers and their crews. If true, what is your best guess as to why that should be so?

VO: It's not true. Steve Gardner served on Kerry's boat longer than anybody else and he's one of our guys. He served with Kerry longer than any other crew member with Kerry, knew him better than any of those guys.

I would also say I don't know how Kerry cultivated those guys two years ago. When I knew them in Viet Nam they couldn't stand him, and even if you read Kerry's book Tour of Duty, that even says his crew couldn't stand him then.

We don't know how much they support him. Of those who are with him, the only one that will come out and talk to the press is Del Sandusky. The rest are never in the press. Whereas all 60 of us who served with Senator Kerry in our group are all out on the road and talking about why we oppose the Senator.

DW: Do you consider the members of Kerry's crew, who have backed his version of the story, to be liars? If not, why do you believe their perceptions of the events in question differ so widely from your own?

VO: No I don't consider them liars. I consider them led by Kerry right now. One of the incidents that I can talk about, why I think their story differs, is that Rassman said he heard gunfire from the bank. I didn't see any gunfire and I was at the highest point of the field. I think Rassman just heard our gunfire, and when we realized we weren't under fire we stopped.

You would otherwise have to ask them why they think their memories are different. So far only Del Sandusky has been allowed to talk to reporters, so we really don't know what the others have to say.

I don't know why these guys' memories differ, you will have to ask them. I only know that over 60 who served in An Thoi--and we had about a hundred men in our division at any one time--we've got 60 people from there who say his service was questionable in Viet Nam and who take him to task for lying about us as murderers and war criminals when he came back in 1971. That stacks up to only 7 of his own swift boat people that follow him.

DW: Some have said that by questioning Kerry's valor in combat, you have diminished all who served and were decorated. Do you have a response for those critics?

VO: We're not questioning anybody else's service, we're questioning John Kerry's. To say that you can never question one guy's service is wrong. Kerry fudged and faked things that happened. In a six week time period, he received three purple hearts, a bronze star and a Silver Star. That's faster than Audie Murphy earned his medals in World War II.

What we're questioning is that the way he manipulated his Viet Nam record, the way he came back and called us all war criminals, and the way he's behaved since then, which shows me that he's not fit to be Commander in Chief.

DW: Are you a Republican?

VO: No I'm an independent. I usually vote both sides of the ticket.

DW: Some have suggested that you guys only questioned John Kerry's medals because that was the best way to get attention. That your other issues wouldn't have made as much news if you hadn't done that. Do you have any response to such accusations?

VO: We question both equally. We find that his actions after the war are extremely despicable because they cast aspersions on all veterans that served in Viet Nam. But at the same time you have to look at how he treated the Navy and the system in order to gain as many medals as possible to further his own career. And that goes to his character.

There's a lot of officers who served with us who were there longer and did more, and no one gathered so many commendations in so short a time. Most of the people who earned that many medals spent a hell of a lot of time in a battle zone, and didn't write the reports that allowed them to get those medals.

That's why we're not questioning anybody else's medals, only Kerry's. I did not realize, none of us realized, that he'd gotten all these commendations until just this last year or so.

DW: What have the reactions from your fellow veterans been like when you've encountered them since you started your campaign against Senator Kerry?

VO: The ones that I've had are mostly people that I've known, my relatives who served, and they're so happy that we're doing this. I even received a letter from a lady whose husband was killed in Viet Nam and she said "thank you for doing this, this man should not be our President, and I thank you for bringing out the truth about him."

The reactions from veterans and veterans' wives has been overwhelmingly supportive of what we're doing.

DW: Not much negativity then?

VO: I have had no negative encounters and I don't know any in our group who have.

DW: Would you say it's really Kerry's combat record that disturbs you most, or his testimony and actions after coming home from the war?

VO: I would have to say it's both. You have to take Kerry as a whole ball of wax, you have to look at what he did in Viet Nam and what he did after coming home.

But deep down, viscerally, when he went before the Senate and called me a killer, a murderer and a rapist, I couldn't believe one of our own service members would get up and lie about us like that. I was there for 12 months, not just the 4 months that he was there, and I never saw or participated in any atrocities, nor anything like he described, while I was there.

DW: Do you think all Viet Nam vets who came to oppose the war were finks?

VO: No! As a matter of fact, everybody has a right to protest a war. What they don't have a right to do is to lie about their fellow soldiers in such a fashion that it affects them in the field of battle and affects them in a prison camp.

Things that POWs were tortured to be forced to say are things John Kerry said freely to the Senate and to the TV cameras and guys were sometimes tortured back in prison camps showing them that.

I would say that any American has a right to say anything he wants about a war they want to but they do not have a right to lie about what soldiers are doing in the field.

DW: In the past you and others in your group defended Kerry. Did you guys just not know about his congressional testimony and statements about war crimes before this?

VO: Well, I have never defended John Kerry. The two who did are Adrian Lonsdale and George Elliot. And they defended Kerry against war crimes charges by his opponent in 1996. They were more interested in the truth getting out than in defending John Kerry.

What they did is that his opponent kept charging him that he was a war criminal by his own words in the Senate. Lonsdale and Elliot got up and said he was not a war criminal, and I would say that those guys were committed to the truth and not John Kerry himself. But I have never defended John Kerry for anything.

DW: If President Bush were to publicly call for your group to pull its ads and to stop campaigning against Senator Kerry, would you stop?

VO: No. No. No. We're not part of the Republican party, we're not trying to elect Bush, we're Democrats and independents and Republicans across the board. The Navy didn't send Republicans to Vietnam, they sent men.

All 60 of our group who served with Kerry in Vietnam, and the others who served there and have joined us, we want the American people to hear our story. Personally, I also want this story to be known to historians....

We're not tied to any campaign. We're a group of private citizens who've formed a 527. We're going to tell our truth to the American people up until November 2nd. We don't want his lies recorded as truth in the history books.

DW: Are you going to quit on November 2 even if Kerry wins?

VO: Well, yeah, the American people will have spoken. Just speaking personally, I'll return to my job, start making money again, and move on. But by that time our story will be out.

That's personally for me. I wouldn't go back to this after the election. I don't want to say for the other guys. We're doing this day by day right now.

DW: You have received some big money from a few wealthy Republicans.

VO: Yes. The wealthy Democrats haven't been flooding us with money. But the biggest donor we have is the American people. We have received over 5 million dollars in small donations. I think the total number of people who have given us money have been around 70,000, in donations of $20, $30, $50, sometimes $200 or $500.

Sure some big money Republican donors gave us money, and we thank them, but we let them know up front that we would not be accepting any input from them on what we had to say. When we go out there and speak or put out statements or new ads, we meet together just us Vets, without any input from the donors, to talk about what we'll say.

DW: Some of President Bush's critics allege that he avoided the draft by having political strings pulled to get into National Guard service. Some say that's a bogus charge. If it were true, would it bother you?

VO: I didn't serve with George Bush, I'd rather not even comment on that. That's for people who served with George Bush to comment on what he did or didn't do. I did serve with John Kerry, and I'm concerned with talking about what I know of him and his service and his statements.

DW: If Kerry had not built so much of his campaign around his service, would you still attack him for it?

VO: We would still be out there telling the story, yes. I don't think we would have had as big an effect if he hadn't brought it up. But the first few months of his campaign we kept hoping someone else would be the nominee. [But] the way he made his Viet Nam record such a big part of his campaign made it clear that we had to say something, that we had to let the American people know what we know of this man and to help them see what he really is.

DW: If John Kerry offered to shake your hand, look you in the eye, and apologize for his actions after returning from Viet Nam, would you accept his apology?

VO: I would accept his apology.

DW: That's it? You'd just accept it?

VO: I'd still keep telling my story. Basically I would accept his apology but it's about 35 years too late. It's essentially too late to the men who died since we got back, the men who never got back, and the families involved.

But knowing the man the way I do, he would never apologize.

DW: You've obviously been very busy with this campaign. How have you and your family been holding up? Have you had trouble with harassers?

VO: Early on we had quite a bit of harassment and it was very rough, but we got so much good positive feedback from people that that helped us through. And a couple of times that I was rather down, when we were getting beat to death pretty heavy, and I was thinking about how much the cost was to our family, my wife said "Just suck it up, think about what the prisoner of war guys went through. You just keep on trucking." My wife's been my biggest supporter and when things got tough she's always told me to keep going and supported me.

DW: Is there anything else you'd like to add or say to our readers?

VO: I would just like to say that I am extremely concerned now having children that are military age and soon will have grandchildren of military age that someone like John Kerry who doesn't respect the people, the men and women of the military, to be Commander In Chief, that concerns me to the point where I have taken a large amount of my life to tell the story of how Kerry behaved in Viet Nam and how his statements in 1971 affected veterans and the people he served with.

DW: Thanks for your time.

The Swift Boat Vets for Truth have recently merged with another Viet Nam veterans group, POWs for Truth. The latest ad from the combined group, featuring statements from the wives of former POWs, can be found here.

To see all the ads put out by the Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth, click here. If you would like to sign a petition urging Senator Kerry to release his military records and come clean about his military and post-war activities, you can find that petition right here.

Unfit For Command cover

A book documenting the group's claims about Senator Kerry, written by the man who took over Lt. Kerry's boat after he left Viet Nam, and with the full support of a majority of the men who served with Senator Kerry, is entitled Unfit For Command, and can be purchased at any book store, including Amazon. It is currently a national bestseller.

I am now seeking an interview with George Elliot, the man who claims he was misquoted and distorted by reporters at the Boston Globe. If I am successful in that endeavor, I will then seek an interview with the reporters and editors responsible for the story at the Globe, since that one story has been used repeatedly to try to discredit this man and his associates. Stay tuned.

Finally, in closing, I'll mention that if any of you have any questions--skeptical or otherwise--for Mr. Odell, you can leave them in the comments here. I cannot promise he'll answer, but I will forward any reasonable questions to him to see if he has any response, so long as we are not deluged. --Dean

Posted by Dean | Permalink | Technorati Trackbacks
Steven Malcolm Anderson (www):
That was an excelent interview, Dean. Thank you. You asked good questions. He gave excellent replies. He, and his fellow soldiers, are heroes, not "war criminals". I despise all those who call them "war criminals". No one who calls our soldiers "war criminals" is fit to be Commender in Chief over our armed forces.
10.4.2004 2:55pm
John Van Laer (mail):
Couple of questions for Van Odell, if he should have the time and the inclination:

1. John O'Neill's book (p. 78) says that you heard from Kerry's crewmen on the occasion of his 2nd Purple Heart (2/20/69) that his leg wound was caused by a negligently self-inflicted grenade round. He goes on to say that one of his crewmen in 2002 told the same story in an email but later retracted it. Would you care to elaborate on what you heard? Do you have any personal knowledge of this email?

2. The book also says you were Jack Chenoweth's gunner on 3/13/69 when Kerry got a Purple Heart—apparently for a bruised arm—and a Bronze for fishing Rassmann out of the drink. Was Kerry with you when you ferried the wounded from PCF3 to the USCG Cutter Spencer? Did you observe him? How badly wounded did he appear to be?
10.4.2004 5:36pm
GayPatriot (mail) (www):
Great interview Dean. I'm pleased to see the blogosphere moving into some more serious journalism (ie - real interviews) as we move past the Rathergate episode.
-GP
10.4.2004 5:52pm
Dave Schuler (mail) (www):
Great interview, Dean. Thanks.

Why does Big Media conflate contradiction with refutation? They have produced opposing and contradictory testimony on the events reported by the SBFVT. And they've impugned their motives. But they never refuted them.

This situation is a commonplace in court cases. And it's up to the jury to decide between the conflicting claims based on the credibility of the witnesses.
10.4.2004 7:08pm
Ted Armstrong (mail):
Excellent interview. I would like see the SBVFTT debate John Kerry or one of his surrogates for 90 minutes. I would think the Swifties and American people deserve that much.
10.4.2004 8:29pm
Paul Burgess (www):
Dean, you're a gentleman, a scholar, and a journalist. That was simply an excellent interview.
10.4.2004 9:41pm
La Shawn Barber (www):
I hate your trackback system, Dean. Great interview!
10.4.2004 10:31pm
Bill Dooley:
Good work, Dean. Odell's story does have the ring of authenticity.
10.4.2004 11:21pm
Scott Kirwin (mail):
Excellent work, Dean.
These guys are true American heroes, nad the Swift Boat Vets have done more to raise the issue of Kerry's credibility than Karl Rove.
Saying they have the "ring of authenticity" must be the understatement of the year.
10.5.2004 12:27am
Catch 22:
Your interview was excellent, Dean.

Follow up questions:

In my first reply to any questions for Mr. Odell, I requested four of which one was answered. These are the remaining three to date unanswered:

I would ask some specific questions related to this article as it relates to Naval Instruction 1300.39. which permited under certain conditions to be relieved from combat. How prevalent was its use and did any of his combat buddies know in advance Kerry would invoke it.

I would also ask, if is it not true that Kerry wrote his own medal recommendations, that his crewmates were recommended for medals by Kerry and they in turn wrote medal recommendations for Kerry. I suspect this might be a weak question.

I would also ask if there was any talk by Kerry as to his immediate post war anti-Vietnam activities.

If you find any of these have merit please ask Mr. Odell for reply. Thank You.
10.5.2004 12:49am
Little Miss Attila (mail) (www):
Wow, Dean! Very nice.

My questions have to do with what John Kerry was like during his time in Vietnam:

1) If he didn't get along with others, was it because of philosophical differences, or because he was simply abrasive? And

2) Was there any hint during the time that Kerry was in Vietnam that he was against the war, and might become an anti-war activist when he came back? Was this one source of friction? Or

3) Was the "class" difference a problem? (The way he spoke with that upper-crust accent, the family's wealth, possible snootiness . . .)
10.5.2004 2:48am
bdfaith (mail) (www):
Excellent, Dean. I'll link from my place and submit a post for approval at The Mudville Gazette. I came here from Backcountry Conservative or I'd post a link there too.
10.5.2004 3:02am
SRobbins (mail):
As a Viet Nam veteran with the 62d Engineer Battalion during nearly the same time period as Van Odell, I was struck by his comment that,

"Most of the people who earned that many medals spend a hell of a lot of time in a battle zone, and didn't write the reports that allowed them to get those medals."

There were even officers who diminished the actions of others to promote themselves. During an enemy mortar and rocket propelled grenade attack on one of our units in Cambodia in the Spring of 1970, all medics but one were immediately injured. Dennis Johnson, a fearless Alabama-born "Doc," heroically patched up and saved the lives of close to 30 soldiers under fierce fire, and without regard for his personal safety. Everyone thought Silver Star at a minimum, except the company commander who had reportedly cowered in a former VC tunnel throughout the action. That Captain wrote the after-action report, resulting in him being awarded a Bronze star with a "V" device. But he refused to write Dennis up for anything more than he himself got.
10.5.2004 4:03am
Ted Armstrong (mail):
Dean,
Have you tried to do a simular interview with any of the Kerry vets?
10.5.2004 9:32am
Dean Esmay (www):
No I haven't Tim. My interest in the Swifties has stemmed from a couple of things, first that every single Vietnam vet I know despises John Kerry, and partly because everything I've seen in the mainstream press on the Swifties has seemed to be dedicated to refuting them without simply letting them say their piece and letting voters decide what they think.

I've also been trying to get an interview with one of these guys for two months. It wasn't easy.

Still, if I had an opportunity to talk to one of the Kerry-supporting vets who served with him, I would. I would prefer it to be one of the guys who has so far not spoken to the press, rather than Rassman or Sandusky, but I'd talk to any of them that would talk to me. If you have any clear idea who I'd contact about that let me know.
10.5.2004 11:52pm
Wince and Nod (mail) (www):
Dean,

Shep pointed me to John Dean and I found The Daily Howler. They describe pure smear in chapter four of Unfit for Command.

You might ask Odell why O'Neill and Corsi stoop to calling Kerry a baby killer, when by their own evidence he was no such thing.

Stick a fork in the Swift Vets. I won't tolerate that kind of behavior.

Yours,
Wince
10.6.2004 8:16pm
Catch 22:
So it's okay for Kerry to declare his heroism while his buddies were called war criminals by Kerry in addressing the US Senate ? The persons with the behavior problem aren't the Swift Vets.
10.6.2004 9:59pm
Dean Esmay (www):
Wince: Those are very fair questions to ask. The Howler makes some good points as well. Though it's going to be tricky since I'm not interviewing O'Neill--in fact I've gone out of my way to let the Swifties know that I don't want to talk to O'Neill, who's been everywhere, that I want to talk to actual guys who served with Kerry.

To be blunt, if true, and if they have no good answer, then these charges are as vile and baseless as claims that the Bush administration intentionally lied to the American people in order to take us to a war to enrich their oil buddies. That sort of accusation is as corrosive and nasty as can be. It's well worth asking about.
10.7.2004 12:29am
Dean Esmay (www):
...although I'll add that John Dean has shown himself to be something of a flake in recent years, so I'm not about to simply take his word for it. You would think, for example, that Mr. O'Neill might have had a response to this. I guess I'll have to look into that as well.

One thing that's really nagging at me: I could have sworn I'd heard that Kerry himself admitted to accidentally killing a kid, and admitting that he thought about that often. But I may be misremembering this as well.

I'm wondering if anyone wants to help me track this story?
10.7.2004 12:34am
Catch 22:
Here's one link though I not sure it applies specifically.
10.7.2004 1:10am
Catch 22:
Does the linker work ?
\
I did it correctly.
10.7.2004 1:23am
Dean Esmay (www):
I never use it so I'm not sure. I always just code links manually. I think you're trying to link this story, which seems tangentially related.

I'm in something of a quandary about this. I have not requested interviews with either O'Neill or Corsi. I have not read "Unfit for Command" and have never been particularly interested in reading it. I've never been particularly interested in the "he said/she said" debate of what happened in Viet Nam, merely in the motivation driving the actual Vets who served with Kerry and what their candid thoughts are. I cannot find any references to these allegations of John Dean, nor any response to them even though the Swift Boat guys are generally good about responding to negative press attacks.

I also note that Dean does make some fundamental errors in his column at least in describing who the Swifties are.

I'm going to have to punt on this. I'll ask Elliot and Odell about it, and whether or not they endorse every word that's in O'Neill's book. That's as far as I'm willing to take it; I have neither the time nor the resources to track down O'Neill and try to get him to answer John Dean &the Daily Howler's specific allegations or mediate that. I'd like to suggest, though, that the Howler's right when it says the mainstream guys should be investigating this. The MSM should have done a better job of covering these guys in the first place than it has so far, and overall everything I've seen is that the press first tried to ignore this then went right on the attack against these guys. Still, if they've raised a demonstrably false allegation, then that's serious.
10.7.2004 1:32am
Wince and Nod (mail) (www):
Dean,

I think the accidental slaying of a child is the one mentioned in John Dean's article and the Daily Howler. His gunner pulled the trigger though Kerry gave the order. Here is a description from CounterPunch:
a few weeks after the incident on the Cambodian border Kerry's boat was heading up the Cua Lon river toward Square bay, when one of the crew yelled "sampan off port bow". Kerry ordered the machineguns to fire on the fishing boat. The sampan stopped and Kerry and his crew boarded it. They found a woman holding an infant, and near her the body of her young child riddled with machine gun bullets, lying face down among bags of rice. Kerry tells Brinkley he refused to look at the dead child, saying, "the face would stay with me for the rest of my life and it was better not to know whether it was a smile or grimace or whether it was a girl or boy". Kerry's preferred mode is the usual one. "Our orders", he tells Brinkley a few pages later, "were to destroy all the hooches and sampans we could find."
I think that Steve Gardner was the gunner, and he told the story on the O'Reilly Factor. He says Kerry did not follow the proper rules of engagement, and that he covered up the child's death and inflated the body count in the after action report.

The problem I have is that you can't use this accident to conclude, as Unfit for Command apparently does, that John Kerry has a callous disregard for human life. It isn't right to call Kerry a baby-killer just because ignorant, short-sighted and ungrateful jerks called you a baby-killer when you came home. It isn't right to call Kerry a baby-killer just because Kerry made vague, unsupported McCarthy-like accusations before the Senate and on Meet the Press. These men should know better than that.

Kerry deserves to be treated like Tailgunner Joe. Both men thought they were protecting the country from evil. Both picked the same unscrupulous way to do it. But Ike knew how to protect the American military from McCarthy and bogus charges. Too bad Symington and the Democrats in the Senate weren't up to Ike's standards.

Yours,
Wince
10.7.2004 1:33am
Wince and Nod (mail) (www):
Dean, you are right about the MSM. The documentary evidence alone would make one curious about Kerry's first and last Purple Heart and the Bronze Star. His Silver Star, just from the documents alone, looks inflated to me, compared to the ones I read about from Iraq, but hey, I'm ignorant as dirt about military awards. (LBJ's Silver Star was almost certainly not deserved, from what I've read.) The MSM chased awful hard after Bush's TANG service, but has left these stories alone.

Yours,
Wince
10.7.2004 1:42am
Dean Esmay (www):
I have just interviewed George Elliot about this and am in touch with Steve Gardner about it. Will publish results soon.
10.11.2004 3:56pm