Dear Mr. Roger Warner,
I just watched your video on, “What was the Deal.” http://www.ciafilm.com/ And I must say that while I acknowledge Mr. Bill Lair’s opinion, I must respectfully disagree with his position that “the deal” was made only between him and VP. The notion that this was a private deal is purely hogwash. When Mr. Lair met with VP he was a CIA agent representing the United States of America. An agent by definition is a person authorized to act for and under the direction of another person when dealing with third parties. An agent can enter into binding agreements on the principal's behalf and may even create liability for the principal if the agent causes harm while carrying out his or her duties. Lair was an agent of the US and not some rouge Boy Scout. His verbal contract with the Hmong was morally and legally binding once the killing started.
If Lair didn’t have the backing of the US Government, where were the millions of dollars coming from to pay for supplies and to arm the Hmong? Who bought the thousands of bombs that were dropped on a piece of dirt that no one in the US feels an obligation to? All you have to do is to follow the money trail to have it lead directly back to the US. I would doubt that Lair had the personal funds to cover such a costly ongoing battle in Laos. If this was a private deal why was the operation covert? It is infantile to suggest that this whole thing started as a result of two men rubbing sticks together. If Lair truly believes that this was a private deal, then what is he doing personally to right a very wrong? How then does one sleep at night with all the death and continuing suffering hanging over ones head?
Where is the fairness when only Lair spoke of the "deal" between him and VP. VP should have also been in on the discussion of the "deal". A one sided discussion of the subject makes what Lair said not to be credible. When there is no balance of "truth" in a subject that is both sensitive and at the same time explosive no healing can take place. Lair alluded that when he met with VP, it was VP who made the request for arms. Again, hogwash; It was Lair who sought out VP and not the other way around. Lair was quick to point out what VP wanted from the meeting but failed to mention what he wanted from VP and what the cost would be.
Lair, in your video, said, “He never wanted to sell the people down the drain”. And yet that is what exactly happened. In your book, Shooting at the Moon, Lair was "hugely pleased" that he had not done any of the fighting. "They'd just push the training button and the Meo had done everything else by themselves" pg. 38. Lair was obviously using the Meo as mere pawns. Lair’s pretense that “He never wanted to sell the people down the drain" is a contradiction when he knew that the Meo couldn't win with or without the U.S. help. Yet as you stated in your book, Lair was in charge of Operation Momentum.
He also stated that, “nothing was ever promised to the Hmong”. Lair is misleading himself. Any person who knows and understand human nature would be more inclined to believe that both parties made requests and promises. The “deal” while verbal is just as binding as the written word. Even today, U.S. Federal courts recognize that a verbal contract is binding.
U.S. culture upholds the written word more than “the word of a person” while other cultures such as Asians and Latin countries believe in the word of a person as being equally binding. Where is the honor in Lair by saying “nothing was ever promised to the Hmong.”
Honor and trust among men and comrades is crucial in time of war. Why is it so difficult for Lair to grasp that concept in time of peace? No one is looking for restitution. No one is interested in guarded answers. Truth, recognition, gratitude and respect for the part that the Hmong played on behalf of the US would go a long way instead of platitudes that betray.
Lair justifies that the suffering of the Hmong during and after the war years, although brutal, resulted in some Hmong having better opportunities at life. This may allow Lair to sleep a little better, but is in no way a justifiable trade for the death and torture of innocent people. Those who believe in this philosophy should be required to live in the refugee camps stripped of their dignity and later be asked again for their opinion.
Mr. Warner, your book Shooting at the Moon and your new video are from the point of views of Americans. If you had the opportunity to have interviewed key Hmong participants as you did Americans, a whole new perspective of what took place in the “clandestine” operations would be revealed.
I do not believe that an unbalanced presentation was intentionally skewed. This perception is inevitable when only one point of view is given.
I would like to leave you with the following thoughts. Col. Carl Bernard, the point man on the "White Star Mobile Training Team" from the Army's Special Forces in charge of recruiting and training the Hmong.
When ask why he has remained loyal to the Hmong he trained so long ago, Bernard is resolute.
"My loyalty to the Hmong stems from their having paid an impot du sang -- the French term for "blood tax" -- for us. Simply, they fought and many died for us. They are "blood brothers" and cannot be abandoned. They earned our loyalty and it is a disgrace that they have been abandoned. Making the sins and shames of our predecessors known and undeniable is the only thing that can be done.
"These blotches on our nation need to be in the consciousness of each of our citizens, starting at about the age of joining the Boy Scouts. All of us must do what we can to reverse this shameful situation. That our betrayal of our allies, like the Hmong, Karen, Afrikaners, Rhodesians, UNITA, South Sudan and Kurds as a common behavior needs to become known, and a campaign launched to reverse that trend. If we keep betraying our allies, who is going to fight with us in the future?" Sourses; Anthony LoBaido
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com
Chong