Vietnam Vets name used and abused again.

[thedrifter]

From: "P.O.W. Network - Chuck and Mary Schantag" <info@pownetwork.org>
Subject: Re: Vietnam Vets name used and abused again. My apologies on behalf
of an ungrateful nation to them......

Just a question ---

Anyone wonder why the Vietnam Memorial Fund and Jan Skuggs CONTINUE to raise millions for an organization (VVMF) when the WALL is maintained by the Park Service. Kinda like The 3 Fighting men statue on public land, in a public park being PRIVATELY copyrighted by Fred Hart. TRY putting that statue on a Tshirt and see what happens. Skuggs uses a WALL replica for his own pocket and sells cemetery plots with it display. Sure Ted Samply has MUCH MORE on Skruggs and Hart and charging to perform at the WALL seems to be right on target for them. It's that I, ME, MINE disease.

How about Trees America (or Arlington Project or Trees for Arlington) raising money to reforest Arlington Cemetery at $3000 a Tree when that too is Park maintained and trees don't cost 3K. But they do have a real purdy board of directors.

Mary S.

At 10/27/2002 09:01 PM -0500, *Guns* Gunny Di'ane wrote:
Well, we all know and love when Gunny Di has to eat her words and her foot. lol And yes, it isn't so awful when you add salt and maybe some mustard. I must relent on this one and give over to Dane Brown and his words. He describes this injustice better than I, and if all of this is true, which I tend to believe after reading the two articles online which I've included in this email for your reading and viewing un-pleasure too, I'm sure you would have to agree. I love Eric Horner and his music with all my heart and soul. Eric is one very valuable and good man. He doesn't just do gigs for the heck of it, or for just the money involved. I'm quite sure that he will be quite offended by the possibilities of what all of this means to other performers, singers, song writers and veterans. This is just another case of un-justness to our Veteran community. Dane, all I can offer unto you and your son, and any and all other singers, songwriters that are associated with the event at the Wall on Nov. 6 is my apologies. Jan Scruggs needs a rude awakening. I am praying that he's gotten it since these articles were written, but by the sounds of your information, it sure doesn't seem so. My apologies dear friend. In all honesty, I wish I could be at the Wall for this event just so I could storm the stage and have MY VOICE BE HEARD ABOUT THIS SAD SITUATION! IT'S A FURTHER ABUSE, CRIME AND SHAME AGAINST OUR UNITED STATES VETERANS, AND ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS.
I got a lil beef about one of yer items Gunny...the following item is what I am talking about !!
================================================== ===
Just wanted to update you on this - Jan Scruggs - President of the Vietnam Wall in DC called and asked Eric Horner to come and sing on Nov. 6th for the opening ceremonies at the Wall for Veterans Day. They are flying us out there on the 5th and Eric will sing at approximately 4:20 pm on the 6th. It will be Eric's first visit to the wall. He will be singing 3 songs that day - "Welcome Home" "No Greater Love" and "We Will Stand". Updated tour info is on his website - www.erichorner.com
================================================== ========
My son who is a musician and songwritter wrote a song for Vietnam Vets titled
"Freedom Standing Tall".....he was invited to play and sing it at the "Wall" gathering on Nov 6th. Yeah, he was invited, if he wants to pay $ 250.00 to be allowed to get up for 6 minutes and do his song !! He's dedicated a large part of his life to support and aid Vietnam Veterans. So he went out and busted his ass to get the 250.00 and paid it....well, I bet Mr Horner who probably has plenty of moola ain't gotta pay nothing....Its a slap in the face if ya ask me.......if you want to read more about the real "Jan Scruggs", go to this url: http://www.usvetdsp.com/story40.htm

I respect Jan Scruggs for his service in Nam. He is a true Vietnam Vet and bro, but he's lost sight of some of the sacrifices them bro's made....just my opine !!!!



Semper Fidelis,
Dane Brown, USMC, Nam 68
1st Battalion 27th Marines

Jan Scruggs Is Attacking His Fellow Veterans Again


March 7, 1997
By Ted Sampley
U.S. Veteran Dispatch



Chalk up another vintage Jan Scruggs poison pen attack on the Vietnam veteran activists who finance their organizations by selling POW/MIA and veteran related T-shirts near the Lincoln and Vietnam Veterans Memorials in Washington, D.C.

Scruggs, who is president and founder of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, bitterly complained in a March 2, 1997 Washington Post guest editorial that the activists, whom he described as "vendors" and "hawkers," are destroying the "integrity" and "heritage" of the Vietnam Veteran and Lincoln Memorials. He said the 24-hour POW/MIA vigil sites are "an ugly presence" and that the "courts or Congress must end this travesty" by "evicting" the activists from federal land.

In 1995, the National Park Service joined Scruggs in his crusade to eradicate the POW/MIA activists from the Mall and passed regulations outlawing T-shirt sales in Washington's federal parks. Prior to the new regulations, the Park Service had recognized the constitutional right of groups to sell T-shirts imprinted with advocacy messages. The activists banned together and appealed the regulations and are now awaiting a judge's decision as to whether or not they will be allowed to continue their vigils.

Scruggs' latest attack is one of many that have appeared in the national news media since early 1993 when he declared the POW/MIA issue a "non-issue." He reasoned the time had come for the United States to stop spending money on what he said was "a lost cause" and that continued "unfounded" accusations about Vietnam still holding U.S. servicemen as prisoners of war was hindering the "reconciliation and healing" between the peoples of Vietnam and America.

In 1982, Scruggs became a national figure and American folk hero for pushing his dream of a national Vietnam veterans memorial in Washington until it became a reality. The Wall was dedicated on Veteran's Day of that year. Ironically, Scruggs' dream might never have come true had it not been for the help of Texas billionaire and POW/MIA activist Ross Perot, who provided more than $160,000 in start-up money desperately needed by Scruggs to launch a national memorial campaign.

According to a conveyance agreement signed by President Ronald Reagan, the Memorial Fund should have dissolved in 1984. Scruggs refused to let it happen and instead made the Memorial Fund a permanent organization whose board of directors is exclusive and hand picked by him.

Scruggs' excuse for hanging on to the Memorial Fund is that the Wall is a "holy shrine," of which he is its keeper and that he and his Memorial Fund must continue to raise money to ensure that the "shrine" is properly maintained.

During the last three years, the Memorial Fund has been the subject of national news reports questioning what it does with the millions of dollars raised allegedly for "maintaining the Wall," a responsibility that is taken care of by the taxpayer. When Reagan signed the conveyance agreement, the Department of the Interior took over all responsibilities of maintenance and security of the Wall.

The Memorial Fund has raised an additional $10,000,000 since the original $7,000,000 used to build the memorial. Much of the new money is believed to have come from the corporations who continue to lobby for normalized relations with Vietnam.

In a July 13, 1993 USA Today guest editorial, Scruggs actually compared himself to Jesus Christ and his campaign against the activists to that of the Messiah overturning the tables of moneychangers and chasing them out of the temple. He rationalized that activists should not be allowed to sell T-shirts and POW/MIA bracelets near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial because "moneychangers" do not belong in a "place of worship."

Scruggs appears to actually believe he is a Messiah and that the Wall is a "sacred" place of worship. He is convinced he built a shrine where anyone, whether Vietnam veteran, war protester, draft dodger or politician, can be healed--just come to the Wall and repent before the 58,000 chiseled names of dead and missing American servicemen and be cleansed of the pains of the Vietnam War.

If the Wall has a mystical power to heal, then why was Scruggs' close friend, Lewis Puller, Jr. not able to find peace and acceptance? Why did he give up and commit suicide?

Puller was a Vietnam veteran and the son of Gen. "Chesty" Puller, the most decorated member of the Marine Corps. In Vietnam, young Puller served as a Marine combat leader, losing his legs and part of his hands in 1968 when he tripped a mine while trying to escape from a Viet Cong ambush. His body was riddled with shrapnel, yet somehow he survived after long months in a hospital bed. Puller's book, "Fortunate Son," which chronicled his valiant struggle to survive as an invalid in the aftermath of the war, won the Pulitzer Prize in 1992.

continued.................

[thedrifter]

Personally, I have often wondered where Scruggs and the other Memorial Fund veterans were when Puller needed them the most. Puller was one of the Memorial Fund's strongest supporters. He even went back to Vietnam in 1993 carrying Scruggs' message of "reconciliation." He co-founded in 1994 the Vietnamese Memorial Association and began raising money to aid people in Vietnam. Puller often spoke of his visits to the Wall and the emotions he experienced while there.

Why didn't the healing powers of the Wall work for Lewis Puller? If Scruggs and the Memorial Fund veterans had worried less about the North Vietnamese veterans and more about what's happening to the war veterans in this country, maybe they would have noticed that their friend Lewis desperately needed them.

The Wall is not sacred and it has no mystical power to heal. It is the seemingly endless lines of names, each representing a life given for this country that makes the Wall special. The Wall is there to honor their sacrifices and as a tribute to those who came home alive.

Groups occupying the vigils are nonprofit organizations led by Vietnam veterans. The vigils are run by veterans and POW/MIA family members, not "hawkers" and "vendors." POW/MIA activists have maintained vigils near the Wall since the day of its dedication and whether Scruggs likes it or not, they have became a part of the memorial's legacy and heritage.

The vigils operate with permits, issued by the National Park Service, in areas where the Park Service has for years allowed private contractors to sell beer, hotdogs, ice cream, posters, pens, film, hats, trinkets, etc. The activists who maintain these vigils through rain, sleet and snow deserve appreciation, not Scruggs' vindictive and poisonous attacks.

But he does attack, again and again. Armed with the power of $10,000,000 in donated money and a force of $500-an-hour attorneys, Scruggs maintains a small, but powerful, political empire which he sanctimoniously guards with malice if necessary.

Many vets cynically refer to Scruggs as the "Godfather of the Wall," because of his possessiveness of the memorial. He has dictatorial control over all official ceremonies at the Wall, including who is or is not invited to speak.

After inviting President Clinton to speak at the Wall for Memorial Day, 1993, Scruggs, it was reported, offered the most coveted seats near the apex of the Wall for a $500 per chair "donation" to the Memorial Fund.

Although Scruggs claims the Wall must be protected from politics, his invitation to Clinton, who left the United States rather than fight in the Vietnam War, was political. Clinton's appearance there resulted in one of the ugliest demonstrations ever to take place at the memorial. At a critical point in the 1992 presidential campaign, an ungrateful Scruggs also unleashed a bitter attack on Perot, who was an independent presidential candidate running against Clinton. Scruggs implied through his attacks that the benevolent billionaire was unfit to be president.

Added to the controversy is Scruggs' friendship with Hanoi advocates Sens. John Kerry and John McCain and their hatred for POW/MIA activists. Scruggs and his Memorial Fund board of directors have not hesitated to publish their opinions supporting efforts of U.S. corporate giants to do business with communist Vietnam.

When President Clinton normalized trade and diplomatic relations with Hanoi, Scruggs and his so-called nonpolitical, nonprofit Memorial Fund joined Kerry and McCain in praising Clinton's decision even though the two major POW/MIA family groups and most veterans organizations opposed closer U.S. ties to Vietnam.

Some say Scruggs' fall to the dark side results from the power and influence he gained after years of rubbing elbows with powerful Washington politicians, including Presidents Bush and Clinton and Sens. McCain and Kerry.

In any case, Scruggs' campaign against T-shirt sales on the Mall is not about the desecration of Washington's memorials. It is about his fanatical attempts to please his political friends by censoring the POW/MIA activists.

The T-shirt controversy started in late 1991 after I refused to allow Homecoming II Project, of which I was the unpaid chairman, to pay the Memorial Fund royalties on T-shirts sold at the Homecoming II POW/MIA vigil. Other vigils were paying the Memorial Fund. One group paid more than $30,000 in what some vets were classifying as "homage" to Scruggs.

Scruggs accused Homecoming II of violating the Memorial Fund's copyright on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. He hired one of Washington's most influential law firms and spent over a $100,000 of Memorial Fund money, suing Homecoming II and a construction company which I owned and me personally.

Neither Homecoming II or I had money to properly fight Scruggs' battery of high powered attorneys. His lawyers argued that a copyright owned by the Memorial Fund was violated when Homecoming II sold POW/MIA T-shirts imprinted with the image of the "Three Servicemen Statue," which is a part of the National Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Homecoming II's lawyer argued that the statue is a national symbol belonging to all the people and that the Memorial Fund could not demand royalties because a national memorial maintained by the government and located on public property could not be copyrighted.

Attorneys for the Memorial Fund countered, arguing that the statue is not a national symbol. They said it is a piece of "military art," on which the Memorial Fund owns a legitimate copyright.

The judge agreed with Scruggs' lawyers and in 1993 awarded the Memorial Fund an unprecedented $359,000 judgment against Homecoming II, my construction company and me personally.

Not satisfied with that victory, Scruggs launched a second front of attacks, this time against all veteran's groups operating near the Wall. He began his editorial writing campaign painting the vigils as a "desecration" of the Washington memorials.

In April 1994, the Lenoir County of North Carolina Sheriff's Department served notice on me that Scruggs and his Memorial Fund had foreclosed and was demanding possession of all assets. Fortunately, I had already dissolved Homecoming II and my construction company. Unfortunately, Scruggs' lawyers slapped the judgment on my home and a business property and scheduled an auction. That is where a line was drawn in the sand.

On the day of the auction, a dozen POW/MIA activists, to whom I am forever grateful, showed up on the court house steps telling the press they intended to disrupt the auction. Scruggs' lawyers got the message and withdrew.

The pressure of possibly losing everything we owned and had worked for was particularly hard on my wife, whose father in still missing in action as a result of the Vietnam War and is listed on the Wall. Our marriage did not survive the stress. The Memorial Fund still holds the $359,000 judgment on my property.

Scruggs Goes On The Road With A Counterfeit Moving Wall

At about the same time Reagan was signing the conveyance agreement in 1984, Vietnam Combat Veterans Ltd., of San Jose, Calif., began traveling about the nation with what has come to be known as the "Moving Wall," a scaled-down version of the Wall.

With the leadership of Vietnam veteran John Devitt, Vietnam Combat Veterans displayed the "Moving Wall" in communities throughout the United States, allowing Americans unable to visit the memorial in Washington an opportunity to see the Wall.

This was being done," Devitt said, "without a buck being made" in profits. We were taking in only enough money to pay for the expenses of moving the Wall around the country.

Then, in 1992, along came Scruggs and the giant cemetery corporation, Service Corporation International (SCI), which had copied the "Moving Wall." With Scruggs as a featured speaker accompanying it, SCI used this Moving Wall to snare veterans into buying cemetery plots.

"SCI manages to obtain the names of local vets in each community where its Wall is to appear in one of its cemeteries," Devitt explained to the press. "Then, through telemarketing, they offer the vets various deals on buying cemetery plots and end the conversation by inviting them to see 'the Wall.'"

As a result, SCI reaped the benefits of its counterfeit copy of the "Moving Wall" and Scruggs was paid $1,000 per month and $2,500 to $5,000 per speech by the cemetery plot hawkers. Scruggs said he typically charges $6,500 for motivational speeches to companies, calling the lower charge for his Moving Wall speech "reasonable."

In responding to complaints about his speaking charges, Scruggs said, "I guess my response would be: What's the big deal?" Scruggs added, "it's not money coming out of their (the veterans) pocket."

Scruggs dismissed criticism by stating that Devitt "doesn't understand" that "the memorial doesn't belong to John Devitt because he was the first guy on the block. No one owns it, he doesn't own it."

But Scruggs Does Claim Ownership Of The Wall

As a tactic to halt a veteran's group from building a smaller version of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Pensacola, Fla., known as the "Wall South," Scruggs, in 1992, claimed the Memorial Fund owned the design rights to the Wall and threatened the vets with legal action. To avoid any potential legal action, the "Wall South" was altered. The redesign set back construction for three months and cost the sponsors additional funds for the project.

continued................

[thedrifter]

was bluffing," Scruggs later admitted. "We never had any copyright over the Wall design."

"I'm angered that he would use such a ploy," Bill Corbin, a director of the Vietnam Veterans Wall South Foundation, said. "It would have been no worse than spitting on the grave of a veteran."

CBS Questions The Fundraising Techniques Of The Memorial Fund

On rare occasions, some of the Memorial Fund's jaded activities are exposed. The following is a verbatim transcript of a TV segment titled "Vietnam Veterans Memorial fundraising techniques questioned." The program aired April 20, 1994 on CBS This Morning.

HARRY SMITH, co-host: Our country's national monuments are the markers of our history, so preserving them is important to all of us, including the most visited memorial in the country, Washington's Vietnam Wall. But our consumer correspondent, Hattie Kauffman, found out questions have come up about fundraising to maintain the Wall that could hurt it far more than the cracks in its surface.

Good morning.

HATTIE KAUFFMAN reporting: Good morning, Harry. In 1982, the nonprofit known as the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund raised more than $8 million to build the Wall--certainly an honorable feat. But 12 years after it was finished, the Fund is still raising millions of dollars every year.

One fundraising letter among the thousands sent asks for money for the upkeep of the memorial. Another states how proud the donor should be that the Wall is being kept in tip-top condition. But when people donate money, how much of it is going to maintaining the Wall? Pennsylvania Attorney General Ernie Preate is investigating the Fund's activities.

Mr. ERNIE PREATE (Pennsylvania Attorney General): They clearly try to create the impression that they are the sole organization that maintains this wall, and--and that simply is not true. The prime group that maintains this wall is the United States Park Service.

KAUFFMAN: Jan Scruggs, the president of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, says the issue is a matter of interpretation.

Mr. JAN SCRUGGS (President, Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund): When he is thinking of maintenance of the Wall, he seems to be thinking about mowing the grass and providing park police for security. When we think of maintenance of the Wall, we--we are more geared towards thinking of the special maintenance, things that the government cannot provide.

KAUFFMAN: The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund built the Wall with donations, but when it was completed, like all of U.S. monuments, the Wall came under the care of the National Parks Service.

Mr. PREATE: This organization raised $4.6 million over the last three years on the claims that it is going to maintain--use that money to maintain the Wall. In fact, under our conservative estimates, we can see that it--only about $230,000, or only 5 percent, has actually gone into events and maintenance of the--the Wall area.

Mr. SCRUGGS: We have a direct-mail program that raises money to help maintain the memorial and to help with educational programs associated with it.

KAUFFMAN: Attorney General Preate says many of those direct-mail letters are misleading and fraudulent.

Mr. PREATE: People who are receiving direct-mail solicitation are thinking that their money is the sole money that is going to maintain the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington.

KAUFFMAN: 1992 tax records show that the charity raised over $2 million that year. Only $180,000 was spent on taking care of the Wall, while $630,000 was spent on fundraising. The remaining money went to public education and ceremonies to commemorate the Wall.

In 1984, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund was asked by the federal government to help maintain the Wall in case of catastrophe. They've purchased eight replacement panels of granite just in case. Two years ago, they fixed a portion of the sidewalk. But only three weeks ago, the Fund hired an engineering firm to begin studying the small hairline cracks that first appeared on the Wall in 1984, what the Fund calls maintenance. But do those cracks signify a catastrophe? Recently, Scruggs pointed out the cracks in the Wall to CBS THIS MORNING.

Mr. SCRUGGS: The visible effects are essentially a--a series of cracks which are about the width of three strands of hair together which go through names such as Curters Burnett and Robert Standerwick.

KAUFFMAN: According to the National Park Service, a 1990 report commissioned by the Fund found that the cracks in the Wall were part of the stone.

Mr. ARNOLD GOLDSTEIN: (National Park Service): The cracks were natural geological cracks that formed in the granite and that the cracks were in the granite when the blocks of granite were brought to the United States.

KAUFFMAN: The National Park Service and the American taxpayer are already spending more than $750,000 a year to take care of the Wall. It's a sum the Park Service says adequately covers the needs of the monument.

SMITH: Kind of a sad story.

KAUFFMAN: It is.

SMITH: Thanks, Hattie.

If Scruggs Is A True Believer -- His Neck Hair Should Be Standing

If Scruggs truly believes his teachings about the "mystical" powers of the Wall, then the hair on the back of his neck should be standing straight up.

In trying to justify his case to CBS for the need to raise more money, Scruggs placed his finger on one of the hairline cracks in the granite Wall. When the camera zoomed in Scruggs' finger was touching the name Robert Standerwick. Col. Standerwick has been listed missing in action in Laos since Feb. 3, 1971. The Standerwicks are long time POW/MIA activists. Two of his three daughters were on the board of directors of Homecoming II Project, which Scruggs destroyed with his copyright lawsuit.

Editors Note: Also SeeThe Unrelenting Effort to Silence The Last Firebase

The Unrelenting Effort to Silence The Last Firebase


By Donna Long
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
September/October 1994 issue

Some of the same Washington, D. C. elitist snobs who, in 1981, helped Jan Scruggs, president of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, stop the American flag from being permanently flown directly over the National Vietnam Veterans Memorial have now joined his new and unrelenting effort to evict POW/MIA activists from vigils near the memorial.

Scruggs, who does not believe Vietnam held live POWs back after 1973, has made no secret of his contempt for POW activists whom he has publicly categorized as "vendors exploiting the POW/MIA issue for personal gain."

In commenting about POW/MIA families, Scruggs told the Morning News Tribune of Seattle, WA, "I'm kind of sorry for them, that they don't have normal lives."

Since the dedication of the memorial in 1982, Vietnam veterans and POW/MIA family members have maintained POW/MIA vigils adjacent to sidewalks leading to the Wall "to remind politicians of the abandonment of American Vietnam War veterans who were left behind against their will in Southeast Asia."

The activities of the POW/MIA activists who operate the vigils, which are set-up on "demonstration sites" designated by the National Park Service, are supposed to be protected by the First Amendment. Under that free speech amendment, activists demonstrating on federal land can offer for sale to the public printed materials that display messages directly related to their cause and activity.

Last year, the Commission on Fine Arts, a presidentially appointed group of bureaucrats who have a say in what Washington, D.C.'s memorials should look like and represent, jumped in to help Scruggs' rid the area near the Wall of those "disgusting non-artistic" POW/MIA vigils they claim are cluttering up the sidewalks.

Members of that commission are lobbying Congress for new laws which they hope can be used against the POW vigils. The Commission on Fine Arts said publicly in 1982, while opposing the placement of the American flag over the Wall, that there was no need to "adorn the memorial with patriotic claptrap."

The primary target of Scruggs and his federal government bureaucrat friends is The Last Firebase Veteran's Archives Project which has maintained a 24-hour POW/MIA vigil near the Lincoln Memorial since 1986.

The Last Firebase is a non-profit veteran's organization whose leadership is made up of Vietnam veterans and POW/MIA family members. It has the full endorsement of the National Alliance of POW/MIA Families. Outside of the U.S. and Vietnamese governments, The Last Firebase holds the largest database of POW/MIA information in the world.

Activists who man The Last Firebase raise funds by selling printed materials, including POW/MIA related t-shirts, bracelets, and books, which are used to finance national and international campaigns designed to focus public attention on the POW/MIA issue.

Once Washington's elite have cleansed "their monument" of the "embarrassing" Last Firebase vigil, then the "long-haired, booney, hat-wearing, over-the-hill wannabes" won't have any place to "hang around," swapping stories about "a war they lost." Most importantly, they will not be there cluttering up Washington's most visited "tourist attraction" with their unsightly presence.

This type of in house contempt for Vietnam vets who don't wear a "three-piece" suit and eat sushi for lunch is typical among the Washington bureaucrats who view the Vietnam Veterans Memorial as nothing more than military art and a tourist attraction.

continued..................

[thedrifter]

The following is a documented chronology of how upper-crust politically motivated "Beltway Insiders", a multi-million dollar corporation, and an equally greedy, pompous, self-serving former folk-hero Vietnam vet, have joined forces in an attempt to shut down The Last Firebase and rid themselves of "undesirables."

SCRUGGS SUED THE POW/MIA ACTIVISTS

November, 1991 - Jan Scruggs, president of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund and Frederick Hart, a Vietnam War protestor and the designer of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial "Three Servicemen Statue" in Washington, filed a copyright infringement suit against Homecoming II Project (former keeper of The Last Firebase), Red Hawk, Inc. (former publisher of U.S. Veteran News and Report), and Ted Sampley, a highly decorated Vietnam veteran who was chairman of Homecoming II and president of Red Hawk, Inc.

The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. sought to stop Homecoming II, the U.S. Veteran News and Report, and Ted Sampley from using the image of the "Three Servicemen Statue" on POW/MIA t-shirts and the payment of back royalties.

In the lawsuit, Scruggs and Hart, who paid their attorneys over $100,000 from money the public had donated to the memorial fund, alleged that their ownership of the copyright and charging royalties are important to provide a source of income needed to maintain the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and to protect the statue's artistic integrity.

Sampley's lawyer argued that under copyright law, a national symbol could not be copyrighted. He maintained the "Three Servicemen Statue" was a national symbol for all Vietnam veterans and their families.

Scruggs and Hart's lawyers told the judge that the copyright was valid because the statue was nothing more than "a piece of art with no function or symbolic meaning.

SAMPLEY ARRESTED--THE LAST FIREBASE IMPOUNDED

February 1, 1992 - Several trucks carrying an estimated dozen United Stated Park Police made a morning raid on The Last Firebase demanding that Sampley order The Last Firebase dismantled and removed from federal land.

Sampley refused and was arrested. The police then dismantled and impounded The Last Fire Base charging Sampley with demonstrating without a permit.

Charges against Sampley were later thrown out of court and The Last Firebase property was returned to the activists and their permit to demonstrate reissued.

FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERED ACTIVISTS TO STOP USING IMAGES OF STATUE

February 4, 1992 - Rejecting Sampley's argument that the "Three Servicemen Statue" could not be copyrighted because it belongs to the people, Judge John Garrett Penn ruled that the Scruggs/Hart copyright was valid. He ordered the POW/MIA activists to stop making and selling "unauthorized images" of the statue and that all items the activists possessed containing the image be impounded.

In his ruling, Judge Penn said the activists had attempted to justify their unauthorized use of the images by "wrapping themselves in the flag of patriotism." He said the public is served by the enforcement of the copyright.

SCRUGGS WON AN UNPRECEDENTED JUDGEMENT AGAINST ACTIVIST

December 10, 1992 - Federal Judge Charles R. Richey rejected Sampley's documented argument that activists at The Last Firebase had grossed, in a 3 year period, less than $72,000 in sales of printed material featuring the "Three Servicemen Statue." Judge Richey awarded Scruggs' memorial fund and Hart $300,000 in damages and $59,000 in attorney fees saying he had based the $300,000 damages, in part, on an affidavit from Walt Sides, president of Warriors Inc. In the affidavit, Sides, who operates a booth adjacent to The Last Firebase, said that he pays Scruggs' memorial fund 10 percent of his booth's gross sales of t-shirts with the copyrighted image of the statue, which tabulates to approximately $10,000 per year.

SEVERELY WOUNDED, HOMECOMING II PROJECT AND THE U.S. VETERAN NEWS ARE DISSOLVED

March 1993 - As a result of the judgement and with their finances depleted, Homecoming II and the U.S. Veteran News and Report, which had occupied The Last Firebase since the mid-80s, were forced to dissolve. During its tenure of The Last Firebase, Homecoming II had diligently distributed millions of pieces of literature explaining the plight of American POWs and MIAs and had given away nearly 700,000 issues of the U.S. Veteran.

The activists quickly reorganized and The Last Firebase Veterans Archives Project and the U.S. Veteran Dispatch became the new occupants of The Last Firebase.

SCRUGGS TRIED TO DEFEND JUDGEMENT AGAINST ACTIVISTS

March 1993 - Scruggs, responding to thousands of faxes, calls and letters demanding an explanation as to why Scruggs' organization holds a copyright on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, which is supposed to be a public monument, began a counterattack.

He wrote to one activist, "The courts have spoken on the issue [copyright] for several hundred years. Patents protect inventors from those who steal their ideas and line their own pockets. Copyrights do the same for authors and artists."

To another he wrote, "We initiated this lawsuit only after being forced to do so. Now that we have won we will take measures to get the money which could have been used to help the Memorial rather than go to a for profit enterprise such as REDHAWK [U.S. VETERAN NEWS AND REPORT]. The money is available. Sales are brisk at the Memorial. Thousands of dollars in cold hard cash from tourists is changing hands every day."

Scruggs wrote, "The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund is not involved with Agent Orange, POWs, or other veterans issues. We are involved in protecting the memorial from those who misuse it and we are cooperating with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in protecting the memorial from those who threaten to use explosives to destroy it."

April 4, 1993 - Scruggs answered the complaint of the brother of a man who is still missing in action as a result of the Vietnam War, "Personally I would like to settle this entire affair and become friends. Each time we try we have been rebuffed. Believe me, we will continue aggressive tactics to get the money owed to us from those who can clearly afford it. After all our legal fees are being paid by Homecoming II. And I have no sympathy for t-shirt vendors."

SCRUGGS - THE CATALYST IN A NEW ATTACK

April 14, 1993 - Scruggs wrote a letter to J. Carter Brown, chairman of the Commission on Fine Arts. In the letter, Scruggs told Brown that "groups claiming to help American POWs" and "others who claim to be helping the Vietnam Veterans Memorial" are "retail operations making a small fortune." He suggested that because "structures" being used on some First Amendment demonstration sites have been there for a long period of time, they have achieved "a degree of permanency as to merit design approval" by the arts commission.

APRIL 15, 1993 - Brown answered Scruggs with a three paragraph letter thanking him for his continuing concern for the memorial and telling Scruggs that he had passed his letter on to the National Park Service.

APRIL 26, 1993 - Scruggs, an attorney, wrote Brown back, informing him that the National Park Service is "powerless to take corrective action" against the POW/MIA activists, "because of the First Amendment there is a right to demonstrate" and "a part of one's demonstration can consist of selling items with one's First Amendment message emblazoned upon merchandise." Scruggs added, "allowable merchandise includes tourist souvenirs such as t-shirts, buttons and other items."

Scruggs wrote, because the demonstrations "are perfectly legal," the National Park Service "has no authority to deny anyone a permit to demonstrate and sell merchandise as part of their demonstration." He added, "I have researched the law in great detail, believe me" and ended his letter by calling upon Brown to "exercise your authority under the law to halt all sales activities at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial until such time as the demonstrator's structures have met the high architectural standards for which our city is famous."

MAY 27, 1993 - Brown wrote to Robert G. Stanton, Regional Director of the National Park Service. Brown called the area between the Vietnam and Lincoln Memorials a "mess" and lamented over why "one or two" groups should be allowed to spoil the beauty of "one of our great monuments" (obviously referring to the Lincoln Memorial, since he suggested that the groups be moved out of the main visual axis connecting the Lincoln Memorial, Washington Monument and the Capitol).

SCRUGGS BEGAN MEDIA PRESSURE

JUNE 20, 1993 - WASHINGTON POST - Scruggs, described as the Vietnam veteran who "conceived" the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, attacked POW/MIA activists on First Amendment demonstration sites near the Wall, saying they had created a "K-Mart on the Mall". Scruggs said the activists should only be allowed to pass out brochures and "things like that." The Post quoted National Parks Service spokesman Sandra Alley as saying the Park Service is "concerned about the carnival atmosphere" and is studying regulations to "better control" the area.

continued..............

[thedrifter]

NOW THAT I'VE GOT YOUR ATTENTION

JUNE 21, 1993 - Scruggs wrote Sandra Alley telling her that demonstrators near the Wall are selling pins, sweatshirts, videos, patches and other items in violation of their permits. In addition, Scruggs said that he learned from an (unnamed) appointee of President Clinton that one of the demonstrators had set a gas can next to a generator. Scruggs called the latter alleged incident "a clear and present danger" to the public and reminded Ms. Alley that the Park Service had the right to immediately revoke permits for both alleged violations.

ENTER SEN. KERRY---THE PRO-HANOI POLITICIAN

JUNE 30, 1993 - A call was logged in at the Park Ranger Kiosk, located at the entrance to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, from the office of Senator John Kerry (D-MA). According to the log book, Kerry's office asked about the "vendors" near the Wall and was told to contact the Park Service Public Affairs office.

Kerry, who was chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, and Senator John McCain (R-AZ), a member of the committee, led the fight on the U.S. Senate floor to lift the trade embargo against Vietnam.

(POW/MIA activists at The Last Firebase have publicly accused both senators of suppressing evidence during the committee's investigation that American POWs were held years after the end of the Vietnam War).

THE SECOND COMING

JULY 13, 1993 - An article written by Scruggs, headlined "Seedy side of the memorial," is published in USA TODAY. In that article, Scruggs compared his crusade against POW activists who demonstrate near the Wall to Jesus chasing the "money-changers" out of the temple. He ended his sanctimonious posturing by declaring that "real" demonstrators should "only be allowed to give away pamphlets and brochures."

(What Scruggs failed to include in his "holier than thou" tirade against "making money at a sacred place" was that his memorial fund has received thousands of dollars in royalties from the sale of t-shirts and other items that bear the image of the copyrighted "Three Servicemen Statue" generated at First Amendment demonstration sites near The Wall).

SORRY I DIDN'T ANSWER SOONER

JULY 16, 1993 - Sandra Alley answered Scruggs' June 21 letter. Ms. Alley told Scruggs the Park Service is doing its best to enforce permit regulations and is considering changing the regulations.

WHAT'S SO HARD ABOUT DENYING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS?

DECEMBER 17, 1993 - Scruggs sent a memorandum to Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt.

"For quite a while I have been unsuccessful in persuading your agency that the vendors at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial are simply that ....they are not demonstrators ...they are vendors selling souvenirs to tourists," Scruggs wrote. Scruggs told Babbitt that the Park Service plans to "eventually somehow get around to issuing regulations" to get rid of the demonstrators and expressed his "utter amazement" at the Park Service's "inability to accomplish this small task." Scruggs ended his letter by offering to give Babbitt's department a tour of the memorial.

OH, MY GOD - EVEN THE WORST WINTER OF THE CENTURY CAN'T SHUT THEM DOWN!

JANUARY 31, 1994 - Brown wrote to National Park Service Director Roger Kennedy telling the director that he had driven by the Lincoln Memorial during the snow, which had shut down the U.S. government, and regretted to report that despite the "severity of the weather," the "vendors" in front of the Lincoln Memorial were still there.

(The Last Firebase, which is located across from the Lincoln Memorial, near the Reflecting Pool, maintained its 24-hour vigil for POW/MIAs that day, as it has every day, 365 days a year, regardless of the weather).

Saying that the commission's lawyers were "very nervous" about taking any steps that might be "construed as an abridgment" of the demonstrator's rights, Brown suggested relocating the demonstration sites to a "less conspicuous spot" as an alternative.

I'LL GET RID OF THEM!

FEBRUARY 27, 1994 - Senator Kerry visited the Park Ranger Kiosk at the Wall and wanted to know what was being done about the POW/MIA demonstration sites. According to the daily log book, after Park Ranger Oates explained the permit process to Kerry, the senator asked, "Aren't the memorial people doing anything about it?" Oates told Kerry that there is a controversy about the POW/MIA vigils. To this Kerry replied, "They are disgusting. We'll do something about it tomorrow."

PITTING "BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER"

MARCH 1994 - BRAVO VETERANS OUTLOOK published a vicious attack by Scruggs on fellow Vietnam veterans who man POW/MIA vigils near the Wall. In that article, Scruggs called upon Vietnam veterans to protect their "sacred" Wall from the greedy "money-changers" by writing a letter to Stanton asking him to change sales regulations on First Amendment demonstration sites.

(Again Scruggs failed to mention the thousands of dollars his organization had received and the money it continues to receive to this date from some of the demonstration sites he so vehemently attacks. The Last Firebase, which refuses to recognize the copyright on the "Three Servicemen Statue," is not among the groups that pays copyright royalties to Scruggs' organization).

"BELTWAY MEDIA" SILENT ON MAIL FRAUD INVESTIGATION OF SCRUGGS's FUND RAISING

APRIL 20, 1994 - CBS THIS MORNING reported that Pennsylvania Attorney General Ernie Preate was investigating the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund's direct mail fund-raising activities.

"This organization raised over $4.6 million over the last three years on claims that it is going to use that money to maintain the Wall. In fact, under our conservative estimates, we can say that only about $230,000, or only 5 percent, has actually gone into events and maintenance of the wall area," Preate said. Calling Scruggs' direct-mail letters "misleading and fraudulent," Preate added that according to VVMF's tax returns, Scruggs' organization raised over $2 million in 1992.

"Only $180,000 was spent on taking care of the Wall, while $630,000 was spent on fund-raising. The remaining money went to public education and ceremonies to commemorate the Wall," Preate said.

"The National Park Service and the American taxpayers are already spending more than $750,000 a year to take care of the Wall, it's a sum the Park Service says adequately covers the needs of the monument," said CBS THIS MORNING reporter Hattie Kauffman.

(There's something perversely evil about someone who calls upon Vietnam veterans to "protect their sacred Wall" from POW/MIA activists who fund their cause by offering tangible items to the public, while raising millions of dollars in donations under the fraudulent pretext of maintaining the Wall).

SCRUGGS' MEMORIAL FUND TRIED TO COLLECT JUDGEMENT BY ATTEMPTING TO SEIZE SAMPLEY'S PROPERTY

April 27, 1994 - The Kinston Daily Free Press reported that a sheriff's deputy had called Sampley to inform him that the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund was ordering his property seized as partial payment of the $359,000 judgment. The date of June 3 was set for the public auctioning of Sampley's property.

THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS COSTING US MONEY

MAY 4, 1994 - S.J. DiMeglio, president and CEO of Guest Services, a multi-million dollar corporation that operates the Park Service marinas, kiosks and vending operations on the Mall, met with Stanton and complained about his company losing money to First Amendment demonstration sites.

TO PROTECT THE PARK VISITOR

MAY 18, 1994 - The Park Service published a proposed regulation change in the Federal Register that would limit sales on First Amendment demonstration sites to books, newspapers and traditional printed material, such as pamphlets and leaflets. Stanton claimed the demonstration sites near the Vietnam Memorial, which are the only ones attacked in the proposed regulation change, "have severely disrupted the quality of the park visitor experience." The public was given a 60-day period to comment on the proposed regulation change.

ACTIVISTS FORCE SCRUGGS TO CANCEL AUCTION

June 3, 1994 - The Kinston Free Press reported that Scruggs had backed down from auctioning Sampley's property.

"The whole idea behind the memorial was to help heal the wounds of the whole Vietnam War and to help the vets recover," Scruggs told The Free Press. Scruggs said that the memorial fund had been told that "The only thing Sampley really wants is for us to foreclose on his property in order to become what he considers a martyr. But, we're not going to make him a martyr. That's not really what we're about anyway."

Although the auction was canceled, the memorial fund can still foreclose on Sampley anytime within the next 10 years.

GEE, THANK YOU FOR ASKING ME TO COMMENT ON YOUR PROPOSED CHANGES

JUNE 9, 1994 - Scruggs wrote a letter to Stanton saying he is "pleased to respond" to Stanton's request for public comments on the proposed regulation change concerning "vendors at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial."

(Scruggs' invitation to comment on a regulation change that he worked over a year to put into motion is so incestuous that it warrants no comment).

JUNE 16, 1994 - Brown wrote Stanton praising him for his "courageous leadership" in taking action against the "vendors."

continued...........

[thedrifter]

TO HELL WITH FREE SPEECH - WE'RE LOSING MONEY

JUNE 30, 1994 - DiMeglio wrote Stanton about the increased number of First Amendment "vendors" on the Mall since their May 4th meeting. Saying Guest Services had lost over $300,000 in sales in June alone and expected to lose about $750,000 in July, he told Stanton that the Park Service must either tighten policy regarding First Amendment demonstrators or grant Guest Services relief by a reduction in its franchise fee.

(The dramatic increase in the number of groups getting permits for First Amendment Demonstration sites on the Mall in June was deliberately created by the Park Service. On Memorial Day weekend, a Park Service employee, sympathetic to the POW/MIA cause, told The Last Firebase that he had overheard his superiors talking about how they were going to "flood the Mall with so many t-shirt vendors that Congress would become involved because that's all they would see when they drove by the Mall."

The employee said his superiors "joked" about how they were going to issue permits to "everyone and everyone's brother." The Park Service "created a forest in order to cut down a tree," by telling people in a June Washington Post article how easy it was to get a "free speech" permit. By September 1, the Park Service had succeeded in "flooding the Mall" with 200 t-shirt vendors.

GET RID OF THEM OR ELSE

JULY 11, 1994 - DiMeglio wrote Stanton and threatened to "indefinitely postpone" scheduled construction on the Mall of four new kiosks by Guest Services unless the Park Service enacted a "speedy adoption" of regulation changes to limit "competing free speech" vendors.

JULY 18, 1994 - The 60-day public comment ended. The Park Service said the response from the public was "about even" in its comments "for and against" the proposed regulation change.

FRAUDULENT LETTERS EXPOSED IN PUBLIC COMMENT

SEPTEMBER 4, 1994 - THE STARS AND STRIPES veteran's newspaper reported that hundreds of form letters supporting the Park Service's proposed regulation change were fakes, raising the "specter of mail fraud." Someone it seemed, signed the computer generated letters with the names and addresses of people without their permission. Most of the names affixed to the approximately 1,300 letters were either those of slip holders at Park Service-owned marinas (operated by Guest Services) or temporary or past employees of Guest Services.

Guest Services at first told STARS AND STRIPES that they had nothing to do with any of the fraudulent letters, but later admitted that their company had printed a form letter with the names of employees of Ameritemps, a company that supplied Guest Services with temporary workers. The company said it contacted "95 percent of the employees" to let them know their names had been used. Guest Services, however, denied that it sent in letters with the names and addresses of people who were slip holders at the Park Service owned marinas that are administrated by their company.

"I believe that we probably did the text (of the fraudulently signed form letter)," Andrew Normandeau, secretary of Guest Services told STARS AND STRIPES in a follow up article, adding that he was going to write a letter to the Park Service with the "findings" of an initial, internal investigation.

The Park Service, which also denied any connection to the fraudulent letters, said the 1,300 form letters would not be considered in their assessment of the public comment.

HO, HUM, YAWNS--THE POSTAL SERVICE

SEPTEMBER 11, 1994 - STARS AND STRIPES. An Inspector General's official told the veterans newspaper, "We're checking it out," but added that the case (of the fraudulent letters) was probably more within the jurisdiction of the Post Office.

"It's not clear that the mail fraud statute has been violated here, but we will look into it," said John Brugger, a Post Office spokesman. A long-time postal inspector, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told the STARS AND STRIPES that he doubted mail fraud had been committed because "no money or property was involved."

(EXCUSE ME! Money isn't involved? What about the one million dollars Guest Services complained to the Park Service about losing because of "unconscionable proliferation of these First Amendment vendors." What about Guest Services' threat to delay construction on the Mall unless new regulations are enacted to get rid of the "free speech" vendors? And just what is involved when someone signs the name of someone else to a letter without their permission and mails that letter to a government agency supporting a regulation that would deny POW/MIA activists the right to raise money for their cause?)

PUBLIC COMMENT 4-1 AGAINST REGULATION CHANGE

After removing the 1,300 fraudulent letters from consideration, the "almost even" count of people for and against the proposed new sales regulations on First Amendment demonstration sites dramatically changed to approximately 3,035 against the regulation change and 774 in favor. Of the 774 in favor, 241 were form letters and petitions signed by Guest Services employees. Some 2,500 park visitors to the Wall - the very people the Park Service claimed were having the "quality" of their park visit experience "severely disrupted" by First Amendment demonstrators - signed cards during their visit to the Wall against the regulation change.

In addition, a private poll of visitors at the Wall by Jacobs, Jenner and Kenton, revealed that 55 percent of those polled felt the First Amendment activists had "little or no effect" on their experience, while 24 percent found them to have a "positive effect."

It should also be noted that about 160 million people (20 million a year) have visited the Wall since The Last Firebase began its POW/MIA vigil in 1986. Prior to the May 18, 1994 60-day public comment period, the Park Service had received less than 50 complaints about activists on First Amendment demonstration sites.

(That should be the end of the story, right? Wrong. It appears that the Park Service doesn't give a damn about how the public really feels. The call for public comment was nothing more than a technicality required by law, the results of which Park Service officials said they were not obligated to act upon. The Park Service is going to get rid of the POW/MIA activists, by hook or crook, and the only question left now is when and how).

BELTWAY MEDIA IGNORED FRAUD
Not one news organization, with the exception of the STARS AND STRIPES (which put the story out on the wire service), reported the mail fraud scandal. Instead, the Washington Post and CNN produced one-sided reports on the terrible "T-shirt Pollution" on the Mall, never bothering to look below the surface for the real story of the who, what, when and how behind the regulation change and damage such a change will do to the right of free speech.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Money, politics and greed - that same unholy alliance which caused the abandonment of Vietnam veterans during and after the war in Southeast Asia, is the motivation behind the effort to evict The Last Firebase. If that alliance succeeds, Scruggs will be praised by the pro-Hanoi Kerry crowd for silencing the voice of the POW/MIAs, lauded by the uppity arts commission and the Park Service for making the memorial a "pretty tourist attraction." He will no doubt be thanked by Guest Services (perhaps with a "donation" for his "maintenance" of The Wall charity?) for getting rid of "competing free-speech" demonstrators.

Then, unless he's in jail for fraudulent fund raising, Scruggs will continue to smile all the way to the bank and a Guest Services employee with a foreign accent will be selling Scruggs' copyrighted "Three Servicemen Statue" t-shirts, coffee mugs, statues, pins, patches and other Vietnam "military art" items out of a brand new kiosk located - you guessed it - on The Last Firebase's First Amendment demonstration site.

Editor's Note Also see Jan Scruggs is attacking his fellow Veterans Again

With Much Love and Many Prayers,
Diane M. Weller *guns*
GunnyDi@neo.rr.com
http://militaryops.tripod.com
http://militarymomone.tripod.com/operationchristmaslove/
http://militarymomone.tripod.com Our Fallen Heroes
http://gunnydi.tripod.com Parris Island Info site
http://gunnydi.tripod.com/honor/ Honoring Veterans
http://gunnydi.tripod.com/armedforces/ Armed Forces
http://www.geocities.com/dmweller01/main1.html main ++++++++++++++++++
Groups: MilitaryMomsOnline,AMENN,VeteransRights,USMCMoms,
USMCJapanLoopList, AMFF, BCUSMC~yahoogroups.
MilitaryMomsOnline,AmericanMilitaryForces~MSNGroup s.
++++++++++++++++++
"If You Were Arrested For Kindness, Would There Be Enough Evidence To Convict You?"
++++++++++++++++++
AMENN~http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AMENN
+++++++++++++++++++
Where there is Faith in God, there is Hope.
Where there is Hope, there is Peace.
Where there is Peace, there is Freedom.
++++++++++++++++++
http://gunnydi.tripod.com/militarymomsonlinestore/
419-902-1362 24/7/365

Mary and Chuck Schantag
http://www.pownetwork.org

Read the book that will leave an imprint on your soul!!
More than a Band of Metal.... Loveletters from those who care
http://www.pownetwork.org/book_order_blank.htm

Sempers,

Roger