Our Final Word.
This is our final word on the matter of Don and Annette Hall, re: Brother Against Brother. And then we. are. done.
You have accused us several times of claiming to be “investigative journalists”. I’m quite certain that to you, a investigative journalist is “someone who prints what they’re told to without first doing the research.” If the fact that we didn’t simply print your allegations without checking out the information first means we’re not investigative journalists, then I gladly concede that point. Hang on to that point, for it’s the only one you’ll have when we’re done.
You’re fond of linking our names with the likes of Michael Moore and Dan Rather. While I chuckle that you find us to be in the same league of notoriety as these two “celebrities”, I must again point out that what we did was actually nothing like either of them. I know you love to use the term “hack job” in reference to our work, but unfortunately it doesn’t really apply. However, it may very well refer to your own. The errors in your “research” are apparent to any intelligent reader, as is the obvious bias.
As for the claim that we’re after fame and fortune, well, thanks for the chuckle. We don’t have a book deal, and we don’t have any desire to get on “cable TV”, unlike you, who have already contacted everyone in the electronic media in an effort to get a book sold.
I don’t plan on spending the next ten years of my life engaging in your fantasies of conspiracies and personal attacks, so this will be my final dissertation on the matter.
• For you to accept that the documentation you have staked your entire campaign on is faulty, you demand a standard that is logistically impossible to meet. You know this, and that’s why you demand it. Ignoring the laundry list of proven errors and mistakes in your paperwork speaks toward a deeper, perhaps more sinister purpose than “finding the truth”. I’m not a mental health professional, so I’ll leave the diagnosis to them.
• For a moment, I’ll even set aside all the problems with the records that you’ve camped on like a Boy Scout on a summer trip. If the records are in fact accurate, then they still prove you to be incorrect. Your conclusions about the villages and their chiefs are drawn by taking completely unrelated events in unrelated locations that were dealt with by unrelated units and patching all together with a sign that says “All roads lead to F/58 because we say so”. You cannot deny that the entries from early in the morning on 20 Nov 1968 do not have anything to do with the members of Team 24, F Company, 58th Infantry. These events are from many miles away. How is it that you don’t see this? You claim B-36’s CO didn’t let his men have maps while you were there. Perhaps that’s why you can’t read one. If so, my apologies. I didn’t realize it was a training issue.
• The 1594 also mistakenly identifies the female enemy soldier who lived a few moments after the ambush as being male. Which is it, Don? Are the 1594s correct or are they not? You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Either way, the 1594s themselves prove you incorrect.
• Please remember that you came to us. In fact, at the beginning of this little journey you bemoaned the fact that out of the long list of military bloggers you had sent the story to, most hadn’t given you the time of day. Only one other blogger besides us published anything about your story, and he did so without looking at any information besides what was on your site. Apparently you think we should have gulped down what you spoon-fed us and then regurgitated it onto the site. Would you be attacking us personally then? Of course not.
• You claimed publicly on the internet that you believe Gary Linderer and the men of F/58th attempted to murder their commanding officer. If I were Gary, I would demand that you have charges brought within 30 days. If not, I’d sue you. How is it that it’s okay for you to threaten anyone who disagrees with you, and personally threaten us if we said anything that made you look bad, and yet it’s okay for you publicly accuse someone of attempted murder when there is so much evidence to the contrary?
I see you have continued to ride the wave of your “confidential source” fiasco. I will state this very clearly, and I will be sure to use small words. We at no time lied about anything related to that. Heidi assumed the reason that he had been “outed” was due to her questions. Contrary to what you might think, Heidi and I don’t talk incessantly all day, and she had no reason or way of knowing what had happened until I told her myself. You’ll notice that I did not deny outing him. In fact, I’ll even plainly state in public on this site what I did. I stand by my decision.
A Unit Director in the 75th Ranger Regiment Association sent you confidential emails from within the association. You can claim every day for a year that it was only two, and you can claim that they were directly related to you and that you somehow had a “right” to see them. However, you and I both know what the truth is.
I contacted Steve Crabtree, the President of the 75th RRA, by telephone and told him that I had in my possession email from this Unit Director that had been forwarded to you. Since the emails dealt with internal financial business of the association, I felt it would be in the association’s best interest to be aware that they had a person in their midst who apparently had no problem leaking this sort of information. Crabtree sent out an email to the association stating that I had told him this Unit Director was forwarding all email, which was not the case. Crabtree apologized to me for the error, and for accidentally sending the email to the leak himself; true to form, the person passed it right back to you like a good little minion.
There is a difference between being a whistleblower and being a troublemaker. Your friend in the 75th RRA did nothing helpful with his actions. He brought no law enforcement in to investigate any actual complaints. He showed no proof of wrongdoing by any parties in the association. He simply passed on an email that gave you fuel for your eternally burning flame.
You also claim that we chose not to talk to the men who served with you. What actually happened when we called them is this:
• One vet hung up on me when he heard your name and that I was calling him at your request,
• Several refused to get back to us,
• One rambled on for over an hour in your defense but finally admitted that all his information was secondhand from you,
• One tried to hit on Heidi via email,
• The one who actually chose to talk to me had less than glowing reviews of your book and your conduct. I chuckled to see you claim that he told you I used his remarks out of context since I taped the conversation. I’m quite certain that you didn’t mention to him the email you sent me warning me about him.
Almost a full week before publishing the series Brother Against Brother, we served you with our research findings. We were quite clear that what we had found was not what you wanted us to find, and we gave you ample time to respond.
Instead of simply providing additional documentation to support your claims, you did the following:
• Left a total of four voicemails on our home telephone numbers in less than 30 minutes. During these voicemails you engage in behavior that leaves us no choice but to question your emotional stability, including threats and intimidating statements. The voicemails get more and more disturbing as they go on. At one point, on Heidi's voicemail, you lapse into a sort of eerie singsong chant. I have copies of them, and have no problem whatsoever posting them on the website.
• Your wife wrote us a 10-page email attacking us personally and disparaging any and all work we did on the case.
That was just the first day. In the weeks since, you’ve added to that pile with the following:
• Called me personally to threaten me with legal action, as well as claiming that you were getting calls about us from “people in the military”.
• Left several voicemail messages, each time attempting to use intimidation and threats to convey your point. In one message to Heidi you claim that you “just got off the phone with 20/20 and 60 Minutes”, who are apparently “very interested” in a story about “Bloggers Gone Mad”. (Your choice of title was priceless. May I suggest you visit Democratic Underground? There’s quite a few over there.)
• Posted personal attacks against us on Amazon.com, in your “reviews” on Linderer’s books using a fake name.
• Slyly lied to Heidi that something was wrong with her military records, and "we'd all soon find out about that - heh heh heh."
You even dug around in the personal lives of Heidi and myself, looking for whatever dirt you could find. Your gleeful voicemail to Heidi proclaiming me as “Kit - or should I say 'Jeanette' - Jarrell” is proof of that. I haven’t really hidden my real name. Until now, it’s never been a problem. However, if knowing that Kit is not the name I was born with somehow gives you a charge, then be my guest.
You came to us. You wanted publicity for your story. You told us to read the information and make our own decision. We read everything you gave us, and then dug for more. We have an incredible number of resources unrelated to the men of F/58th that corroborated the testimony of Team 24 and their CO. Most, if not all, of this information was available to you. You chose not to even look for it. Don’t blame us because your story is full of gaping holes.
The rest of your accusations against us personally are simply half-truths, twisted pieces of information, and outright lies. I doubt you'd know truth if it slapped you in the face. Perhaps even worse is the knowledge that you willingly choose not to see it. Our readers, our family, our friends, and those who know who we are see your attacks for what they are. I'm not worried. Take your best shot.
I hope you do decide to dig into our personal lives and military records as you’ve threatened to do. I hope you do decide to bring legal action for your supposed victimization. Just remember when all is said and done that you brought this one on yourself.
We don’t care to hear your continued pleas for attention. Annette said in one of her last emails that you are sorry you ever contacted us. If that’s the case, then stop doing it. We have better things to do with our time, and so this matter is now closed.
You have accused us several times of claiming to be “investigative journalists”. I’m quite certain that to you, a investigative journalist is “someone who prints what they’re told to without first doing the research.” If the fact that we didn’t simply print your allegations without checking out the information first means we’re not investigative journalists, then I gladly concede that point. Hang on to that point, for it’s the only one you’ll have when we’re done.
You’re fond of linking our names with the likes of Michael Moore and Dan Rather. While I chuckle that you find us to be in the same league of notoriety as these two “celebrities”, I must again point out that what we did was actually nothing like either of them. I know you love to use the term “hack job” in reference to our work, but unfortunately it doesn’t really apply. However, it may very well refer to your own. The errors in your “research” are apparent to any intelligent reader, as is the obvious bias.
As for the claim that we’re after fame and fortune, well, thanks for the chuckle. We don’t have a book deal, and we don’t have any desire to get on “cable TV”, unlike you, who have already contacted everyone in the electronic media in an effort to get a book sold.
I don’t plan on spending the next ten years of my life engaging in your fantasies of conspiracies and personal attacks, so this will be my final dissertation on the matter.
• For you to accept that the documentation you have staked your entire campaign on is faulty, you demand a standard that is logistically impossible to meet. You know this, and that’s why you demand it. Ignoring the laundry list of proven errors and mistakes in your paperwork speaks toward a deeper, perhaps more sinister purpose than “finding the truth”. I’m not a mental health professional, so I’ll leave the diagnosis to them.
• For a moment, I’ll even set aside all the problems with the records that you’ve camped on like a Boy Scout on a summer trip. If the records are in fact accurate, then they still prove you to be incorrect. Your conclusions about the villages and their chiefs are drawn by taking completely unrelated events in unrelated locations that were dealt with by unrelated units and patching all together with a sign that says “All roads lead to F/58 because we say so”. You cannot deny that the entries from early in the morning on 20 Nov 1968 do not have anything to do with the members of Team 24, F Company, 58th Infantry. These events are from many miles away. How is it that you don’t see this? You claim B-36’s CO didn’t let his men have maps while you were there. Perhaps that’s why you can’t read one. If so, my apologies. I didn’t realize it was a training issue.
• The 1594 also mistakenly identifies the female enemy soldier who lived a few moments after the ambush as being male. Which is it, Don? Are the 1594s correct or are they not? You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Either way, the 1594s themselves prove you incorrect.
• Please remember that you came to us. In fact, at the beginning of this little journey you bemoaned the fact that out of the long list of military bloggers you had sent the story to, most hadn’t given you the time of day. Only one other blogger besides us published anything about your story, and he did so without looking at any information besides what was on your site. Apparently you think we should have gulped down what you spoon-fed us and then regurgitated it onto the site. Would you be attacking us personally then? Of course not.
• You claimed publicly on the internet that you believe Gary Linderer and the men of F/58th attempted to murder their commanding officer. If I were Gary, I would demand that you have charges brought within 30 days. If not, I’d sue you. How is it that it’s okay for you to threaten anyone who disagrees with you, and personally threaten us if we said anything that made you look bad, and yet it’s okay for you publicly accuse someone of attempted murder when there is so much evidence to the contrary?
I see you have continued to ride the wave of your “confidential source” fiasco. I will state this very clearly, and I will be sure to use small words. We at no time lied about anything related to that. Heidi assumed the reason that he had been “outed” was due to her questions. Contrary to what you might think, Heidi and I don’t talk incessantly all day, and she had no reason or way of knowing what had happened until I told her myself. You’ll notice that I did not deny outing him. In fact, I’ll even plainly state in public on this site what I did. I stand by my decision.
A Unit Director in the 75th Ranger Regiment Association sent you confidential emails from within the association. You can claim every day for a year that it was only two, and you can claim that they were directly related to you and that you somehow had a “right” to see them. However, you and I both know what the truth is.
I contacted Steve Crabtree, the President of the 75th RRA, by telephone and told him that I had in my possession email from this Unit Director that had been forwarded to you. Since the emails dealt with internal financial business of the association, I felt it would be in the association’s best interest to be aware that they had a person in their midst who apparently had no problem leaking this sort of information. Crabtree sent out an email to the association stating that I had told him this Unit Director was forwarding all email, which was not the case. Crabtree apologized to me for the error, and for accidentally sending the email to the leak himself; true to form, the person passed it right back to you like a good little minion.
There is a difference between being a whistleblower and being a troublemaker. Your friend in the 75th RRA did nothing helpful with his actions. He brought no law enforcement in to investigate any actual complaints. He showed no proof of wrongdoing by any parties in the association. He simply passed on an email that gave you fuel for your eternally burning flame.
You also claim that we chose not to talk to the men who served with you. What actually happened when we called them is this:
• One vet hung up on me when he heard your name and that I was calling him at your request,
• Several refused to get back to us,
• One rambled on for over an hour in your defense but finally admitted that all his information was secondhand from you,
• One tried to hit on Heidi via email,
• The one who actually chose to talk to me had less than glowing reviews of your book and your conduct. I chuckled to see you claim that he told you I used his remarks out of context since I taped the conversation. I’m quite certain that you didn’t mention to him the email you sent me warning me about him.
Almost a full week before publishing the series Brother Against Brother, we served you with our research findings. We were quite clear that what we had found was not what you wanted us to find, and we gave you ample time to respond.
Instead of simply providing additional documentation to support your claims, you did the following:
• Left a total of four voicemails on our home telephone numbers in less than 30 minutes. During these voicemails you engage in behavior that leaves us no choice but to question your emotional stability, including threats and intimidating statements. The voicemails get more and more disturbing as they go on. At one point, on Heidi's voicemail, you lapse into a sort of eerie singsong chant. I have copies of them, and have no problem whatsoever posting them on the website.
• Your wife wrote us a 10-page email attacking us personally and disparaging any and all work we did on the case.
That was just the first day. In the weeks since, you’ve added to that pile with the following:
• Called me personally to threaten me with legal action, as well as claiming that you were getting calls about us from “people in the military”.
• Left several voicemail messages, each time attempting to use intimidation and threats to convey your point. In one message to Heidi you claim that you “just got off the phone with 20/20 and 60 Minutes”, who are apparently “very interested” in a story about “Bloggers Gone Mad”. (Your choice of title was priceless. May I suggest you visit Democratic Underground? There’s quite a few over there.)
• Posted personal attacks against us on Amazon.com, in your “reviews” on Linderer’s books using a fake name.
• Slyly lied to Heidi that something was wrong with her military records, and "we'd all soon find out about that - heh heh heh."
You even dug around in the personal lives of Heidi and myself, looking for whatever dirt you could find. Your gleeful voicemail to Heidi proclaiming me as “Kit - or should I say 'Jeanette' - Jarrell” is proof of that. I haven’t really hidden my real name. Until now, it’s never been a problem. However, if knowing that Kit is not the name I was born with somehow gives you a charge, then be my guest.
You came to us. You wanted publicity for your story. You told us to read the information and make our own decision. We read everything you gave us, and then dug for more. We have an incredible number of resources unrelated to the men of F/58th that corroborated the testimony of Team 24 and their CO. Most, if not all, of this information was available to you. You chose not to even look for it. Don’t blame us because your story is full of gaping holes.
The rest of your accusations against us personally are simply half-truths, twisted pieces of information, and outright lies. I doubt you'd know truth if it slapped you in the face. Perhaps even worse is the knowledge that you willingly choose not to see it. Our readers, our family, our friends, and those who know who we are see your attacks for what they are. I'm not worried. Take your best shot.
I hope you do decide to dig into our personal lives and military records as you’ve threatened to do. I hope you do decide to bring legal action for your supposed victimization. Just remember when all is said and done that you brought this one on yourself.
We don’t care to hear your continued pleas for attention. Annette said in one of her last emails that you are sorry you ever contacted us. If that’s the case, then stop doing it. We have better things to do with our time, and so this matter is now closed.
posted by HE!D! at 03:31
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home