Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Meeting with Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense
Ambassador Charles Ray
And
Defense Dept. POW/Missing Personnel Office
2006 Annual Korean War POW/MIA Family Update Meeting
Arlington,VA
October 2006
Brief by Bill Dumas
On Monday, October 15th, I met with Ambassador Charles Ray, the former US ambassador to Cambodia and now Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (DASD) and director of the Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO.)
Amb. Ray asked DPMO Public Relations Director, Larry Greer, and Special Asst. to the Director of DPMO, Adrian Cronour (who is the Army radio disc jockey that Robin Williams portrayed in Good Morning Vietnam) to sit in on the meeting.
In a phone conversation with Amb. Ray three weeks prior, I had requested he view my documentary film, Missing Presumed Dead: The Search For America’s POWs and asked if we could meet to discuss the issues examined in the film. He agreed and a 30-minute meeting was scheduled during the week of the annual DPMO Korean War POW/MIA Family Update conference.
I would be attending the conference as a family member (my uncle is Cpl. Roger Dumas, a POW and a Last Seen Alive case) and I was also representing the National Alliance of Families for the Return of America’s Missing Servicemen.
Amb. Ray began the meeting by asking what I would like to talk about. I asked if he had screened the film. He said he had and found it “interesting.” I responded that in the Hollywood film world “interesting” is not a critique we hope for (this is usually a default description one uses because they don’t have anything positive to say about a film.) Amb. Ray stood by his one-word review.
I then decided I would have to get right to the point so I said, “I want to tell you how many of the POW/MIA advocates and organizations working outside the government feel about the DPMO’s efforts to find live POW/MIAs and the general impression of our government’s handling of the POW/MIA issue.
I assumed that at Amb. Ray’s very recent Presidential appointment to this position hadn’t allowed him the opportunity to confer in depth with many (if any) NGO POW/MIA heads.
I began the discussion by giving an overview of Cpl. Roger Dumas’ case, explaining that this was not a unique case and there are perhaps many others like it. The Roger Dumas case is an especially poignant example of the issue of abandoned POW/MIAs because it has the validity bestowed upon it by an unprecedented Federal Court ruling. In the trial, Robert Dumas v. U.S. Sec. of the Army (originally against Ronald Reagan), the judge ruled in Bob Dumas’ favor and ordered the Army to reclassify Roger from KIA (Killed-In-Action) to POW.
Amb. Ray listened intently as I described story of Roger’s disappearance on Nov. 4,,1950 and the continual government denials that Roger was ever captured and held as a POW even when his name appeared on the 389 list of Last Seen Alive POWs. And how they claimed Roger’s records were burned in the St. Louis Records Repository fire when, in fact, they had a complete set of his records on file.
I explained how all of Bob’s ex-POW witnesses had been intimidated by FBI agents and Army officials who warned them not to testify in court and that two of the witnesses died of heart attacks weeks before the trial and two others became too ill to travel. The only witness that made it to the courtroom was approached by an Army Major who warned the ex-POW that if he testified his mother’s indiscretions as a youth would be made public.
I questioned the Ambassador why the Army and the U.S. Attorney would go to such extremes and take such legal risks to prevent Roger from being reclassified a POW. I said I believe the answer is, that to reclassify Roger a POW would lead to an investigation that would reveal hundreds and maybe thousands more were also left behind in North Korea.
Amb. Ray interjected explaining his extensive background in the military, service in South Korea (his wife of 35 years is from South and his in-laws still live there) and his work at the State Department, etc. Amb. Ray vehemently denied that soldiers would knowingly be left behind followed by a systematic government cover-up.
Mr. Cronour assured me that for the six years he’s worked at DPMO he’s never seen any evidence of mismanagement in the handling of DPMO’s mandate to resolve all missing personnel cases.
Amb. Ray said it’s clear that the Dumas family was “jerked around” by the government in the past and pointed out that there are a lot of (stupid) people in government. He said that he cannot respond to anything his predecessors did or said, or what the future DASD will do but he assured me that he would ensure that all that can be done to account for missing servicemen will be done while he’s in charge.
I responded that in two years he’ll be replaced by another Presidential appointee and I’ll be sitting here telling this story to his replacement and on and on it goes while very little ever gets resolved.
By now the 30-minute scheduled meeting was approaching two hours when Mr. Cronour interjected with a request to change direction of the discussions.
He was actually proposing a topic I was about to segue into. Mr. Cronour remarked that DPMO receives a lot of criticism from some of the POW/MIA organizations but whenever their detractors are asked what specifically they would like DPMO to do, they have no ideas and then revert to criticizing DPMO.
I expressed agreement with the concept of finding common ground on which to move forward and in fact came to the meeting prepared with a plan that I would like them to consider.
Mr. Cronour bluntly asked, “What would you like us to do?” Amb. Ray picked up on this bottom line approach emphasizing the leading question, “What do you want us to do about Roger?” I reflected his tone, “Find him!” “Okay,” said Amb. Ray, “That’s what we’re going to try to do. We don’t know what the outcome will be but we’ll do all that we can.”
I then presented my thoughts and ideas including the need to get documents declassified, which Amb. Ray said was a very frustrating problem for everyone at DPMO as well.
I finally came to the point that had very recently become my prime objective for this meeting and it concerned a recent confluence of thoughts I’d been ruminating on for the past couple weeks prompted by the continuous news, commentary, political maneuvering and rhetoric surrounding the North Korean (DPRK) nuclear tests.
During the previous week, the U.S. public had an extremely rare occasion to hear the voice of DPRK U.N. Ambassador Pak Gil Yon expressing how the nuclear bomb test was a proud moment for his nation.
In 1985 Amb. Pak Gil Yon made a very unusual overture by calling Bob Dumas at his home after hearing about Bob’s federal court case to reclassify Roger a POW. Amb. Pak invited Bob to meet with him in New York to discuss how the POW/MIA issue could be negotiated on a presidential one-on-one level.
This was the start of a 10-year relationship between Bob and Amb. Pak and other ambassadors at the North Korean Mission to the U.N. Bob had several meetings with Amb. Pak, Amb. Ho Jong and over 250 phone conversations with Pak, Ho and other DPRK ambassadors and embassy staff.
Bob asked Amb. Pak in 1994, “Would your country ever use a nuclear weapon against South Korea, Japan or the U.S.?” Amb. Pak replied,
“If we used a nuclear weapon we know our country would be destroyed in 20 minutes and be reduced to water. We’re not that stupid.”
From my knowledge of these meetings and taped conversations I have listened to, I have a strong opinion that North Korea has always desired direct one-on-one negotiations with the U.S. president, a non-aggression pact and ultimately a signed peace treaty to officially end the Korean War.
As for saber rattling in the form of nuclear bomb testing, my belief is that this extreme measure seeks to force the U.S. into direct negotiations and because there really is no military option for the U.S. in Korea, these direct talks are going to happen and the Korean War peace treaty will be signed.
I told Amb. Ray that this will give us the best (and maybe the only) opportunity to achieve resolution to the POW/MIA issue and receiving a full accounting of all the Last Seen Alive POW cases, all unaccounted for MIA cases and recovery of remains.
As the White House has been getting pressure to engage in direct talks with North Korea, President Bush has indicated that signing the Korean War Peace Treaty is a necessary step in normalizing relations with the DPRK.
I gave Amb. Ray an overview of the Korean War peace negotiations breakdown based on my research while producing my documentary.
The issue of prisoner exchange was the final stalemate in the peace negations during the war. In fact, for over half of the three-year war, POW repatriation was the last issue to be resolved.
Since South Korean President, Sygmund Rhee allowed thousands of DPRK and Chinese POWs that the U.N. Command was holding to defect and not return to the north or China, the North Korean government considered this tantamount to not returning all of their POWs and in retaliation would not return all of the U.N. Command POWs it was holding.
Without ever resolving the POW repatriation issue a peace treaty could not be signed and instead the hostilities ended by the compromise signing of an Armistice.
To this day, North Korea and the United States are technically still at war.
Amb. Ray appeared thoughtful and intrigued and said this was an interesting idea. He asked Mr. Cronour and Mr. Greer to verify that the prisoner exchange was not resolved when the Armistice was signed.
Amb. Ray said that DPMO could make such a recommendation to the President but it would be up to the President to consider it in any peace treaty negotiations that may occur.
As the meeting winded down I felt as if something very substantial had been achieved at this meeting.
While we made our way to the office door I asked Amb. Ray how long he would be director of DPMO. He said he didn’t know and that it depended on who would be the next President and when/if he gets called back to the State Dept. (Amb. Ray informed me earlier he was “on loan” from the State Dept.) He said he thought he would be in this position for at least two years.
At the end of the week, on Friday during the final plenary session Q&A of the DPMO Korean War POW/MIA Family Update Meeting, all the department heads and key support staff were on the stage to answer any questions in this final open forum.
I waited until there were no other questions from the audience before I made my final inquiry.
Throughout the three-day conference I would often throw hardball questions at the panelists. Usually I already knew the answers but I wanted the family members to hear these issues and the official responses that often are not satisfactory. Over half of the 400-plus family members in attendance were attending the conference for the first time and have no idea there is a continuing controversy concerning abandoned POW/MIAs and the live POW/MIA issue.
After the Army sergeants who brought wireless microphones to those wishing to ask questions joked that I was “shut off” from asking questions I did finally rise to make a plea as opposed to making a point.
I could see everyone was bracing for my final assault but I disarmed the DPMO officials by thanking them for a productive conference explaining that I spent several hours with DPMO analyst Phil O’Brian and Army Casualty officer, Lt. Col. Schuneman and we exchanged some crucial information concerning Roger Dumas which also shed light on other aspects of the general POW investigation.
I then described the meeting with Amb. Ray and my idea for DPMO to advise President Bush or his successor that the POW repatriation issue must be resolved before a peace treaty to formally end the Korean War can be signed.
I made an impassioned plea that this may be the only opportunity to ever achieve a resolution for live POWs, MIAs and the return of remains. I requested that DPMO should have as strong a case as possible ready to present to the President in order to achieve this goal.
Finally I posed the question, “What can we do to make this happen?”
Q&A moderator Chuck Henley responded by saying, “The key word you said is, ‘We.’” Mr. Henley explained that DPMO takes orders from above and their orders come from Congress. Mr. Henley suggested I disseminate this POW/MIA resolution proposal to all the veterans, POW/MIA organizations and family members and urge them to contact their Congressmen to support this resolution.
I think at lease some of us came out of this meeting with a sense that this peace treaty idea may provide an opportunity for all POW/MIA organizations, veterans groups, family members and DPMO to work together for a common goal.
This may be overly optimistic but I think we can all learn more and become more effective in our ultimate mission to account for our POW/MIAs if we can take advantage of this little piece of common ground that we can all find safe for mutual cooperation.
At this point I will draft a POW/MIA peace treaty initiative that can be directed to our legislators who will hopefully direct the Defense Dept. and DPMO to present a formal request to the President that a POW/MIA resolution must be a part of the requirements to sign the Korean War Peace Treaty.
Ambassador Charles Ray
And
Defense Dept. POW/Missing Personnel Office
2006 Annual Korean War POW/MIA Family Update Meeting
Arlington,VA
October 2006
Brief by Bill Dumas
On Monday, October 15th, I met with Ambassador Charles Ray, the former US ambassador to Cambodia and now Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (DASD) and director of the Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO.)
Amb. Ray asked DPMO Public Relations Director, Larry Greer, and Special Asst. to the Director of DPMO, Adrian Cronour (who is the Army radio disc jockey that Robin Williams portrayed in Good Morning Vietnam) to sit in on the meeting.
In a phone conversation with Amb. Ray three weeks prior, I had requested he view my documentary film, Missing Presumed Dead: The Search For America’s POWs and asked if we could meet to discuss the issues examined in the film. He agreed and a 30-minute meeting was scheduled during the week of the annual DPMO Korean War POW/MIA Family Update conference.
I would be attending the conference as a family member (my uncle is Cpl. Roger Dumas, a POW and a Last Seen Alive case) and I was also representing the National Alliance of Families for the Return of America’s Missing Servicemen.
Amb. Ray began the meeting by asking what I would like to talk about. I asked if he had screened the film. He said he had and found it “interesting.” I responded that in the Hollywood film world “interesting” is not a critique we hope for (this is usually a default description one uses because they don’t have anything positive to say about a film.) Amb. Ray stood by his one-word review.
I then decided I would have to get right to the point so I said, “I want to tell you how many of the POW/MIA advocates and organizations working outside the government feel about the DPMO’s efforts to find live POW/MIAs and the general impression of our government’s handling of the POW/MIA issue.
I assumed that at Amb. Ray’s very recent Presidential appointment to this position hadn’t allowed him the opportunity to confer in depth with many (if any) NGO POW/MIA heads.
I began the discussion by giving an overview of Cpl. Roger Dumas’ case, explaining that this was not a unique case and there are perhaps many others like it. The Roger Dumas case is an especially poignant example of the issue of abandoned POW/MIAs because it has the validity bestowed upon it by an unprecedented Federal Court ruling. In the trial, Robert Dumas v. U.S. Sec. of the Army (originally against Ronald Reagan), the judge ruled in Bob Dumas’ favor and ordered the Army to reclassify Roger from KIA (Killed-In-Action) to POW.
Amb. Ray listened intently as I described story of Roger’s disappearance on Nov. 4,,1950 and the continual government denials that Roger was ever captured and held as a POW even when his name appeared on the 389 list of Last Seen Alive POWs. And how they claimed Roger’s records were burned in the St. Louis Records Repository fire when, in fact, they had a complete set of his records on file.
I explained how all of Bob’s ex-POW witnesses had been intimidated by FBI agents and Army officials who warned them not to testify in court and that two of the witnesses died of heart attacks weeks before the trial and two others became too ill to travel. The only witness that made it to the courtroom was approached by an Army Major who warned the ex-POW that if he testified his mother’s indiscretions as a youth would be made public.
I questioned the Ambassador why the Army and the U.S. Attorney would go to such extremes and take such legal risks to prevent Roger from being reclassified a POW. I said I believe the answer is, that to reclassify Roger a POW would lead to an investigation that would reveal hundreds and maybe thousands more were also left behind in North Korea.
Amb. Ray interjected explaining his extensive background in the military, service in South Korea (his wife of 35 years is from South and his in-laws still live there) and his work at the State Department, etc. Amb. Ray vehemently denied that soldiers would knowingly be left behind followed by a systematic government cover-up.
Mr. Cronour assured me that for the six years he’s worked at DPMO he’s never seen any evidence of mismanagement in the handling of DPMO’s mandate to resolve all missing personnel cases.
Amb. Ray said it’s clear that the Dumas family was “jerked around” by the government in the past and pointed out that there are a lot of (stupid) people in government. He said that he cannot respond to anything his predecessors did or said, or what the future DASD will do but he assured me that he would ensure that all that can be done to account for missing servicemen will be done while he’s in charge.
I responded that in two years he’ll be replaced by another Presidential appointee and I’ll be sitting here telling this story to his replacement and on and on it goes while very little ever gets resolved.
By now the 30-minute scheduled meeting was approaching two hours when Mr. Cronour interjected with a request to change direction of the discussions.
He was actually proposing a topic I was about to segue into. Mr. Cronour remarked that DPMO receives a lot of criticism from some of the POW/MIA organizations but whenever their detractors are asked what specifically they would like DPMO to do, they have no ideas and then revert to criticizing DPMO.
I expressed agreement with the concept of finding common ground on which to move forward and in fact came to the meeting prepared with a plan that I would like them to consider.
Mr. Cronour bluntly asked, “What would you like us to do?” Amb. Ray picked up on this bottom line approach emphasizing the leading question, “What do you want us to do about Roger?” I reflected his tone, “Find him!” “Okay,” said Amb. Ray, “That’s what we’re going to try to do. We don’t know what the outcome will be but we’ll do all that we can.”
I then presented my thoughts and ideas including the need to get documents declassified, which Amb. Ray said was a very frustrating problem for everyone at DPMO as well.
I finally came to the point that had very recently become my prime objective for this meeting and it concerned a recent confluence of thoughts I’d been ruminating on for the past couple weeks prompted by the continuous news, commentary, political maneuvering and rhetoric surrounding the North Korean (DPRK) nuclear tests.
During the previous week, the U.S. public had an extremely rare occasion to hear the voice of DPRK U.N. Ambassador Pak Gil Yon expressing how the nuclear bomb test was a proud moment for his nation.
In 1985 Amb. Pak Gil Yon made a very unusual overture by calling Bob Dumas at his home after hearing about Bob’s federal court case to reclassify Roger a POW. Amb. Pak invited Bob to meet with him in New York to discuss how the POW/MIA issue could be negotiated on a presidential one-on-one level.
This was the start of a 10-year relationship between Bob and Amb. Pak and other ambassadors at the North Korean Mission to the U.N. Bob had several meetings with Amb. Pak, Amb. Ho Jong and over 250 phone conversations with Pak, Ho and other DPRK ambassadors and embassy staff.
Bob asked Amb. Pak in 1994, “Would your country ever use a nuclear weapon against South Korea, Japan or the U.S.?” Amb. Pak replied,
“If we used a nuclear weapon we know our country would be destroyed in 20 minutes and be reduced to water. We’re not that stupid.”
From my knowledge of these meetings and taped conversations I have listened to, I have a strong opinion that North Korea has always desired direct one-on-one negotiations with the U.S. president, a non-aggression pact and ultimately a signed peace treaty to officially end the Korean War.
As for saber rattling in the form of nuclear bomb testing, my belief is that this extreme measure seeks to force the U.S. into direct negotiations and because there really is no military option for the U.S. in Korea, these direct talks are going to happen and the Korean War peace treaty will be signed.
I told Amb. Ray that this will give us the best (and maybe the only) opportunity to achieve resolution to the POW/MIA issue and receiving a full accounting of all the Last Seen Alive POW cases, all unaccounted for MIA cases and recovery of remains.
As the White House has been getting pressure to engage in direct talks with North Korea, President Bush has indicated that signing the Korean War Peace Treaty is a necessary step in normalizing relations with the DPRK.
I gave Amb. Ray an overview of the Korean War peace negotiations breakdown based on my research while producing my documentary.
The issue of prisoner exchange was the final stalemate in the peace negations during the war. In fact, for over half of the three-year war, POW repatriation was the last issue to be resolved.
Since South Korean President, Sygmund Rhee allowed thousands of DPRK and Chinese POWs that the U.N. Command was holding to defect and not return to the north or China, the North Korean government considered this tantamount to not returning all of their POWs and in retaliation would not return all of the U.N. Command POWs it was holding.
Without ever resolving the POW repatriation issue a peace treaty could not be signed and instead the hostilities ended by the compromise signing of an Armistice.
To this day, North Korea and the United States are technically still at war.
Amb. Ray appeared thoughtful and intrigued and said this was an interesting idea. He asked Mr. Cronour and Mr. Greer to verify that the prisoner exchange was not resolved when the Armistice was signed.
Amb. Ray said that DPMO could make such a recommendation to the President but it would be up to the President to consider it in any peace treaty negotiations that may occur.
As the meeting winded down I felt as if something very substantial had been achieved at this meeting.
While we made our way to the office door I asked Amb. Ray how long he would be director of DPMO. He said he didn’t know and that it depended on who would be the next President and when/if he gets called back to the State Dept. (Amb. Ray informed me earlier he was “on loan” from the State Dept.) He said he thought he would be in this position for at least two years.
At the end of the week, on Friday during the final plenary session Q&A of the DPMO Korean War POW/MIA Family Update Meeting, all the department heads and key support staff were on the stage to answer any questions in this final open forum.
I waited until there were no other questions from the audience before I made my final inquiry.
Throughout the three-day conference I would often throw hardball questions at the panelists. Usually I already knew the answers but I wanted the family members to hear these issues and the official responses that often are not satisfactory. Over half of the 400-plus family members in attendance were attending the conference for the first time and have no idea there is a continuing controversy concerning abandoned POW/MIAs and the live POW/MIA issue.
After the Army sergeants who brought wireless microphones to those wishing to ask questions joked that I was “shut off” from asking questions I did finally rise to make a plea as opposed to making a point.
I could see everyone was bracing for my final assault but I disarmed the DPMO officials by thanking them for a productive conference explaining that I spent several hours with DPMO analyst Phil O’Brian and Army Casualty officer, Lt. Col. Schuneman and we exchanged some crucial information concerning Roger Dumas which also shed light on other aspects of the general POW investigation.
I then described the meeting with Amb. Ray and my idea for DPMO to advise President Bush or his successor that the POW repatriation issue must be resolved before a peace treaty to formally end the Korean War can be signed.
I made an impassioned plea that this may be the only opportunity to ever achieve a resolution for live POWs, MIAs and the return of remains. I requested that DPMO should have as strong a case as possible ready to present to the President in order to achieve this goal.
Finally I posed the question, “What can we do to make this happen?”
Q&A moderator Chuck Henley responded by saying, “The key word you said is, ‘We.’” Mr. Henley explained that DPMO takes orders from above and their orders come from Congress. Mr. Henley suggested I disseminate this POW/MIA resolution proposal to all the veterans, POW/MIA organizations and family members and urge them to contact their Congressmen to support this resolution.
I think at lease some of us came out of this meeting with a sense that this peace treaty idea may provide an opportunity for all POW/MIA organizations, veterans groups, family members and DPMO to work together for a common goal.
This may be overly optimistic but I think we can all learn more and become more effective in our ultimate mission to account for our POW/MIAs if we can take advantage of this little piece of common ground that we can all find safe for mutual cooperation.
At this point I will draft a POW/MIA peace treaty initiative that can be directed to our legislators who will hopefully direct the Defense Dept. and DPMO to present a formal request to the President that a POW/MIA resolution must be a part of the requirements to sign the Korean War Peace Treaty.
Monday, February 21, 2005
The choice of Ed Asner as narrator of "Missing Presumed Dead" raised the ire of many who are extremely offended by Mr. Asners politics.
Following is a series of emails concerning an invitation for me to address the Vietnam Veterans Asso. California annual conference:
FALLOUT FROM ED ASNER AS NARRATOR OF "MISSING, PRESUMED DEAD"
(From Ed Mentz of the Vietnam Veterans Asso.)
Bill,
I have already received some feed back although not all positive just from the flyer. One of our representatives from a Chapter down south wrote this comment.
<< I find it hard to fathom that we would give credence to anything with the name of Ed Asner attached. Do we not remember the past? Ed Asner sent money to and supported the South American Communist rebels fighting American troops in the 80's. This is why his TV show was canceled and he was relegated to the obscurity he deserves. He, deservedly, has a hard time finding work because of his financing and public support of the rebels. Supporting, endorsing or endorsing anything that Ed Asner has his name attached to is parallel to supporting Jane Fonda. Americans died because of Ed Asner, if we forget our history then we are doomed to repeat our history.>>
He seemed satisfied when the past president told him we would ask you why he was chosen as the narrator. Just to give you a heads up so you may know what to expect. Of course that is one person's opinion. To me what is more important is what the message is not who is narrating it, as most of the comments are in the first person own words....I do agree with his last sentence tho, if we forget we are doomed to repeat our history on the POW-MIA issue....Ed
Hello Ed,
Thank you for forwarding this feedback. I've been getting similar sentiments from others. I do understand the concern about Ed Asner but the fact is Ed Asner has a very strong appeal to more than half of the American population. It's the same portion of the population that would not watch a documentary that Bob Dornan had anything to do with. My concern is not wether someone is a communist but rather reaching as wide an audience as possible so that we can get our POWs returned. If it meant interviewing Satan to do that, I would.
Here is an explanation that will hopefully resolve this issue. Fee free to send this response to anyone.
WHY ED ASNER IS THE NARRATOR OF "MISSING, PRESUMED DEAD: THE SEARCH FOR AMERICA'S POWS"
There has been concern about the choice of Ed Asner as narrator of my feature documentary film, MISSING, PRESUMED DEAD: THE SEARCH FOR AMERICA'S POWS, for what some consider his "extreme" left leaning politics.
My purpose in making this film is to reach as wide an audience as possible to elevate our abandoned POWs to a top national priority. It will take an extraordinary effort to convince the American public that POWs were abandoned and that some are still being held against their will. When the public is made aware of this fact, they will demand the government to do what ever it takes to repatriate these forgotten soldiers.
If this film reaches a wide audience, I believe a public mandate will ensue to force our government into action.
The only way we can achieve this mandate is to appeal to EVERYONE. Opposing political camps must unite to enable a completely non-partisan effort. Personal differences in politics must be put aside for the sake of our POWs. Political bickering, mudslinging and hate-mongering on all sides only undermines this effort.
In making this film it was my intention to include all political camps in the presentation of the POW/MIA issue. Before a narrator was chosen, the film appeared to represent a conservative point of view (to wit: interviewees Bob Dornan, Bob Smith, James Lucier, etc.) Liberal screeners of the film rough-cuts (and even a staffer at Sen. John McCain's office who was told about the film) argued that many audience members would not consider the film seriously because it's coming from an "extreme" conservative viewpoint.
I decided that the film needed a narrator that would give balance to the film's political POV. Ed Asner was made aware of the film and offered to provide the narration free of charge because he felt very strongly about the POW/MIA issue.
Though Mr. Asner's politics may raise the ire of many conservatives, the same can be said of liberal towards Mr. Dornan. The fact that both of these public figures are willing to advocate for this issue in the same documentary film only shows that the rest of America can fall between these two political extremes and support the POW effort.
What other issue can unite all political camps as this?
For this one effort I urge everyone to put aside political differences and unite on this one issue until we can convince the American public that it's time our POWs come home.
(P.S. If it meant getting our POWs home, Satan would be the narrator.)
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Ed Mentz Sr."
Date: January 10, 2005 2:10:49 PM PST
To: William Dumas
Subject: Possible grievous error
Bill:
I was very concerned when your answer included this "(and even a staffer at Sen. John McCain's office who was told about the film) argued that many audience members would not consider the film seriously because it's coming from an "extreme" conservative viewpoint.” Especially after reviewing the DVD. The negative fall out from Vietnam Veterans on having Ed Asner as the narrator has been swift and harsh. Almost to the point were it may be taken under consideration in the best interest of the State Council not to show it in Feb. I will keep you posted and let you know of any developments. Here are just a few more of the replies.
“what a shame - he (Asner and others) is the reason why POW's were treated so badly. He supported the enemy....and gave comfort to the enemy.
If VVA supports this program VVA definitely will lose VVA members over this. I hope you pass this along to the liberal media.
Again another slap in the face to the Vietnam Veteran.”
“Calling Ed Asner "Left Leaning" is a big
understatement! The same "Balance" could have been reached by
asking Jane Fonda to be the narrator. Again I repeat, Ed
Asner Gave money to support the Sandinista's who at
the time were fighting American troops. His money
supported a faction that was involved in American troops
being killed. Benedict Arnold (who was considered an
American traitor) was hanged for doing less. Bob Dornan has
never supported publicly or financially a group
that was fighting US troops so using that comparison
doesn't pan out. The documentary film may be the best
that has been made to date, but it probably will never
be seen by those who remember Ed Asner's politics”
“I was at a "Welcome Home" concert for Vietnam Veterans
at the Los Angeles Form sometime in the mid to late
80's there were many actors and musical groups that were
paraded onstage, Peter Fonda, Credence Clearwater
Revival to name a couple. All received a standing ovation
when they were announced with the exception of one, Ed
Asner. When his name was announced the booing started
and didn't stop until he left the stage. What I
remember the most was (and I participated in this) Vietnam
Veterans (dressed in jungle fatigues and hats)
standing and turning their backs to the stage and remained
standing with their backs turned until he was done and
gone. Of course this was never made public but I was
there with my wife. My point to this story is many
will not forget that Ed Asner is an American traitor that
would have been hung if what he did had been done one
hundred or maybe even fifty years earlier. Using his
as the narrator was a grievous error.” end of quotes.
Ed
TO: Ed Mentz (Vietnam Veterans Asso.)
FROM: Bill Dumas
Ed,
What a shame some of your members are more interested in harboring their hatred for Ed Asner than realizing that Ed Asner appeals to a large segment of the population that must be included in this mandate to achieve the goal of bringing the issue of abandoned POWs to the American Public and repatriating any POWs still being held against their will.
For these people to say that they are going to quit your organization and boycott the film because Ed Asner, "(and others) is the reason why POWs were treated so badly" (which is an overstatement to begin with-the N. Vietnamese didn't need American actors to mistreat POWs) is like saying, "Ed Asner betrayed our POWs in the past so we're not going to allow this documentary film help repatriate POWs that are still being held against their will. In fact, we'd rather they remain in labor camps than allow this film to be viewed by the public." The point is, this attitude, which tries to condemn (Asner's) betrayal of our POWs actually perpetuates the betrayal. That's the real crime here and a sickening example of throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Anyone who possesses even a modicum of spiritual development, whether it be Christian, Judaism, etc., would look at this situation and say something to the effect, "It's good to see that Ed Asner has made a turnaround and is now helping the cause of our POWs."
If your members would rather, I'll send a letter to North Korea, where my uncle was abandoned in a POW camp, and I'll tell him, "I'm sorry the Vietnam Veterans Association would rather boycott a film narrated by Ed Asner than get you released from a labor camp where you've been imprisoned for the last 53 years. You don't have a problem with that, do you?"
I surely hope this mentality is the exception among your membership. If not, God help our POWs.
Sincerely,
Bill
Here's a good analysis from Jeff Smith of Task Force Omega:
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Jeff Smith"
Date: January 11, 2005 4:50:14 AM PST
To: "William Dumas"
Subject: Asner and the Dumas documentary
Bill:
I think your original response to me that we need to draw in those on the left to
this issue also, said it all, and Asner is one of their communist heroes. It is hard
for me to even look at the commie bastard, or to hear his voice, so I understand
people having a problem with this. I am a strong anti-communist and Asner is one
of the leaders of the "enemy within".
One thing I would correct in your response is:
"for what some consider his "extreme" left leaning politics."
because it isn't that "some consider", it is a stone cold fact that Asner is one of
the worst communists in Hollyweird. I think saying it that way may get people
fired up a little more instead of a little less. Just a suggestion. It sure raised my
eyebrow immediately.
Of course, when you made the decision to use Asner, you also indirectly made the
decision to have to eventually deal with this issue of Asner's communism.
The fact that Ed did it free of charge is excellent. It should be consoling to many
that Asner is receiving nothing for his efforts. I sure couldn't justify putting any money
in his pockets, knowing the extreme leftist / communist causes that he supports. That
made me feel much better immediately when you first told me that. Of course, I also
understood the real reason you let Asner do it and I think you have the best interests
of our POWs and their families in heart in using Asner. That is the ultimate bottom line.
No film that makes it into "mainstream" will ever be hard hitting enough for me and if I
truly want this film to make it into "mainstream", I have to accept the use of some people
I find offensive to me. It is that simple. Nothing in the mainstream that I have witnessed
is really giving 100% of the truth or the dirtiest secrets. The sheeple can't handle it, and it
is the sheeple that we are trying to educate, so we cannot drive them away with the hardest
of facts or with using only conservative commentators.
I could care less about raising the ire of any liberals because liberals are just plain wrong.
But bringing both camps into this film in support of its mission is, I believe the correct
thing to do and shows not only maturity on your part, but wisdom as well. I think anyone
that looks at it with an open mind will see that. There will be people who will not be able
to open up their minds, but they exist on both sides. You won't be able to satisfy everyone
and you need to be ok with that.
However, your efforts to justify the use of Asner, as you are doing, are very important and
it is wise of you to publicly explain it. At least it wasn't Ho Chi Kerry or Hanoi Jane! I was
immediately convinced of the wisdom of your decision when you explained it to me. It is a
wise move Bill, and might be, in the end, one of the wisest decisions of this entire project,
and that comes from someone who could easily put Asner in the crosshairs if the "fit ever
hits the shan", heh heh heh.
People need to get off their high horses because this mission is too important to "empower
Asner's politics" by allowing that to derail it. That is what the VNV Association needs to
understand above all else!
Your friend in Liberty,
Jeff "Mario" Smith
Task Force Omega of Kentucky
From: Ed Mentz csc_vvaed@sbcglobal.net
Subject: The Show will go on
Date: January 12, 2005 6:19:23 AM PST
To: wd@billdumas.com
Bill:
The California State Council Board of Directors, the President and I extend our personal invitation to have you come and speak to us about "missing, presumed dead" and your quest for the Truth. The showing of the film will be announced as it will be scheduled for all those who may wish to attend in a meeting room set aside for that purpose. Tentative showing for those who wish to attend may be during my POW tier Saturday afternoon, or after dinner. Positive feedback is coming in and looking at the number of people who may have been initially notified, less than five percent voiced their objections. Others do not like the narrator but sum it up this way:
“With respect to the members protesting, I would like to hear the message. I have not watched any program that Mr. Asner has been on in a long time. However this is not about Mr. Asner it is about POW's.”
“objections duly acknowledged. Let's not waste time on Mr Asner, we know who he is ...”
I apologize if I sounded negative; I was however taken back by the initial objections. Which I did not quite expect, if known would of announced the DVD without the credits except for yours, and the brief synopsis of what it is all about. Please don’t judge us all on a few discontented members. I am loaning out my first copy to my Chapter members to view, and time permitting will show all or a selected part to spar interest at our next Chapter meeting. I am also going to check on the possibility of a showing to students at the local college. Will keep you posted. “
I can assure you as a small part of a special effort during the war, many of us laid our lives on the line to try and free our POWs and others downed behind enemy lines. Just like saving Private Ryan, we did not give up on our brothers. After the papers are sign however, it becomes your story.
Looking forward to your acceptance and meeting you in February.
Sincerely,
Ed Mentz, Sr.
V.V.A. Calif. State Council
Central Dist. Director
Vets Incarcerated/POW MIA Chair
Following is a series of emails concerning an invitation for me to address the Vietnam Veterans Asso. California annual conference:
FALLOUT FROM ED ASNER AS NARRATOR OF "MISSING, PRESUMED DEAD"
(From Ed Mentz of the Vietnam Veterans Asso.)
Bill,
I have already received some feed back although not all positive just from the flyer. One of our representatives from a Chapter down south wrote this comment.
<< I find it hard to fathom that we would give credence to anything with the name of Ed Asner attached. Do we not remember the past? Ed Asner sent money to and supported the South American Communist rebels fighting American troops in the 80's. This is why his TV show was canceled and he was relegated to the obscurity he deserves. He, deservedly, has a hard time finding work because of his financing and public support of the rebels. Supporting, endorsing or endorsing anything that Ed Asner has his name attached to is parallel to supporting Jane Fonda. Americans died because of Ed Asner, if we forget our history then we are doomed to repeat our history.>>
He seemed satisfied when the past president told him we would ask you why he was chosen as the narrator. Just to give you a heads up so you may know what to expect. Of course that is one person's opinion. To me what is more important is what the message is not who is narrating it, as most of the comments are in the first person own words....I do agree with his last sentence tho, if we forget we are doomed to repeat our history on the POW-MIA issue....Ed
Hello Ed,
Thank you for forwarding this feedback. I've been getting similar sentiments from others. I do understand the concern about Ed Asner but the fact is Ed Asner has a very strong appeal to more than half of the American population. It's the same portion of the population that would not watch a documentary that Bob Dornan had anything to do with. My concern is not wether someone is a communist but rather reaching as wide an audience as possible so that we can get our POWs returned. If it meant interviewing Satan to do that, I would.
Here is an explanation that will hopefully resolve this issue. Fee free to send this response to anyone.
WHY ED ASNER IS THE NARRATOR OF "MISSING, PRESUMED DEAD: THE SEARCH FOR AMERICA'S POWS"
There has been concern about the choice of Ed Asner as narrator of my feature documentary film, MISSING, PRESUMED DEAD: THE SEARCH FOR AMERICA'S POWS, for what some consider his "extreme" left leaning politics.
My purpose in making this film is to reach as wide an audience as possible to elevate our abandoned POWs to a top national priority. It will take an extraordinary effort to convince the American public that POWs were abandoned and that some are still being held against their will. When the public is made aware of this fact, they will demand the government to do what ever it takes to repatriate these forgotten soldiers.
If this film reaches a wide audience, I believe a public mandate will ensue to force our government into action.
The only way we can achieve this mandate is to appeal to EVERYONE. Opposing political camps must unite to enable a completely non-partisan effort. Personal differences in politics must be put aside for the sake of our POWs. Political bickering, mudslinging and hate-mongering on all sides only undermines this effort.
In making this film it was my intention to include all political camps in the presentation of the POW/MIA issue. Before a narrator was chosen, the film appeared to represent a conservative point of view (to wit: interviewees Bob Dornan, Bob Smith, James Lucier, etc.) Liberal screeners of the film rough-cuts (and even a staffer at Sen. John McCain's office who was told about the film) argued that many audience members would not consider the film seriously because it's coming from an "extreme" conservative viewpoint.
I decided that the film needed a narrator that would give balance to the film's political POV. Ed Asner was made aware of the film and offered to provide the narration free of charge because he felt very strongly about the POW/MIA issue.
Though Mr. Asner's politics may raise the ire of many conservatives, the same can be said of liberal towards Mr. Dornan. The fact that both of these public figures are willing to advocate for this issue in the same documentary film only shows that the rest of America can fall between these two political extremes and support the POW effort.
What other issue can unite all political camps as this?
For this one effort I urge everyone to put aside political differences and unite on this one issue until we can convince the American public that it's time our POWs come home.
(P.S. If it meant getting our POWs home, Satan would be the narrator.)
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Ed Mentz Sr."
Date: January 10, 2005 2:10:49 PM PST
To: William Dumas
Subject: Possible grievous error
Bill:
I was very concerned when your answer included this "(and even a staffer at Sen. John McCain's office who was told about the film) argued that many audience members would not consider the film seriously because it's coming from an "extreme" conservative viewpoint.” Especially after reviewing the DVD. The negative fall out from Vietnam Veterans on having Ed Asner as the narrator has been swift and harsh. Almost to the point were it may be taken under consideration in the best interest of the State Council not to show it in Feb. I will keep you posted and let you know of any developments. Here are just a few more of the replies.
“what a shame - he (Asner and others) is the reason why POW's were treated so badly. He supported the enemy....and gave comfort to the enemy.
If VVA supports this program VVA definitely will lose VVA members over this. I hope you pass this along to the liberal media.
Again another slap in the face to the Vietnam Veteran.”
“Calling Ed Asner "Left Leaning" is a big
understatement! The same "Balance" could have been reached by
asking Jane Fonda to be the narrator. Again I repeat, Ed
Asner Gave money to support the Sandinista's who at
the time were fighting American troops. His money
supported a faction that was involved in American troops
being killed. Benedict Arnold (who was considered an
American traitor) was hanged for doing less. Bob Dornan has
never supported publicly or financially a group
that was fighting US troops so using that comparison
doesn't pan out. The documentary film may be the best
that has been made to date, but it probably will never
be seen by those who remember Ed Asner's politics”
“I was at a "Welcome Home" concert for Vietnam Veterans
at the Los Angeles Form sometime in the mid to late
80's there were many actors and musical groups that were
paraded onstage, Peter Fonda, Credence Clearwater
Revival to name a couple. All received a standing ovation
when they were announced with the exception of one, Ed
Asner. When his name was announced the booing started
and didn't stop until he left the stage. What I
remember the most was (and I participated in this) Vietnam
Veterans (dressed in jungle fatigues and hats)
standing and turning their backs to the stage and remained
standing with their backs turned until he was done and
gone. Of course this was never made public but I was
there with my wife. My point to this story is many
will not forget that Ed Asner is an American traitor that
would have been hung if what he did had been done one
hundred or maybe even fifty years earlier. Using his
as the narrator was a grievous error.” end of quotes.
Ed
TO: Ed Mentz (Vietnam Veterans Asso.)
FROM: Bill Dumas
Ed,
What a shame some of your members are more interested in harboring their hatred for Ed Asner than realizing that Ed Asner appeals to a large segment of the population that must be included in this mandate to achieve the goal of bringing the issue of abandoned POWs to the American Public and repatriating any POWs still being held against their will.
For these people to say that they are going to quit your organization and boycott the film because Ed Asner, "(and others) is the reason why POWs were treated so badly" (which is an overstatement to begin with-the N. Vietnamese didn't need American actors to mistreat POWs) is like saying, "Ed Asner betrayed our POWs in the past so we're not going to allow this documentary film help repatriate POWs that are still being held against their will. In fact, we'd rather they remain in labor camps than allow this film to be viewed by the public." The point is, this attitude, which tries to condemn (Asner's) betrayal of our POWs actually perpetuates the betrayal. That's the real crime here and a sickening example of throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Anyone who possesses even a modicum of spiritual development, whether it be Christian, Judaism, etc., would look at this situation and say something to the effect, "It's good to see that Ed Asner has made a turnaround and is now helping the cause of our POWs."
If your members would rather, I'll send a letter to North Korea, where my uncle was abandoned in a POW camp, and I'll tell him, "I'm sorry the Vietnam Veterans Association would rather boycott a film narrated by Ed Asner than get you released from a labor camp where you've been imprisoned for the last 53 years. You don't have a problem with that, do you?"
I surely hope this mentality is the exception among your membership. If not, God help our POWs.
Sincerely,
Bill
Here's a good analysis from Jeff Smith of Task Force Omega:
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Jeff Smith"
Date: January 11, 2005 4:50:14 AM PST
To: "William Dumas"
Subject: Asner and the Dumas documentary
Bill:
I think your original response to me that we need to draw in those on the left to
this issue also, said it all, and Asner is one of their communist heroes. It is hard
for me to even look at the commie bastard, or to hear his voice, so I understand
people having a problem with this. I am a strong anti-communist and Asner is one
of the leaders of the "enemy within".
One thing I would correct in your response is:
"for what some consider his "extreme" left leaning politics."
because it isn't that "some consider", it is a stone cold fact that Asner is one of
the worst communists in Hollyweird. I think saying it that way may get people
fired up a little more instead of a little less. Just a suggestion. It sure raised my
eyebrow immediately.
Of course, when you made the decision to use Asner, you also indirectly made the
decision to have to eventually deal with this issue of Asner's communism.
The fact that Ed did it free of charge is excellent. It should be consoling to many
that Asner is receiving nothing for his efforts. I sure couldn't justify putting any money
in his pockets, knowing the extreme leftist / communist causes that he supports. That
made me feel much better immediately when you first told me that. Of course, I also
understood the real reason you let Asner do it and I think you have the best interests
of our POWs and their families in heart in using Asner. That is the ultimate bottom line.
No film that makes it into "mainstream" will ever be hard hitting enough for me and if I
truly want this film to make it into "mainstream", I have to accept the use of some people
I find offensive to me. It is that simple. Nothing in the mainstream that I have witnessed
is really giving 100% of the truth or the dirtiest secrets. The sheeple can't handle it, and it
is the sheeple that we are trying to educate, so we cannot drive them away with the hardest
of facts or with using only conservative commentators.
I could care less about raising the ire of any liberals because liberals are just plain wrong.
But bringing both camps into this film in support of its mission is, I believe the correct
thing to do and shows not only maturity on your part, but wisdom as well. I think anyone
that looks at it with an open mind will see that. There will be people who will not be able
to open up their minds, but they exist on both sides. You won't be able to satisfy everyone
and you need to be ok with that.
However, your efforts to justify the use of Asner, as you are doing, are very important and
it is wise of you to publicly explain it. At least it wasn't Ho Chi Kerry or Hanoi Jane! I was
immediately convinced of the wisdom of your decision when you explained it to me. It is a
wise move Bill, and might be, in the end, one of the wisest decisions of this entire project,
and that comes from someone who could easily put Asner in the crosshairs if the "fit ever
hits the shan", heh heh heh.
People need to get off their high horses because this mission is too important to "empower
Asner's politics" by allowing that to derail it. That is what the VNV Association needs to
understand above all else!
Your friend in Liberty,
Jeff "Mario" Smith
Task Force Omega of Kentucky
From: Ed Mentz csc_vvaed@sbcglobal.net
Subject: The Show will go on
Date: January 12, 2005 6:19:23 AM PST
To: wd@billdumas.com
Bill:
The California State Council Board of Directors, the President and I extend our personal invitation to have you come and speak to us about "missing, presumed dead" and your quest for the Truth. The showing of the film will be announced as it will be scheduled for all those who may wish to attend in a meeting room set aside for that purpose. Tentative showing for those who wish to attend may be during my POW tier Saturday afternoon, or after dinner. Positive feedback is coming in and looking at the number of people who may have been initially notified, less than five percent voiced their objections. Others do not like the narrator but sum it up this way:
“With respect to the members protesting, I would like to hear the message. I have not watched any program that Mr. Asner has been on in a long time. However this is not about Mr. Asner it is about POW's.”
“objections duly acknowledged. Let's not waste time on Mr Asner, we know who he is ...”
I apologize if I sounded negative; I was however taken back by the initial objections. Which I did not quite expect, if known would of announced the DVD without the credits except for yours, and the brief synopsis of what it is all about. Please don’t judge us all on a few discontented members. I am loaning out my first copy to my Chapter members to view, and time permitting will show all or a selected part to spar interest at our next Chapter meeting. I am also going to check on the possibility of a showing to students at the local college. Will keep you posted. “
I can assure you as a small part of a special effort during the war, many of us laid our lives on the line to try and free our POWs and others downed behind enemy lines. Just like saving Private Ryan, we did not give up on our brothers. After the papers are sign however, it becomes your story.
Looking forward to your acceptance and meeting you in February.
Sincerely,
Ed Mentz, Sr.
V.V.A. Calif. State Council
Central Dist. Director
Vets Incarcerated/POW MIA Chair
Monday, December 27, 2004
Bill Dumas: Writer/Producer/Director
Sunday, December 26, 2004
Happy Holidays! So it’s been over a month since my last blog entry when I promised to make regular updates here and keep everyone informed of our progress to release the film.
Unfortunately, the endless stream of computer problems continued to plague us. It wasn’t until last Wednesday at 1 a.m. that my editor, Jason Stelzel, arrived at my home with the first five DVDs to bring with me to the east coast just in time for my flight from Los Angeles several hours later.
We finally uncorked a bottle of champagne that had been sitting in the fridge for about as long as this 3 1/2 year-plus production has been underway. We relished the joy of seeing the final product playing from a DVD player (as opposed to from a computer editing program timeline.) Jason did an awesome DVD mastering job not to mention some dazzling last minute reedits while we were resolving technical problems.
Just to assure all the contributors to this film production, a few listings for the film appeared over the past month stating that the film was completed and we were taking orders. These announcements were a bit premature, which was our fault.
Be assured that our contributors are the first to be receiving DVDs and VHSs which were put into the mail by Christmas day in Los Angeles. VHSs and large, multi-item packages were mailed Media Rate because the first class shipping was very expensive. The post office told me these should take a week to arrive, though I’ve heard it can actually take up to a couple weeks.
Included in all the packages are order forms for the film and I hope that after watching the film everyone will feel inspired to spread the word about this documentary. This film needs to reach a mass audience. If this grassroots effort succeeds we can elevate the POW/MIA issue to a top national priority.
Over the next few weeks we will be developing a plan to distribute the film to key law-makers and the media. If anyone has any suggestions to help us with this promotion please send an email: blog@billdumas.com. Also, if anyone knows a publicist who would be willing to help, we would like to talk to them.
After viewing the film please send us an email and let us know what you think.
Happy New Year to everyone!
Unfortunately, the endless stream of computer problems continued to plague us. It wasn’t until last Wednesday at 1 a.m. that my editor, Jason Stelzel, arrived at my home with the first five DVDs to bring with me to the east coast just in time for my flight from Los Angeles several hours later.
We finally uncorked a bottle of champagne that had been sitting in the fridge for about as long as this 3 1/2 year-plus production has been underway. We relished the joy of seeing the final product playing from a DVD player (as opposed to from a computer editing program timeline.) Jason did an awesome DVD mastering job not to mention some dazzling last minute reedits while we were resolving technical problems.
Just to assure all the contributors to this film production, a few listings for the film appeared over the past month stating that the film was completed and we were taking orders. These announcements were a bit premature, which was our fault.
Be assured that our contributors are the first to be receiving DVDs and VHSs which were put into the mail by Christmas day in Los Angeles. VHSs and large, multi-item packages were mailed Media Rate because the first class shipping was very expensive. The post office told me these should take a week to arrive, though I’ve heard it can actually take up to a couple weeks.
Included in all the packages are order forms for the film and I hope that after watching the film everyone will feel inspired to spread the word about this documentary. This film needs to reach a mass audience. If this grassroots effort succeeds we can elevate the POW/MIA issue to a top national priority.
Over the next few weeks we will be developing a plan to distribute the film to key law-makers and the media. If anyone has any suggestions to help us with this promotion please send an email: blog@billdumas.com. Also, if anyone knows a publicist who would be willing to help, we would like to talk to them.
After viewing the film please send us an email and let us know what you think.
Happy New Year to everyone!
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Production Set-back.
We suffered a setback last Sunday at a very crucial moment in the final post-production process. When we were about to output the film from the computer to master the DVDs one of the hard drives containing nearly 120 Gigs of video footage had a catastrophic failure.
Since then we have been going through a complicated process of recovering the footage. We've also encountered additional, unrelated system problems hampering this effort. Fortunately our team includes top-notch computer experts.
If the media on this drive cannot be restored we will then begin the painstaking process of reloading the video footage from the original tapes (which number over 100.)
I'm sure this is very frustrating for those who have been waiting so long to view this film. For me, personally, it feels like a twisting dagger in a very long and arduous process.
At this point we do not know how long this will set us back. Best estimate right now is 1-3 weeks.
I will make an effort to update this blog frequently to chart our progress.
Since then we have been going through a complicated process of recovering the footage. We've also encountered additional, unrelated system problems hampering this effort. Fortunately our team includes top-notch computer experts.
If the media on this drive cannot be restored we will then begin the painstaking process of reloading the video footage from the original tapes (which number over 100.)
I'm sure this is very frustrating for those who have been waiting so long to view this film. For me, personally, it feels like a twisting dagger in a very long and arduous process.
At this point we do not know how long this will set us back. Best estimate right now is 1-3 weeks.
I will make an effort to update this blog frequently to chart our progress.
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
It's 1:32 a.m. PST, November 3rd. The Presidential election is still too close to call. My editor, Jason, and I have been working all evening on the final edit of the film. We've been delayed once again because Jason's primary film project is also being completed and has been screening extensively on the west coast for the past couple weeks.
We'll be wrapping for the evening shortly and will still need another day of editing. We'll also need several sessions to put together the packaging and DVD mastering.
To continue filling in the gaps of my infrequent blogging, I'll talk a bit about attending the annual National Alliance of Families meeting in Washington, DC in June.
I was invited to the three-day event to screen a work-in-progress of the film. The screening was the last event of weekend, which coincided, with the Dept. of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO) annual meeting of Vietnam POW/MIA family members.
I videotaped the speeches and was especially happy for the opportunity to finally get former DPMO analyst Insung Lee on tape.
On Saturday, the film was shown on video projector allowing for a large screen viewing. This was the first audience to screen the film that was well versed on the POW/MIA issue. I knew this was an important test for the film. I was ready to listen to criticism of the film's shortcomings.
I was happy with the audience reaction during the screening but never expected the long, standing ovation when the film ended. During the Q&A Rich Sanders and Bill Kessling of Vietnow presented me with a $1000 donation. This was the most rewarding experience of this project.
We'll be wrapping for the evening shortly and will still need another day of editing. We'll also need several sessions to put together the packaging and DVD mastering.
To continue filling in the gaps of my infrequent blogging, I'll talk a bit about attending the annual National Alliance of Families meeting in Washington, DC in June.
I was invited to the three-day event to screen a work-in-progress of the film. The screening was the last event of weekend, which coincided, with the Dept. of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO) annual meeting of Vietnam POW/MIA family members.
I videotaped the speeches and was especially happy for the opportunity to finally get former DPMO analyst Insung Lee on tape.
On Saturday, the film was shown on video projector allowing for a large screen viewing. This was the first audience to screen the film that was well versed on the POW/MIA issue. I knew this was an important test for the film. I was ready to listen to criticism of the film's shortcomings.
I was happy with the audience reaction during the screening but never expected the long, standing ovation when the film ended. During the Q&A Rich Sanders and Bill Kessling of Vietnow presented me with a $1000 donation. This was the most rewarding experience of this project.
Sunday, October 24, 2004
The Red Sox are leading in game 2 of the World Series 4-1 in the 6th inning.
It looks like yet another week is going to pass without the final editing being completed.
I’ve been working solo on the editing for the past few days until my editor, Jason, can take a break from his other documentary project. One more session this week should finish this edit.
On Friday I helped out Jason with a screening of his other documentary at the Human Rights Film Festival in Los Angeles. I was interviewed for a web radio station about Missing, Presumed Dead. The interview should be webcast on KillRadio.org’s “Talk Is Still Cheap” program within the next few weeks.
As I was saying in the last blog entry, this film is considered a “hard sell” by the Hollywood community who I have to rely on to bring this film to the public via major media outlets such as Discovery Channel, A&E, etc.
I’m reluctant to say the History Channel because I don’t want to pigeonhole this film as an historic film. This story is not only current but there is an urgency in it being told. If there are POWs still being held in N. Korea time is of the essence as these men are now in their 70s.
I asked Steve Nemeth at Rhino Films just what makes this film “a hard sell.” He said that the film doesn’t pit one group against another, like how Michael Moore rallies liberal against conservatives – it doesn’t make one group angry with another.
Maybe that’s the level political documentaries have succumbed to. Yet, I don’t consider this a political film. At least it doesn’t pit conservatives against liberals. There’s blame to go around to both political camps for the POW situation.
It’s clear to me from several work-in-progress screenings I’ve held of the film over the past year that the audience experiences feelings of anger over our government’s actions and non-action in the POW issue.
Hollywood always underestimates its audience. Since they can’t put a face on the antagonist of this story (preferably President Bush) they don’t think the audience can “root” for this film.
I think another problem Hollywood has in backing the film is that it lacks “entertainment value” for Hollywood to stake an interest in it. There isn’t the visual stimulation of action sequences or an interviewer who relentlessly stalks his interviewees hoping to catch them off-guard
Missing, Presumed Dead, is essentially a “talking head” documentary. The story is compelling but the visuals may not be. Hollywood doesn’t believe an audience can be captivated by merely a captivating story. It also needs captivating screen images. Of course, the audience doesn’t know that. They’re captivated by the story with the visual stimulation that Hollywood is convinced they need. The irony is, that with all its research and observation, Hollywood still doesn’t know its audience.
In coming blog entries I’ll recap some of the highlights since June including the annual meeting of the National Alliance of Families in Washington, DC where I was flying to while writing the last entry before this current series of blog entries.
In my next entry I’ll talk about my correspondence with Village Voice writer, Sydney Schanberg who wrote a cover story on Sen. John Kerry’s mishandling of the 1992 Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs.
Boston is now up 6-1 in the 7th.
Update: The BoSox have won game 2.
It looks like yet another week is going to pass without the final editing being completed.
I’ve been working solo on the editing for the past few days until my editor, Jason, can take a break from his other documentary project. One more session this week should finish this edit.
On Friday I helped out Jason with a screening of his other documentary at the Human Rights Film Festival in Los Angeles. I was interviewed for a web radio station about Missing, Presumed Dead. The interview should be webcast on KillRadio.org’s “Talk Is Still Cheap” program within the next few weeks.
As I was saying in the last blog entry, this film is considered a “hard sell” by the Hollywood community who I have to rely on to bring this film to the public via major media outlets such as Discovery Channel, A&E, etc.
I’m reluctant to say the History Channel because I don’t want to pigeonhole this film as an historic film. This story is not only current but there is an urgency in it being told. If there are POWs still being held in N. Korea time is of the essence as these men are now in their 70s.
I asked Steve Nemeth at Rhino Films just what makes this film “a hard sell.” He said that the film doesn’t pit one group against another, like how Michael Moore rallies liberal against conservatives – it doesn’t make one group angry with another.
Maybe that’s the level political documentaries have succumbed to. Yet, I don’t consider this a political film. At least it doesn’t pit conservatives against liberals. There’s blame to go around to both political camps for the POW situation.
It’s clear to me from several work-in-progress screenings I’ve held of the film over the past year that the audience experiences feelings of anger over our government’s actions and non-action in the POW issue.
Hollywood always underestimates its audience. Since they can’t put a face on the antagonist of this story (preferably President Bush) they don’t think the audience can “root” for this film.
I think another problem Hollywood has in backing the film is that it lacks “entertainment value” for Hollywood to stake an interest in it. There isn’t the visual stimulation of action sequences or an interviewer who relentlessly stalks his interviewees hoping to catch them off-guard
Missing, Presumed Dead, is essentially a “talking head” documentary. The story is compelling but the visuals may not be. Hollywood doesn’t believe an audience can be captivated by merely a captivating story. It also needs captivating screen images. Of course, the audience doesn’t know that. They’re captivated by the story with the visual stimulation that Hollywood is convinced they need. The irony is, that with all its research and observation, Hollywood still doesn’t know its audience.
In coming blog entries I’ll recap some of the highlights since June including the annual meeting of the National Alliance of Families in Washington, DC where I was flying to while writing the last entry before this current series of blog entries.
In my next entry I’ll talk about my correspondence with Village Voice writer, Sydney Schanberg who wrote a cover story on Sen. John Kerry’s mishandling of the 1992 Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs.
Boston is now up 6-1 in the 7th.
Update: The BoSox have won game 2.
