Seymour Hersh was born on April 8, 1937 in Chicago, Illinois. He was American journalist who He went to University of Chicago and became a correspondent for the Associated Press in Chicago and Washington in 1963. He was an American journalist who reported on the Vietnam War and in 1969, he uncovered the My Lai Massacre. He received the Pulitzer Prize for the story. Beside the My Lai massacre, he also reported on the Watergate Scandal.[3]
There were three article published by St. Louis Post-Dispatch to expose the My Lai massacre to the American Public:
Lieutenant Accused of Murdering 109 Civilians
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, November 13, 1969
On November 13, 1969, St. Louis Post-Dispatch published the first article on the former Army lieutenant William L Calley Jr who was convicted on 22 counts of murder in My Lai Massacre. The first half of the article gave in depth information on Calley’s case. One of the key information that was in the article was that the area was known to be a Viet Cong fortress since the beginning of Vietnam War. One of the man who participated with the mission with Calley had this to say….[4]
“We were told to just clear the area. It was a typical combat assault formation. We came in hot, with a cover of artillery in front of us, came down the line and destroyed the village.
“There are always some civilian casualties in a combat operation. He isn’t guilty of murder.”
The order to clear the area was relayed from the battalion commander to the company commander to Calley, the source said. Calley’s attorney said in an interview: “This is one case that should never have been brought. Whatever killing there was in a firefight in connection with the operation. “
“You can’t afford to guess whether a civilian is a Viet Cong or not. Either they shoot you or you shoot them.
There were also other key information in the article that makes question why the American Army did not take any action against Calley right away. Why did it took them almost a year to charge Lt. William L Calley? The second half of the article focused how the army knew about the incident but did not take any action against the people who were involved in this massacre until now when the whole thing got exposed to the public. According to the article….[4]
“There is another side of the Calley case—one that the Army cannot yet disclose. Interviews have brought out the fact that the investigation into the Pinkville affair was initiated six months after the incident, only after some of the men who served under Calley complained”.
“The Army has photographs purported to be of the incident, although these have not been introduced as evidence in the case, and may not be”.
“Another view that many held was that the top level of the military was concerned about possible war crime tribunals after the Vietnam war”.
Most of the article talked about Calley’s involvement in the incident and the people who supported Calley’s action. The article also suggested that there was a possibility of US Army trying to cover up the whole incident but it did not go into too much detail. It seems like the article was published to tell the public who was behind the massacre without giving any detail about the incident. [4]
“We were told to just clear the area. It was a typical combat assault formation. We came in hot, with a cover of artillery in front of us, came down the line and destroyed the village.
“There are always some civilian casualties in a combat operation. He isn’t guilty of murder.”
The order to clear the area was relayed from the battalion commander to the company commander to Calley, the source said. Calley’s attorney said in an interview: “This is one case that should never have been brought. Whatever killing there was in a firefight in connection with the operation. “
“You can’t afford to guess whether a civilian is a Viet Cong or not. Either they shoot you or you shoot them.
There were also other key information in the article that makes question why the American Army did not take any action against Calley right away. Why did it took them almost a year to charge Lt. William L Calley? The second half of the article focused how the army knew about the incident but did not take any action against the people who were involved in this massacre until now when the whole thing got exposed to the public. According to the article….[4]
“There is another side of the Calley case—one that the Army cannot yet disclose. Interviews have brought out the fact that the investigation into the Pinkville affair was initiated six months after the incident, only after some of the men who served under Calley complained”.
“The Army has photographs purported to be of the incident, although these have not been introduced as evidence in the case, and may not be”.
“Another view that many held was that the top level of the military was concerned about possible war crime tribunals after the Vietnam war”.
Most of the article talked about Calley’s involvement in the incident and the people who supported Calley’s action. The article also suggested that there was a possibility of US Army trying to cover up the whole incident but it did not go into too much detail. It seems like the article was published to tell the public who was behind the massacre without giving any detail about the incident. [4]
Hamlet Attack Called “Point-Blank Murder”
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, November 20, 1969
A headline from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch read, “Hamlet Attack Called “Point-Blank Murder”.
The second article was published on November 20, 1969 which headline “Hamlet Attack Called “Point-Blank Murder”. The article gave the eye testimony of three witnesses who took part in the My Lai Massacre and called the whole incidence as a “pointblank murder”. The article also pointed out other names of the people who might have been indirectly involve with the incident. The first eye witness Bernhardt gave his side of the story. According to his interview, the soldiers were burning down the villager’s house and they were shooting women and children. There was no presence of Viet Cong forces in the village. Bernhardt also said Army had photographs of the incident. In the interviews he said….[4]
“I saw them shoot an M-79 (grenade launcher) into a group of people who were still alive. But it (the shooting) was mostly done with a machine gun. They were shooting women and children just like anybody else”.
“Bernhardt said he had no idea precisely how many villagers were shot. He said that he had heard death counts ranging from 170 to more than 700”.
Michael Terry was the second witness who came on the scene moment after the shooting began. According to him, the soldiers were gathering the villagers into a group and lining them up in from of a ditch to shot them. The soldier had not regard for the human life. Nobody even try to stop the shooting. A lot of soldiers were unsure whether they were ordered to kill the villagers. According to his interview, a helicopter pilot attempted to stop the shooting. This is what Michael Terry said in a interview….[4]
“They just marched through shooting everybody,” he said. “Seems like no one said anything. …They just started pulling people out and shooting them.”
At one point, he said, more than 20 villagers were lined up in front of a ditch and shot.
The second articles focused informing the American public about the My Lai massacre and gave eye testimony of three witness. Unlike the first article, this article provided detail about what happened at My Lai massacre. The article did end with one of the source saying that Calley was just following orders. According to the source….[4]
“Calley and other officers in the company initially resisted the orders but eventually did their job. Calley’s platoon led the attack on the village, with the other units forming a horseshoe-shaped cordon around the area, to prevent enemy troops from fleeing.
“I don’t care whether Calley used the best judgment or not—he was faced with a tough decision,” the source said”.
The second article was published on November 20, 1969 which headline “Hamlet Attack Called “Point-Blank Murder”. The article gave the eye testimony of three witnesses who took part in the My Lai Massacre and called the whole incidence as a “pointblank murder”. The article also pointed out other names of the people who might have been indirectly involve with the incident. The first eye witness Bernhardt gave his side of the story. According to his interview, the soldiers were burning down the villager’s house and they were shooting women and children. There was no presence of Viet Cong forces in the village. Bernhardt also said Army had photographs of the incident. In the interviews he said….[4]
“I saw them shoot an M-79 (grenade launcher) into a group of people who were still alive. But it (the shooting) was mostly done with a machine gun. They were shooting women and children just like anybody else”.
“Bernhardt said he had no idea precisely how many villagers were shot. He said that he had heard death counts ranging from 170 to more than 700”.
Michael Terry was the second witness who came on the scene moment after the shooting began. According to him, the soldiers were gathering the villagers into a group and lining them up in from of a ditch to shot them. The soldier had not regard for the human life. Nobody even try to stop the shooting. A lot of soldiers were unsure whether they were ordered to kill the villagers. According to his interview, a helicopter pilot attempted to stop the shooting. This is what Michael Terry said in a interview….[4]
“They just marched through shooting everybody,” he said. “Seems like no one said anything. …They just started pulling people out and shooting them.”
At one point, he said, more than 20 villagers were lined up in front of a ditch and shot.
The second articles focused informing the American public about the My Lai massacre and gave eye testimony of three witness. Unlike the first article, this article provided detail about what happened at My Lai massacre. The article did end with one of the source saying that Calley was just following orders. According to the source….[4]
“Calley and other officers in the company initially resisted the orders but eventually did their job. Calley’s platoon led the attack on the village, with the other units forming a horseshoe-shaped cordon around the area, to prevent enemy troops from fleeing.
“I don’t care whether Calley used the best judgment or not—he was faced with a tough decision,” the source said”.
Ex-GI Tells of Killing Civilians at Pinkville
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, November 25, 1969
The third article was published on November 25, 1969 which talked about Paul Meadlo who also participated in the killing of Vietnamese people at Pinkville. In an interview, he shared his side of the story that proved Calley’s involvement in the My Lai Massacre and also Medina involvement in the massacre. According to him, Calley ordered his men to start shooting at the villagers. There were supposed to some Viet Cong in the village so the soldiers began to gather the villagers outside their houses. There were 40 to 45 civilian who were standing in the circle and Calley told his man to kill them. Meadlo did not stop there. He continued his spree of killing and did not think too much about it. He threw a hand grenade in hootches where people were trying to hide. This is what he had to say about his action….[4]
“We all were under orders,” Meadlo said “We all thought we were doing the right thing. At the time it didn’t bother me.”[4]
“We all were under orders,” Meadlo said “We all thought we were doing the right thing. At the time it didn’t bother me.”[4]
First Photographs of My Lai Massacre that were published:
|