When an Artist, In Vietnam Era, Tried to Drown Robert McNamara -- and Nearly Did It
It didn't make The New York Times or Washington Post obituaries today, but one of the most dramatic, and in some ways revealing, incidents in the long life of former Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara occurred in 1972 -- when a young man, reputedly angry about Vietnam, attempted to heave him off the Martha's Vineyard ferry, during its 7-mile voyage, and nearly succeeded.
Only McNamara's tenacious hold on a railing kept him from likely death.
The episode took place on Sept. 29, 1972. The U.S. still had half a million troops in McNamara's war, although a draw down was now in the works. A peace candidate, Sen. George McGovern, was getting batted around by Richard Nixon who was en route to a landslide victory a few weeks down the road (two guys named Woodward and Bernstein were deeply into probing the Watergate break-in).
And Robert McNamara was in the dining area of the Islander ferry en route to the Vineyard and his summer home there. The press had reported, just three weeks earlier, that with three other men he had purchased 41 acres on the island -- including its most famous nude beach.
For years, the details on the ferry boat assault reported in the press were sketchy. The attacker, name unknown, hoisted up McNamara by his belt and collar, and nearly got him overboard, in an area of the passage where he would have probably drowned and/or got stuck in the ship's propellers. McNamara luckily was able to clutch some grill work on the railing, battled for a least half a minute, and finally others intervened.
Amazingly, after the ship got to shore, McNamara did not press charges -- the man had somehow drifted away.
End of story? Not quite.
Several years later, Paul Hendrickson, a longtime reporter and feature writer for The Washington Post, started doing some digging and in 1985, managed to identify the perpetrator, an artist still living on the Vineyard. Of course, the man was surprised to be discovered but agreed to explain what happened, if his name was kept secret.
Hendrickson would write an article about it for the Post, and then give it feature attention in his 1995 book The Living and the Dead: Robert McNamara and Five Lives of a Lost War. (He's written several other books since.) Until then it was barely mentioned in books.
The man said that on the night of the incident he'd been drinking on board the Islander when he spotted McNamara in the dining area. The artist, 27 years old at the time, believed he'd been harassed by his draft board, and felt under pressure because his two brothers (and some other family members) had served in Vietnam.
In a 1996 "Book Notes" interview with C-SPAN's Brian Lamb, Hendrickson said that the artist "saw the icon of the Vietnam War standing just a few feet away from him, the embodiment of all of these terrible tensions about Vietnam.... This 27-year-old artist, who had avoided the war, whose two older brothers had served, who was regarded in some ways in his own family as 'the shirker,' stood there on the other side of the lunchroom and watched Mr. McNamara enjoying himself.
It was a Friday evening, and Mr. McNamara had a companion and they were standing against the canteen bar of the lunchroom and they were having a high old time.... A murderous rage began climbing up inside this man's throat. And almost unable to stop himself, he said he was going to do something... He walked over to Mr. McNamara and he said, 'Sir, you have a phone call. Please follow me.' He was posing, in a sense, as a member of the crew... He instantly put down his drink and followed the guy right out.
So they walk out into the inky dark of the boat. They're out there alone in this narrow passageway, and... he just turned and got him by the shirt collar and the belt and he tried to hoist him over the side... And there were about 35 or 40 seconds of titanic struggle at the rail. And the way McNamara saved himself was by inserting his hands and holding on for dear life into the metal grill work.
Hendrickson continued:
And, Brian, I feel that that kind of see saw battle, which is 45 seconds out of an artist's life and 45 seconds out of McNamara's life, is the Vietnam War. It's that '60s struggle between what? -- between immense authority on the one hand and disenfranchised, '60s, quote, 'shirker.' Rebellion and authority -- that's what a lot of Vietnam and the '60s and all of this things we're dealing with now in residue are about."
Lamb then asked, "What's he think of what he did today?"
Hendrickson:
He has very mixed feelings. I think again that's part of the legacy of the terrible turmoil that Vietnam caused in all of us. On the one hand, he would understand that what he did was contextual with the rage of the times. And on the other hand, I think he would, of course, regret what he did to a degree that it could have resulted in somebody's death and he could have been a murderer. So he has those kinds of mixed feelings.
That portion of the TV interview concluded with this exchange.
LAMB: "You say that this man has seen Robert McNamara on the island since?"
HENDRICKSON: "That's what he tells me. They were once seated across from each other in a restaurant in Edgartown. They were very close to one another. And their eye contact lasted a second just like yours and mine just now. And then they both looked away and they both went on with their dinners."
I should note that some people on the island believe that the real reason for the artist's attack was McNamara threatening to cuff off access to the nude beach.
Here is a link to the full interview.
Greg Mitchell's latest book is "Why Obama Won." He is editor of Editor & Publisher.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I saw him in a restaurant once too. I wanted to hit him over the head with a wine bottle. But my arms felt paralyzed. He went on enjoying his meal. My dinner tasted like dust.
A factoid I recall from Halberstam's "Best and the Brightest": McNamara was an avid rock climber. The hand strength he developed during years of climbing probably saved his life.
This is a gross generalization, but the type of people who vacation on Martha's Vineyard, the "best and the brightest", shouldn't be running our government. These so-called elites represent the entrenched interests that are causing the decay of our out-of-touch political class.
Note where the president will be vacationing shortly.
DC needs a good flushing. They're all just tools of Wall Street.
The Bush family has its own compound near Kennebunkport, Maine, and it served as the summer spot for George H.W. and Barbara Bush. I though you were ga-ga over George W. Bush, Julie. You really think W. was a rancher. He bought the ranch at Rove's suggestion just to look like a Texas cowboy and sold it as soon as his term was over.
JulieSA...did you mean tools..or "fools"....my tongue in cheek ditty.
so..attempted murder on a ferry to the Vineyard...a world I've NOT a clue about (closest I ever got was Kennebunkport on a driving trip in the area).. Must as I'd be tempted...I couldn't throw anyone off a Ferry to their death... but we do need to file McNamera under...WTF were you thinking... seems that most (all) in power in DC...would rather have young service people die for us..than admit they were oh so wrong...(don't except a deathbed mea culpa from W or Cheney or Rove...the devil won't wait).
that Robert got to live to 92....70 YEARS longer than Viet Nam Vets...(have you seen the drug addiction stats for those that lived?...sad beyond sad) Death comes to us all...and McNamera finally admitted his mistakes...after all the deaths.. I can only hope that he has eternity to contemplate his sins...which of Dante's circles shall we place him on?
McNamara almost saw what warfare was like there for a moment. He went from one moment sitting in comfortable surroundings to almost being thrown overboard and drowned in the next. It is a fitting analogy for how the troops must feel when faced with a lonely death in a far off land.
People who did not live through the era cannot understand the tremendous passions the Viet Nam war created. I can understand the unknown artist's impulse, even though I would never have tried to carry it out, myself. I would have been content to spit on the man and leave it at that. But people have to understand, there was great anger in the land in those days.
That's pretty frickin' awesome. It's like cape fear, but without anyone actually dying in the end.
That would have been an occasion for some foreboding music followed by some dangerous jazz during the impromptu assassination-attempt scene.
That guy should get a book deal. It would be a very thin best-seller.
This anecode is no doubt why Bush and Cheney were terrified of going anywhere in public the last eight years, and even to this day stick exclusively to the "loyalty oath" circuit.
CHENEY, McNAMARA = WAR PROFITEERS, liars, war criminals.
HALLIBURTON got the war contracts.
What's the difference between this guy who tried to drown McNamara and the madman who murdered George Tiller, or Paul Hill, who was executed in Florida for the murder of an abortion clinic doctor and escort? All thought their actions were to avenge past slaughters and prevent future ones. I just read an article pleading for President Obama to save her from those who would murder because of what she did and believed.
So tell me why this guy gets a sympathetic articleand Tiller's killer is excoriated and remains under the jail, as he should.
1) McNamara didn't die.
2) No one encouraged or incited the unnamed artist to his actions.
1) McNamara apparently had monkey fingers, which is the sole reason he didn't end up as chum.
2) I guess the anti-war movement wouldn't count as incitement?
What those doctors were doing was perfectly legal.
As for the "sympathetic article", the answer is clear- McNamara never pressed charges, and did what he could to make sure the story never got out. Obviously not even McNamara thought the guy did anything wrong.
I don't think this was, as you put it, a "sympathetic article." It's just a story about an episode in McNamara's life, which included outtakes from an interview with the attempted murderer.
This wasn't about sympathy, it was about ambivalence - a microcosm of the times. Nothing was excused here. Try reading again, without your personal filters on.
what about john brown?
So the guy got away with attempted murder.... Now he admits it....
Statute of limitations!
No charges were ever filed. McNamara didn't have the guts to do it. Plus no jury would convict.
I read this yesterday, in a McClatchey column I think, and showed it to my husband, a skeptical criminal defense lawyer, who immediately declared it a hoax. I couldn't forward your column to him fast enough this a.m.!
The MSM has spent more time on the Michael Jackson death and subsequent circus than they spent on the lead up to the war in Iraq.
All you have to do is follow the money if you really want to find out who/what is driving any of the wars. It is that easy.
McNamara designed the dirty work, and Colin Powell and many others did the dirty work -- without conscience.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/powell.html
I'll say it: I enjoy when these American "mass murderers" die -- Nixon and now McNamara. Looking forward to Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. A fringe benefit is that after they die we get more of the truth about their depravity because the spineless and self-aggrandizers finally start sharing what they know.
By the way, there's no shortage of men like them. There are many. (Not only neocons.) Give them the power -- the opportunity -- and they'll inflict their dreams (our nightmares) on anybody. Which members of the Obama administration are capable of it? Afghanistan is their current playground. The action has already begun.
During the VietNam war, thousands of American citizens -- millions of citizens -- marched in the streets to try to stop the war. But our "leaders" ignored them as best they could. And the carnage, and the secret atrocities, wore on for years and years. Now, we have thousands of American citizens with knowledge and historical wisdom who have opposed the USA's wars of choice in the Mideast. Yet, our new president is ramping up, like Pres. Johnson and then Nixon did in VietNam.
Obama? Gates? McChrystal? Who are the LBJs, McNamaras, and Powells? And who will have to die before enough truth will be told?
I wish I could stop it all. But I only have one little vote. And I wasted it.
You also have a voice, and a fine way with words.
Have you read Howard Zinn's latest?
"Do you know that there were mutinies in the American Revolutionary Army by the privates against the officers? The officers were getting fine clothes and good food and high pay and the privates had no shoes and bad clothes and they weren’t getting paid. They mutinied. Thousands of them. So many in the Pennsylvania line that George Washington got worried, so he made compromises with them. But later when there was a smaller mutiny in the New Jersey line, not with thousands but with hundreds, Washington said execute the leaders, and they were executed by fellow mutineers on the order of their officers.
http://www.progressive.org/zinn070309.html
Sound familiar?
Why is war always our answer? It's the mythology! (Read my other comments for a fuller explication.)
"My administration has a job to do and we're going to do it. We will rid the world of the evil-doers," [Pres. Bush] said. "
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.bush.terrorism/
Only 5 days after 9/11/2001, GWB preached a fake holy war. Bogus "holy" war is What We Do.
Keep writing, mountclemens. Changing the course of history can only be done the same way you are hearing these unspoken words: *from within.*
McNamara was indeed a war criminal of the first order. We are bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan today because the neo-con war criminals who were responsible for our invasion and occupation of Vietnam were never held accountable for their crimes. Kissinger should be in prison right now. Instead our corporate media treats him as a celebrity.
You have to separate out Afghanistan. The Taliban, who was in charge of the country, helped AQ attack us. They planned 9/11 there, they trained there and they protected the guy there. When a country attacks you, invading is acceptable in my book. The fact of the matter is that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and was simply an oil grab. One that cost 5000 Americans their lives and another 50,000 their limbs and sanity. That it cost almost a million Iraqi their lives and almost a million their limbs and their sanity. Afghanistan is a different matter and frankly we will never leave the country, just as we never left Japan after Pearl Harbor, and never left Germany after WWII. The two wars are different and while I believe, deeply that Iraq was and is an illegal occupation, I believe that Afghanistan is a response to Taliban aggression.
J
Yes, separate out Afghanistan. And then separate the Bush retaliation in Afghanistan for 911 (years ago) from the current war of choice in Afghanistan.
"The Taliban, who was in charge of the country, helped AQ attack us. They planned 9/11 there, they trained there and they protected the guy there. "
An excellent summary of the official story. It might even be true.
Do a little more research.
Afghanistan was the original oil grab.
Just ask the Russians
How'd we get there? Carter and Brzezinski stoked the flames of a bogus holy war.
Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul.
[...]
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [integrisme], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
http://www.counterpunch.org/brzezinski.html
Ask the dead. 9/11 was blowback. There are no "good wars." War is only good for profiteers.
"But our culture is so war prone that we immediately jump from, “This is a good cause” to “This deserves a war.”
http://www.progressive.org/zinn070309.html
Saudi Arabia had more of a role in 9/11 than the Taliban.
Add Obama to the war criminal list. He has steadfastly refused to end the occupation of Iraq. He doesn't have to wait until 2011. He could do it now if he wanted. He has also expanded war in Afghanistan and Pakistan and will have his own indefinite detention authority. Anyone who gets to the oval office should be on the world's most wanted list.
because this person was belittled by his family he felt it would be permissable to murder someone?
People will always find a way to rationalize slaughtering others, just as McNamara rationalized his war crimes.
That's what you got out of this? You're beyond help.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
