Business

False Flags In History

thefadd.

Posted to Business on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:26:59 AM EST (promoted by port1080). RSS.

Write it down, stone cold lock, The Gulf of Tonkin Incident, false flag for embarking on the Vietnam War, was a fake. So reveals newly declassified National Security Agency information.

In the wake of an eerily similar near-incident with Iran during high tensions between the two countries, America's lead agency for cracking communication codes has finally declassified a 500-page report on communications during the Vietnam War. The findings in the report had been hinted at in two previous waves of partial declassification. Full declassification of the 2002 report finally occurred thanks to a Mandatory Declassification Review request filed on behalf of the Federation of American Scientists.

The full report covers communications intercepted and compromised from Vietnam's first overtures to the communist Soviet regime in 1945 through the evacuation of American sympathizers in 1971. The most historically significant of the findings is the assertion that "The Gulf of Tonkin" incident did not occur. In response to the supposed incident, Congress voted President Lyndon Johnson the power to broaden the conflict in 1964, plunging a generation into a war of aggression.

From an intelligence perspective, however, the report contains even more inflammatory information. On multiple occasions, American communications themselves were compromised. North Vietnamese operatives penetrated radio transmissions, passing along fake information to call down American air and artillery attacks on American troops. The NSA report also finds that dependence on intercepting enemy communications caused General William Westmoreland, head of US command, to miscalculate in the run-up to the Viet Cong's Tet Offensive. No intercepts were made and the US suffered its symbolically harshest loss of the war.

Tags: edited by Port1080, written by thefadd, false flags, Iran, Vietnam, war (all tags)

This story: 6 comments (3 from subqueue)
Post a Comment
3

Breathless Revelation Known For At Least A Decade.

MayorBob.

Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:19:51 AM EST

5.00 (brilliant, interesting, astute)

Those portions of the American public who weren't asleep back in 80s and 90s, when the truth about what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin was briefed to Congress and reported in the media, already knew the books were cooked to get us deeper into Vietnam.  The recently declassified NSA material just places a period at the end of the sentence which reads "LBJ got his war on."  As a subsequent participant in the festivities in Southeast Asia and knowing more than a few people whose names are etched on that wall in Washington, I hold the memory of LBJ, Westmoreland, McNamara, Nixon & Kissinger with a special level of loathing.

History is a bitch and a bitch that comes back to bite those who think they can shade things and fool everyone.  History has also taught us that virtually everything we thought we knew about Vietnam was a fabrication aimed at setting Southeast Asia up as a hotter proxy for the Cold War.  We could have arrived at meaningful terms with Ho Chi Minh after WWII; he wasn't necessarily in thrall to the Soviets.  But we opted instead to locate our kind of Vietnamese, Ngo Dihn Diem, and install him as president of South Vietnam.  We stuck by him and his dictatorial ways until he outlived his usefulness.  Then we blinked and members of his military saw too it he was assassinated and replaced by another of our kind of Vietnamese.

We could have fought the war in Vietnam, keeping it within its borders but we said bombing the supply routes of the Ho Chi Minh trail wasn't enough, so we invaded Cambodia with US forces and the South Vietnamese military and we overthrew Norodom Sihanouk and replaced him with our kind of Cambodian.  What this did was tip the political scales in that country and make it possible for the Khmer Rouge to ultimately rise triumphant after we unassed Vietnam.  The ultimate result -- the genocide of the Killing Fields and decades of warfare and unrest in Cambodia, one of the most peaceful of nations before we started mucking it up.

We were supposedly fighting for democracy and freedom in South Vietnam, opposing the Communist dictatorship in Hanoi.  No argument that, once we flipped Ho Chi Minh the bird after WWII that the North became a Communist ally of the Soviet Union.  However, down in the South we were actively supporting a non-democratic succession of coup-driven governments.  We were also operating a nasty little war of assassination against people we linked to Viet Cong or North Vietnamese connections with Operation Phoenix.  This is not to say the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese didn't engage in atrocities and the like.  It is to say, we did it too, so we don't really have any right to say we were any more morally pure than anyone else there.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

4

^ 3

Re: Breathless Revelation Known For At Least A Dec

novy.

Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:46:26 AM EST

5.00 (astute)

US decisions in Indochina led to over 6,000,000 unnecessary deaths. Most Americans don't have guts to take responsibility for what happened there, would rather pretend that nationalistic resistance to US choice to engage in what amounted to continuation of French imperial policies caused all those deaths. If only they had accepted colonial status forever, all would have been well! Communists killed those people in Cambodia! (Yes, even if US and China supported them, and even if genocide eventually ended only when your North Vietnamese enemies came to rescue of Cambodian people.) I admire your brutal honesty about what actually happened in Indochina, that much more admirable because you served there and could be excused for holding sanitised version of events in your memories.

That 6,000,000 number should ring alarm bells. When Hitler killed 6,000,000, it became clarion call to never let such things happen again. When Hitler's minions tortured people for information, those who authorised those acts were executed. But when US kick-started ultimately futile war based on bald lies that resulted in 6,000,000 dead, or when US tortures people for information, those who issued those orders get excused, die peacefully in their sleep decades later, and phalanxes of academics try to excuse their behaviour in any way they can, however disingenuous. Sad stuff, really.

Sure, Gulf of Tonkin really was old news. But it comes up again now because Bush wants to pull another Iraq, wanted to fabricate incident in Strait of Hormuz (and has now been caught with fingers in cookie jar again) to excuse warlike acts. And yet, his minions will insist that he was innocent of any wrongful intent, that Pentagon believed their own story, that Iran really remains dangerous even though this particular incident was nonsense. Intelligence community wants no part of run-up to next bogus war, so why do so many Americans continue to embrace these sorts of lies and fabrications? Why do they want to believe their President no matter what?      

1

Re: False Flags In History

PenitenziAgite.

Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:51:43 AM EST

4.00 (astute)

Thanks for declassifying something that has been forehead-slappingly obvious since 1970.  Good going, NSA.  Thanks for the update.

sierra tango foxtrot uniform

2

^ 1

Re: False Flags In History

novy.

Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:29:50 AM EST

4.00 (interesting)

This declassification probably should be regarded as yet another effort by US intelligence community to comment on Bush's ongoing efforts to foment war between US and Iran. Having been screwed once on Iraq, some people inside that community refuse to get screwed again on Iran.

Recent news reports suggesting that latest incident with Iran in Strait of Hormuz didn't actually happen, even as Bush uses incident to ratchet up tensions with Iran again, should tell all of us that nothing emerging from US Pentagon or from White House can be trusted or taken at face value, that Bush will try same trick over and over again even as some people laugh at those who notice as "conspiracy nuts".

5

^ 2

Re: False Flags In History

novy.

Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:02:41 PM EST

4.50 (informative, informative)

For those who don't yet know that Iranian fast boat incident was bogus, see this link among others.

6

^ 5

Re: False Flags In History

thefadd.

Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:10:28 PM EST

4.00 (funny)

that the radio channel over which the US warships and the Iranian patrols were communicating, UHF frequency channel 16, is like "bad CB radio" in the Persian Gulf..."Everybody and their brother is on it; chattering away.... On Ch. 16, esp. in that section of the Gulf, slurs/threats/chatter/etc. [are] commonplace. So my first thought was that the "explode" comment might not have even come from one of the Iranian craft, but some loser monitoring the events at a shore facility. "

So, it's like plastic.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

This story: 6 comments (3 from subqueue)
Post a Comment