JF_Aidan_Pryde
Regular
Joe DeFuria said:
Funny that you wouldn't know the details of these things if Oliver Stone DIDN'T make his high treason film. Irony ^ MAX FACTOR.
Ever heard of Operation Northwoods?
- Thread starter Natoma
- Start date
Funny that you wouldn't know the details of these things if Oliver Stone DIDN'T make his high treason film. Irony ^ MAX FACTOR.
chavvdarrr
Veteran
Just a thought - what provoked Carrebean crisis in 62 .... ie what was first - plans to attack Cuba or USSR's nukes in Cuba .... (or "attack" at Cochinos - "Pigs bay")
AFAIK , CIA made the first move @ Cochinos ?
AFAIK , CIA made the first move @ Cochinos ?
Joe DeFuria
Legend
JF_Aidan_Pryde said:
Wrong.
The "best" one can get from such a film is FAR from the factual details of these things. At best, it raises awareness about some issue that may deserve actual investigation of the facts. At worst, it presents "interpreted details" as facts, or pushes one set of details to the exclusion of others to suit the film-makers agenda....and that's what people believe to be "the facts, and all the facts". Complete factual details take a back seat to both convenience to make a "nice story" and to sensationalize to make a "film that will sell tickets" when it comes hollywood.
If you honestly believe that the film JFK represents some type of factual detailed account of the situation, then you are part of the reason why I'm more afraid of people learning history from Hollywood, than I am afraid of U.S. gov't conspiracy theories.
I thought JFK was an interesting enough film but I don't know to what level the conspiracy theories are correct. However, some of the purely factual information does make you wonder. I remember seeing something in the film about the "Magic bullet" which injured 3 different people seconds apart - undoubtedly, there must have been another assassin firing. If this was the case, why did the authorities insist there was just one man?
As for Operation Northwood, were it to have been approved you can be sure that none of the innocent Americans killed would have been related to any military men, top politicians or anyone with financial clout. As usual, it would be the average man on the street who suffered.
How this went from a discussion regarding Operation Northwoods to JFK is a mystery.
Anyways, back on topic!
I sent this abcnews article to a few friends of mine, and a couple of them had the same "meh" reaction. "Well they didn't actually kill anyone. Who cares if they plotted. They didn't go through with it."
The antipathy of the american public can be pretty shocking at times.
Anyways, back on topic!
I sent this abcnews article to a few friends of mine, and a couple of them had the same "meh" reaction. "Well they didn't actually kill anyone. Who cares if they plotted. They didn't go through with it."
The antipathy of the american public can be pretty shocking at times.
I think what we have here yet again is another demoralizing attack on the US. If one could for example go into documents regarding Chinese foreign policy or Russian policy (heck France, German, British, Canadian, North Korean, Iraq , any mid eastern country at all.... for that matter most any country in the world FFS.) you would find many such brainstorming ideas. This is nothing specific to America and should not be viewed as such but rather is a testament to the US government. Now I realize the liberal media is the first to put this sort of document up on their bulletin boards so they can remind themselves of just how horrible and oppressive the US is. But if they were able, and they are not, to go into the records of every country in the world and find records such as this they would run out of space on their bulletin boards.
There is no reason to say ..... "look here see how horrible America is" when we all know that indeed there are plenty of other countries doing the same sort of policy plaining. We can only wonder how Russia and China worked together for the planning of the takeover of South Vietnam or supported the Commier Rouge. We can only wonder just what it is that the Russians are doing in Iran as we speak. Oh.. the horror!
, any mid eastern country at all.... for that matter most any country in the world FFS.) you would find many such brainstorming ideas. This is nothing specific to America and should not be viewed as such but rather is a testament to the US government. Now I realize the liberal media is the first to put this sort of document up on their bulletin boards so they can remind themselves of just how horrible and oppressive the US is. But if they were able, and they are not, to go into the records of every country in the world and find records such as this they would run out of space on their bulletin boards. There is no reason to say ..... "look here see how horrible America is" when we all know that indeed there are plenty of other countries doing the same sort of policy plaining. We can only wonder how Russia and China worked together for the planning of the takeover of South Vietnam or supported the Commier Rouge. We can only wonder just what it is that the Russians are doing in Iran as we speak. Oh.. the horror!
That's the point sabastian. We *aren't* Russian, China, Iraq, North Korea. We're at least supposed to be the bastions of democracy and freedom. And I say that without a *hint* of sarcasm and irony. While I have problems with this country, I love it through and through because of what this nation represents.
I don't see how the revelation of these papers is in any way a demoralizing attack on the United States. This actually happened. The heads of our own military, the joint chiefs of staff, unanimously supported, *with their signatures*, the destruction of american cities and military bases in order to blame it on the cubans and set a pre-text for war.
The military is supposed to protect us, not wage war against us. What they did amounts to treason, or at the very least conspiracy to commit treason.
Natoma said:
I don't see how the revelation of these papers is in any way a demoralizing attack on the United States. This actually happened. The heads of our own military, the joint chiefs of staff, unanimously supported, *with their signatures*, the destruction of american cities and military bases in order to blame it on the cubans and set a pre-text for war.
The military is supposed to protect us, not wage war against us. What they did amounts to treason, or at the very least conspiracy to commit treason.
It is a bit scary to know that there were top military advisors that were supportive of the idea.
Of course, the most damaging thing about it is that now ANY action that happens to the US is immediately referred to this unfortunate past (and the Maine) and called a government plot by certain segments of the population. The Cole, the WTC/Pentagon, Anthrax, the DC snipers, etc. At one point or another, every one of these incidents was accused of being black ops directed against the US population by <pick your illuminati group>.
Not to say such a thing couldn't happen, but usually, a cigar is just a cigar.
Of course, the most damaging thing about it is that now ANY action that happens to the US is immediately referred to this unfortunate past (and the Maine) and called a government plot by certain segments of the population. The Cole, the WTC/Pentagon, Anthrax, the DC snipers, etc. At one point or another, every one of these incidents was accused of being black ops directed against the US population by <pick your illuminati group>.
Not to say such a thing couldn't happen, but usually, a cigar is just a cigar.
The implication is that the US staged the attack on the two towers today to justify the war on terrorism. Well you can speculate all you like.... but the simple fact of the matter is that this never did occur. While you point out that it had the signatures of military big wigs you can be sure that similar documents in other countries are also signed with military endorsement. The problem is it never happened did it..... and while it might be a bit upsetting that this plan was thought of and indorsed it really didn't happen.
The attack on NYC WTC is no American plan to rationalize the war effort on terrorism. These terrorist groups have been plaining these affairs for years. Their governments supported the mentality.
My sakes Natoma, despite this forty some odd year old document the US is still about democracy and freedom and will always be. To use some forty year old cold war document with military brainstorming plans that never were implemented to suggest otherwise is not really being fair to the America today. Do you think that such a plan would be devised and implemented today? Or no...
I do understand your fears though.
The attack on NYC WTC is no American plan to rationalize the war effort on terrorism. These terrorist groups have been plaining these affairs for years. Their governments supported the mentality.
My sakes Natoma, despite this forty some odd year old document the US is still about democracy and freedom and will always be. To use some forty year old cold war document with military brainstorming plans that never were implemented to suggest otherwise is not really being fair to the America today. Do you think that such a plan would be devised and implemented today? Or no...
I do understand your fears though.
JF_Aidan_Pryde
Regular
Joe DeFuria said:
Joe, I was trying to say is that the film brought about the declassification of documents pertaining to the assination which has provided the American public with information they otherwise wouldn't have if the film was not made. Much of this info on Northwood came from those documents if you read the link.
MrsSkywalker
Newcomer
Wow. Congratulations on missing the entire point of my posts. I said that it doesn't shock me that this type of thing was put on the table, just like it doesn't shock me that it never transpired. Scared people have stupid ideas. Wow. Put that in the "No Shit Gazette".
As far as me being in support of an action such as this, hell no...I can't even believe that you would, or even could, ascertain that from anything I have ever said. You misassume a lot of things, natoma.
Let's put this into perspective here. Some half-WATT think tank had a dumb idea 50 years ago that found no support with the decision makers and caused the very people who thought up the idea great embarassment once their fears had calmed.
You are also taking it upon yourself to add more than what was actually said in the article. The "United States" didn't take it upon themselves to orchestrate this...it was a very few people. The United States stopped them from following through.
If you believe that the US had any involvement in the planning/execution of 9/11 after reading a 50 year old piece of gossip, then you are way more naive than I had thought. Either that or you've got a serious persecution complex. I seriously doubt that there is anything I say that you will actually listen to. You want to blow this "report" out of proportion, go right ahead. I am going to see it for what it is.
I never said you supported the action Mrs Skywalker. Talk about missing the point. I said that the fact that you were so blase about it, so nonchalant about it, is what scares me. That you and vince seem to just not care.
From what you stated before, it seems that you're saying, "Well, it didn't happen. So who cares if all of our military leaders signed off and approved of this plan. Why the shock? The US back then was terrified of communism, so why be surprised they acted in that manner."
If I misunderstood that please correct me. I don't believe you're saying you support those actions. I believe that you were saying "meh, who cares." Your own words.
Besides, how would you state this as gossip? Please explain to me how de-classified documents with the signatures of our military leaders from the 60s amounts to naivete. And as I said in my prior post regarding 9/11:
All this has done is open up my eyes to the possibility that hey, historically branches of the government have indeed plotted to kill american civilians and military personnel in order to create a pre-text for war.
I'm not one to jump on conspiracy theories very quickly, which is why I didn't all of a sudden jump onto it when I read it originally on informationclearinghouse.com. That's why I did my own research and came up with that link from abcnews.com from 5/1/2001.
Call it what you will, but I won't accept "history" blindly. *IF* this has occurred (and from the sources it seems to be pretty accurate), you honestly don't think it amounts to conspiracy to commit treason against the american public and military?
MrsSkywalker said:
From what you stated before, it seems that you're saying, "Well, it didn't happen. So who cares if all of our military leaders signed off and approved of this plan. Why the shock? The US back then was terrified of communism, so why be surprised they acted in that manner."
If I misunderstood that please correct me. I don't believe you're saying you support those actions. I believe that you were saying "meh, who cares." Your own words.
Besides, how would you state this as gossip? Please explain to me how de-classified documents with the signatures of our military leaders from the 60s amounts to naivete. And as I said in my prior post regarding 9/11:
Natoma said:
All this has done is open up my eyes to the possibility that hey, historically branches of the government have indeed plotted to kill american civilians and military personnel in order to create a pre-text for war.
I'm not one to jump on conspiracy theories very quickly, which is why I didn't all of a sudden jump onto it when I read it originally on informationclearinghouse.com. That's why I did my own research and came up with that link from abcnews.com from 5/1/2001.
Call it what you will, but I won't accept "history" blindly. *IF* this has occurred (and from the sources it seems to be pretty accurate), you honestly don't think it amounts to conspiracy to commit treason against the american public and military?
MrsSkywalker
Newcomer
Two whole sources...wowwww....No, I don't. I am a firm believer that a plan, no matter who came up with it, is protected under freedom of speech. The treason would have been if they had actually tried to do this (like assembled weapons, ordered military to participate, etc.), and I'm not even sure about the treason charge...certainly it's criminal, but I'm not sure it's treason. If their plot had acutally been put into action, I would consider sucha document as evidence...but "saying" and "doing" are two vastly different things. No matter how you slice it, the act never happened. Doesn't matter if they talked about it in a boardroom, or wrote it down with their John Hancocks...it's just words, and words are protected. I know this idea is being challenged all over the country right now. A few years ago a teen in MA was arrested because they found a notebook in which he and his friends had made plans to "destroy their town"...in all actuality, the kid and his friends were bored and were writing what they thought would be a killer script for a movie. Didn't matter to the court. He and his friends were sentenced for conspiracy. I was outraged, as I am with all these crap cases. It isn't conspiracy...it's free speech.
1) There's more than two sources mrsskywalker. Google "Operation Northwoods" and see for yourself. I just mentioned informationclearinghouse.com because that was the initial link I was sent, and abcnews.com because that was the most credible source imo that I found.
As I said, before I'll begin to believe things, I try to get credible sources for it. Google it yourself. Far more than "just two sources" available.
2) There's a difference, imo, between a couple kids writing a "destroy the town" movie script, and this country's military leaders in the 60s writing official documentation, with all of their signatures, saying an option to waging war on Cuba should be the murders of american civilians so they could blame it on the cubans and use it as a pretext for war.
I don't buy the free speech bit. If you're part of the government, you should not be conspiring with other leaders to kill americans so you can justify a war. There's a responsibility there to the american public first and foremost.
As I said, before I'll begin to believe things, I try to get credible sources for it. Google it yourself. Far more than "just two sources" available.
2) There's a difference, imo, between a couple kids writing a "destroy the town" movie script, and this country's military leaders in the 60s writing official documentation, with all of their signatures, saying an option to waging war on Cuba should be the murders of american civilians so they could blame it on the cubans and use it as a pretext for war.
I don't buy the free speech bit. If you're part of the government, you should not be conspiring with other leaders to kill americans so you can justify a war. There's a responsibility there to the american public first and foremost.
Silent_One
Newcomer
Natoma wrote:
Not offen I agree with you Natoma but on your statement I agree 100%. However as Mrs.Skywalker said -
I'm not shocked. But I also don't have blind faith in the government. One needs to allways watch the government.
Not offen I agree with you Natoma but on your statement I agree 100%. However as Mrs.Skywalker said -
I'm not shocked. But I also don't have blind faith in the government. One needs to allways watch the government.
Have any of you even read the document? First of all, the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not do this on their own. They were requested to by the Chief of Operations of the Cuba Project. Secondly, it says nothing that even comes close to the extent which you seem to credit it. The absolute worst suggestion made in the entire document is "We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized." Wounding, not murder, and these are only options to consider, not specific plans to be implemented. The rest of it involves ideas that for the most part consist of blowing a lot of smoke in the public's eye. Paint a plane to look like a MiG and have it harass a civilian aircraft; spread rumors; have friendly cubans mock an attack on Guantanamo Bay, and pretend to capture them; sink an empty boat in the harbor of Guantanamo Bay and print false casualty reports; etc.
Sure, it's not the most noble document in the world, but it's nowhere near the monstrosity you make it out to be. I mean, christ, listening to you, you'd think they were plotting to detonate an atomic bomb in the middle of Miami and blame Cuba.
And consider the context this document was created in... Castro had just seized power, creating a communist state 90 miles away from the U.S. at a time when we were flat out at war with Russia and communism as a whole, and the Bay of Pigs operation had failed miserably to deal with the problem a year earlier. And if you think the Joint Chiefs had no justification to incite a war with Cuba, please notice that this document was dated March 13, 1962. In October of that year, just 7 months later, the President of the United States announced that the Soviet Union was building nuclear missile bases in Cuba, an event that started what is known today as the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Chief of Operations, Cuba Project was expecting such a thing to happen in the near future, which is why he asked the Joint Chiefs of Staff for suggestions on possible ways to gain support for a war on Cuba.
Given the fact that almost none of the suggestions involve injuring any human being, and none of them involve killing anyone, and also the fact that their intent was to prevent a build up of Russian nuclear missles on Cuba, and that such an even did take place, I don't see how you can justify feeling such animosity towards this group of individuals.
BTW, if you haven't read the actual document, here you go (the "options" start on page 10):
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf
Sure, it's not the most noble document in the world, but it's nowhere near the monstrosity you make it out to be. I mean, christ, listening to you, you'd think they were plotting to detonate an atomic bomb in the middle of Miami and blame Cuba.
And consider the context this document was created in... Castro had just seized power, creating a communist state 90 miles away from the U.S. at a time when we were flat out at war with Russia and communism as a whole, and the Bay of Pigs operation had failed miserably to deal with the problem a year earlier. And if you think the Joint Chiefs had no justification to incite a war with Cuba, please notice that this document was dated March 13, 1962. In October of that year, just 7 months later, the President of the United States announced that the Soviet Union was building nuclear missile bases in Cuba, an event that started what is known today as the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Chief of Operations, Cuba Project was expecting such a thing to happen in the near future, which is why he asked the Joint Chiefs of Staff for suggestions on possible ways to gain support for a war on Cuba.
Given the fact that almost none of the suggestions involve injuring any human being, and none of them involve killing anyone, and also the fact that their intent was to prevent a build up of Russian nuclear missles on Cuba, and that such an even did take place, I don't see how you can justify feeling such animosity towards this group of individuals.
BTW, if you haven't read the actual document, here you go (the "options" start on page 10):
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf
NO WAY! I will believe what Indymedia tells me. No need to investigate on my own!
MrsSkywalker
Newcomer
While you make a case for "morally repugnant", you can't make a criminal case. In this country people are allowed to think, no matter if we like or agree with their thoughts. They are even allowed to write them down. Not agreeing in any way with their proposed solution, but they had a right to think it up, and they had the right to propose anything they felt like proposing. That's the beauty of our system. You can't allow a government official to propose a bill to, say, declare a new national holiday in honor of Bob Hope (or whoever) if you disallow another to propose starting a war. You can't have it both ways. Either you have to let everyone have their say, or no one, and last time I checked, having your say, especially in the context of propositioning the government, is most certainly a protected right. Ergo, there was no crime.
MrsSkywalker said:
Here is another source (thats credibility & objectivity is hard to contest), it is a PDF of scans of the actual declassified documents that were released.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf
Natoma said:
Shame on you Natoma for calling abcnes.com a credible source. Your left-wing/liberal/Chomsky-esqe instincts should tell you better.
Seriously though, is it really a surprise to anyone that people in power (regardless of nationality or affiliation) who are intent on keeping the power (and money) they have horded and accumulated will stop any anything? Just open any history book to see how man's inhumanity to man & man's unending quest for power knows no limits. This is a story as old as time.
Along a more concrete vein, I am not all that surprised by this either. I can see where a post-WW2/early-Cold-War general sweating bullets over Cuba could see this is a viable option. The world was a very different place then.
Of course, i am still appaled by the idea, just not that surprised.
-stvn
RussSchultz said:
Since when did abcnews become indymedia? Crusher:
Anyways, I had read that PDF yesterday, and I'm wondering if it's complete, considering the number of articles written about operation northwoods. There are a lot of details in the articles I've read that don't exist in that PDF.
Considering the vast amount of articles on the web that exist, I'm leaning toward the PDF being an incomplete version. Unless of course everyone is incorrect with regard to what Operation Northwoods really is.
