Ever heard of Operation Northwoods?

[Joe DeFuria]

I reckon. Maybe then, and only then would the public pressure be so high that the government is forced to release material which they deemed 'unsafe' for Americans to see.

I see.

So you are saying it's bad for the U.S. gov't to make false statements or "stage things" that don't represent the 100% real truth in order to push what they believe is a greater and more important agenda.

On the other hand, it's quite OK and even NECESSARY for the Entertainment industry to do exactly that? :?

 

[Sabastian]

Natoma I think you are saying the date that the document was made available to the public. The article from ABC news is most definitely dated November 7 2001 less then two months after the 9/11 terrorist attack. May 1 2001 is when the document was made avialable. Look for yourself in the top left hand conner.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html

November 7 2001 is the date ABC news presented the above article. May 1 2001 is when the classified information was made public AFAICT.

 

[Natoma]

Ok that is really confusing. But the thing is, even the date of the url is 05/01/01, along with the date in the first paragraph. I hadn't even noticed the november date in the upper left.

Hmmm....

 

[Crusher]

What I believe is that the general opinion of the public is not always right. Just because the majority of the nation is against a war does not mean the war itself is wrong. It also does not mean that the military and/or governmnet should bow down to the will of the masses if they know that it will put the country in much greater danger very quickly.

In many ways, I think the situation with Castro at the time paralleled the situation with Iraq a few months ago (though I was not alive in the 60's, so I admit my perception of the situation might not be entirely accurate). The Cubans wanted to get rid of Castro, the U.S. government wanted to get rid of Castro, but the world as a whole thought a war with Cuba had no justification. Given what we now know actually took place with the build up of nuclear missiles in Cuba, I think the U.S. government would have been entirely justified in destroying public property to encourage the public to back a war to prevent that. Yes, it would have frightened a lot of people in Florida. But is it more frightening than hearing that there are nuclear missile silos being built 90 miles away from you? Is it more frightening than hearing the President tell you that you should get a fallout shelter as soon as possible?

Do you think the destruction of one building, with the possible risk of collateral damage, is worthwhile in order to prevent an enemy from gaining the ability to destroy multiple cities with millions of casualties? Do you think the money lost with the destruction of the building would have been worthwhile, compared to the ammount of money Americans might have saved from not feeling the need to buy fallout shelters?

 

[Fred]

'Hmm...I'm more horrified as we go along, and I don't foresee that changing down this line of reasoning.'

I asked you to take the premise of those two arguments as an assumption, for arguments sake. I am well aware they aren't valid.
But if they were valid, then it follows.

 

[Natoma]

There is a difference, Crusher, between the 60's with Cuba and today. There was no doctrine of preemption in place due to a catastrophic act. We had 9/11 to spur the new doctrine. They certainly didn't have that back in the 60's.

However, this northwoods operation certainly was an attempt at serving as the impetus for a doctrine of preemption.

 

[Crusher]

And the presence of a prior catastrophic attack is precisely why the current administration felt justified in going to war to remove the leadership in Iraq, while the Kennedy administration didn't feel justified in going to war to remove the leadership in Cuba.

But also notice that even with this, a large portion of the world didn't approve of the action. Odds are similar feelings would have existed if the Kennedy administration had gone through with any of the options detailed in the Northwoods document. But if they could manage to make the majority of the U.S. feel justified, they could have prevented the Cuban Missile Crisis altogether, and freed Cuba at the same time. In hindsight, we managed to live through the event without going to war with Cuba. But the Kennedy administration took a very large and very real risk in doing so.

So as I said, I don't blame the Chief of Operations, Cuba Project for requesting these suggestions, and I don't blame the Joint Chiefs of Staff for providing them.

 

[demalion]

'Hmm...I'm more horrified as we go along, and I don't foresee that changing down this line of reasoning.'

I asked you to take the premise of those two arguments as an assumption, for arguments sake. I am well aware they aren't valid.
But if they were valid, then it follows.

Yes, I realize you're stipulating that about the validity of the premises you are proposing, that's what horrifies me: you give no concern to the validity of the actions.

Your stipulation for the Northwood plan being valid and "not wrong", even specifically if Americans were to be killed to influence public opinion, is that the people implementing it truthfully believe that they were right in Cuba being a threat.

Further, even a valid scientifc basis for "Aryan genetic supremacy" would not make exterminating "lesser races" any less horrifying.

You are giving no concern to limitations on acceptable actions, because you disregard the constant possibility of fallibility in decision making, and recognize no definition of right or wrong besides the successful achievement of the proposed goal. This is common to all of your proposed examples, and it is what horrifies me.

Now that I've said that again, is it clearer?

 

[Sabastian]

Ok that is really confusing. But the thing is, even the date of the url is 05/01/01, along with the date in the first paragraph. I hadn't even noticed the november date in the upper left.

Hmmm....

I did find something that you may be interested in Natoma .... according to this link http://www.public-action.com/911/northwds.html May 1 2001 was the date the document was supposedly made public.....

Operation Northwoods was unknown to the American public until May, 2001, when details were released in James Bamford's new book, "Body of Secrets"

Some other interesting information on that page as well. The suggestion is that the document is a counterfiet, which is not an outragious suggestion IMO. Supposedly a Brit wrote it while "off on a holiday" .... hehe. I don't know take a look though and tell me what you think.

It's hard to believe the author of a book on intelligence matters went past this obviously questionable documentation. His alarm bells should have gone off. Who is James Bamford?

According to the dustjacket, author James Bamford "was until recently Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's "World News Tonight with Peter Jennings." Impressive!

Whence Operation Northwoods?
ABCNews.com raised the question of how this fascinating Northwoods material came into Bamford's possession:

"Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film, 'JFK,' which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

"As public interest in the assassination swelled after 'JFK's' release, Congress passed a law designed to increase the public's access to government records related to the assassination.

"The author says a friend on the board [?] tipped him off to the documents.

"Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had ordered all Joint Chiefs documents related to the Bay of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these remained."

So it seems that the documents missed the shredder, were stored by mistake, and surfaced after Congress made more JFK assassination documents available, whereupon Bamford's friend tipped him off (above). Whatever. All very lucky for Bamford, but with all this luck playing into his hands, you'd think he'd read them more carefully and notice the writers used British English and not American English. And you'd think his spook buddies at NSA would have noticed. And his publishers at Doubleday.

Hmmmmm......