Home · Maps · About

Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

(1298240)

view threaded

Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 09:34:39 2015

fiogf49gjkf0d

George Will Confirms Nixon's Vietnam Treason




Richard Nixon was a traitor.

The new release of extended versions of Nixon's papers now confirms this long-standing belief, usually dismissed as a "conspiracy theory" by Republican conservatives. Now it has been substantiated by none other than right-wing columnist George Will.

Nixon's newly revealed records show for certain that in 1968, as a presidential candidate, he ordered Anna Chennault, his liaison to the South Vietnam government, to persuade them to refuse a cease-fire being brokered by President Lyndon Johnson.

Nixon's interference with these negotiations violated President John Adams's 1797 Logan Act, banning private citizens from intruding into official government negotiations with a foreign nation.

Published as the 40th Anniversary of Nixon's resignation approaches, Will's column confirms that Nixon feared public disclosure of his role in sabotaging the 1968 Vietnam peace talks. Will says Nixon established a "plumbers unit" to stop potential leaks of information that might damage him, including documentation that he believed was held by the Brookings Institute, a liberal think tank. The Plumbers' later break-in at the Democratic National Committee led to the Watergate scandal that brought Nixon down.

Nixon's sabotage of the Vietnam peace talks was confirmed by transcripts of FBI wiretaps. On November 2, 1968, LBJ received an FBI report saying Chernnault told the South Vietnamese ambassador that "she had received a message from her boss: saying the Vietnamese should "hold on, we are gonna win."

As Will confirms, Vietnamese did "hold on," the war proceeded and Nixon did win, changing forever the face of American politics—with the shadow of treason permanently embedded in its DNA.

The treason came in 1968 as the Vietnam War reached a critical turning point. President Lyndon Johnson was desperate for a truce between North and South Vietnam.

LBJ had an ulterior motive: his Vice President, Hubert Humphrey, was in a tight presidential race against Richard Nixon. With demonstrators in the streets, Humphrey desperately needed a cease-fire to get him into the White House.

Johnson had it all but wrapped it. With a combination of gentle and iron-fisted persuasion, he forced the leaders of South Vietnam into an all-but-final agreement with the North. A cease-fire was imminent, and Humphrey’s election seemed assured.

But at the last minute, the South Vietnamese pulled out. LBJ suspected Nixon had intervened to stop them from signing a peace treaty.

In the Price of Power (1983), Seymour Hersh revealed Henry Kissinger—then Johnson’s adviser on Vietnam peace talks—secretly alerted Nixon’s staff that a truce was imminent.

According to Hersh, Nixon “was able to get a series of messages to the Thieu government [of South Vietnam] making it clear that a Nixon presidency would have different views on peace negotiations.”

Johnson was livid. He even called the Republican Senate Minority Leader, Everett Dirksen, to complain that “they oughtn’t be doing this. This is treason.”

“I know,” was Dirksen’s feeble reply.

Johnson blasted Nixon about this on November 3rd, just prior to the election. As Robert Parry of Consortiumnews.com has written: “when Johnson confronted Nixon with evidence of the peace-talk sabotage, Nixon insisted on his innocence but acknowledged that he knew what was at stake.”

Said Nixon: “My, I would never do anything to encourage….Saigon not to come to the table….Good God, we’ve got to get them to Paris or you can’t have peace.”

But South Vietnamese President General Theiu—a notorious drug and gun runner—did boycott Johnson’s Paris peace talks. With the war still raging, Nixon claimed a narrow victory over Humphrey. He then made Kissinger his own national security adviser.

In the four years between the sabotage and what Kissinger termed “peace at hand” just prior to the 1972 election, more than 20,000 US troops died in Vietnam. More than 100,000 were wounded. More than a million Vietnamese were killed.

But in 1973, Kissinger was given the Nobel Peace Prize for negotiating the same settlement he helped sabotage in 1968.

According to Parry, LBJ wanted to go public with Nixon’s treason. But Clark Clifford, an architect of the CIA and a pillar of the Washington establishment, talked Johnson out of it. LBJ’s close confidant warned that the revelation would shake the foundations of the nation.

In particular, Clifford told Johnson (in a taped conversation) that “some elements of the story are so shocking in their nature that I’m wondering whether it would be good for the country to disclose the story and then possibly have [Nixon] elected. It could cast his whole administration under such doubt that I think it would be inimical to our country’s best interests.”

In other words, Clifford told LBJ that the country couldn’t handle the reality that its president was a certifiable traitor, eligible for legal execution.

Fittingly, Clark Clifford’s upper-crust career ended in the disgrace of his entanglement with the crooked Bank of Credit and Commerce (BCCI), which financed the terrorist group Al Qaeda and whose scandalous downfall tainted the Agency he helped found.

Johnson lived four years after he left office, tormented by the disastrous war that destroyed his presidency and his retirement. Nixon won re-election in 1972, again with a host of dirty dealings, then became the first American president to resign in disgrace.




This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

Post a New Response

(1298242)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 09:57:10 2015, in response to Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 09:34:39 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I'm not the least bit surprised. Within ten years we'll be seeing the details about Reagan's minions disrupting the Iran hostage negotiations. That'll be more interesting than this.

Post a New Response

(1298243)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 10:17:58 2015, in response to Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 09:34:39 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I don't know if it's true either. But it's not contradictory to Nixon's character.



Post a New Response

(1298265)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 5 14:21:18 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 09:57:10 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
IAWTP !

Post a New Response

(1298274)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 5 15:10:03 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 09:57:10 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I thought there was something about that, but it was more or less ignored.

Post a New Response

(1298275)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by R2ChinaTown on Sun Jul 5 15:13:37 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 5 14:21:18 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Why, baldy?

Post a New Response

(1298276)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 15:15:14 2015, in response to Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 09:34:39 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Actually, this is a few years old.




Post a New Response

(1298278)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by Allan on Sun Jul 5 15:25:45 2015, in response to Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 09:34:39 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
It looks like something one might throw up.

Post a New Response

(1298287)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 17:05:49 2015, in response to Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 09:34:39 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I didn't know you were in the habit of posting year-old rants from Progressive scandal sheets.

You didn't look for the original George Will article, did you?

And I love how the Left, who throughout my lifetime have spouted "How DARE you call us unpatriotic?" Throw around charges of TREASON.

Post a New Response

(1298290)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 17:13:07 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 17:05:49 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, you must admit that, if true, it's a bit stronger an action against the government of the United States than hanging around some meeting hall in the 1930s telling your fellow communists how wonderfully the Soviet experiment was going.





Post a New Response

(1298293)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 17:18:18 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 17:13:07 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
A better comparison is our current Secretary of State, boasting about meeting with the north Vietnnamese and Viet Cong or Carter's negotiating with North Korea.

Post a New Response

(1298297)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 5 17:48:18 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 5 15:10:03 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
There was indeed. Reagan's negotiations with the Ayatollah and the deal that was made that the hostages would REMAIN there until the moment he was inaugurated was the final blow for me with the GOP.

Post a New Response

(1298299)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 17:53:01 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 17:18:18 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
???

The Nixon story, if true, is that Nixon offered a genuine quid pro quo. Refuse this deal now, and we'll give you more support once I'm in.

What did Kerry and Carter offer to the North Vietnamese and the North Koreans. At most general advice: do this and I think you'll find the US government to be receptive.

The latter activities, while dubious, don't strike me as being "negotiations." Nixon had about 1,000 times the power to affect the American position that Kerry and Carter had.




Post a New Response

(1298303)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 18:08:09 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 17:53:01 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
People like Kerry and Carter (especially the latter) have gone out of their way to engage in foreign affairs, often despite being at odds with any current government. Proressives simply don't have the standing they pretend to throw stones in their glass houses.

Post a New Response

(1298304)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 18:10:47 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 18:08:09 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Carter's activities are inappropriate and unseemly. But they don't hurt the US because he has no power. Nixon's alleged activities, if true, hurt the US because he had power.


Post a New Response

(1298351)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 19:12:53 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 17:05:49 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Here's the original Will article.

Post a New Response

(1298359)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by SLRT on Sun Jul 5 19:37:13 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by AlM on Sun Jul 5 18:10:47 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, the 18th century law that everyone is lately citing doesn't say you have to show harm.

But if you assert that Carter had no power in N. Korea, why did he get the Nobel Prize for the nuclear agreement? And he did harm in giving N. Korea extra years to ignore the agreement and advance its military intrests.

Post a New Response

(1298378)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 5 20:14:28 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 5 17:48:18 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
So there was truth to that? I remember hearing rumors and saw that Playboy had an article about it, but no one else made a big stink about it. That should have been a HUGE scandal.

Post a New Response

(1298404)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 5 20:22:42 2015, in response to Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 5 20:14:28 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Yep. When I got sent down to cover the inauguration back in 1981 with our satellite truck for CBN, we also had to cover the return of the hostages which curiously happened right after he was sworn in. Hmmm.

Post a New Response

(1298426)

view threaded

Re: Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it

Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 5 21:01:00 2015, in response to Just throwing this up here. Not saying I believe it, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sun Jul 5 09:34:39 2015.

fiogf49gjkf0d
That's a whole lot of throwup, indeed. But what can one expect from Soros websites?

Post a New Response


[ Return to the Message Index ]