Nope, how about Lyndon Johnson and the Gulf of Tonkien? nm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Yes, we were in Vietnam, but this lie told to the American people was when the Vietnam War actually began.

30-year Anniversary: Tonkin Gulf Lie Launched Vietnam War

Media Beat Fairness in Reporting

Thirty years ago, it all seemed very clear.

American Planes Hit North Vietnam After Second Attack on Our Destroyers; Move Taken to Halt New Aggression, announced a Washington Post headline on Aug. 5, 1964.

That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: President Johnson has ordered retaliatory action against gunboats and 'certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam' after renewed attacks against American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.

But there was no second attack by North Vietnam � no renewed attacks against American destroyers. By reporting official claims as absolute truths, American journalism opened the floodgates for the bloody Vietnam War.

A pattern took hold: continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media...leading to over 50,000 American deaths and millions of Vietnamese casualties.

The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an unprovoked attack against a U.S. destroyer on routine patrol in the Tonkin Gulf on Aug. 2 � and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with a deliberate attack on a pair of U.S. ships two days later.

The truth was very different.

Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers � in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.

The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam...had taken place, writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those assaults were part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been pursuing since early 1964.

On the night of Aug. 4, the Pentagon proclaimed that a second attack by North Vietnamese PT boats had occurred earlier that day in the Tonkin Gulf � a report cited by President Johnson as he went on national TV that evening to announce a momentous escalation in the war: air strikes against North Vietnam.

But Johnson ordered U.S. bombers to retaliate for a North Vietnamese torpedo attack that never happened.

Prior to the U.S. air strikes, top officials in Washington had reason to doubt that any Aug. 4 attack by North Vietnam had occurred. Cables from the U.S. task force commander in the Tonkin Gulf, Captain John J. Herrick, referred to freak weather effects, almost total darkness and an overeager sonarman who was hearing ship's own propeller beat.

One of the Navy pilots flying overhead that night was squadron commander James Stockdale, who gained fame later as a POW and then Ross Perot's vice presidential candidate. I had the best seat in the house to watch that event, recalled Stockdale a few years ago, and our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets � there were no PT boats there.... There was nothing there but black water and American fire power.

In 1965, Lyndon Johnson commented: For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.

But Johnson's deceitful speech of Aug. 4, 1964, won accolades from editorial writers. The president, proclaimed the New York Times, went to the American people last night with the somber facts. The Los Angeles Times urged Americans to face the fact that the Communists, by their attack on American vessels in international waters, have themselves escalated the hostilities.

An exhaustive new book, The War Within: America's Battle Over Vietnam, begins with a dramatic account of the Tonkin Gulf incidents. In an interview, author Tom Wells told us that American media described the air strikes that Johnson launched in response as merely `tit for tat' � when in reality they reflected plans the administration had already drawn up for gradually increasing its overt military pressure against the North.

Why such inaccurate news coverage? Wells points to the media's almost exclusive reliance on U.S. government officials as sources of information � as well as reluctance to question official pronouncements on 'national security issues.'

Daniel Hallin's classic book The Uncensored War observes that journalists had a great deal of information available which contradicted the official account [of Tonkin Gulf events]; it simply wasn't used. The day before the first incident, Hanoi had protested the attacks on its territory by Laotian aircraft and South Vietnamese gunboats.

What's more, It was generally known...that `covert' operations against North Vietnam, carried out by South Vietnamese forces with U.S. support and direction, had been going on for some time.

In the absence of independent journalism, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution � the closest thing there ever was to a declaration of war against North Vietnam � sailed through Congress on Aug. 7. (Two courageous senators, Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of Alaska, provided the only no votes.) The resolution authorized the president to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.

The rest is tragic history.

Nearly three decades later, during the Gulf War, columnist Sydney Schanberg warned journalists not to forget our unquestioning chorus of agreeability when Lyndon Johnson bamboozled us with his fabrication of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Schanberg blamed not only the press but also the apparent amnesia of the wider American public.

And he added: We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the government is telling us the truth.

I was in Gulfport, MS before, during and after Katrina. About a year after, all the rent on the coast went sky high (was paying $425 for an efficiency, raised it to $800). I was working 7 days a week at two hospitals (many MTs had already left the coast), and I had to leave too, leaving them even more short handed. There have been many articles regarding the majority of the rebuild on the coast is new casinos and high-end housing. I have no idea how they expect anyone in the service industries to live there without affordable housing. You cannot have tourist industry without people that support it - casino workers, fast food folk, maids, low-end hospital jobs.

What drove me nuts is the way they portrayed the people in the media - as if we were all illiterate crackheads. I worked with many fine people at those hospitals, and it would take pages to descibe their suffering. It disgusts me how there will always be money to accomodate the disposable income players, while the backbone of the community, hard working, serious, responsible people, were left with a trashed out house with no roof, a mortgage to pay and an insurance company that said they didn't have to give them a dime to rebuild.

They may not have been polished but they could think on their own and put an entire sentence together all on their own. Truman, I believe, said **The buck stops here.*** Being a war time president, he took full responsibility for what was going on on his watch for which he was much admired, here and abroad. Johnson gave us civil rights. I did not much like Johnson personally but I admired what he did. He said **I have just given the south to the Republicans** when he signed civil rights into law, but, he had the courage of his convictions and did the right thing, control or no control, votes or no votes. I cannot say the same about the current administration. To them the buck stops anywhere but with them and they would do ANYTHING to keep their party in control, sacrifice a few seats here and there in order to do the right thing, not in this lifetime, not if it means losing control.

Interesting you should mention 2 Democrats as unpolished but (I assume) decent presidents.

It IS important that our president can express himself well. We as a nation look more and more weakened because our leader does not read and cannot produce a complete sentence to save his soul; and he was elected to be OUR president and the leader of the free world. What does that say about all of us. The more situations deteriorate the more inarticulate he becomes. America has always been the mediator in the Middle East but this time, the Italians and the French OMG showed up first. Norway and Greece were the first on the scene to move Americans out of Lebanon. When asked if they were surprised that the first to show up were not Americans, the Americans in Lebanon said ***NO, I mean, look at Katrina. We thought we would be here a long long time.*** I know that many on the right don't care what the world thinks of us but I do and I think it is always best to have allies. This administration just burns bridges. Scary Scary Stuff.

I insinuated that that is how we have evolved, into 2 main separate parties. No, I don't think we have to have 2 parties. One would be fine so long as decisions that are made are made in the best interest of the people. That's one thing I like about Obama, his willingness to work with the other side, regardless of whether or not they return the favor. However, quite frankly, the republican side of the equation is not doing very well. They have managed to stampede all over the constitution (founding father stuff, btw), take away rights, left us with a deficit when they started with a surplus (while they are calling us the spending party), and completely destroyed any credibility we had worldwide. What I see in the democratic party IS common sense.

The couple that just had the union would also have the same opportunity to practice whatever ceremony that applied to them, and just like the christians, would not be recognized legally without a union.

Look at it like this (and this is probably a bad analogy, but I'll try it anyway): Everyone has to go to high school (unions), but if they want to go that extra mile to excell they go to college (practice whatever religious beliefs).

And before you guys start, yes, I do know that not everyone goes to high school.

Most, if not all, of YOUR posts are incredibly tasteless, in addition to being rude, crude, offensive and frequently untrue. Yet, NO liberal has accused you of saying they aren't allowed to speak.

Are you agreeing that the poster lied in saying that Army Mom was told she wasn't allowed to speak?

as long as libs wan't to dig up dirt we'll continue throwing the mud you throw from your huge pig stye right back at ya...