Tricky Dick ... the rumors were true

coolm

New member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
8,694
Reaction score
0
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-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 crap pails in comparison to what has been going on with the current admin.

But let me guess, having hillary have a gmail account is perfectly acceptable and she shouldn't be punished
 
This crap pails in comparison to what has been going on with the current admin.

But let me guess, having hillary have a gmail account is perfectly acceptable and she shouldn't be punished

1. It may very well be bad. I dont know. I know it creates a lack of transparency which is always bad in government so it at least gives some appearance of impropriety. But I'd actually hafta see ill conduct resulting from it to say she is bad.

2. that said .. how in the world can you say that actual treason pales in comparison to whatever you think is happening in the current administration? are you REALLY so full of hate that you can't make an objective analysis?
 
I think it is funny that you believe this article. It's been nearly 50 years and now the truth is known! lol If LBJ knew this was going on like the article speculates, and that is would hurt his VP's chances of presidency, he would have went public with it. And this crap would have come out during watergate investigations.

But again, you posted shirtless pics on a professional recruiting site so I shouldn't be surprised that you believe in conspiracy theories.

So yes, I do believe that fast and furious, benghazi, and the social unrest created by this administration is much worse than this theory

i love the irony in your posts....
 
you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer bounce

1. I never "posted" a shirtless pic on a professional recruiting site. I linked FB with it and it automatically used my FB avatar pic. But if that concept is too hard for your little mind to grasp then I will argue it this way - who cares? Are you really such a shallow, pretentious human being that this is how you decide someone's value? If that's the case then I thank my lucky stars that I dont know you personally because I'd immediately avoid the Christmas rush and start hating you ASAP.

2. I dont subscribe to conspiracy theories at all. The mere fact you say "benghazi" tells me your view on "trumped up conspiracy theories".

3. apparently you're not old enough to remember watergate or the political unrest in the US at the end of Viet Nam or you'd easily see how this is very possible and, in fact, probable. As for LBJ not exposing it ... SOME people don't hate this country like your small-minded group seems to. There were many on the left who felt exposing Iran-Contra would be a death knell for US politics.

4. you're the king of irony so I wouldn't keep throwing stones.
 
you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer bounce

1. I never "posted" a shirtless pic on a professional recruiting site. I linked FB with it and it automatically used my FB avatar pic. But if that concept is too hard for your little mind to grasp then I will argue it this way - who cares? Are you really such a shallow, pretentious human being that this is how you decide someone's value? If that's the case then I thank my lucky stars that I dont know you personally because I'd immediately avoid the Christmas rush and start hating you ASAP.
I am not deciding your value on how you dress. But I am deciding your professionalism as an attorney on how you present yourself.

2. I dont subscribe to conspiracy theories at all. The mere fact you say "benghazi" tells me your view on "trumped up conspiracy theories".
ironic

3. apparently you're not old enough to remember watergate or the political unrest in the US at the end of Viet Nam or you'd easily see how this is very possible and, in fact, probable. As for LBJ not exposing it ... SOME people don't hate this country like your small-minded group seems to. There were many on the left who felt exposing Iran-Contra would be a death knell for US politics.
oh please
 
my professionalism as an attorney? you have got to be kidding me

- first, how is it any of your business?

- I have hundreds of clients so apparently my "lack of professionalism" isn't a problem professionally

- my days of identifying solely with my job are long over

- what does it matter in this context anyway?

- in case you just keep missing it .. I never posted a picture to that site. are you so technologically daft that you dont understand this?

I am done with you. I thought you were just an idiot politically. But this has shown me that you're just an idiot, period. I see that Denver hasn't exactly rushed to your side in defense either. Even the other political idiots see that you're an exceptional idiot. And with that I am done.
 
I don't agree with either of you. I see things a lot different than most people. I think all politicians and government employees should be held to the highest standard. If you can't handle that, do something else for a living.

I think these allegations are disturbing. I am not sure I would agree it is treason. I would call treason aiding and abetting the enemy (but that probably isn't the legal definition). Regardless interfering with negotiations appears to be against the law and should not be tolerated. I felt that way about John Kerry's involvement in Vietnam negotiations and I feel that way about Nixon's.

With respect to the claims that we would have to see the email to know if something wrong happened, I find that absurd. Basically it requires a confession or self incrimination to conclude someone is guilty or wrong. If you destroy the evidence whether it clears your or implicates, you should not receive the benefit of the doubt that it clears you or nothing bad happened unless we can see the evidence you destroyed.

I really don't get coolm's constant need to insult people. This was a group of friends. This was different than OUinsider and so many other boards. Ultimately, I can assure every liberal on this site they are not inherently smarter than the conservatives. On an individual basis certain people will be the most intelligent but they will not all be conservatives or all be liberals. The only thing they will all be is human.
 
I really don't get coolm's constant need to insult people. This was a group of friends. This was different than OUinsider and so many other boards. Ultimately, I can assure every liberal on this site they are not inherently smarter than the conservatives. On an individual basis certain people will be the most intelligent but they will not all be conservatives or all be liberals. The only thing they will all be is human.

I have no intentions of taking sides in what has become an absolute mess of a debate on politics. It should be obvious by now why the rules for every forum except this one do not permit posts about politics. It should also be obvious to every poster who has been a regular on this or any other board I have been part of over the years, where I stand without me attempting to bore anyone with my "wisdom." on political matters.

I will, however, weigh in on an observation Denver made. The hurtful, and mostly unnecessary insults a few posters on this board have been hurling at each other is troubling to me. Every single one of you are longtime users I like and respect, and will continue to do so long after these worthless political debates have run their course. Anyone who believes they "won" is wrong. There are no winners here.

The question is this. Can you forget and forgive, and move on in harmony as before on the main board when this is over? I truly hope you can, but I can't deny that it worries me a lot. Please consider that moving forward in these discussions.
 
I am not going to say anything about this or bring this up on other forums. But, that said, I will not change my opinion about any of the republicans. I put them right in line with the anti-vaxxers and creationists. EVEN IF you have a modicum of intelligence ... if you use it in this manner then I consider you an idiot.

so - will I carry this argument on to other boards? no.

will I still consider them idiots? most definitely.
 
I am not going to say anything about this or bring this up on other forums. But, that said, I will not change my opinion about any of the republicans. I put them right in line with the anti-vaxxers and creationists. EVEN IF you have a modicum of intelligence ... if you use it in this manner then I consider you an idiot.

so - will I carry this argument on to other boards? no.

will I still consider them idiots? most definitely.

so tolerant for somebody that belongs to a party that preaches tolerance.

You do realize how childish it is to say all republicans are idiots right?

I'm done. have a nice day
 
I am not going to say anything about this or bring this up on other forums. But, that said, I will not change my opinion about any of the republicans. I put them right in line with the anti-vaxxers and creationists. EVEN IF you have a modicum of intelligence ... if you use it in this manner then I consider you an idiot.

so - will I carry this argument on to other boards? no.

will I still consider them idiots? most definitely.

You've made a point to proclaim how your health issues have allowed you to reexamine your lot in life. Usually such circumstances provides you with one of two choices for either your vision of life becomes softened or it becomes hardened. It's become apparently obvious which road your reexamination has taken you. Good luck with your choice, but remember, tolerance is golden but so is silence.
 
Last edited:
You've made a point to proclaim how your health issues have allowed you to reexamine your lot in life. Usually such circumstances provides you with one of two choices for either your vision of life becomes softened or it becomes hardened. It's become apparently obvious which road your reexamination has taken you. Good luck with your choice, but remember, tolerance is golden but so is silence.

My outlook has softened. significantly. I will even be heading back to Nepal this November like back in '89. I just don't agree with Republicans. At all. And if you think tolerance is a key republican strength then please excuse my while I go outside to laugh my *ss off.
 
The US is doing very good right now, on the verge of the next leg of massive prosperity. We have emerged from the 2000-2010 lost decade very similar to 1966-1975. It's not a coincidence the last two true bear markets for the US economy coincided with Vietnam and the Iraq boondoggle.

A great country, no matter how strong, can't overcome such a frivolous waste of resources. 1976-1999 saw the US enter an incredible period of prosperity. We climbed out of the grave in 2011 and are about reaching full speed.

2016 is about who can keep the ship churning forward. Not some fake scandal or some fictional narrative that the US has lost it's way due to government oppression. That's all nonsense.

Steady as she goes. As long as some clown like W doesn't come in and turn the country upside down with wars and tax cuts we are on easy street for 20 years.
 
My outlook has softened. significantly. I will even be heading back to Nepal this November like back in '89. I just don't agree with Republicans. At all. And if you think tolerance is a key republican strength then please excuse my while I go outside to laugh my *ss off.

Tolerance as in your tolerance towards others as it always starts at home, and if you can't pass the muster yourself then it should be quite a stretch to ask the same of others, republican or otherwise.
 
I dont impede their progress.
I dont take away their rights.
I dont restrict their access to anything.
I dont refuse to serve them.

They have a right to believe as they do. I have a right to think they are idiots.

Why is that so hard for you? There's not any amount of shaming or guilt that's going to make me think otherwise. I think someone who bases their political decisions on self-serving crap is an idiot. You can try to attach whatever label or somesuch to me that you wish . . . it's not going to affect me.
 
Last edited:
I dont impede their progress.
I dont take away their rights.
I dont restrict their access to anything.
I dont refuse to serve them.

They have a right to believe as they do. I have a right to think they are idiots.

Why is that so hard for you? There's not any amount of shaming or guilt that's going to make me think otherwise. I think someone who bases their political decisions on self-serving crap is an idiot. You can try to attach whatever label or somesuch to me that you wish . . . it's not going to affect me.

You are the one attaching labels to people coolm.

Tell you what, you can come have lunch with me, and see what kind of person I am, see my family, see my faith, see my works, see my job and then label me an idiot and self serving. You have a real issue with republicans. You have real issues with anybody that disagrees with you and it is sad. You use huge blankets to label people. You say all republicans are self serving. You say that all republicans impede progress, take away rights,
restrict access, etc. It is incredibly insulting. And very hypocritical for you to do so whil at the same time calling all republicans intolerant.

I apologize for the remarks I made about you appearance. From the way you talk and your credentials, I was expecting a more professional looking person. I was more caught off guard than anything. To each their own.

Having said that, I'm finished with any non sports discussions with you as message boards really seem to bring out a bad side of you. I'm sure you are not as intolerant in person. I would say you have a lot of growing up to do but it appears you are older than I am and you are set in your ways. I can't imagine living a life being so angry at people that disagree with you all the time. It almost seems like you are pissed off anybody that has wealth and you label all republicans as having wealth. I don't know.

Good day and God bless
 
I didnt say republicans did those things (impede, restrict, refuse). I said I wasn't doing those things. I didnt even insinuate republicans did those things. You guys have some rather serious reading-comprehension issues.

Even more on the appearance thing? Geez. Dude ... I'm a biker ... what is it you expect me to wear? I will be wearing a suit to court tomorrow. You're welcome to stop by Judge Hall's and take a picture if being attired otherwise bothers you so.

Why don't you stop trying to analyze me and accept that I just don't agree with you? I think you're wrong but I am not gonna preface everything I say with "I think". I am just going to say "you're wrong". I think your views are idiotic - especially the whole republican thing combined with all this "faith" and religion crap. Believe it or not there is a world of people out there who are fully grown and also would find you to be an idiot for your self-serving philosophies.

There also exists a world of people out there who have democratic beliefs and we still disagree about things. I am not angered by them, or wealth if they have it. I am not angry at republicans. I just pity them much like one would pity anyone with a mental disability. You should save your dime-store psychology to figure out why you lack a cognitive dissonance despite such a hypocritical contrast of beliefs.

Now you go your way, I will go mine, and neither of us will have changed anything based on what the other said. Just like I knew it would be before this little tirade started.
 
I'll pray for your hatred in your heart. Let it go. Life will be better


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
and I will kill a ram and scold some churchies on your behalf.

my life is fine. worry about your own. just because someone doesn't believe in something doesn't mean they have hate. You can put away your condescension any time now.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top