Historical reminder...

[W1GUH]

I'm almost done with the Memiors I'm reading, and in one section there's a few quotes from Nixon's transcripts. Just want to share a few, not just for old time's sake, but to give some concrete examples of what goes on in the oval office. I suppose it's kind of a stretch to say that if Nixon was like that, so are the rest, so I'm not really saying that, but I'd say that the likelihood of conversations like these, albeit with less infantile word usage, is pretty high.

Here's a quote from April 25, 1972, as quoted in the above mentioned book:

President: How many did we kill in Laos?
Ziegler: Maybe ten thousand -- fifteen?
Kissinger: In the Laotian thing, we killed about ten, fifteen...
President See, the attck in the North that we have in mind..power plants, whatever's left -- POL [petroleum], the docks...And, I still think we ought to take the dikes out now. Will that drown people?
Kissinger: About two hundred thousand people.
President: No, no, no...I'd rather use the nuclear bomb. Have you got that, Henry?
Kissinger: That, I think, would just be too much.
President: The nuclear bomb, does that bother you?...I just want you to think big, Henry, for chrissakes.
(Page 418 of Ellsberg's book.)

And it gets better. From May 4, same year, discussing his decision [bombing and mining]. Present were the President, Al Haig, and John Connally....

Thumping his desk as he pointed to an imaginary or perhaps a real map on it:

Vietnam: Here's those little c---s---rs (male chicken lollipops) right in there, here they are. (Thump) Here's the United States (thump). Here's Western (thump) Europe, that cocky little place that's caused so much devastation...Here's the Soviet Union(thump), here's the (thump) Mid-East...Here's the (thump) silly Africans...And (thump) the not-quite-so-silly Latin Americans. Here we are. They're taking on the United States. Now, g-d it, we're gonna do it. We're going to cream them. This is not in anger or anything. This old business that I'm "petulant," that's all BS [spelled out]. I should have done it long ago, I just didn't follow my instincts.
...I'll see that the United States does not lose. I'm putting it quite bluntly. I'll be quite precise. South Vietnam may lose. But the United States cannot lose. Which means, basically, I have made the decision. Whatever happens to South Vietnam, we are going to cream North Vietnam.
...For once, we've got to use the maximum power of this country...against this SA [again, spelled out..a 4 letter word followed by a three letter word - feces donkey] little country; to win the war. We can't use the word, "win." But others can.

(Page 419 of Ellsberg's book)

Wouldn't it be fun to be a fly on the wall when the FM, ol' Dead-Eye, and the Rummy get together?

To think that we probably wouldn't ever have known what goes on in the Oval Office if some two-bit burglars hadn't botched the job at the Watergate. It's my view that things are no better today, except that they've gotten much better at keeping the lid on the swampy things that go on.

Hope this was at least comic relief.

[K3XR]

Isn't history grand!!

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/LIES.html

[wa6ccw]

To think that we probably wouldn't ever have known what goes on in the Oval Office if some two-bit burglars hadn't botched the job at the Watergate. It's my view that things are no better today, except that they've gotten much better at keeping the lid on the swampy things that go on.

http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/indifferent/indifferent0021.gif

[N4VGB]

Ellsberg has you by the throat! :)

It was a short lived experience for me. ;)

[W1GUH]

Ellsberg has you by the throat! :)

It was a short lived experience for me. ;)

Apparently it was much too short for most voters, too. Seemed to forget all about it, and what it meant, practically as soon as it was over.

[N4VGB]

Apparently it was much too short for most voters, too. Seemed to forget all about it, and what it meant, practically as soon as it was over.

The old Potomac Two Step is a song and dance performed around the world. Deception in governance is not an exclusive practice to the U.S.

[W1GUH]

The old Potomac Two Step is a song and dance performed around the world. Deception in governance is not an exclusive practice to the U.S.

You know that, and I know that. There's millions of others that don't know that. There's many more who kind of have a notion of government deception but have never actually seen documented evidence of same, nor do they have any clue just how extensive and extreme it is.

The president and his closest advisors consider themselves above the law, "better" than average people, and feel no obligation whatsoever to "do the right thing." They only do what they want to do, a lot of the time in utter disregard from good, sound advice.

Educating people who need to know this is never "old hat" or "out of vogue." It's a part of living in the type of government we alledgedly have. If you're so bored with the subject, you're welcome to move on.

There's also the notion of extensive misinformation and revisionist history concerning the late 60's & early 70's. This is one source of the straight skinny.

[N4VGB]

Educating people who need to know this is never "old hat" or "out of vogue." It's a part of living in the type of government we alledgedly have. If you're so bored with the subject, you're welcome to move on.
There's also the notion of extensive misinformation and revisionist history concerning the late 60's & early 70's. This is one source of the straight skinny.


Undoubtedly a noble pursuit but one that you'll find extremely frustrating.

Those of us who lived the period aren't affected by "revisionist history". I'm especially amused by the current revisionist history version of the JFK assassination and the use of computer simulation to verify that all Warren Commission findings are correct. Only one flaw, Dealey Plaza isn't quite in the same perfect configuration as it was on that day! But the youngsters believe it and are comforted. ;)

I would also advise the sprinkling of at least a tad of salt on Mr. Ellsberg book, since he most assuredly had an axe to grind in the affair. ;)

Those who want to be believe are the easiest led astray.

[KV1M]

Those of us who lived the period aren't affected by "revisionist history".

I lived it there skippy and I am always ready to ponder the new evidence as it is released, as are most intelligent and informed people.
You are daft if you think you got the true story when it was happening, Nixon was nearly as secretive as Cheney.

Keep your head in the sand Jethro, it's scary and cold in the real world.

[n5xm]

Think about it...a group of men sit down to discuss an issue and it quickly degrades into lies and one-upmanship. Imagine some of the untaped things said at one of these meetings in Reagan or Clinton eras? I can almost see Reagan entering the room dressed like a cowboy with gun and holster in tow. I can see Clinton coming in with a cigar tucked behind his left ear, maybe even carrying in some panties he just pilfered from some awestruck conquest.

Frankly, I'm not sure we really want to know ALL the stories. You tend to let your hair down a little more around people you've known a long time. Soon the deep waders come out or we'd all drown. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely! Maybe the most realistic truism of all.

[N4VGB]

I lived it there skippy and I am always ready to ponder the new evidence as it is released, as are most intelligent and informed people.
You are daft if you think you got the true story when it was happening, Nixon was nearly as secretive as Cheney.
Keep your head in the sand Jethro, it's scary and cold in the real world.

So you think Ellsberg just released a new book? :rolleyes:

[k4kyv]

I suppose it's kind of a stretch to say that if Nixon was like that, so are the rest, so I'm not really saying that, but I'd say that the likelihood of conversations like these, albeit with less infantile word usage, is pretty high.

ROTFLMAO...

The very last thought that would ever enter my mind about the current occupants.

[W1GUH]

Undoubtedly a noble pursuit but one that you'll find extremely frustrating.



Yep, ain't that the truth. Sometimes I wonder why I bother....prolly some defect in my genes or sumpin'.

I'd go a step further and call it Sisyphean.

[W3MIV]

Those who want to be believe are the easiest led astray.

Too true. I put small faith in Ellsberg because he grew self-righteous and made himself into a zealot. I do not thereby mean to indicate that his "Pentagon Papers" as delivered to the NYT were not genuine or that what he divulged was anywhere near as damaging to "national defense" as the administration and its goons insisted at the time they sued for suppression. Most of the stuff the administration sought to suppress was embarrassing, and the only damage done to national defense was the result of everyone seeing what a collection of putzes was running the war. For anyone who was in any way involved in a military role during those years, nothing that was revealed was either shocking or even surprising.

Of all the actors strutting and fretting those hours on the DC stage, I have two heroes that I value as the sheet anchor for those wearing months: Archie Cox and John Sirica. Those are the two selfless soldiers who held the barricade against incredible presidential abuse of power.

Nixon once averred that whatever a president did in the course of handling what he saw as his duty under the Constitution was "above the law." The disturbing thing about that astonishing bit of hubris is that there is a frightening measure of truth in it.

[W1GUH]

Too true. I put small faith in Ellsberg because he grew self-righteous and made himself into a zealot. I do not thereby mean to indicate that his "Pentagon Papers" as delivered to the NYT were not genuine or that what he divulged was anywhere near as damaging to "national defense" as the administration and its goons insisted at the time they sued for suppression. Most of the stuff the administration sought to suppress was embarrassing, and the only damage done to national defense was the result of everyone seeing what a collection of putzes was running the war. For anyone who was in any way involved in a military role during those years, nothing that was revealed was either shocking or even surprising.

Of all the actors strutting and fretting those hours on the DC stage, I have two heroes that I value as the sheet anchor for those wearing months: Archie Cox and John Sirica. Those are the two selfless soldiers who held the barricade against incredible presidential abuse of power.

Nixon once averred that whatever a president did in the course of handling what he saw as his duty under the Constitution was "above the law." The disturbing thing about that astonishing bit of hubris is that there is a frightening measure of truth in it.


"I put small faith in Ellsberg because he grew self-righteous and made himself into a zealot. "

Something I specifically looked for and didn't seem to find much. His whole tenet was that he really didn't want any attention, even though he knew he'd get plenty. He wanted the attention solely on the papers, and especially the actions of five presidents (Started with Truman) viz a viz what was in the papers. One could say that about anyone who was actively against the Vietnam War.

Nixon once averred that whatever a president did in the course of handling what he saw as his duty under the Constitution was "above the law."

Yes...without congressional and judicial review.

But now that I've finished, the full review will be forthcoming as I find the time.

[K0RGR]

I'm really disappointed in old Tricky Dicky. I always gave him credit for having a decent grasp of the real world, in spite of his obvious paranoia, but these brief exchanges really draw that into question. I think we've learned that there is no such thing as a p___a__ little country anywhere in the world. It's that same ####-sure arrogance that has led us into Iraq - the belief that America simply can't lose a war. I think even the Romans were smarter than that.

And Kissinger went along with this? Very hard to believe...

[W1GUH]

I'm really disappointed in old Tricky Dicky. I always gave him credit for having a decent grasp of the real world, in spite of his obvious paranoia, but these brief exchanges really draw that into question. I think we've learned that there is no such thing as a p___a__ little country anywhere in the world. It's that same ####-sure arrogance that has led us into Iraq - the belief that America simply can't lose a war. I think even the Romans were smarter than that.

And Kissinger went along with this? Very hard to believe...

"And Kissinger went along with this? Very hard to believe..."

Absolutely YES!

Mr. Ellsberg had a lot of words about Henry Kissinger, and left me with questions about him, to the point that I've now bought, and am going to read, two books by Mr. Kissinger.

While I was perusing what he has written I came across a review, and, omigod, am I embarassed and almost horrified I didn't take closer note of who said it, and where it came from, but the review had the words..."wanted to save America, and Nixon, from Nixon".

I have to re-trace my steps to find out exactly where I read that. It was either while I was searcing amazon.com, or when I was in Border's today. I'll let you know when I get that info.

The context was, "how could someone (Kissinger) whose personality was so different from Nixon's, be so close to him?" The answer was the above.

This is fascinating stuff...and I'm going to persue it...I'll let you know what I learn. Know that the question you posed has been asked in a lot of places.

His books are big, and will take a while to read, and digest...but I'll keep you posted on what I learned.

And, in Mr. Ellsberg's book, he talks in some depth about Mr. Kissinger, all respectful and very informative, and it might be an accurate thing to say that, "Thank GOD (or whatever or whoever you want to thank) that he was one of Nixon's insiders."

More later...

[n2ize]

I'm really disappointed in old Tricky Dicky. I always gave him credit for having a decent grasp of the real world, in spite of his obvious paranoia, but these brief exchanges really draw that into question. I think we've learned that there is no such thing as a p___a__ little country anywhere in the world. It's that same ####-sure arrogance that has led us into Iraq - the belief that America simply can't lose a war. I think even the Romans were smarter than that.



"Even the Romans" ? The Romans would make todays punks look like clowns.