Operation Northwoods

[Caper]

Of all the truther evidence pointing to 9/11 as an inside job, Operation Northwoods probably is what gets them the most recruits. And to be fair, I am quite suprised that such plans ever made it to a presidents desk. This isn't really evidence for a 9/11 conspriacy, it's more evidence that the government would plot to harm their own citizens.

Anway the reason I bring this up is because I want to know if this is true or false (arguing a truther).

1. true or false, the united states military would carry out terrorist attacks on it's own people? and such plans gained the approval of all joint chiefs of staff?

This more pertains to the "approval of all joint chiefs of staff" part. If you look at wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
they state that.

Destroying an unmanned drone masquerading as a commercial aircraft supposedly full of "college students off on a holiday". This proposal was the one supported by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Now this leads me to believe that all the other parts were not approved, such as this.

Blowing up a U.S. ship in Guantánamo Bay and blaming it on Cuba—reminiscent of the destruction of the USS Maine at Havana in 1898, which helped to precipitate the Spanish-American War. (The document's first suggestion regarding the sinking of a U.S. ship is to blow up a ship at sea and hence would result in U.S. Navy members being killed, with a secondary suggestion of possibly using an unmanned ship and fake funerals instead.)

Or this.

Staging a "terror campaign", including the "real or simulated" sinking of Cuban refugees:

If it was just one part that was approved, the simulated part, then the answer would be false. But if in fact the whole thing was approved (even if the joint chiefs of staff would never have implemented the real part anyway) then the statement made would be true.

Can anyone help me?

[Reheat]

1. true or false, the united states military would carry out terrorist attacks on it's own people? and such plans gained the approval of all joint chiefs of staff?

False

I do realize that there are a lot of folks who believe that members of the US Military are "mindless drones" who obey orders without question. This could not be further from the truth.

[Drudgewire]

:hb:

[rwguinn]

is it necessary to go through this crap every 3 months?
There are more than sufficient threads already on this.
There is a "search" function on this forum. Please use it.

[Caper]

is it necessary to go through this crap every 3 months?
There are more than sufficient threads already on this.
There is a "search" function on this forum. Please use it.


Well my question was more specific to what aspects were approved and what wasn't. A seach brought 1000's of results and i couldn't immediately find what specifically what I was looking for.

[Norseman]

Read the document, it is linked on the Wikipedia page. See for yourself how they intended to do it, do not trust the truthers.

[defaultdotxbe]

Blowing up a U.S. ship in Guantánamo Bay and blaming it on Cuba—reminiscent of the destruction of the USS Maine at Havana in 1898, which helped to precipitate the Spanish-American War. (The document's first suggestion regarding the sinking of a U.S. ship is to blow up a ship at sea and hence would result in U.S. Navy members being killed, with a secondary suggestion of possibly using an unmanned ship and fake funerals instead.)
nowhere does it state they would kill anyone, this is assumption on the part of the truthers, to me blowing it up in guantanamo indicates it would probably be sitting empty in a harbor

heres some work i did on northwoods a while back
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66214

[Gravy]

Of all the truther evidence pointing to 9/11 as an inside job, Operation Northwoods probably is what gets them the most recruits.On what do you base that statement? I rarely see Northwoods being brought up.

And to be fair, I am quite suprised that such plans ever made it to a presidents desk. This isn't really evidence for a 9/11 conspriacy, it's more evidence that the government would plot to harm their own citizens.No, it isn't. The government didn't ask for plans to harm U.S. citizens, nor were any such plans suggested by the military, which did the brainstorming. Northwoods is evidence that the government has rejected stupid ideas.

Can anyone help me?Please use the search function, or refer to sites like 911myths for this old stuff.

[Gravy]

Well my question was more specific to what aspects were approved and what wasn't.None.

[Norseman]

Well my question was more specific to what aspects were approved and what wasn't. A seach brought 1000's of results and i couldn't immediately find what specifically what I was looking for.

You will find what was approved in the document if you read it:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf

It was paragraph 8 on page 6 in the PDF (marked page 3) that was approved, the paragraph says that the document should be forwarded to the Secretary of Defense for approval. Se also page 3 in the PDF. The document was made for planning purposes only to be used for further planning. It was not an operational plan. An operational plan based upon any of the proposed courses of action would have had to go back for approval at later stage. But that never happened since the document was turned down, sensible enough. But read the whole document and get the whole context. Do not trust Wikipedia on controversial things like this, there are lot people out there who wants to make the worst assumptions they can based on this document. As pointed out by other posters here, nowhere is it said that anyone was going to be killed. At the worst it was proposed to wound some exile Cubans.

[Caper]

On what do you base that statement? I rarely see Northwoods being brought up.



Really I see it brought up quite a bit. It's usually the first response when someone states, "you guys are crazy to think the government would do this to their own people".


No, it isn't. The government didn't ask for plans to harm U.S. citizens, nor were any such plans suggested by the military, which did the brainstorming. Northwoods is evidence that the government has rejected stupid ideas.


It does alarm me somewhat. To me even the fact it was suggested mildly alarming. Personally who ever even brainstormed the idea should have been charged with treason immediately.... not so much the faking the attacks, but the real attacks on their own civilians or refugees.

[Norseman]

On what do you base that statement? I rarely see Northwoods being brought up.


The few truthers we got here in Norway loves to use it, but they are few and insignificant. So maybe this is more of a european thing.

[defaultdotxbe]

It does alarm me somewhat. To me even the fact it was suggested mildly alarming. Personally who ever even brainstormed the idea should have been charged with treason immediately.... not so much the faking the attacks, but the real attacks on their own civilians or refugees.
if you dont mind my asking, how old are you?

im not trying to lead into an ad hom, i just want to know if you are old enough to remember the cold war, specifically in the late 50s/early 60s

[Caper]

You will find what was approved in the document if you read it:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf


Thanks. It was quite telling. Very different when read in context.

[OldTigerCub]

For anyone interested, the NWO is getting ready to pull off "Operation Southwoods"....a gathering in Florida where we plan to camp, drink beer, eat corndogs and watch the SuperBowl.:cool:

(The location is a closely guarded secret, however....)

[Gravy]

Really I see it brought up quite a bit. It's usually the first response when someone states, "you guys are crazy to think the government would do this to their own people".

It does alarm me somewhat. To me even the fact it was suggested mildly alarming. Personally who ever even brainstormed the idea should have been charged with treason immediately.... not so much the faking the attacks, but the real attacks on their own civilians or refugees.You need to look up the definition of treason, and understand the threat that Castro's Cuba was seen to be. We pay our military to propose ways to deal with myriad threats, real and imagined. We pay our government to decide which of those proposals should be approved.

[Gravy]

For anyone interested, the NWO is getting ready to pull off "Operation Southwoods"....a gathering in Florida where we plan to camp, drink beer, eat corndogs and watch the SuperBowl.:cool:

(The location is a closely guarded secret, however....)The secret is out. (http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/48/39/)

[RedIbis]

For anyone interested, the NWO is getting ready to pull off "Operation Southwoods"....a gathering in Florida where we plan to camp, drink beer, eat corndogs and watch the SuperBowl.:cool:

(The location is a closely guarded secret, however....)

Right, which is about as realistic as the Liberty City Seven.
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0733513120071213

[OldTigerCub]

The secret is out. (http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/48/39/)

Sigh...I wish I could go to that one. I was a few points short on my last "evil gubmint shill evaluation" so I have to settle for just a case of beer and a box of corndogs....at home....in the cold....:(

[Norseman]

Thanks. It was quite telling. Very different when read in context.
Good:)

You also have to view this in a Cold War context. The Cuban Missile Crisis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis)occurred later that year. It is also to be noted that the mindset of american military leaders before and after the Vietnam War is quiet different, but that is a discussion that does not belong in the CT forum.

[Caper]

You need to look up the definition of treason, and understand the threat that Castro's Cuba was seen to be. We pay our military to propose ways to deal with myriad threats, real and imagined. We pay our government to decide which of those proposals should be approved.

Yeah I knew treason was the wrong word even as I was writing it. I was thinking of it in the context of attack and American citizen as a baisis of trying to fool that nation into going to war should be considered treasonous..I guess I should state it should be criminal to suggest harming civilians, which was in the document. But I do understand the time period was different and the enemy called for extreme measures.

[beachnut]

Of all the truther evidence pointing to 9/11 as an inside job, Operation Northwoods probably is what gets them the most recruits. And to be fair, I am quite suprised that such plans ever made it to a presidents desk. This isn't really evidence for a 9/11 conspriacy, it's more evidence that the government would plot to harm their own citizens.

Anway the reason I bring this up is because I want to know if this is true or false (arguing a truther).

This more pertains to the "approval of all joint chiefs of staff" part. If you look at wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
they state that.

Now this leads me to believe that all the other parts were not approved, such as this.

Or this.

If it was just one part that was approved, the simulated part, then the answer would be false. But if in fact the whole thing was approved (even if the joint chiefs of staff would never have implemented the real part anyway) then the statement made would be true.

Can anyone help me?
There are idiots who would do this; they are all in 9/11 truth. They think it is possible because 9/11 truth has idiots.

In the military these guys are section 8s.

[uk_dave]

Right, which is about as realistic as the Liberty City Seven.
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0733513120071213

Accused ringleader Narseal Batiste testified he never asked al Qaeda for money and made up stories of plotting to bring down the Sears Tower to con government informants who posed as Middle Eastern contacts out of $50,000. Batiste said he wanted the money to build a nonprofit religious organization and community outreach program in Liberty City.

Bless.

Looks like a bunch of idiots got a bit of a scare when they decided to play at being terrorists in a country which had suffered a traumatic terrorist attack. A bit like going through airport security and joking that you have a bomb in your bag. Don't effin do it!

[Tweeter]

False

I do realize that there are a lot of folks who believe that members of the US Military are "mindless drones" who obey orders without question. This could not be further from the truth.

Orlly?

http://admins.20at.com/marwa05/abu%20grab%202.jpg

[gumboot]

Orlly?

http://admins.20at.com/marwa05/abu%20grab%202.jpg


Evidence that Lynndie England was just mindlessly following orders rather than a seriously disturbed individual?

-Gumboot

[Tweeter]

If you insist.
In her first interview since all of this began, one of the more famous faces of the scandal Pfc. Lynndie England, the guard seen smiling and pointing at Iraqi prisoners, said she was ordered to pose for the pictures by “persons in my higher chain of command.” Correspondent Dan Rather reports.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/12/60II/main617121.shtml

[beachnut]

If you insist.
In her first interview since all of this began, one of the more famous faces of the scandal Pfc. Lynndie England, the guard seen smiling and pointing at Iraqi prisoners, said she was ordered to pose for the pictures by “persons in my higher chain of command.” Correspondent Dan Rather reports.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/12/60II/main617121.shtml
She is like you in a way, You mindlessly repeat, spew, lies of 9/11 truth! Most people are relational, you repeat the lies of 9/11 truth~! exceptions exist, you are an example presenting an example; how ironic!

[funk de fino]

If you insist.
In her first interview since all of this began, one of the more famous faces of the scandal Pfc. Lynndie England, the guard seen smiling and pointing at Iraqi prisoners, said she was ordered to pose for the pictures by “persons in my higher chain of command.” Correspondent Dan Rather reports.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/12/60II/main617121.shtml

maybe it was the sergeant she was shagging and got her pregnant who said "lets take some photos of naked men and dead men it'll be fun"

hardly a military order as such

[HappyHarryHampton]

Thank God for Kennedy. Who knows what another less squeamish President may have decided.

At least it proves that there are people in the US military establishment willing to contemplate and carry out false flag operations.

Oh I forgot... that's not true apparantly.

[Reheat]

Thank God for Kennedy. Who knows what another less squeamish President may have decided.

At least it proves that there are people in the US military establishment willing to contemplate and carry out false flag operations.

Oh I forgot... that's not true apparantly.

Excuse me. Is this the same as folks who are willing to make baseless accusations with no evidence?

You need a spell checker. The word is apparently.

[CurtC]

I guess I should state it should be criminal to suggest harming civilians, which was in the document.

Where in the document does it suggest harming civilians? American civilians?

[defaultdotxbe]

Where in the document does it suggest harming civilians? American civilians?
it does say they could attack cuban refugees "to the extent of wounding" but doesnt specify if they would be aware of their role in the operation or just victims