Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Excerpt: "In just-released Watergate grand jury testimony from 1975, ex-President Richard Nixon complained that his 1968 campaign was bugged by the Johnson administration. But there was little curiosity then - or now - as to why that surveillance was justified, reports Robert Parry."

Richard Nixon says goodbye to his staff members outside the White House as he boards a helicopter after resigning the presidency on August 9, 1974. (photo: AP)
Richard Nixon says goodbye to his staff members outside the White House as he boards a helicopter after resigning the presidency on August 9, 1974. (photo: AP)

go to original article

 

Comments  

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+33 # humanmancalvin 2011-11-13 12:53
Nixon=Bush
 
 
+24 # lorenbliss 2011-11-13 14:27
No, it's LBJ=Nixon=Ford=Carter=Reagan=Bush=Clinton=Bush
=Obama -- fascists every one.

Don't lionize LBJ, who ran as the "peace candidate" even as he was plotting war -- much as Obama the Orator ran as the candidate of "change" then turned into Barack the Betrayer.

The last president who represented the 99 percent in any way at all was John Fitzgerald Kennedy -- murdered for doing just that.

(The U.S. really is the Fourth Reich.)
 
 
+11 # doneasley 2011-11-14 14:07
And no matter what they say, I still believe to this day that Oswald did not act alone in the JFK assassination.
 
 
+7 # doneasley 2011-11-14 13:32
You're so right about that, Calvin. These leopards don't change their spots. In addition to the treasonous Nixon (1968) and Bush (1980) contacts with the enemy prior to the elections, the GOP has always used behind-the-scenes collusion as a means to accomplish their ends. It was true in Watergate, Iran-Contra, and "W"'s invasion and occupation of Iraq. Now Jack Abramoff (just out of prison) has written a book about his dirty dealings for the GOP leadership during the Bush administration. It continues today with coordinated conspiratorial attempts to scrub the voter rolls in GOP-controlled states. And furthermore the conservatives on the Supreme Court are in on the act.

The acts performed by these bible-thumping, flag-wearing traitors are so perfidious that the mainstream media is afraid to touch them - intimidated. Just take a look at the Republican field running for nomination now, and you can't help but say, "Heaven help us". If we'd stick Giuliani and Trump back in this sanctimonious group with Newt, we'd have NINE WIVES to deal with!
 
 
+75 # Texan 4 Peace 2011-11-13 13:39
"the shocking story never was played up by the major U.S. news media, perhaps because it risked devastating public faith in the political system." Well, no need to worry about THAT any more... That horse left the barn long ago.
 
 
+6 # minkdumink 2011-11-13 16:53
yeah when Lincoln was killed. Its been one intrigue after another ever since.
 
 
+37 # anarchteacher 2011-11-13 14:03
Robert Parry has once again demonstrated why he remains one of America's greatest investigative journalists.

He has for decades doggedly stuck to reporting each and every new machination and sordid revelation relating to the Reagan/Bush campaign's 1980 "October Surprise," of their negotiations with Iranian officials concerning the 55 Americans held hostage in Tehran and corrupt arms deals preceeding the Iran-Contra Scandal.

In this outstanding article he keeps alive the quest for truth directed at the Nixon/Agnew campaign's 1968 "October Surprise" concerning GOP sabotage of Vietnam peace negotiations.

Others may be content with the Walt Disney version of history as told by court historians, the mainstream media, and other apologists for the regime du jour.

Robert Parry, Peter Dale Scott, Jim Hougan, Douglas Valentine, Russ Baker, Anthony Summers, Pete Brewton, Roger Morris, and Sterling Seagreave are a few of those who continue to speak truth to power.
 
 
+48 # angryspittle 2011-11-13 14:09
BFD. What about Nixon sending Madam Chiang to Paris to tell Thieu (sp?) that he would get a better deal from Nixon so he scuttled the peace talks. Stinks of treason. Just like the Repukes in the 30's trying to oust FDR, the October surprise of 1980 and on and on. Fucking traitorous motherfuckers.
 
 
+15 # jon 2011-11-13 16:15
Hey man, quit mealy-mouthing around, and say what you mean!
 
 
+24 # mjc 2011-11-13 14:52
Some might think that what we don't know won't hurt us but...we certainly are hurt by politicians, leaders of our country, who manipulate various channels to make sure their particular ideology survives. I'm not such a Democrat that I don't believe Johnson had his own little twists and turns but Nixon was sure one for the history books in that regard. What really stinks is that no one in the media had the guts or journalistic instincts to let us...the lesser Americans know about these manipulations. In the long run, and that is how policy should be judged, American lives were lost for wars that had no real purpose or need: the saddest part.
 
 
+17 # jon 2011-11-13 16:19
Lives lost were around 58,000 - Viet-Nam Conflict Historians please weigh in on the exact figure, if you please.

And all of them were lost for absolutely NOTHING.

I don't need help from any historian on that call!
 
 
+31 # in deo veritas 2011-11-13 15:11
Thanks for mentioning the 1980 October Surprise. The infor that has come out so far (with more to come) shows that old man Bush committed treason by contacting the Iranians and getting them to wait until Regan took office to release the hostages. Just another repuke legacy from the Nixon Era. When will it end?
 
 
+37 # Paul Scott 2011-11-13 16:09
Nixon was simply doing what Nixon always did; lie his ass off. Both Chenney and Rumsfeld worked for and learned from Nixon.
 
 
+22 # Dion Giles 2011-11-13 16:25
Whether it’s been plotting in secret to murder a popular president, or to rape Vietnam, or to make deals with the Iranian mullahs to finance the Honduran fascist dictatorship’s war against Nicaragua, or to rig the “election” of a president, or to put their country on a permanent war footing by levelling (or conniving at levelling) the Twin Towers and murdering three thousand mainly Americans, or to lie their country into a war of blatant aggression, the political class will rightly fear an existential threat to the whole political system of “the 99% elect them, the 1% buy them”. They will sink their faux differences and close ranks “right”, “left” and “centre”: ‘The public mustn’t get to know, the system must be protected’.

The political class isn’t just the bought pollies, it’s an integrated and heavily financed Praetorian guard of pollies, commentators, key public “servants”, brasshats, media management, party management - all knowing that when the chips are down nobody’d better rock the boat. Look at their united hysteria over Bradley Manning and Wikileaks! What they fear most is democracy, and this has been shown right back to the antidemocratic structure agreed to in the framing of the American Constitution.
 
 
+18 # Billsy 2011-11-13 17:29
Am surprised not to see Kissinger's name in this. Thought he was the architect of the plan to scuttle the peace talks and build up his own power while helping Nixon. He should be serving time. Imagine Kissinger in Guantanamo :)
 
 
+20 # James38 2011-11-13 18:26
The chicanery and craziness about Viet Nam goes back further than most realize. Toward the end of WWII, when the Japanese were forced to retreat from SE Asia (including Viet Nam), the French began to plan to return to control of their old colonial Fiefdom. Ho Chi Minh, representing the aspirations of the Vietnamese to regain control of their own country for the first time in centuries, went to the Generals in charge of the US forces in SE Asia, and requested that they help prevent the French from resuming colonial power. He was essentially laughed out of the tent. Then the Viet Nam war really started. The Vietnamese finally defeated the French, in spite of major help in weapons and aircraft from the US, at Dien Bien Phu in May, 1954. Talks were held in Geneva, and the French agreed to withdraw, recognizing Ho Chi Minh as leader in the North, with elections to be held in the South. The US decided to intervene, cancelled the elections and installed a puppet government in the South. The entire war was an unnecessary mistake made by US Expansionist and Colonialist interests. There never was an actual will to survive as a separate state on the part of the South. The partition of the country was devised to create an excuse for the war of Colonial Expansion by the US, as were all the claims of Communist threats in the region. Nixon's chicanery was just a sordid addition.
 
 
+8 # conniejo 2011-11-14 09:40
This is exactly what happened after the Cuban revolution. Castro came to the US to ask for help getting the country back on its feet after the damage Batista and his mafia handlers did to Cuba. The US turned him down, leaving him no option but to turn to the other big power of that time - Russia.
 
 
+5 # James38 2011-11-14 20:29
As you said, Conniejo. I watched all that happening with complete horror. It was as if watching a re-run of the whole nightmare that Ho Chi Minh went through, and the results were startlingly similar, right down to the development of an excessively authoritarian government. One can only wonder what would have happened had the US had the wisdom to generously help Cuba without strings or games. Of course, the reason we didn't was mostly down to big corporations such as Shell Oil who were (somewhat understandably) furious because Castro had nationalized their facilities. However the obvious importance of helping the Cuban people achieve a decent standard of living should have taken precedence easily over the corporate squabble, but since when has the US government been free of such influence?
Our Supreme Court was blatantly packed with far-right ideologues by the Bushes, and the payoff was the election ruling in Florida and the recent outrage of elevating corporations to personhood. That is such a disgusting excess of forthrightly grotesque manipulation of constitutional reality that I still feel an almost unbearable revulsion every time I am reminded of it.
 
 
0 # badbenski 2011-11-20 19:21
The American OSS and various elements of British covert operations, both of whom had fought side by side with Ho Chi Mihn's forces against Japan, had to leave the field in shame as the French gave small arms to many captured Japanese soldiers and employed them as policemen in Viet Nam. A totally shameful episode and a prelude to much more carnage.
 
 
+17 # James38 2011-11-13 18:39
Some have asked why there was such a close connection between Russia and Viet Nam. When Ho realized he was going to have to fight the US, a much more formidable opponent than the French, he needed far more weapons and support than had been needed to defeat the French. He was reluctant to seek more help from China since China had been one of the colonial powers over Vietnam in the past, so he tried to balance the situation by playing the Russians off against the Chinese, using the rivalry that had developed between the two of them. Ho had been educated in France and was involved with the Ideology of Communism. I feel that the incredible pressure of the war plus the enforced closeness with both Russia and China led to the growth of excessive authoritarianis m in the Vietnamese government. Since Vietnam has never shown any interest in expansion, and has respected the sovereignty of its neighbors, I see real hope of an eventual liberalization and growth of freedom in the country. One of the reasons I did not disbelieve totally when Bush claimed WMD in Iraq was the feeling that no US president would ever make the mistake of again creating a war of aggression for no good reason, after the awful lessons of Viet Nam. How wrong I was.
 
 
+9 # Doc Mary 2011-11-13 18:45
And it worked just as well in 1980 ...
 
 
+10 # Fight the Reich 2011-11-13 18:59
"(Rober Parry) ... has for decades doggedly stuck to reporting each and every new machination and sordid revelation relating to ... (including) corrupt arms deals preceeding the Iran-Contra Scandal.

Well, unfortunately the vast majority of great reporters are themselves afraid to reveal much deeper and darker and more dangerous (to reporters) matters, especially the huge drug cabal behind much of the sordid deeds of the violent money / power factions of our 'shadow govt', and their paramilitary goons, that operate to a great degree via the most top-secret "halls" of our government, ....the "Iran-Contra" affair a prime example not to mention JFK's assasination. Well known authors that have accomplished widespread distribution thus readership know very well that there is a line that if they cross will surely endanger the lives of mostly their families, and most-often ruin their careers by expert character assasination (if not physical assasination) by empire goons with unlimited resources. That reality is exactly why some powerful figures get away with murder (even thousands of innocent women and children) and treated like heroes while others receive the full wrath of empire machinery for getting a blow job.
 
 
+11 # Fight the Reich 2011-11-13 19:06
The CIA "rogues" and their goons of the "Iran-Contra" affair didn't even need investment money to make vulgar and obscene profits for their cabal; Ronald Reagan made sure they had all the arms they needed to trade for the cocaine they flew back to the USA and sold on our streets for their cabal. The "Contras" didn't buy those arms with money, ....they didn't have any money; They bought the arms with drugs, mostly cocaine. All the while the white house's "drug war" hawking and support eliminated competition with vast logistical support. The "Iran-Contra" documents also reveal the cabal's 'October Surprise' trying to stop Jimmy Carter's rescue of U.S. hostages in Iran until ronnie raygun could take office; ie. That cabal of elephant dung had been well established long before ron raygun became president, and they plugged right into ronnie's administration.
 
 
+11 # Fight the Reich 2011-11-13 19:09
It is no mere coincidence at all that the Vietnam / Laos war (the French Connection), and the "Iran-Contra" drug bust affair, and the short battle in Grenada (mostly for recapturing control of their small off-route airport used by drug smugglers), and the short Panama battle to capture Noriega (because he was pulling a bin ladden and trying to break his own drug cartel away from CIA control), and the Afghanistan war (the planets largest supplier of opium / heroin), and the Iraq war (logistical support for the Afghan opium / heroin operations, like the vietnam war was for the U.S. opium / heroin cabal in Laos), and our insurgency into Pakistan (same filth); .....All of which revolve(d) around control of the planet's biggest expensive hard drugs sources and supply networks ever since WWII.
 
 
+12 # Fight the Reich 2011-11-13 19:10
I have the highest regard for brave reporters like ex-LA drug agent Michael Ruppert ( FromTheWilderne ss.com ) and Daniel Hopsicker ( MadCowProd.com ) who have been exposing the Fourth Reich goons drug cabal and activities for many years now, including tying the events of 9-11 to these very M.I.C. / Fourth Reich filth.

Primary to the general public learning the big picture of a fully developed and sordid empire that has been hidden from them since WWI, are the dedicated and relentless Reporters we all owe so much to. THANK YOU dearly.
 
 
+7 # KittatinyHawk 2011-11-13 19:21
Got bit confused on who was president in one of the statements. Nixon supposedly went out at night and told Protesters the War was not going to close up.
But I know I take the word of Christian Science Monitor with a grain of salt.

One of there latest conclusions is that extinction of animals doesnot happen as fast as is indicated. I would like to see them at some toxic spills explain destruction of the creatures and plants.
I guess as long as the extinction takes longer it is okay>
Second note on CSM was they have okayed the Chemicals in Fracking saying they are safe. So I would like to see these Board Members and Journalists come here to Pa and drink these chemical, let their family also.

Everyone was bugged, Hoover and McCarthy helped us with this Paranoia. We are still bugging everyone including the internet. God Bless Democracy
 
 
+7 # futhark 2011-11-14 04:21
I personally found Nixon's "secret plan" to end the Vietnam war to be outrageously unethical and was a bit surprised that no one in the news media seemed to catch on that any leading politician who claimed to have a way of ending the bloodbath in Southeast Asia, but held the country hostage to it to secure his election was practicing a kind of unconscionable political blackmail.
 
 
+6 # lin96 2011-11-14 04:25
Nixon is an example of the fact that the truth comes out eventually. In Nixon's case it ruined him and still is. Good Actions, good reactions and bad actions, bad reactions. As you give so you will receive. Politicians haven't learned anything about running a country with character and integrity. The Republican party specifically, has been built on falsity and it gets clearer everyday as to why we're where we are today. When Bush pointed his finger at the television and warned us of an "axis of evil", he had three fingers pointing back at himself. After 8 years of living with the horrible things that Bush did, it's hard to believe that the GOP has the guts to try and dupe the people again. So, do we put the "axis of evil" back in? I hope not.
 
 
+4 # StPete 2011-11-14 05:41
How odd there's nothing in this story or even in the comments about the perceived prospect of oil off SE coast of Vietnam, its effects on everyone's behavior, and the influence of oil/engineering firm Brown & Root (eventually KBR) with its family & political ties to LBJ during the run-up to and during the US chapter of the that war. By the time Kennedy was killed they'd invested millions with an eye to the South China Sea, just off Vietnam. They were a little early, but oil was a big player there, even then.
 
 
+1 # James38 2011-11-16 14:49
In my comment above I tell about the back-history of the Vietnam War. The US involvement started when we supported the French with munitions, weapons, and aircraft in their attempt to reestablish their colonial control of Vietnam. When they were defeated in 1953, the US stepped in to win the war the French had lost. The motive was colonialism based on egotistical inertia. As far as I know there was no talk of oil on any side at that time. Later the idea of oil may have "fueled" some of the drive to continue the war, but that, and rumors of a large tin deposit, were about all one heard beyond excuses based on the ridiculous "domino theory". That was the idea that if we allowed Vietnam to "fall", the rest of SE Asia would drop under communist domination one country after another.

When the US got involved in Vietnam, things were simpler. The population of the world was about 1/4 to 1/3 the present level, oil was plentiful, and we were not faced with overpopulation and global warming and looming battles over starvation and migration and water supplies, nor were we worried about mass extinctions and ocean level rise. Motives were more transparent and based on old ideas of simple territorial and economic domination.
 
 
+5 # 666 2011-11-14 05:51
At best, Johnson was another pol who believed the American people "can't handle the truth." At worst he protected & enabled fascist elements to extend their control over our government, not unlike Obama. As Sartre argues, each of us is ultimately responsible for our own actions; we can't blame them on anyone/anything else. The point being lack of responsibility is an innate political characteristic of both authoritarian & representative govts. Lack of responsibility IS the "status quo". We elect corrupt idiots & blame them for being corrupt enablers.
"True democracy" (characterized by randomly selected reps like a jury) requires an informed & educated citizenry (who often refuse to be either, baah-baah). "Representative democracy" shifts responsibility from citizens to elected representatives . Authoritarianis m appears when said elected reps transfer their responsibility to powers "above" them: Corporations, military, religions, ideologies, etc.
The eternal problems are #1 how to keep the genie in the bottle & #2 how to put it back in (we are here now). Whatever "solutions" come out of OWS, they must ultimately address #1 knowing no solution is eternal. All political & utopian thought is trapped in an eternal yin-yang: must people be led or can they take responsibility themselves? Does history offer us any hope? Not really.
 
 
+3 # reiverpacific 2011-11-14 09:24
This whole subterfuge is covered in great and revealing depth in Larry Berman's excellent book "NO PEACE, NO HONOR" in which the sabotaging of the Paris Vietnam peace talks by Nixon and his uber-criminal accomplice Henry "Mr. Hubris" Kissinger, who was actually the true manipulator of these events and the mess, death, destruction, environmental degradation, Cambodian horrors and ultimate US defeat that followed.
 
 
+4 # doneasley 2011-11-14 13:15
You're so right about that, PaulV. These leopards don't change their spots. In addition to the treasonous Nixon (1968) and Bush (1980) contacts with the enemy prior to the elections, the GOP has always used behind-the-scenes collusion as a means to accomplish their ends. It was true in Watergate, Iran-Contra, and "W"'s invasion and occupation of Iraq. Now Jack Abramoff (just out of prison) has written a book about his dirty dealings for the GOP leadership. It continues today with coordinated conspiratorial attempts to scrub the voter rolls in GOP-controlled states. And furthermore the conservatives on the Supreme Court are in on the act.

The acts performed by these bible-thumping, flag-wearing traitors are so perfidious that the mainstream media is afraid to touch them. Just take a look at the Republicans running for nomination
now, and you can't help but say, "Heaven help us"!
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.