Operation Northwood. Did it happen?

Hobbes

It's is a supposed plan by the US to start a domestic terrorist campaign in order to get support to Invade Cuba.

The plan was written in March 1962. There is a PDF version of the document on the web, but I haven't been able to find any news about it beyond tin-foil hat sites (which tend to post to legitimate sites).

Even the NSA+CIA sites where empty.

So anyone know if this is actually true or not?

Only place I could find info is http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/

The actual archive itself http://nsarchive.chadwyck.com/ is password protected, but in a sucky way (so if you know the actual page address you can surf from that area).

Victor

Is it the documentary on Discovery that prompted you on this? There was something the other day about how they were planning to sabotage the Cuban sugar industry back in the 1960s, but then the Cuban Missile Crisis blew up - I didn't see the end of the documentary, so I'm not sure what happened after that.

Sand

Doesnt this belong on the "USA is evil" board?

Hobbes

If they had actually gone through with the plan then yes it would be evil, but according to what I have read cooler heads prevailed.

Anyway, my original question is "Did it happen?", so it wasn't a statement that it did happen. Try to contribute a bit better sand.

Sand

Seriously Hobbes, what sort of response are you looking for? This is a supposed (your own description) plan/operation which is probably as real as those covered up UFO sightings the US government is also accused of. You offer no proof, then go ask for verification on its status from here? An unbiased group of historians and political experts for the US 1960s with a wealth of experience and knowledge regarding US policies on Cuba and secret operation regarding Cuba? Eh no - just a bunch of people who, as the "Americans" thread showed so well, have a bigoted attitude regarding americans. Its just another troll and an exscuse to bash the US.

Hobbes

Sand.

I was asking if it was true or not. You want proof? There is a this thing called a "link" you click on link and read and you find more information. I had already looked through a whole range of sites and was hoping someone here would have more information.

The only person who seems to think this is an American attack is you. The operation was secret, it is not now.

If it's not real fine, it would explain a lot, however considering a lot of sites quote it and there are a number of books out on it I would like to know (one by James Bramford). I don't have the books here but I was just curious where they quote their sources, as the only place I can find as the actual quoted source is locked off to public access.

I just thought someone here would know more about it (prehaps even Americans) so take the stick out of your ass.

bonkey

Originally posted by Sand
Seriously Hobbes, what sort of response are you looking for? This is a supposed (your own description) plan/operation which is probably as real as those covered up UFO sightings the US government is also accused of.

It may come as a surprise to you Sand, but the US have actually done some questionable things in their time, and usually covered it up until well after the event.

For example, I believe the official US line is that no CIA operatives ever had any involvement with the training of the Mujhadeen, nor did the US have any involvement in the USSR/Afghan war. Funnily enough, no-one really believes them when they say it.

Put a different way - just because it is an unconfirmed story about the US government, doesnt mean it is false. You seem to be taking the line that it must be just another conspiracy theory - without having any information on either side. Isnt that just a little bit blind? You level "anti-American" or "left-wing" allegations at anyone who seems to question issues like this, but are now showing that your stance seems to be blind acceptance of the US government and what it says. If the US government havent owned up to this, it must be false, right?

You offer no proof, then go ask for verification on its status from here?

Well, if he offered proof, he'd heardly be asking for verification, now would he.

jc

logic1

Watergate.

.logic.

bonkey

For further reference, I found information on this story in the following locations :

copvcia - From The Wilderness Publications

[URL=http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:uupauzSbe9sC:www.en.monde-diplomatique.fr/2001/11/18nsa+operation+northwood&hl=en&ie=utf-8]En Monde Diplomatique (cached in google, to avoid login)

eaglesup.com (extract from James Bamford's "Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency")

ABCNews

I've deliberately avoided anything which is clearly a conspiracy site. Some of the above may be borderline, but some seem pretty credible,

Moscow times also ran an article, but it requires registration, so I didnt bother adding that.

jc

[edit]
A lot of these reports seem to credit the work back to Bamford's book, or are in the same approximate timeframe, indicating that they are mostly jumping on the bandwagon.

So - two possibilities. Bamford is right, or he is making it up. He seems reasonably competent, but I guess he would
[/edit]

Kix

I think that it likely that such a plan existed at the time. The CIA's plan to undermine Castro's popularity by making his hair fall out us legendary.

Still, we shouldn't confuse plans with policy. Government and military and intelligence community departments are filled with eager little beavers coming up with plans for all kinds of eventualities.

"Godammit, I don't like how things are going in Fictionataria. It's vitial to our strategic interests!"

"No problem sir, we have a cunning plan."

K

bonkey

Originally posted by Kix
Still, we shouldn't confuse plans with policy. Government and military and intelligence community departments are filled with eager little beavers coming up with plans for all kinds of eventualities.

What is scary about Northwood, if it is true, is that it allegedly had massive support all the way up to the Joint Chiefs, and it was pretty much only the President's refusal to sign which prevented it.

Apparently (on a slightly different note) Bamford's book also has a chapter about the Israeli's sinking a US spy-boat back in the 60s, with significant loss of American life. Bamford claims that there is, at the least, sufficient evidence to indicate that this was not an accident as the Israeli's have claimed, and that the US should (at the very least) have a full investigation into it (which was never done after the event itself for some reason).

jc

Sand

Thx for finally providing a link to your proof. Links to the home pages of the NAS and the Digitial NSA Online arent proof.

Hobbes the majority of threads Ive seen you start are just attempts to take meaningless trivia as a starting point for bashing the US. This is trivia as well, assuming its true, there is no evidence it was ever carried out. It was probably filed right next to the USAF rules of engagement with flying saucers.

Bonkey only one of the links you provided worked for me- could you double check them pls? The one that did was the Bamsford book. Got to admit I stopped reading after this

Indeed, we must wonder if the inexplicable intelligence and defense failures claimed by US Government agencies are simply part of some elaborate cover story. Even worse, we must consider the possibility that the September 11th attacks on New York and Washington were simply a bigger, badder version of the Gulf of Tonkin "incident," which was successfully foisted upon a gullible US public to push them into supporting the war against Vietnam.

Goodbye Credibility, Hello Paranoia. BTW Hobbes when you were posting this troll was this the sort of quote you were looking for?

The CIA has carried out quite simply wrong actions. AFAIK they do not confirm or deny any operations that remained classified. I dont see any proof that the CIA would carry out a terrorist campaign against American civillians.

The funny thing is I dont belive the US is inherently correct. It appears that way due to the attitudes of others who will take some meaningless trivia like this (Its a matter of opinion whether this plan was ever planned or taken seriously - its a matter of fact that there is no evidence it was ever carried out) and use it as an exscuse to vent their attitudes regarding the US. See the "Americans" thread for an example.

And if Bonkey wanted proof/verification hed go to someone who could provide him with credible proof. This is just another in a long line of anti-US trolls.

Hobbes

Originally posted by Sand
Thx for finally providing a link to your proof. Links to the home pages of the NAS and the Digitial NSA Online arent proof.

Those links I gave you are the exact same areas as the second set of links I gave. I purposely didn't give the exact places as what is the point asking if people knew where to look if they start off where I was?

NSarchiv is a guy who apprantly works for that educational body and because of such is allowed access to the NSA site (which is where the document is reported to have come from). I checked on that too, but all stories seemed to go back to that source.

Bonkey found some more stuff that I didn't but his seems to lead back to what I found as the source.

This is trivia as well, assuming its true, there is no evidence it was ever carried out. It was probably filed right next to the USAF rules of engagement with flying saucers.

Actually it was never carried out. It says on the site that it was never carried out and I'm pretty sure if it had, it would of been ooh in the history books (and I wouldn't have to bother posting asking if it was true or not).

. BTW Hobbes when you were posting this troll was this the sort of quote you were looking for?

Actually no it wasn't. If you do a search in google you'll see that pop up loads of times. On another private forum I read someone mentioned Operation Northwoods with a similar quote and it seemed somewhat urban legend'ish. I checked snopes and other places and I could find no credible evidence it ever happened. If I was going for shock value I could of just posted "OMG look what the US did!". Without serious investigation there is enough websites, news postings to make it seem credible.

I dont see any proof that the CIA would carry out a terrorist campaign against American civillians.

You know, try to actually bother reading what I post. It has nothing to do with the CIA. It was a declassifed NSA document and it was to do with the US Military. As far as I know the CIA only do operations outside of the US (think it's illegal for them to do anything domestic, like the NSA).

The funny thing is I dont belive the US is inherently correct.

I don't believe anything is inherently correct, which is why I always try to find more information on something said that I am not familar with.

If your that upset about what people post, put them on ignore. Won't upset me in the slightest that you won't read what I post.

bonkey

Originally posted by Sand
Thx for finally providing a link to your proof. Links to the home pages of the NAS and the Digitial NSA Online arent proof.

Sand - which part of "So anyone know if this is actually true or not? " do you not understand? No-one has offered "proof", and the fact that the question about its veracity is being asked (as well as a request for further information) should be enough indication for anyone that an open mind is being kept.

People have offered links which provide a remarkably consistent set of information. remarkable consistency is one of the few things you will not find in your UFO theorists. I can find no reference to Operation Northwood anywhere which contains information contradictory to the other points.

So - the information being linked to, at the very least, points to a common origin, if not an underlying truth.

Bonkey only one of the links you provided worked for me- could you double check them pls? The one that did was the Bamsford book. Got to admit I stopped reading after this

OK - I'll check them tomorrow.

BTW, this "goodbye credibility, hello Paranoia" guy has an impressive history. It might benefit you to read up on it a bit before debunking him. Furthermore, you may have noticed that the paragraph you posted poses a set of questions, which are not answered in the excerpt printed.

You are the one assuming that by posing these questions, Bamsford is actually making implications. Without reading the book, you do not know if this was selective editing by the website who posted the link or not? For all you know, Bamsford may show how completely ridiculous these allegations are only a page or two later.

Instead, you take a single out-of-context paragraph as grounds to debunk the man's entire set of work as "paranoia". Hello Kettle, I have a pot beside me who is making allegations about your colour.

This is just another in a long line of anti-US trolls.

This seems to be a recurring answer any time the US is called into question. Tell me - if they're nothing but trolls, what in the name of <insert deity of choice here> are you doing responding to them with such ferocious regularity?

jc

Victor

Originally posted by bonkey
For example, I believe the official US line is that no CIA operatives ever had any involvement with the training of the Mujhadeen, nor did the US have any involvement in the USSR/Afghan war. Funnily enough, no-one really believes them when they say it.

The US was quite public for its support of the Mujhadeen. Say part of a speech where Reagan was approving funding of US$6bn. And it is quite possible that the CIA had little or no involvment on the ground in Afghanistan. Of course the Pakistani secret services and the British SAS are another matter.

Sand

BTW, this "goodbye credibility, hello Paranoia" guy has an impressive history. It might benefit you to read up on it a bit before debunking him. Furthermore, you may have noticed that the paragraph you posted poses a set of questions, which are not answered in the excerpt printed.

Anyone who raises the possibility of the WTC being "staged" is an idiot, or worse yet attempting to cash in on the WTC bombings in a cold hearted manner - I sped read the rest and saw no mention of 9/11 or WTC so I can only assume he leaves the possibility open, and encourages belief in it by saying "Hey, theyve done it before". Can you name *any* politician who would approve such a plan? And for what? To invade Afghanistan? Please. Such fantasies exsist only amongst the US right wing militia groups.

Bonkey only you have offered links (apart from Hobbes of course) . It is not unusual they would be consistent in that case.

Hobbes

I'm sorry I can't seem to see any post here that implies a connection between WTC and Northwoods except your own.

The review you posted isn't Bramsford, it's a reviewers and the northwoods details where released (I believe) long before 9/11.

Intresting your link points to another incident which is similar that happened "The Gulf of Tonkin incident"... but hey one conspiracy at a time.

bonkey

Originally posted by Sand


Anyone who raises the possibility of the WTC being "staged" is an idiot, or worse yet attempting to cash in on the WTC bombings in a cold hearted manner - I sped read the rest and saw no mention of 9/11 or WTC so I can only assume he leaves the possibility open,

The URL showed an extract from a book. Gettit? You know what books are, yes? Now, in my experience, questions like the ones he posed are typical book-starting or chapter-starting points which get the attention of the reader. So is it any wonder that an extract of perhaps one page of the book didnt supply an answer to the question?

The simple fact is that there are dozens and dozens of conspiracy theories about who is behind the 9/11, from the Israeli's to the US, to the Palestinians, the Russians, the Chinese, and so on.

Bamford has a long history of invetigative reporting. He typically uses current affairs as a "jumping point" to his researched. Point in case - the US spyplane over Russia. Bamford used this as a lead into his research on US satellite and ground-based ELINT tech. The report started with a question (paraphrased) : With the quality of low-orbit and ground-based intelligence gathering technology the US has, which is targetted at China, is there anything to be realistically gained by these spy planes any more, and even if so, does the risk outweigh the benefit.

His style is to pose a question about current affairs, and to use it as a lead into his material.

Had you, as I suggested, done the tiniest bit of research into this guy (hell, even a google search would do it), you would find an impressive bibliography, mostly all of which has been focussed around research into the workings of the various US inteliigence services. His work is generally highly regarded. He has based work on declassified documents which the US wanted to reclassify once they learned he had his hands on him. At the time, this was not possible by law, and is considered to be one of the reasons that the Reagan administration changed the law to allow re-classification of declassified documents.

So - you call this guy a parnaoid idiot (using two terms from different posts, lest you want to deny you ever said such a thing) without doing any research into him that I can see. You debunk his latest work without doing any research into that, other than following the links which others have supplied and speed-reading some of them. The US government, on the other hand have tried taking legal action against him for obtaining documents they didnt want him to have, indicating that he is, at the least, capable of being well-informed and obtaining inside information. Paranoid idiot, you say? Exactly why again? Oh - yes - I forgot - because he's making allegations about your beloved USA which you take offence to. That seems to be the height of your uninformed reasoning.


Also, as Hobbes pointed out - the piece you quoted wasnt even from the book - it was from the site introduction to Bamfords writing. So - you've debunked Bamford based on what someone else wrote *about* Bamford's writing. Well done.

Can you name *any* politician who would approve such a plan? And for what? To invade Afghanistan? Please. Such fantasies exsist only amongst the US right wing militia groups.

Did anyone on this thread even suggest that the US was behind the 9/11 bombings? Oh - yes - you did. All anyone has done is pointed out that there appears to be a consistent story about a never-instantiated plan called Operation Northwood, and asked for details.

All you have done is said that it must be rubbish - basically on the grounds that you dont want to believe that it could be true, backed by allegations that anyone who does believe in such stuff must be a paranoid crackpot.

Good solid reasoning.

Bonkey only you have offered links (apart from Hobbes of course) . It is not unusual they would be consistent in that case.

Excuse me? I did a couple of google searches. I filtered out all the obviously "consipiracy theory" and "anti American" hits. I posted all the rest. They are consistent with each other.

So, either you're accusing me of selectively choosing my links (in which case, I'd love you to go and find some contradictory links to show how biased I am), or you are once again disregarding information without bothering to check on it yourself.

The information is consistent. If you dont believe me, go look for contradictions to it. But until you do, I would appreciate that you kept your ill-informed beliefs to yourself, as they have nothing to do with intelligent discussion.

jc

Sand

Did anyone on this thread even suggest that the US was behind the 9/11 bombings?

"eaglesup.com (extract from James Bamford's "Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency") "

The information is consistent.

Im not calling your bias into question Bonkey. If you say these are a good sample of information available then fine. It is the nature of conspiracies that you will find a lot more information regarding them than regarding their denial. Conspiracies are after all more exciting. And as you state yourself

A lot of these reports seem to credit the work back to Bamford's book, or are in the same approximate timeframe, indicating that they are mostly jumping on the bandwagon.

Given its your own opinion Im sure your well ahead of slow witted old me again when you *expect* the sources to be consitent seeing as theyre based of Bamfords work, as you state.

Hobbes - Lets run with a hypothetical situation. One , Operation Northwood was planned and the information sources quoted are accurate. Two (This is where you come in) - And.....?

Hobbes

and what?

Wtf is your point Sand? I ask if it actually happened or not and you get your pants in a knot.

First Post Forth Paragraph

So anyone know if this is actually true or not?

The post could of ended at Bonkeys post, but it seems to be continual replies of you not realising how much of a plonker you are even after it's explained to you.

Btw, it was the fact that a lot of the sources where consistant that made me suspect it might be faked, incidents in history rarely ever have one side to them. Hence the reason I posted asking if anyone else knew.

Sand

You asked. I assume you had a reason. Assuming that by complete fluke an expert on the field showed up and said yes it did - what would that matter to you? Or did you have no interest and simply post it as another "USA is Evil" thread?

Hobbes

Yes I had a reason you muppet. I already explained the reason. Go back and read or do I have requote everything?

Sand

Yeah Ive got my own idea as to what your reason was. BTW any contacts yet from reputable sources able to confirm or deny the validity of this? Or were you ever really interested in contacting them?

Hobbes

Look Sand wtf is your problem?

I don't know everything, I don't claim to know everything. Which is why I ask other people about stuff I don't know.

What do you mean by "reputable sources"? I already checked the NSA and other goverment sites but as locked out of them, I checked up on the guy who ran the other site on the university website to see if he made it up and was told he is allowed access to the NSA site. I told you this already.

Sand why don't you just go **** off somewhere else, just because your in a p!ssing contest in the other thread doesn't mean every thread is like that. Actually nearly every thread you seem to hijack to go on about something completely different and troll them.

What are you waiting for? Me to say "I posted it for the reason you said"? get a grip on reality.

Here's a thought next time, don't even bother replying unless you actually have something constructive and on topic to say.

Celt

Originally posted by Hobbes
Look Sand wtf is your problem?

I don't know everything, I don't claim to know everything. Which is why I ask other people about stuff I don't know.

What do you mean by "reputable sources"? I already checked the NSA and other goverment sites but as locked out of them, I checked up on the guy who ran the other site on the university website to see if he made it up and was told he is allowed access to the NSA site. I told you this already.

Sand why don't you just go **** off somewhere else, just because your in a p!ssing contest in the other thread doesn't mean every thread is like that. Actually nearly every thread you seem to hijack to go on about something completely different and troll them.

What are you waiting for? Me to say "I posted it for the reason you said"? get a grip on reality.

Here's a thought next time, don't even bother replying unless you actually have something constructive and on topic to say.

Ignore Sand, I think half of humanities/politics already does...

Victor

Originally posted by Hobbes
Btw, it was the fact that a lot of the sources where consistant that made me suspect it might be faked, incidents in history rarely ever have one side to them. Hence the reason I posted asking if anyone else knew.

As I posted, I think actiosn were planned, but events overtook those plans (Russia agreed not to use Cuba as a springboard and the USA agreed not to directly attack Cuba).

Sand

Politics Board- Threads started By Hobbes over the last 100 days. You can find these yourself quite easily, just enter sorted by thread starter.

Israel waving it's nukes at the Arabs

Wheres the tape? ( One liner post about Bush)

US State department admits to lying. (Another one liner)

Opinion Poll on Americans and everyone else ( no comment)

Rogue Nation (One liner- Link to US as rogue nation)

MMR thingy. (Woohoo not US related even indirectly)

No really it was all about justice (Cynical one liner about US and Afghan Oil)

Speechless (Another Oneliner about US/ Afghan War (indirectly of course))

US people.. you messed up on the USA act (Notable for being more than a line long)

America blowing up their allies now. (Made up for here- no lines, two links)

LOL another oil connection (More US and Afghans)

Double Standards. (Israelis but gets a kick at the US as well)

US to invade Iraq? (Another no liner - got a link though)

Bushes state of the Union address. (More US, Smart remarks free)

UN cover up of sex trade. (Woohoo another non US one- were on a roll)

Isn't this what started the mess? (No lines, one link - US wants Taliban prisoners- yikes)

US Caught spying on China again. (More US - Spying japers)

US declares Ireland harbours terrorists. (Another US bashing session)

18 threads Hobbes. 15 american related, 2 Israeli related (one of these with a US mention however) and 1 not even indirectly related. This is just the politics board. Not counting this post.

Wonder where I got the idea that you want to start a "USA is evil" board? How much time do you spend every day looking for links to start (anti) US threads with? Out of curiosity, just like you asked about Northwood out of pure curiosity.

Hobbes

Originally posted by Celt

Ignore Sand, I think half of humanities/politics already does...

I did already. He brings nothing to the debate, so no point reading him.

Victor

Originally posted by Sand
Politics Board- Threads started By Hobbes over the last 100 days. You can find these yourself quite easily, just enter sorted by thread starter.

Where has Hobbes lived for the last few years?