The Secrets and Lies of the Vietnam War, Exposed in One Epic Document
With the Pentagon Papers revelations in 1971, the U.S. public’s trust in the government was forever diminished. What did they contain? If you are a Vietnam Veteran, this should upset you. Read this eye-opening account:
This article is part of a special report on the 50th anniversary of the Pentagon Papers.
Brandishing a captured Chinese machine gun, Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara appeared at a televised news conference in the spring of 1965. The United States had just sent its first combat troops to South Vietnam, and the new push, he boasted, was further wearing down the beleaguered Vietcong.
“In the past four and one-half years, the Vietcong, the Communists, have lost 89,000 men,” he said. “You can see the heavy drain.”
That was a lie. From confidential reports, McNamara knew the situation was “bad and deteriorating” in the South. “The VC have the initiative,” the information said. “Defeatism is gaining among the rural population, somewhat in the cities, and even among the soldiers.”
Lies like McNamara’s were the rule, not the exception, throughout America’s involvement in Vietnam. The lies were repeated to the public, to Congress, in closed-door hearings, in speeches and to the press. The real story might have remained unknown if, in 1967, McNamara had not commissioned a secret history based on classified documents — which came to be known as the Pentagon Papers.
By then, he knew that even with nearly 500,000 U.S. troops in theater, the war was at a stalemate. He created a research team to assemble and analyze Defense Department decision-making dating back to 1945. This was either quixotic or arrogant. As secretary of defense under Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, McNamara was an architect of the war and implicated in the lies that were the bedrock of U.S. policy.

Daniel Ellsberg, an analyst on the study, eventually leaked portions of the report to The New York Times, which published excerpts in 1971. The revelations in the Pentagon Papers infuriated a country sick of the war, the body bags of young Americans, the photographs of Vietnamese civilians fleeing U.S. air attacks and the endless protests and counterprotests that were dividing the country as nothing had since the Civil War.
The lies revealed in the papers were of a generational scale, and, for much of the American public, this grand deception seeded a suspicion of government that is even more widespread today.
Officially titled “Report of the Office of the Secretary of Defense Vietnam Task Force,” the papers filled 47 volumes, covering the administrations of President Franklin D. Roosevelt to President Lyndon B. Johnson. Their 7,000 pages chronicled, in cold, bureaucratic language, how the United States got itself mired in a long, costly war in a small Southeast Asian country of questionable strategic importance.
They are an essential record of the first war the United States lost. For modern historians, they foreshadow the mind-set and miscalculations that led the United States to fight the “forever wars” of Iraq and Afghanistan.
The original sin was the decision to support the French rulers in Vietnam. President Harry S. Truman subsidized their effort to take back their Indochina colonies. The Vietnamese nationalists were winning their fight for independence under the leadership of Ho Chi Minh, a Communist. Ho had worked with the United States against Japan in World War II, but, in the Cold War, Washington recast him as the stalking horse for Soviet expansionism.
American intelligence officers in the field said that was not the case, that they had found no evidence of a Soviet plot to take over Vietnam, much less Southeast Asia. As one State Department memo put it, “If there is a Moscow-directed conspiracy in Southeast Asia, Indochina is an anomaly.”
But with an eye on China, where the Communist Mao Zedong had won the civil war, President Dwight D. Eisenhower said defeating Vietnam’s Communists was essential “to block further Communist expansion in Asia.” If Vietnam became Communist, then the countries of Southeast Asia would fall like dominoes.
This belief in this domino theory was so strong that the United States broke with its European allies and refused to sign the 1954 Geneva Accords ending the French war. Instead, the United States continued the fight, giving full backing to Ngo Dinh Diem, the autocratic, anti-Communist leader of South Vietnam. Gen. J. Lawton Collins wrote from Vietnam, warning Eisenhower that Diem was an unpopular and incapable leader and should be replaced. If he was not, Gen. Collins wrote, “I recommend re-evaluation of our plans for assisting Southeast Asia.”

Secretary of State John Foster Dulles disagreed, writing in a cable included in the Pentagon Papers, “We have no other choice but continue our aid to Vietnam and support of Diem.”
Nine years and billions of American dollars later, Diem was still in power, and it fell to President Kennedy to solve the long-predicted problem.
After facing down the Soviet Union in the Berlin crisis, Kennedy wanted to avoid any sign of Cold War fatigue and easily accepted McNamara’s counsel to deepen the U.S. commitment to Saigon. The secretary of defense wrote in one report, “The loss of South Vietnam would make pointless any further discussion about the importance of Southeast Asia to the Free World.”
The president increased U.S. military advisers tenfold and introduced helicopter missions. In return for the support, Kennedy wanted Diem to make democratic reforms. Diem refused.
A popular uprising in South Vietnam, led by Buddhist clerics, followed. Fearful of losing power as well, South Vietnamese generals secretly received American approval to overthrow Diem. Despite official denials, U.S. officials were deeply involved.
“Beginning in August of 1963, we variously authorized, sanctioned and encouraged the coup efforts …,” the Pentagon Papers revealed. “We maintained clandestine contact with them throughout the planning and execution of the coup and sought to review their operational plans.”
The coup ended with Diem’s killing and a deepening of American involvement in the war. As the authors of the papers concluded, “Our complicity in his overthrow heightened our responsibilities and our commitment.”
Three weeks later, President Kennedy was assassinated, and the Vietnam issue fell to President Johnson.
He had officials secretly draft a resolution for Congress to grant him the authority to fight in Vietnam without officially declaring war.
Missing was a pretext, a small-bore “Pearl Harbor” moment. That came on Aug. 4, 1964, when the White House announced that the North Vietnamese had attacked the U.S.S. Maddox in international waters in the Gulf of Tonkin. This “attack,” though, was anything but unprovoked aggression. Gen. William C. Westmoreland, the head of U.S. forces in Vietnam, had commanded the South Vietnamese military while they staged clandestine raids on North Vietnamese islands. North Vietnamese PT boats fought back and had “mistaken Maddox for a South Vietnamese escort vessel,” according to a report. (Later investigations showed the attack never happened.)
Testifying before the Senate, McNamara lied, denying any American involvement in the Tonkin Gulf attacks: “Our Navy played absolutely no part in, was not associated with, was not aware of any South Vietnamese actions, if there were any.”

Three days after the announcement of the “incident,” the administration persuaded Congress to pass the Tonkin Gulf Resolution to approve and support “the determination of the president, as commander in chief, to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression” — an expansion of the presidential power to wage war that is still used regularly. Johnson won the 1964 election in a landslide.
Seven months later, he sent combat troops to Vietnam without declaring war, a decision clad in lies. The initial deployment of 20,000 troops was described as “military support forces” under a “change of mission” to “permit their more active use” in Vietnam. Nothing new.
As the Pentagon Papers later showed, the Defense Department also revised its war aims: “70 percent to avoid a humiliating U.S. defeat … 20 percent to keep South Vietnam (and then adjacent) territory from Chinese hands, 10 percent to permit the people of South Vietnam to enjoy a better, freer way of life.”
Westmoreland considered the initial troop deployment a stopgap measure and requested 100,000 more. McNamara agreed. On July 20, 1965, he wrote in a memo that even though “the U.S. killed-in-action might be in the vicinity of 500 a month by the end of the year,” the general’s overall strategy was “likely to bring about a success in Vietnam.”
As the Pentagon Papers later put it, “Never again while he was secretary of defense would McNamara make so optimistic a statement about Vietnam — except in public.”
Fully disillusioned at last, McNamara argued in a 1967 memo to the president that more of the same — more troops, more bombing — would not win the war. In an about-face, he suggested that the United States declare victory and slowly withdraw.
And in a rare acknowledgment of the suffering of the Vietnamese people, he wrote, “The picture of the world’s greatest superpower killing or seriously injuring 1,000 noncombatants a week, while trying to pound a tiny backward nation into submission on an issue whose merits are hotly disputed, is not a pretty one.”
Johnson was furious and soon approved increasing the U.S. troop commitment to nearly 550,000. By year’s end, he had forced McNamara to resign, but the defense secretary had already commissioned the Pentagon Papers.
In 1968, Johnson announced that he would not run for re-election; Vietnam had become his Waterloo. Nixon won the White House on the promise to bring peace to Vietnam. Instead, he expanded the war by invading Cambodia, which convinced Daniel Ellsberg that he had to leak the secret history.

After The New York Times began publishing the Pentagon Papers on Sunday, June 13, 1971, the nation was stunned. The response ranged from horror to anger to disbelief. There was furor over the betrayal of national secrets. Opponents of the war felt vindicated. Veterans, especially those who had served multiple tours in Vietnam, were pained to discover that Americans officials knew the war had been a failed proposition nearly from the beginning.
Convinced that Ellsberg posed a threat to Nixon’s re-election campaign, the White House approved an illegal break-in at the Beverly Hills, Calif., office of Ellsberg’s psychiatrist, hoping to find embarrassing confessions on file. The burglars — known as the Plumbers — found nothing, and got away undetected. The following June, when another such crew broke into the Democratic National Committee Headquarters in the Watergate complex in Washington, they were caught.
The North Vietnamese mounted a final offensive, captured Saigon and won the war in April 1975. Three years later, Vietnam invaded Cambodia — another Communist country — and overthrew the genocidal Khmer Rouge regime. That was the sole country Communist Vietnam ever invaded, forever undercutting the domino theory — the war’s foundational lie.
Elizabeth Becker is a former New York Times correspondent who began her career covering the Cambodia campaign of the Vietnam War. She is the author, most recently, of “You Don’t Belong Here: How Three Women Rewrote the Story of War.”
This article originally appeared in the New York Times on June 9, 2021. Here’s the direct link: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/09/us/pentagon-papers-vietnam-war.html
*****
So, what percent of everything you hear from government officials today do you believe to be TRUE? Leave your comments below.
#####
Thank you for taking the time to read this. If you have a question or comment about this article, scroll down to the comment section below to leave your response.
If you want to learn more about the Vietnam War and its Warriors, subscribe to this blog and get notified by email or your feed reader every time a new story, picture, video, or change occurs on this website—the button is located at the top right of this page.
I’ve also created a poll to help identify my website audience. Before leaving, please click HERE and choose the one item that best describes you. Thank you in advance!

What we have found out here, is that a number of people are ready for assassination attempts wherever…so great is their hate of all things American. Could it be they are misaligned progs (progressives)? Study them…they totally miss the point of the Constitution, totally.
LikeLike
Should Americans trust their government? Not according to the Founding Fathers, hence the need for a elections. How fortunate that Communist governments are so utterly dependable that elections are unnecessary. Lucky Vietnamese! And so to the Pentagon Papers: How many Americans have read them with an awareness of their limited capacity to illustrate the evils of the Vietnam War? How many have read them at all? And how many Americans, distrustful of their government, have relied instead upon the “liberal” press, only to be rewarded with a fallacious “Vietnam War” mythology?
It is beyond dispute that this mythology exists, and that it indicts America as surely as it exonerates the USSR, Communist China and the Vietnamese Communist Party who in the previous century collectively produced more secrets, lies and “armed struggles” than successive US governments since 1789. Do the Pentagon Papers address any of that? I very much doubt it. Yet time and again they are trotted out to reaffirm the perennial Vietnam War mythology beloved of the New York Times from the 1960s to the present day.
‘The Secrets and Lies of the Vietnam War, Revealed in One Epic Document.’ That’s a tall order — the Pentagon Papers cannot possibly fulfil it. There is a difference between the “secrets and lies” of American administrations and those of the war in general. Does Becker’s article cite any of Moscow, Hanoi and Beijing’s secrets and lies? On the contrary, her assessment of the Pentagon Papers’ significance appears to studiously ignore them.
It would take a comment several times the size of Becker’s article to refute the questionable assertions and omissions it contains. Here are merely five examples; predictably they have little to do with the Pentagon Papers and much do with this article’s affirmation of the Vietnam War mythology:
In this article’s assertions, there is an almost reassuring sense of continuity: Thich Tri Quang’s foremost de facto publicity agent was David Halberstam of the New York Times. He was one of the ‘architects’ of President Diem’s demise, as was the ‘liberal’ Harvard man, John Kenneth Galbraith, Kennedy’s ambassador to India. Galbraith quietly distinguished himself by informing Polish diplomats that the US wanted out of Vietnam even before it went in! The information was dutifully passed to the Soviets and the North Vietnamese. Later, Galbraith would suggest to his trusting readership that dissidents in Mao’s China were disciplined ‘politely.’ ‘Galbraith Has Seen China’s Future and it Works,’ declared the ever-trustworthy New York Times in 1972, the same year South Vietnam repulsed, with the help of US air power, conventional North Vietnamese invasion equipped with Soviet-supplied armor and Chinese ammunition.
It is proclaimed, somewhat ironically, by The Washington Post, that “democracy dies in darkness.” So too did President Diem. So too died South Vietnam. The Pentagon Papers cannot adequately reveal the “secrets and lies of the Vietnam War,” still less the treasonable behavior of those who responsible for America’s betrayal and abandonment of Indochina.
LikeLike
In the above comment, I stated that President Diem’s uncle was murdered by the Viet Minh. That is incorrect: it was in fact Diem’s older brother, Ngo Dinh Khoi. (And the title of the article is of course, “The Vietnam War Exposed….” not “revealed”.)
LikeLike
Very intriguing!
General MacArthur wanted to make Vietnam a free democracy after WWll!
He was overruled by Harry Truman and ultimately replaced by Truman during Korean War!
“Oh what a tangled political web we weave!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Having had French language newspapers and magazines in our home as I was growing up, I was a bit more aware of Indochina and Vietnam than my contemporaries. I was drafted and served in Vietnam despite knowing it was not our war to fight, or win or lose. Had we abided by the the Geneva Accord of 1954, it would have a saved thousands of lives on both sides. The result probably, would have been the same, only 20 years earlier. We would have saved many of our lives, the turmoil to our country, the curse of Agent Orange and all the other problems our generation of veterans suffered. And we would have saved hundreds of billion of our dollars. But the military/industrial complex would have been the big loser, and they did not really want peace.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Zippity doo-dah…if you could back up half of your negatives it would be a miracle. But, being filled with hate, one wonders if what is going on now can satisfy you, or, are you like a demon dog-god demanding even more blood. Turning the other cheek is the rule well followed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not mentioned is that 20,000+ additional Americans were killed after Nixon (as a private citizen in 1968) sent an envoy to plead with the S Vietnam Pres. not to sign Peace Accords that had been signed by other involved parties.
Consequently, America stayed in latter half of ’68, ’69, ’70, ’71, ’72 and only in ’73 withdrew combat troops.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Things like this are exactly why I stopped watching the news fifteen years ago. As others express, our country needs a deep cleaning out from top to bottom. Thanks for sharing, John.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re waiting for Godot…
LikeLike
The lying and control of the press has continued. What astounds me is that so many people have been duped into believing the claptrap the government has been feeding them. You’d think we might have learned something after Vietnam. Thankfully, more Americans are wise to the machinations of the greedy government than those who are not.
The current bureaucracy is terrified that they’ll be exposed as the liars and cheats they are, and they will go to any lengths to destroy the people who have the knowledge, ability, courage, and determination to clean house. This country needs a good housecleaning. It did then, it still does.
LikeLiked by 2 people
What bullpensendup says.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Daniel Ellsberg married the daughter of my childhoodd War Toy King, Louis Marx. He never again spoke to either of them. I protested the Kent State killings in 1970, so Dad came up to Northestern, got into heated arguments with me and my frat brothers, then cut off financing.
To supplement my academic scholarship, I volunteered for the draft, thinking to get the greatest potential financial gain from the shortest amount of time invested.In 1971 the conflict was cooling, and I was an existentialist and a rebel, so ended up in the MPs and both the AMERICAL and 101st Airborne a combat infantryman.
I never went back to NU, but was “born again” in 1973 and my life was radically changed by repentance towards God, and faith in Jesus Christ. Used the G.I. Bill twice. Married twice. Fathered nine. Fostered one Vietnamese boy. Started studying Viet conflict after seeing THE FOG OF WAR ((McNamara)) and SIR, NO SIR! ((Jane Fonda)).
As a disciple of Jesus Christ, I count myself a saint and a child of God according to Holy Scriptures. The Holy Bible is my infallible guide and Owner’s manual, and has much to say about true peace and love to those with ears to hear.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You did not sit and pine away…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hmm, this article brings out lots of hate. that’s not good. Anyway, here, after basic, I was sent down to Ft. Rucker to be a Huey crew chief. I had volunteered airborne, as it was done in those days. I could not fly cause I wore glasses to drive. At reveille one rainy morning, someone poked me and I woke up (I could sleep standing for short periods.) and he said the sergeant had called my name. What, and no recall? So I went up to him and he says to go see Spec. 5 Woods about some school. Well, that was Air Traffic Control School, about the same amount of people were going to Nam from it as from crew chief school. But, our class get sent to Germany. That’s the Army. And we kids in our neighborhood had grown up hunting, trapping, ice skating, riding bikes and motorcycles, and nothing like the sound of a coon hound in the night, way up in the woods. And like we played tackle football with no pads, we would joust with shooting at each other. Nothing like the sound of 7 1/2 pellets raining down around you. Or, I’d, cause I was the fastest, would dare people to hit me with slingshot fired acorns. Everyone in our hood ended up in one service or another, even gay Larry, who went into the Navy and died of AIDS in 1987. Oh, and things were hard core in my family, my father had build our small house, even dug out the cellar by hand. And with all the work to be done by hand, we didn’t have an indoor toilet until I was 13. I suppose that is why, some ten years later and I was teaching at Montana State University, I was hard on this former Huey pilot who told me about flying over real low on Vietnamese crapping off their docks. As a outside crapper myself, I could commiserate. Nothing like a lightning storm on a dork night and you are in the outhouse build of old shutters and you could see the lightning flashes as plain as day. Yup, real life. So, on to this article by a bloated NYT’s pestilence. You know, I keep a copy of the Pentagon Papers on my desk for quick reference. They read mild today and I wonder if I ever found them…incriminating. Well, here, 1967 and I’m in the day room of the 14th Av. at Kitzingen Army Airfield. We would gather to watch some lucky Huey pilots open their chain letters full of bucks. Yup, there was one guy who looked about 17 who was really cleaning up. Cause, you had to get in first and it worked but if you were a later missive writer, it was a no go on getting, what, $10 or $15 per letter. So, this is going on and some one has the shortwave on and there are speeches from the US and the Warrant Officers all take it as a speeches to increase the war effort when actually they were against the war. I’m standing there listening to this gaggle of WO’s going in their confusion. No use in trying to set things straight. So, with this article by Liz Becker, a little Germanski, herself (I’m Lithuanian, Polish, Scandinavian, German…and maybe more), as Germans are the worst frauds when they get to intellectually whining.
And that is what we have here…with the basic question, where the Pentagon Papers really all that incriminating? Well, let’s set a bar here…how many people here had contact with real people who were hiding from the draft. I did. I mean if that is what they wanted to do, that was their thing. I guess the last one I met was in Berlin, Germany. In 1971. Ron was his name. don’t know what happened to him. I mean they were the real thing…not something made of paper mache. But, for now, lets get on with Becker’s article…she has McNamara stating 89,000 North Vietnamese killed from ’55 to ’65. Seems like his number was low…latest figures have it as 1,310,000. Yup, those 10 years. But at least she got Eisenhower into the melee. Ellsberg….the character seems to be the archetype for those who plop state secrets into the media fodder. I’d loved to do a play on him visiting his psychiatrist. Now, in understanding the people who populated Vietnam, the best place I got to do that was the Musee Guimet in Paris. And there I found out about how strong a people they were, much stronger than the Chinese who always tried to rule them. Try the Khmer Empire on for size. Although China always had the size factor over them. And that final war, in the 70’s, Vietnam and China went at it. My wife (who is Chinese) tells me of some of the propaganda against Vietnam during that period, that the Vietnamese would cut off the forearms of Chinese nurses. Hmm, maybe possible, they did enough horrible things under Uncle Ho. But something like that horror should also remain in the forefront of things when questioning the whole war. A war which saw the former Ford Golden Boy, McNamara, in his Sec. of Defense job, turn away from the war. Hey, that’s a normal thing. Business always changes. But to be filled with hate for him and your own life because of a lousy article. That can strike you down. Bam! like a stoke of lightning. Well, this is getting long and I suppose few will read it. I still have other observations on Becker, who my mother would designate a Holy Roller, high on her own farts. And I’ll leave you with a portrait of a guy who spent 7 years in Nam…and bears the effects of Agent Orange for…and guess what service he was in…the Merchant Marine. He would run supplies in small boats up the Mekong River to special forces. And he was armed. That’s the way the mop flops.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Quite a stream of consciousness writing style. I got your story, I think. Welcome home.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Exactly what was meant…
LikeLiked by 1 person
For a it’s quite deflating to discover after 50 some years that the lies of the war that so impacted your life is all the war was for! As a 19 year old infantry soldier, I believed that I was doing my duty and fighting to preserve freedom. Why are we not publicly shaming these lying traitors who sold us out and cost so many lives? Their names and offenses should be plastered on every billboard, newspaper, TV screen around the world. I had good friends who gave their all believing that they were doing this for the good of their country. Think of all the lives that are still impacted today. I’m sitting in Forsyth Hospital in Winston Salem NC right now after 2 very serious neck surgery’s 2 weeks ago. I am not able to walk without a walker and that is a mere few steps.
This is the result of injuries that I received in Vietnam 1971. Months from now and much rehab, I may be able to walk & self function again. SMH What a dummy I was. I will do everything in my power to see that my grandsons don’t fall victim to their lies.
LikeLiked by 3 people
McNamara was a total buffoon. He might have been a “whiz kid” at Ford but totally over his head as SecDef for sure. Why he was allowed the leeway he was is incomprehensible. As others have mentioned, I was a young 20 year old kid fresh out of flight school assigned to a Dustoff unit (45th Med Co). Very naive thinking our government was stemming communism and I was part of that grand scheme. But a scheme it turned out to be making me believe to this day that we were pretty much cannon fodder. Besides not properly equipping our UH-1 Hueys instrumentation wise for the kind of flying in all sorts of weather day and night, many of us in the 1967 time frame were rushed through essential parts of training (specifically for instrument flying in instrument conditions (crappy low visibility weather)), instead of us receiving a standard instrument ticket, we received a “tactical” ticket which essentially meant for flying in nice friendly weather. Our mission was to fly in all weather conditions to rescue those in need – day/night lousy weather. The longer I stayed in the Army flying (23+ years) I felt increased resentment for the Army’s oversight (no doubt a McNamara idea) because we lost several crews to night weather related accidents. I’m proud to have served but left the military with the thought that those of us who served in Vietnam and luckily came home were pawns of a government that could have done a whole lot better.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I was an Infantry combat grunt in I Corps Vietnam in 1970. About as naive, politically, as you could be. I actually believed that the government had the nations best interests at heart, and would never think they could or would lie to the extent they did. I’ve never gotten over the feeling of betrayal, and at my age, probably never will.
LikeLiked by 3 people
This report became news in 1970 while I was assigned to the CINCPAC J2 in Hawaii. Somehow extracts of a copy became available to us and confirmed what many of us had believed to be the actual situation in Vietnam. After one year in country and three at CINCPAC I reached the decision that when my ETS came I would hang up my eight year career in the military.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I was in Nam in 1970 as an Army Grunt in Quang Tri . I was just a 19 year old kid who didn’t know exactly what was going on. I do remember when Nixon was asked what would happen if the NVA would go into northernmost Vietnam, Quang Tri. That dumb SOB Nixon said that we would protect the marines there. The problem is that the Marines had moved out and it was the Army that was up north. I’m now a hard core republican but couldn’t stand the incompetent, Tricky Dicky. Your article was great and very informative. Thanks good work.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hard to fathom our government could leave the rails this far. I used to trust the people serving as our government. I am a Viet Nam Vet, I trusted our leaders to do the right thing. I drank the Kool Aid, now I look back 70 years, I see what a fool I was.
It is quite evident to me that 99.9% of politicians are outright crooks, only in the game to line their own pockets. I have zero respect for any of them.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You may have been fooled…but I don’t feel that makes you a fool. We were brought up, in general, by a less cynical generation. The government WAS the people, or so it seemed. We got washed away in the flood of greed that we never could imagine existed. We’ve learned, the hard way. 11B VN 1970
LikeLiked by 3 people
Facebook dotes not appear to allow comments nor goes Google?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would believe the DOD if they said the sun comes up in the East.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Probably….but I’d use a compass just to be sure.
LikeLiked by 3 people