{"id":108205,"date":"2014-02-19T13:31:43","date_gmt":"2014-02-19T13:31:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/?p=108205"},"modified":"2014-02-19T13:31:43","modified_gmt":"2014-02-19T13:31:43","slug":"pentagon-covers-truth-war-atrocities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/latest-news\/pentagon-covers-truth-war-atrocities\/","title":{"rendered":"How the Pentagon Covers Up the Truth About Its War Atrocities"},"content":{"rendered":"

Nick Turse\u00a0<\/strong>
\nRINF Alternative News<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Pentagon’s 3-year program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam War is filled with distortions.<\/h3>\n

It\u2019s 2053 \u2013 20 years since you needed a computer, tablet, or smart phone to go online. At least, that\u2019s true in the developed world: you know, China, India, Brazil, and even some parts of the United States. Cybernetic eye implants allow you to see everything with a digital overlay. And once facial recognition software was linked to high-speed records searches, you had the lowdown on every person standing around you. Of course, in polite society you still introduce yourself as if you don\u2019t instantly know another person\u2019s net worth, arrest record, and Amazooglebook search history. (Yes, the fading old-tech firms Amazon, Google, and Facebook merged in 2033.) You also get a tax break these days if you log into one of the government\u2019s immersive propaganda portals. (Nope, \u201cpropaganda\u201d doesn\u2019t have negative connotations anymore.) So you choose the Iraq War 50th Anniversary Commemoration Experience and take a stroll through the virtual interactive timeline.<\/p>\n

Look to your right, and you see happy Iraqis pulling down\u00a0Saddam\u2019s statue<\/a>\u00a0and showering U.S. Marines with\u00a0flowers and candy<\/a>. Was that exactly how it happened? Who really remembers? Now, you\u2019re walking on the flight deck of what they used to call an aircraft carrier behind a flight-suit-clad President\u00a0George W. Bush<\/a>. He turns and shoots you a thumbs-up under a \u201cmission accomplished<\/a>\u201d banner. A voice beamed into your head says that Bush proclaimed victory that day, but that for years afterward, valiant U.S. troops would have to re-win the war again and again. Sounds a little strange, but okay.<\/p>\n

A few more paces down the digital road and you encounter a\u00a0sullen looking woman<\/a>\u00a0holding a dog leash, the collar attached to a man lying nude on the floor of a prison. Your digital tour guide explains: \u201cAn unfortunate picture was taken. Luckily, the bad apple was punished and military honor was restored.\u201d Fair enough. Soon, a digital General David Petraeus strides forward and shoots you another\u00a0thumbs-up<\/a>. (It looks as if they just put a new cyber-skin over the President Bush avatar to save money.) \u201cHe surged his way to victory and the mission was accomplished again,\u201d you hear over strains of the National Anthem and a chorus of \u201chooahs<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Past is Prologue<\/strong><\/p>\n

Admittedly, we humans are lousy at predicting the future, so don\u2019t count on any of this coming to pass: no eye implants, no voices beamed into your head, no Amazooglebook. None of it. Except, maybe, that Iraq War timeline. If the present is any guide, government-sanctioned, counterfeit history is in your future.<\/p>\n

Let me explain\u2026<\/p>\n

In 2012, the Pentagon kicked off a\u00a013-year program<\/a>\u00a0to commemorate the\u00a050th anniversary<\/a>\u00a0of the Vietnam War, complete with a sprawling website that includes a \u201chistory and education<\/a>\u201d component.\u00a0Billed<\/a>\u00a0as a \u201cpublic service\u201d provided by the Department of Defense, the United States of America Vietnam War Commemoration site boasts of its \u201cresources for teachers and students in the grades 7-12\u201d and includes a selection of official government documents, all of them produced from 1943-1954; that is, only during the earliest stages of modern U.S. involvement in what was then called Indochina.<\/p>\n

The Vietnam War Commemoration\u2019s educational aspirations, however, extend beyond students. \u201cThe goal of the History and Education effort,\u201d according to the site, \u201cis to provide the American public with historically accurate materials and interactive experiences that will help Americans better understand and appreciate the service of our Vietnam War veterans and the history of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.\u201d To that end, the United States of America Vietnam War Commemoration offers an interactive\u00a0historical timeline<\/a>.<\/p>\n

By far the largest and most impressive offering on the site, the\u00a0timeline<\/a>\u00a0spans 70 interactive pages with 830 individual entries that take a viewer from 1833 to 1976. The entries run the gamut from\u00a0tales<\/a>\u00a0of daring and sacrifice from the official\u00a0citations<\/a>\u00a0of Medal of Honor recipients to short offerings about\u00a0changes of command<\/a>. There are even\u00a0couple-of-sentence<\/a>\u00a0accounts of relatively minor operations \u2013 like a December 20, 1969, sweep in Binh Duong Province by elements of the 1st Infantry Division, which captured 12 of 18 members of a North Vietnamese intelligence unit and 2,000 documents that \u201cproved how much information the enemy had about American operations.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s an eclectic mix, but give credit where it\u2019s due: the digital chronology does mention\u00a0casualties<\/a>from the oft-forgotten first U.S. attack on Vietnam (an 1845 naval shelling of the city we now know as Danang). For the next 131 years, however, mention of Vietnamese dead and wounded is, to put the matter as politely as possible, in short supply. Flawed history, though, isn\u2019t.<\/p>\n

History is Bunk<\/strong><\/p>\n

Take the August 2, 1964, \u201cGulf of Tonkin Incident.\u201d It was a key moment of American escalation and, by the looks of the Pentagon\u2019s historical timeline, just what President Lyndon Johnson made it out to be when he went on television to inform the American people of \u201copen aggression<\/a>\u201d on the part of North Vietnam. \u201cThe USS Maddox was attacked by North Vietnamese gunboats in the Gulf of Tonkin,\u201d reads the\u00a0entry<\/a>. A later one\u00a0mentions<\/a>\u00a0\u201cU.S. Naval Vessels being fired upon by North Vietnamese on two separate occassions [sic].\u201d Case closed. Or is it?<\/p>\n

The official story, the one that kicked off a cycle of U.S. military escalations that led to millions of casualties in Indochina, went like this: the USS Maddox, a destroyer, was innocently sailing through the Gulf of Tonkin when it was attacked by North Vietnamese torpedo boats on August 2, 1964. President Lyndon Johnson, showing great restraint,\u00a0refused<\/a>\u00a0to respond militarily. Two nights later, the North Vietnamese attacked again, targeting the Maddox and the USS Turner Joy and prompting the president to take to the airways to\u00a0announce<\/a>\u00a0that “renewed hostile actions against United States ships on the high seas in the Gulf of Tonkin have today required me to order the military forces of the United States to take action in reply.” Johnson sought and Congress quickly passed the\u00a0Gulf of Tonkin Resolution<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 giving the president carte blanche to repeatedly intensify the war in the years to come.<\/p>\n

But as it turned out, there was nothing innocent about those U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin (as the President had\u00a0implied<\/a>). A claim of two separate attacks on U.S. Navy ships turned out to beuntrue<\/a>\u00a0and the congressional resolution had not been drafted in the wake of the supposed attacks, but had been\u00a0written<\/a>\u00a0months before, in anticipation of an opportune incident. In addition, the single attack by those torpedo boats occurred in the wake of a maritime raid on the North Vietnamese coast \u2013 part of a covert program of attacks that Johnson had\u00a0approved<\/a>\u00a0months earlier.<\/p>\n

After reviewing the history of the incident, it seemed to me that the timeline was on distinctly shaky ground, but I decided to get a second opinion and went to the man who wrote the book on the subject,\u00a0Edwin Mo\u00c3\u00afse<\/a>, author of “Tonkin Gulf and the Escalation of the Vietnam War<\/a>.” He did me not one, but two better. He also pointed out apparent errors in the July 11, 1964, entry, \u201cJoint Chiefs of Staff Unveiled \u201894 Target List,\u2019\u201d and criticized the August 4, 1964, entry, which offers nothing more than a title: \u201cTwo U.S. Aircraft Downed.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cI think this is simply false,\u201d he told me by email. \u201cI am not aware of any U.S. aircraft downed that day and I think I would know.\u201d These planes, he suspected, were actually lost the following day while flying missions \u201cin retaliation for the (imaginary) second Tonkin Gulf Incident on August 4th.\u201d The August 2nd Tonkin Gulf entry, he added, was \u201cnot quite accurate\u201d either and was only \u201cmarginally useful\u201d insofar as it was \u201cclose enough to the truth to allow readers to go looking for more information.\u201d<\/p>\n

With that in mind, I turned to\u00a0Fredrik Logevall<\/a>, winner of the 2013 Pulitzer Prize for History for his book “Embers of War: The Fall of an Empire and the Making of America’s Vietnam<\/a>” and author of “Choosing War: The Lost Chance for Peace and the Escalation of War in Vietnam<\/a>,” a landmark study of American policymaking on Vietnam from 1963 to 1965. When it came to the Commemoration\u2019s take on the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, he told me that \u201csome context for this entry is sorely needed.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThere’s little doubt in my mind that the administration entered the month of August [1964] looking for a pretext to flex a little muscle in Vietnam,\u201d he added. \u201cFinally, it should be said the administration misrepresented what occurred in the Gulf, particularly with respect to the alleged second attack on August 4th, which evidence even at the time showed almost certainly never happened.\u201d<\/p>\n

None of this essential context can, of course, be found anywhere in the timeline. Still, everyone makes mistakes, so I meandered through the Pentagon\u2019s chronology looking at other key entries.<\/p>\n

Soon, I found the one dealing with My Lai.<\/p>\n

On March 15, 1968, members of the 23rd Infantry Division\u2019s Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry, were briefed by their commanding officer, Captain Ernest Medina, ahead of an operation in an area they knew as \u201cPinkville.\u201d As unit member Harry Stanley recalled, Medina \u201cordered us to \u2018kill everything in the village.\u2019\u201d Infantryman Salvatore LaMartina remembered Medina\u2019s words only slightly differently: they were to \u201ckill everything that breathed.\u201d What stuck in artillery forward observer James Flynn\u2019s mind was a question one of the other soldiers asked: \u201cAre we supposed to kill women and children?\u201d And Medina\u2019s reply: \u201cKill everything that moves.\u201d<\/p>\n

The next morning, roughly 100 soldiers were flown by helicopter to the outskirts of a small Vietnamese hamlet called My Lai in South Vietnam\u2019s Quang Ngai Province and followed Medina\u2019s orders to a T. Over a period of four hours, the Americans methodically slaughtered more than 500 Vietnamese civilians. Along the way, they also raped women and young girls, mutilated the dead, systematically burned homes, and fouled the area\u2019s drinking water. It took a year and a half for a cover-up that extended from soldiers in the field to generals at the top of the division to unravel \u2013 thanks in large measure to veterans\u00a0Ron Ridenhour<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Ron Haberle<\/a>\u00a0and crack investigative reporter\u00a0Seymour Hersh<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The military took great pains to contain the fallout from the My Lai revelations, offering\u00a0basement-level<\/a>\u00a0estimates of the death toll and focusing its attention on\u00a0Lieutenant William Calley<\/a>, the lowest ranking officer who could conceivably shoulder the blame, while also\u00a0burying<\/a>\u00a0other\u00a0atrocity allegations<\/a>,\u00a0deep-sixing<\/a>\u00a0inquiries, classifying\u00a0documents<\/a>, and obstructing investigations in order to cast My Lai as a one-off aberration. In their meticulously researched 1992 book “Four Hours at My Lai<\/a>,” Michael Bilton and Kevin Sim write:<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat was first a \u2018massacre\u2019 quickly became a \u2018tragedy\u2019 and was then referred to as an \u2018incident.\u2019 General [William R.] Peers, whose exhaustive inquiry into the events at My Lai remains the best source for what really happened there, was warned by his superiors not to use the word \u2018massacre\u2019 at the press conference held on the publication of his report [in 1970].\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

More than 40 years later, the Department of Defense is still operating from the same playbook. The Vietnam War Commemoration\u2019s interactive timeline refers to My Lai as an \u201cincident\u201d not a massacre, the death toll is listed at \u201cmore than 200\u201d instead of more than 500, and it singles out only Lieutenant Calley (who certainly had plenty of blood on his hands) as if the deaths of all those Vietnamese civilians, carried out by dozens of men at the behest of higher command, could be the fault of just one junior officer.<\/p>\n

Given the Pentagon\u2019s take on the My Lai massacre, I was hardly surprised by the one-sentence timeline entry on Operation Speedy Express, which says little more than that the six-month operation in the Mekong Delta \u201cyield[ed] an enemy body count of 11,000.\u201d This has long been the military\u2019s official position, but the Defense Department knows full well that it isn\u2019t the whole story.<\/p>\n

In the early 1970s, a veteran who served in that operation sent a letter to the Pentagon (and then followed up with letters to other top Army generals) blowing the whistle on the systematic use of heavy firepower on populated areas which resulted in what he called a \u201cMy Lai each month.\u201d His allegations were bolstered by those of U.S. advisors and Vietnamese sources, as well as by an internal report commissioned by the Army’s acting general counsel, endorsing the whistleblower\u2019s contention that an obsession with what was called \u201cthe body count\u201d likely led to civilian deaths. The veteran\u2019s shocking allegations were, however, kept secret for decades and a nascent inquiry into them was suppressed.<\/p>\n

A later Newsweek investigation would conclude that as many as 5,000 civilians were killed during Operation Speedy Express. And a hush-hush internal military report, commissioned in the wake of the Newsweek story, suggested that the magazine had offered a low-end estimate. The document \u2013 also kept secret and then buried for decades \u2013 concluded:<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile there appears to be no means of determining the precise number of civilian casualties incurred by U.S. forces during Operation Speedy Express, it would appear that the extent of these casualties was in fact substantial, and that a fairly solid case can be constructed to show that civilian casualties may have amounted to several thousand (between 5,000 and 7,000).\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Despite these findings, which have \u2013 in recent years \u2013 been aired in publications from theNation<\/a>\u00a0to the\u00a0Washington Post<\/a>, the Vietnam War Commemoration ignores even the military\u2019s own estimate that as many as 60 percent of those killed in the operation may have been innocents.<\/p>\n

Keep scrolling through the timeline and additional examples of dubious history regularly present themselves. Take March 15, 1969: \u201cPresident Nixon ordered a B-52 strike on enemy bases in Cambodia. The first strike was made on 17 March and initiated a fourteen month bombing campaign labeled Operation Menu,\u201d reads the entry. Next to it, there\u2019s a picture of Nixon holding a press conference to announce the missions and point out the targets. Pretty cut and dried, right? Maybe not.<\/p>\n

Operation Menu was a coldly titled collection of B-52 bomber raids against suspected Vietnamese enemy \u201cbase areas\u201d \u2013 given the codenames “Breakfast,” “Lunch,” “Snack,” “Dinner,” “Dessert,” and “Supper.” As William Shawcross demonstrated in\u00a0Sideshow: Kissinger, Nixon, and the Destruction of Cambodia<\/a>, it was kept secret from the American people, Congress, and even some top military brass via a conspiracy of silence, phony cover stories, the burning of documents, coded messages, and a dual bookkeeping system that logged the strikes as occurring in South Vietnam, not Cambodia. Not exactly the kind of thing presidents tend to talk about on TV. (Even the Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\u2019s timeline describes the attacks as \u201csecret bombings<\/a>.\u201d) The image in the Commemoration timeline is actually from an April 30, 1970\u00a0press conference<\/a>\u00a0in which Nixon\u00a0announced<\/a>\u00a0the \u201cincursion\u201d of U.S. and South Vietnamese forces into Cambodia. It would take until August 1973, more than four years after it began, for the president to\u00a0admit<\/a>\u00a0to the clandestine bombing campaign.<\/p>\n

The covert attacks on Cambodia eventually became the basis for the first\u00a0motion<\/a>\u00a0to impeach Nixon, and a resulting investigation revealed documents that proved the president himself had ordered its cover-up. The motion was voted down due to political considerations \u2013 in favor of articles of impeachment for the\u00a0Watergate crimes<\/a>\u00a0and abuse of power, including wiretaps that resulted from the cover-up of the secret bombing \u2013 but 10 members of Congress who backed the motion filed a dissenting view that read, in part:<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is difficult to imagine Presidential misconduct more dangerously in violation of our constitutional form of government than Mr. Nixon\u2019s decision secretly and unilaterally to order the use of American military power against another nation, and to deceive and mislead the Congress about this action.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Given all of this, it\u2019s reasonable to ask whether the timeline entry didn\u2019t warrant a few additional facts, slightly more context, and, perhaps, a photo that doesn\u2019t deceive the audience.<\/p>\n

So I did just that.<\/p>\n

In August 2013, I tried contacting the Vietnam War Commemoration Office to get some answers about the timeline. When asked about the entries for My Lai and Speedy Express, a spokesperson from the office said that they were written by an individual who no longer worked there, so no one could address specific questions. Next, I aired my concerns about the timeline to M.J. Jadick, chief of strategic communications for the U.S. Vietnam War Commemoration, and then followed up by email. I asked eight pointed questions about the entries on the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, My Lai, Speedy Express, Operation Menu, and other problematic information as well, and I didn\u2019t exactly pull punches. \u201cIt seems to me,\u201d I wrote her, \u201cthat some timeline entries are lacking pertinent information, are watered-down, misleading, and in some cases grossly disingenuous … The sheer number of examples suggests that this is something more than accidental.\u201d<\/p>\n

Jadick answered none of my questions. \u201cOur timeline is a work in progress and will continue to be reviewed accordingly,\u201d she responded. \u201cI have forwarded your concerns to our Branch Chief for History and Education for review.\u201d When I checked back four months later on the results of that review, new procedures were indeed in place \u2013 for media queries! Now, all of them were being forwarded to Lieutenant Colonel Tom Crosson at the Office of the Secretary of Defense.<\/p>\n

Crosson? The name rang a bell.<\/p>\n

In August, while writing an\u00a0article<\/a>\u00a0for the BBC, I had contacted Lieutenant Colonel Crosson for comment about evidence of U.S. atrocities and Vietnamese civilian suffering \u2013 much of it from long-classified U.S. military records \u2013 that I present in my book, “Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam<\/a>.” Although decades had passed since the end of the conflict, he expressed doubt that it was possible for the military to provide an official statement in \u201ca timely manner.\u201d<\/p>\n

Not much has changed since then.<\/p>\n

My follow-up request for answers to months-old questions was forwarded to Crosson in early December. A couple weeks later, I contacted him looking for a comment. More than a month has passed and I\u2019m still waiting for an answer to any of the questions I first posed in August.<\/p>\n

Welcome to 2053<\/strong><\/p>\n

In a presidential proclamation kicking off the 50th anniversary commemoration of the Vietnam War, President Barack Obama\u00a0distilled<\/a>\u00a0the conflict down to troops slogging \u201cthrough jungles and rice paddies … fighting heroically to protect the ideals we hold dear as Americans.\u201d He talked of \u201cpatriots\u201d and \u201cheroes,\u201d \u201ccourage\u201d and \u201cvalor.\u201d He said the war was \u201ca chapter in our nation’s history that must never be forgotten.\u201d<\/p>\n

A few days later, in a\u00a0speech<\/a>\u00a0at the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington, D.C., Obama continued praising Vietnam veterans, lauding their \u201csacrifices\u201d and \u201ccourage,\u201d their \u201cvalor,\u201d \u201cpatriotism,\u201d and \u201chonor.\u201d He welcomed them home and commended them for helping \u201cbuild the America that we love and that we cherish.\u201d He told the veterans present, \u201cYou earned your place among the greatest generations.\u201d Obama even gave a passing nod to the civilian toll \u201cnot just in Vietnam, but in all wars,\u201d even if he then followed it up with some eyebrow-raising lines. \u201cWe hate war,\u201d he intoned, though a\u00a0history<\/a>\u00a0of\u00a0almost<\/a>\u00a0constant\u00a0warfare<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0overseas<\/a>\u00a0military interventions<\/a>suggests<\/a>\u00a0otherwise<\/a>. \u201cWhen we fight,\u201d he continued, \u201cwe do so to protect ourselves because it’s necessary.\u201d The tacit suggestion being that, somehow, barefoot Vietnamese guerrillas seeking national reunification also had designs on the United States.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe task of telling your story continues,\u201d Obama\u00a0told<\/a>\u00a0the Vietnam veterans present on the National Mall. \u201c[A] central part of this 50th anniversary will be to tell your story as it should have been told all along. It\u2019s another chance to set the record straight.\u201d<\/p>\n

Setting the record straight seems, however, to be the last intention of the United States of America Vietnam War Commemoration. When I called with my questions last August, the Commemoration\u2019s M.J. Jadick said, \u201cThis is something you should be able to get an answer for.\u201d Yet for six months, government officials have failed to provide me with any answers about the creation of their timeline, about its seeming lack of adequate context, about entries that are at best insufficient and, at worst, dishonest, or just plain wrong. And in that same period, none of the obvious errors and obfuscations I pointed out has been changed in any way.<\/p>\n

The United States of America Vietnam War Commemoration website\u00a0asserts<\/a>\u00a0that its \u201ccontent will not contain misleading information or unsubstantiated claims,\u201d but instead be \u201cevaluated for fairness and acceptability as being in the best interest of the public.\u201d The site goes on to\u00a0claim<\/a>that it will \u201cprovide the American public with historically accurate materials and interactive experiences,\u201d but the timeline suggests other motives at play.<\/p>\n

You don\u2019t need cybernetic eye implants and immersive propaganda portals to alter history. You don\u2019t need a digital David Petraeus or a President Bush avatar to distract you from the truth. You don\u2019t need to wait decades to have disinformation beamed into your head. You just need a constant stream of misleading information, half truths, and fictions to be promoted, pushed, and peddled until they are accepted as fact.<\/p>\n

Welcome to 2053. Mission accomplished.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Nick Turse\u00a0 RINF Alternative News The Pentagon’s 3-year program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam War is filled with distortions. It\u2019s 2053 \u2013 20 years since you needed a computer, tablet, or smart phone to go online. At least, that\u2019s true in the developed world: you know, China, India, Brazil, and even some […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":108206,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-108205","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-latest-news"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/108205","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=108205"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/108205\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/108206"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=108205"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=108205"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=108205"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}