
Vietnamese American families talk about leaving Saigon under the cover of night
Peter Nguyen's first English sentence at 9 years old was 'Give me candy,' after his grandfather carried him away from the naval base their family had been staying at. They were fleeing Northern Vietnamese forces, and Nguyen was face to face with a fleet of battleships and American sailors tossing handfuls of sweets off the boats to Vietnamese children and their families lined up below.
He shared his story with NBC News as part of the 50th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, which effectively ended the Vietnam War 50 years ago on April 30. North Vietnamese forces had captured Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam, and reunited the country as the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
It spurred a refugee crisis with people fleeing by water, described as 'boat people,' who faced attacks by pirates, starvation and drowning.
'It was pandemonium,' Nguyen said. 'Everybody just grabbed and just ran to the ships.'
More than 100,000 refugees from Saigon arrived in the United States through Guam. Today, Saigon is called Ho Chi Minh City, named for the first president of North Vietnam, and April 30 is observed in the country as Reunification Day.
Vietnamese American families described their experiences fleeing Saigon and their new lives in the United States. Nguyen, who was interviewed by his daughter, Porschia, said he had to leave because his father was a lieutenant colonel in the South Vietnamese army, and he feared they might be persecuted when Northern forces captured the city.
Nguyen boarded one of the Vietnamese battleships and docked in Subic Bay, Philippines, a few days later. From there, a commercial freight ship took him to Guam, where he stayed at a makeshift refugee camp. Nguyen, who was 9 when he left Saigon and now lives in the United States, keeps a photo of ship number 502 — the now-decommissioned ship that aided his escape from Vietnam in 1975 during the fall of Saigon.
Dzung Pham, who was 14 when he fled Vietnam, said his family had to leave because his father worked for the U.S. government and his mother worked for an American company. His uncle, a retired colonel in the military, never made it out.
'He was enduring all the mortar fires, and the kid was sick, my cousin. And he's taking her out, you know, to get to some medicine, to see a doctor, and that he will come back in,' Pham said. 'He got stuck up there. And ... he was left behind after the fall of Saigon and he was imprisoned and sent to a labor camp. They called it re-education camp for 10 years.'
Hundreds of thousands of people who had worked for Southern Vietnamese or American forces were imprisoned in re-education camps, in which torture and forced labor were commonplace.
Lehoa Wilson was eight months pregnant when a colonel in the U.S. Embassy knocked on her door and told her that she, her husband and their children needed to evacuate Saigon immediately. She had married her husband on one condition: They would live in Vietnam together — nowhere else. Wilson said her tear-stricken goodbyes and headed to the airport.
Her son, Michael, who fled Vietnam at 13 with the family, has lived most of his life in the United States.
'1975 happened just like a flash or, you know — that short adventure was fun,' he said. 'But now you have to start out new and a new country, a new language, new friends, people don't look much like you.' Now, though, he said, the United States is his 'home.'
'To me, when I go back to Vietnam to visit — it's just a destination to visit,' Michael said. 'So I'm not really missing living there, but I still enjoy the people and the scenery and the food and the culture there.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Titillating tome as controversial as Lady Chatterley's Mollusc
His son used to help him wash windows during the summer holidays, so he was, of course, known as Shammy Davis Junior. Red turns bread A blatant example has been identified by Diary correspondent Alasdair Sinclair, who has uncovered a report stating that the Red Cross and the Red Crescent are to merge. Says Alasdair: 'It's alleged that a joint committee charged with managing the amalgamation has come up with a name for the combined body which, while reminiscent of the traditional titles of both societies, is shorn of any political association or religious imagery, and is in accordance with modern tastes… the Coloured Croissant.' Mind your language DELIGHTED linguist Sally Haggerty says: 'Learning French has encouraged me to live in the moment, because I currently can't conjugate any other verb tense.' The name game RESPECTED American author Edmund White died recently, which reminds Edmund McGonigle, the owner of the Voltaire & Rousseau bookshop in Glasgow's Otago Lane, of the time the literary lion stopped him in the street to ask directions to a restaurant. McGonigle admitted he couldn't assist, then asked if he happened to be chatting to Edmund White, man of letters. Receiving an affirmative answer, our correspondent announced that he, too, was an Edmund. At which point the famous novelist revealed that he came from a long line of Edmunds. 'I mentioned this later to a friend called Bill, who had German ancestry,' says McGonigle. 'He replied that he came from a long line of Willys, which gave me pause for thought…'


South Wales Guardian
8 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Consultation to consider extending ban on destructive bottom trawling fishing
Marine and fisheries stakeholders are being asked to take part in a consultation on the prohibition of destructive bottom-towed fishing gear that could affect approximately 30,000 km2 across 41 marine protected areas (MPAs). Environment Secretary Steve Reed says 'urgent action' is needed to protect seabeds and nature before irreversible damage is caused. The UK is under pressure to step up marine protections as the third UN Ocean Conference begins in France on Monday. Governments, business leaders, scientists and campaigners are gathering for the environmental summit in Nice where the spotlight will be on the commitments individual governments make to reduce the impact on their territorial waters, such as banning the damaging fishing practice of bottom trawling in MPAs. The consultation, led by the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) and Defra, runs for 12 weeks from Monday to September 1. The proposed measures would add to the approximately 18,000 km2 of English seabed already protected from bottom-towed fishing gear. MPAs are areas of the ocean established to protect habitats and species essential for healthy marine ecosystems, allowing vulnerable, rare and important marine life to recover from damaging human activities. Bottom trawling and other forms of destructive fishing are permitted in UK waters but conservationists have long been campaigning for a full ban across all marine protected areas. There are 181 MPAs, including three highly protected marine areas (HPMAs), covering 93,000km² or 40% of English waters. The measures aim to protect marine habitats ranging from subtidal sandbanks to gravels to muds, and support important marine species such as lobster, clams, soft corals and langoustines. A ban on bottom trawling in these areas could help conserve valuable and rare marine life, and allow seabeds to recover from damage caused by destructive fishing practices. It could lead to healthier marine ecosystems across English waters, support greater biodiversity and help preserve vulnerable underwater life. New management measures for fishing in 42 MPAs in English waters – a ban on bottom-towed fishing in 41, and the prohibition of fishing using traps in a specified area – are among the proposals. Mr Reed said: 'Bottom trawling is damaging our precious marine wildlife and habitats. 'Without urgent action, our oceans will be irreversibly destroyed – depriving us, and generations to come, of the sea life on which we all enjoy. 'The Government is taking decisive action to ban destructive bottom trawling where appropriate.' Ariana Densham, head of oceans at Greenpeace UK, said the consultation is 'ultimately a long-overdue completion of a process started by the previous government' and added that bottom-trawling in the protected sea areas is 'like bulldozing national parks'. She said: 'The Government should now strengthen the ban to cover all parts of our marine protected areas, and other types of destructive industrial fishing like supertrawlers and fly-shooters. 'Only this will ensure our marine ecosystems are protected in reality – not only on paper. 'The goal to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 is global, and while the UK must do its part at home it also has a critical role to play in protecting the high seas far from our shores.' Tom Brook, ocean conservation specialist at WWF, said 'done right, these protections can be a win for people, nature and the climate' and 'this is exactly the kind of leadership we need if the UK is to deliver on its promise to protect 30% of the ocean by 2030'. Joan Edwards, The Wildlife Trusts policy and public affairs director, hoped the consultation would see the measures introduced 'rapidly to enable recovery of these sites, a win-win for both nature and the climate.' Oceana UK executive director Hugo Tagholm described the proposals as 'a golden opportunity to safeguard these vital marine sanctuaries from the most damaging fishing practices.' He added: 'If these whole-site bans are fully implemented, this could provide an invaluable and urgently needed lifeline for England's seas, which are so crucial for wildlife and climate resilience.' The consultation comes after Ocean With David Attenborough, released in cinemas to mark the renowned naturalist and TV presenter's 99th birthday last month, showed new footage of a bottom trawling net blasting through silt on the seafloor and scooping up species indiscriminately. The world will also be watching at the summit in Nice to see which countries ratify the UN High Seas Treaty – a pact to establish protected areas across international waters. The ocean treaty, which was agreed by 193 countries two years ago, will not come into force until ratification by 60 countries but just over half of that number have done so. The UK Government is among those that have been criticised by environmentalists for not yet ratifying the treaty or at the very least announcing a timetable to introduce the legislation required. Asked last week whether there has been any progress, nature minister Mary Creagh told the PA news agency: 'We need a legislative slot in Parliament's timetable. 'Any international treaty has to be done by the Foreign Office. We have had discussions with Foreign Office ministers. 'I am confident the treaty will be ratified but it will be ratified in due course.'


North Wales Chronicle
8 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Consultation to consider extending ban on destructive bottom trawling fishing
Marine and fisheries stakeholders are being asked to take part in a consultation on the prohibition of destructive bottom-towed fishing gear that could affect approximately 30,000 km2 across 41 marine protected areas (MPAs). Environment Secretary Steve Reed says 'urgent action' is needed to protect seabeds and nature before irreversible damage is caused. The UK is under pressure to step up marine protections as the third UN Ocean Conference begins in France on Monday. Governments, business leaders, scientists and campaigners are gathering for the environmental summit in Nice where the spotlight will be on the commitments individual governments make to reduce the impact on their territorial waters, such as banning the damaging fishing practice of bottom trawling in MPAs. The consultation, led by the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) and Defra, runs for 12 weeks from Monday to September 1. The proposed measures would add to the approximately 18,000 km2 of English seabed already protected from bottom-towed fishing gear. MPAs are areas of the ocean established to protect habitats and species essential for healthy marine ecosystems, allowing vulnerable, rare and important marine life to recover from damaging human activities. Bottom trawling and other forms of destructive fishing are permitted in UK waters but conservationists have long been campaigning for a full ban across all marine protected areas. There are 181 MPAs, including three highly protected marine areas (HPMAs), covering 93,000km² or 40% of English waters. The measures aim to protect marine habitats ranging from subtidal sandbanks to gravels to muds, and support important marine species such as lobster, clams, soft corals and langoustines. A ban on bottom trawling in these areas could help conserve valuable and rare marine life, and allow seabeds to recover from damage caused by destructive fishing practices. It could lead to healthier marine ecosystems across English waters, support greater biodiversity and help preserve vulnerable underwater life. New management measures for fishing in 42 MPAs in English waters – a ban on bottom-towed fishing in 41, and the prohibition of fishing using traps in a specified area – are among the proposals. Mr Reed said: 'Bottom trawling is damaging our precious marine wildlife and habitats. 'Without urgent action, our oceans will be irreversibly destroyed – depriving us, and generations to come, of the sea life on which we all enjoy. 'The Government is taking decisive action to ban destructive bottom trawling where appropriate.' Ariana Densham, head of oceans at Greenpeace UK, said the consultation is 'ultimately a long-overdue completion of a process started by the previous government' and added that bottom-trawling in the protected sea areas is 'like bulldozing national parks'. She said: 'The Government should now strengthen the ban to cover all parts of our marine protected areas, and other types of destructive industrial fishing like supertrawlers and fly-shooters. 'Only this will ensure our marine ecosystems are protected in reality – not only on paper. 'The goal to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 is global, and while the UK must do its part at home it also has a critical role to play in protecting the high seas far from our shores.' Tom Brook, ocean conservation specialist at WWF, said 'done right, these protections can be a win for people, nature and the climate' and 'this is exactly the kind of leadership we need if the UK is to deliver on its promise to protect 30% of the ocean by 2030'. Joan Edwards, The Wildlife Trusts policy and public affairs director, hoped the consultation would see the measures introduced 'rapidly to enable recovery of these sites, a win-win for both nature and the climate.' Oceana UK executive director Hugo Tagholm described the proposals as 'a golden opportunity to safeguard these vital marine sanctuaries from the most damaging fishing practices.' He added: 'If these whole-site bans are fully implemented, this could provide an invaluable and urgently needed lifeline for England's seas, which are so crucial for wildlife and climate resilience.' The consultation comes after Ocean With David Attenborough, released in cinemas to mark the renowned naturalist and TV presenter's 99th birthday last month, showed new footage of a bottom trawling net blasting through silt on the seafloor and scooping up species indiscriminately. The world will also be watching at the summit in Nice to see which countries ratify the UN High Seas Treaty – a pact to establish protected areas across international waters. The ocean treaty, which was agreed by 193 countries two years ago, will not come into force until ratification by 60 countries but just over half of that number have done so. The UK Government is among those that have been criticised by environmentalists for not yet ratifying the treaty or at the very least announcing a timetable to introduce the legislation required. Asked last week whether there has been any progress, nature minister Mary Creagh told the PA news agency: 'We need a legislative slot in Parliament's timetable. 'Any international treaty has to be done by the Foreign Office. We have had discussions with Foreign Office ministers. 'I am confident the treaty will be ratified but it will be ratified in due course.'