Thursday 4 July 2013

Why Almost Everything You Think You Know About US Drones is Probably Wrong.

Definition of drone can vary with the person.  I include cruise missiles, and military craft which were named drones back in WW II, but lack the sophistication of today's drones.  I include drones in space, air, water, land.  I have not been paying much attention to the hobby dimension.  I am sure toy drones are available in nations not on my list.

It seems to me that no one else can be doing what I am doing, because all other published reports with a count on how many nations have drones, are way below my running totals.

Al Mac (WOW) = Alister William Macintyre
Standford University

Webmaster - Drone Nations


OBAMA Heckled by "Medea" Brown of Code Pink:

"Will you apologize to Muslims...?"



He shouldn't - 

Not at any rate, while he makes appointments like Chuck Hegal, the most anti-Zionist Defence Secretary in a generation and ends two major, decade-long wars in the Muslim world and replaces airstrikes, cruise missile attacks 

(from "giant floating iron islands" as Bill Maher once described them),

invasion, occupation and special forces raids in violation of national sovereignty with surgical strikes targeting specific identifiable self-declared enemies of the state.

Drones Don't Kill People, People Kill People.

And drones don't make Muslims hate America, arming Israel does..

And Medea Benjamin knows that, which is why she is blaming the drones.

Her real name is Susanah Benjamin, by the way - and she appears to be well-connected across Washington and able to get into anywhere, carrying anything and say and do anything, while being photographed doing it.

It's helpful to Israel and the Israeli Right - as is the Syrian Civil War.

Which is a perfect storm of sectarian Islamist in-fighting intended to kill as many Arabs as possible before everyone is dead.

"From his own point of view, Obama has had a rough time lately. It has long been known that his greatest psychological satisfaction comes through the adulation he receives when making public speeches.

When he delivered his speech on national security at the National Defense University, he was subjected to prolonged heckling by the veteran provocateur, Medea Benjamin of Code Pink. 



This heckling went on for a long time. 

Ms. Benjamin is very suspect, because she demanded that Obama stop old drone attacks and close Guant?namo, but said nothing at all about the far greater danger of a short-term attack on Syria, a country she has vilified in the recent past...." 

Webster G. Tarpley


Rule 1: 
Drones Don't Kill People, People Kill People.

Rule 2: 
All a Drone is, is Just a Big, Flying Gun

Rule 3: 
Drones are Typically Used to Hit Targets in Remote, Inaccessible Regions without Ambulances or Paramedics

Rule 4: 
Officials of The Pakistani ISI Habitually Lie and Make Things Up

Rule 5: 
Same Goes for the Yemeni Security Service -They REALLY Don't Like America...

Rule 6:
Use of Drones Doesn't Make Muslims Hate America, Support for the Apartheid State of Israel Makes Muslims Hate America

Is this going to be actual evidence like post-mortem autopsy reports or video footage;

Or just stories?





Yeah, sorry - this story doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

"The lone survivor of the Obama administration’s first strike in North Waziristan, Faheem Qureshi, stated that 

“[u]sually, when a drone strikes and people die, nobody comes near the bodies for half an hour because they fear another missile will strike.” 

He believes that he would likely not have survived if he had not managed to walk out of the smoking rubble of his hujra on his own, because his neighbors would have waited too long in coming to rescue him."

If he's the LONE survivor of the FIRST drone strike in North Waziristan..... 

How can he possibly say "Usually, when a drone strikes...."

How can he possibly know? 

He's supposedly never met anyone who has been involved in one before?? 

It makes no sense. This is a completely made up story - at least in terms of the victim placing his experience in a narrative context. 

Does he know this? 

Does he think this?

Is this something he has figured out all by himself?

Is it his oppinion?

Rumour?

Is he a liar?

Or is he just telling his interlocutors from Stanford what they want to hear?



These are all people who have BEEN THROUGH due process, many of them detailed and convicted at Guantanamo and then LET OUT by the Military Commissions under the Bush Administration from 2006-2009.

These are people who have been turned and recruited by CIA in Camp X-Ray and sentenced to time served,

They are a CIA- Mossad Contra Death Squad created as policy under Cheney and turned into protected hired killers to destabilise foreign governments and cause carnage.

Kill them.

And how does he know its a US Drone, not a Pakistani drone...?



"As for the leaders or those sought after, they should not use communications equipment because the enemy usually keeps a voice tag through which they can identify the speaking person and then locate him.

The drones used in the attacks in Swat Valley depend on electronic chips or radioactive dyes placed at the target by the spy or the agent then the guided missiles come directly toward these targets."






Also, drones move INCREDIBLY slowly.

The idea that you wouldn't spot one coming around for a second attack run and lining up to fire is preposterous.
They're also pretty devastatingly accurate when the mark is tagged with a gamma emitting isotope or a radio transponder or GPS device. 



Inch perfect.



I'm sorry - but this is hilarious.

To be ABSOLUTELY CLEAR: Anwar Al-Awlaki IS NOT a US Citizen and never was - he held a US passport from 1994 until 2004, obtained by fraud, but was born in Yemen to to Yemeni parents and is second-generation CIA.

His father is a Fulbright Scholar and brother-in-law to the Yemeni Defence Minister, a prominent member of the ruling tribe of Yemen that has held power since independence in 1964 - he is not an authentic Jihadi and has a record of numerous arrests for sollicting whilst living in Colorado, where he was also known to enjoy Vodka.

So he isn't an American citizen, and he isn't even an observant Muslim.





Yup, there you go.




Predictable response. Can't even point out 


"He's Yemeni Born, he had a fake passport and he's second generation CIA."



Which is all manifestly true.





"According to a 2012 investigative report by Fox News, the arrest warrant for passport fraud was still in effect on the morning of Oct. 10, 2002, when FBI Agent Wade Ammerman ordered al-Aulaqi's release. U.S. Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA) and several congressional committees are urging FBI Director Robert Mueller to provide an explanation about the bureau’s interactions with al-Aulaqi, including why he was released from federal custody when there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest."



I think we all know the answer to this one: CIA were protecting him and moving him around where they needed him most on the globe, radicalising domestic Muslim Youth, sowing the seeds for homegrown terror and adhering to the Blind Sheikh Omar Rahman model . Slick. Very slick...


"ABC News reported in 2009 that the decision to cancel the arrest warrant outraged members of a Joint Terrorism Task Force in San Diego at the time. They were monitoring al-Aulaqi and wanted to "look at him under a microscope"."

Yes, I bet they did, and I bet they were - this is evidently, a Made Guy, protected on orders right from the top.... "He's someone very important to Mr. Dulles, y'honour..."

In any case, that isn't what a "double-tap" is - that's shooting twice.

A double-tap would be to fire off both Hellfires one behind the other in quick succession to ensure the kill - it's not coming around for a second go a quarter of an hour later. That's absurd.



Three THOUSAND people?!?


These are the same sets of figures quoted on the floor of Congress by Denis Kucinch and he should be ashamed of himself. For this, and other reasons, I would be glad to elaborate on another time.

The "Bureau for Investigative Journalism" should be treated with DEEP mistrust - in fact, I would trust them as far as I could throw them.

I first encountered them last November - I don't know who these clowns are, but they aren't journalists. They were the source of the (quickly discredited, libellous and false) allegation that Lord McAlpine had been named by a former abuse victim and ward of the State at the Bryn Estyn home in Wrexham as his abuser in a piece for Newsnight spinning out of the ever-spiralling out of control Saville Affair.

The Bureau for Investigative Journalism leaked his name, verbally at a media party and it hit Twitter - Speaker's wife, Sally Bercow's epoch making "Innocent face" has had a chilling effect that will reverberate throughout English libel law for years to come.

Their equally shabby reportage and fact checking of Drone Kills (in a manner eerily remincient (if not practically identical to) that of the notorious "Dodgy Dossier" on non-existant Iraqi WMDs. 



The Bureau was flung into crisis, their director resigned on the spot, their name and professional reputation in ruins.....








Here's the thing though, and where things turn really sinister - the story was true. 

His Lordship is, indeed, a notorious pædeeast and photographic evidence exists - somewhere.

It was stolen from the offices of a magazine called Scallywag many years ago around the time of the Kengate Tapes and David Cameron's shenanigans with Carlton and the Cook Report.



Monarch Mind Control is a form of mind control which creates a mind control slave by utilizing the human brain's trauma response of dissociation to create a form of Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) wherein various triggers can cause the slave personality to surface and respond to commands given by the master ("Handler" in Monarch parlance).

Despite the intuitive connection between the Handler and a King or Monarch, the Monarch in this context refers to Monarch Butterflies, not to a Monarchical form of government.

The Monarch Mind Control designation was originally applied by the US Department of Defense to a sub-program under the CIA's MK-Ultra Program. However, the techniques employed in the Monarch programming system extend back further under various names, such as the Nazi marionette programming.

Even further back, the techniques used in Monarch programming can be traced to various generational Satanist families among European royalty. The MPD state created by the Monarch programming techniques were used to isolate the personality involved in Satanic rituals from a public face. Without this alternate personality, the nobles practicing Satanism inevitably went insane, so it's practice spread rapidly through the occult community.

It is unclear who first started practicing the MPD techniques as a way of creating mind control slaves rather than as a defense mechanism, but it is clear that the Nazis were using Electro-shock and binding to create slaves in the 1940s. After World War II, some German and Italian psychologists who were working on Marionette programming were brought to the United States to continue working on their research.

After the original development of the Monarch program inside of MK-Ultra, it has been adopted by other groups such as the Illuminati and the American entertainment industry. Very notably, since the 1970's the Disney corporation has been involved heavily in Monarch programming, and several of their films (especially Alice in Wonderland) are used as a base for Monarch programming.

Monarch programming is achieved through repeated abuse and torture, until the victim dissociates from reality into a fantasy world in their head. When that happens somehow an alternate personality is created, and the handler (abuser) can trigger this personality at any time.





















Newsnight was apparently the victim of an MI5 sting - a modified limited hangout and variation on the October Surprise Pilot gambit; the Dan Rather sting.


Charles Johnson's animated GIF comparison of purported 1970's era typewritten Killian memos with 2004-era MS Word document using default settings.


That's as may be, but almost totally irrelevant - these paper records and these documents DO exist, at least as late as 2003 - in the below W.-centric documentary, Greg Palast speaks personally with the public official who saw them and handled them, confirming that they were indeed secured by representatives of the Bush Family sent by Karl Rove prior to the 2004 Election.

Which makes it overwhelming like that the above facsimile of the REAL, actual documents were more than likely transcribed and typed up on Karl Rove's laptop and he sent the "whistleblower" to hawk the fake documents to Dan Rather to take him and his 35 years of Jouralistic Credibility (I don't count Dallas, November 24th 1963, for obvious reason) off the board prior to the crucial 2004 race.



Likewise, with McAlpine, its overwhelmingly likely that the abuse is real, his guilt is real, the victim is real and telling the truth but being used (either with or without his consent or knowledege) to discredit ALL the allegations and scare off further enquire via the standard instrument of the abuse of English Libel Law.

You know about English Libel Law, gentle reader, I assume...?




"English libel law is becoming a global disgrace" - Jo Glanville, Director English PEN:
"English libel law is a vulture circling the world ": Simon Singh, 2011

"English libel law is becoming a global disgrace" - Jo Glanville, Director English PEN:

"Our libel laws allow the rich and powerful to silence their critics and stop the general public from receiving vital information in their interest. We need to reform our libel laws now to protect the freedom of speech of every citizen." 
- Kirsty Hughes, the CEO of Index on Censorship:

"English libel law is chilling global freedom of expression, by silencing writers, journalists, bloggers and human rights activists in the UK and around the world. Reforming these antiquated laws is long overdue, which is why it is imperative that the government passes the Defamation Bill." 
- Tracey Brown, Managing Director of Sense About Science:

It is for this reason that in the notorious Trapped in the Closet episode of South Park, Tom Cruise famous yells 

"I'll sue you!! I'll sue you in England!!"


This, then is the acknowledged strategy of last resort in a massive cover-up;

Surface a juicy titbit of conspiracy dynamite using a false whistleblower or phoney witness to disclose something TRUE, but with fraudulent and easily discreditable evidence, wait for the hungry WoodStein newshound to take the bait and swallow the story while, only for it to immediately blow up in his face - thereby discrediting both the (true) allegations and the journalist, making him a pariah and a laughing stock, and the whole story utterly toxic.

And then sue the living shit out of everyone in sight.



This is a truly terrifying ruling both for free speech an child protection - let us not forget, this was from all appearances an MI5 sting to shut down investigation an further reporting on a massive and pervasive decades long Conspiracy of Silence regarding elite pædophilia and Quasi-Satanic Ritual Abuse cloaked by Freemasonry at the highest levels of British society, both in the media,  political  and judicial realms, for decades.

What, then should we make of the Bureau for Investigative Journalism's London-based guesswork on drone casualties in South Central Asia?

Not much.




I'm concerned too, but I don't give the BIJ the benefit of thee doubt on the Good Faith score - at best, they are hopeless incompetents and therefore Useful Idiots for the intelligence community.

More likely, they are an intelligence cut-out. 

Either way : they're full of shit.









Hang on - wait, what???

You've gone from 3325 down to (maybe) 155....?! 

Possibly less than half that...?

How can you be out by more than an order of magnitude?!

Oh, wait - these people have a political agenda:





Relying on uncorroborated, anonymous, unarmed sources and reporting what they say verbatim, as fact, is never okay.


Reporting the word of Pakistani Government officials verbatim as fact is doubley not okay.

These are the same people who claimed for 9 years to have absolutely no clue where Osama Bin Laden had gone and now claim that they had him under surveillance in Abbotobad all along.

They can't even get their stories straight.

This is the Pakistani ISI, and you can't trust a word they say.


Figures of 3000 innocent children killed by US Drones is just pure ISI propaganda, plain and simple - it's manifestly not true and ridiculously absurd. 

It's also (when you think about it), remarkably close to the official death toll on the day of 9/11 in New York and Washington and Pennsylvania.

Although I'm sure that's just a total coincidence and in no way a conscious propaganda ploy / PR Stunt

(Not that 9/11 wasn't the ultimate PR Stunt of all time...)


Further relevant information germain to the counting and quantitative metrics of The Drone Wars:

(My Italics)




23 February 2013
Drone Nations

From: "Al Mac Wow" <macwheel99[at]wowway.com>
To: "'Mark Gubrud'" <gubrud[at]gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 11:55:17 -0600
Cc: drone-list[at]lists.stanford.edu


Subject: Re: [drone-list] Nations where drones operating


I have been updating my notes, which I call "Drone Nations" as I see news reports, and government reports, identifying where drones are operating in which nations, doing what.
My Drone Nations notes on Scribd:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/105613448/Drone-Nations-Al-Mac

My collection of drone documents on Scribd:

http://www.scribd.com/collections/3807680/Drone-Info

My collection of drone documents on Google Drive Doc:

https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B9euafJH4b-ZLWR0bmZLS3d5OVk/edit?usp=sharing

As I periodically upload revised editions of notes, I delete the prior version on Google Drive, but use the revision system on Scribd.  Formerly there were other sharing sites I used, which have since died, so at some point in the future I will be looking into additional sites convenient for
me to use.


Definition of drone can vary with the person.  I include cruise missiles, and military craft which were named drones back in WW II, but lack the sophistication of today's drones.  I include drones in space, air, water, land.  I have not been paying much attention to the hobby dimension.  I am sure toy drones are available in nations not on my list.

I carefully cite my sources for the information. For each nation, on my list where drones are operating, or have been operating, I typically have a whole string of url citations.

It seems to me that no one else can be doing what I am doing, because all other published reports with a count on how many nations have drones, are way below my running totals.

Now I grant you that some nations may have in the past had drones, and no longer have drones.  There's also all the nations where NATO has drone bases, but THOSE nations do not have their own drones.  I found out about most of them, thanks to Drone Wars UK data base of where over 100 drones have crashed in recent years.

For that reason I have the two different running totals.
86+ nations have drones which THEY control.
104+ nations have drones operating but
18+ nations have drones which they do NOT control.
There are also nations with mixtures, like Pakistan controls its own military drones, but does not control the NATO drones, which are operating in Pakistan.
Al Mac (WOW) = Alister William Macintyre

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Gubrud [mailto:gubrud[at]gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 11:12 AM
To: macwheel99[at]wowway.com
Subject: Re: [drone-list] US drone base added in Niger


Do you have an independent database or what sources are you using? The last claim seems particularly on the high side. What are the 11+ nations that have used deadly drone attacks, into what 18+ nations?
Mark

Niger was not previously on my list of nations where drones have been operating, so this news increases my tally to:

86+ nations operate drones by its government and people, mainly for spying.
104+ nations & regions have drones, if we include those operated by foreigners.
11+ nations used deadly drone attacks, into 18+ nations.
_______________________________________________


From: "Al Mac Wow" <macwheel99[at]wowway.com>
To: "'Mark Gubrud'" <gubrud[at]gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 12:24:12 -0600
Cc: drone-list[at]lists.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: [drone-list] Nations attacking which nations with drones

Mark Gubrud asked
What are the 11+ nations that have used deadly drone attacks, into what 18+ nations?
I shared links to my "Drone Nations" notes first, so you can go there to check my citations for how I came up with these nations.

There have been several wars, where drones were used on both sides, depending on how drones are defined.

* First Gulf War: Scuds fired at Israel, drones used to shoot down Iraq air force planes.

* Multiple conflicts with Israel, where Israel uses drones to attack leaders of the groups firing rockets into Israel.

* August 2008 there was a five day war between Russia and Georgia, with drones used on both sides.

* In 2010 I learned about a war going on between Armenia and Azerbaijan, with drones on both sides. I do not know how long that conflict has been going on.

Hezbollah claims to have sent drones into Israel in addition to the one Israel shot down, which, if the news media is correct, was merely surveillance.

Nations which have launched drone attacks, as opposed to surveillance of some kind: (there may be more, which I don't know about yet.)
* Armenia
* Azerbaijan
* Britain
* France
* Georgia
* Germany
* Israel
* Russia
* Turkey
* Uganda
* USA
* 11 = my count, as of 2012 Oct-28
Nations which have been on the receiving ends of hostile drones from other nations: (this list is probably incomplete)

Gaza and Palestine are on the receiving ends of Israel military drones.

Hezbollah has flown at least one drone, claims more, over Israel.


Sorry, had to interject - Hezbollah is not "a nation" - nor, if we are obeying the letter of the law (which we should, since this is research into quite an important area) is Gaza.


Afghanistan, Iraq; Libya, Mali, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and Bosnia have been on the receiving ends of NATO nations' military drones, and in Somalia's case, also by Uganda's drones

Djibouti and Seychelles have bases for drones used by NATO nations in above conflicts, which have also experienced the phenomena of drone crashes.

Bermuda, Bahamas, and Caribbean are being spied on by US Border Patrol drones looking for drug smuggling.

Congo and Rwanda fighting monitored by UN drones.

Nations which have been on the receiving end of military attacks by drones, not surveillance but actual killing and destruction:  (this list is probably incomplete)
* Afghanistan
* Armenia
* Azerbaijan
* Bosnia
* Britain            
He's counting V-1 Doodlebugs and V-2 Rockets as "Drones" - Which, technically they are. But the point is, these WW2 Deaths are contributing to the 3325 figure.
His working definition of "Drones" includes "Cruise Missiles" 


* Chechnya
* Gaza
* Georgia
* Iraq
* Mali
* Pakistan
* Palestine
* Russia
* Somalia
* Sudan
* Turkey
* Vietnam
* Yemen

* 18 = my count, as of 2012 Oct-28
I have not updated my notes with Syria latest, because it is unclear to me which nations are on the receiving end of which kinds of attacks ... drones, manned flight, ground troops.

Al Mac (WOW) = Alister William Macintyre

_______________________________________________
drone-list mailing list
drone-list[at]lists.stanford.edu

Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/drone-list
If you would like to receive a daily digest, click "yes" (once you click above) next to "would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest?"

You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders.

Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator.




A final word on this -

Using this form of accouting, President Kennedy's eldest brother, Joe Kennedy Jr. is included in the totals of those killed by drones...


Operation Aphrodite made use of unmanned, explosive–laden Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and B-24 Liberator bombers, that were deliberately crashed into their targets under radio control.

These aircraft could not take off safely on their own, so a crew of two would take off and fly to 2,000 feet (610 m) before activating the remote control system, arming the detonators and parachuting from the aircraft.

After U.S. Army Air Forces operation missions were drawn up on July 23, 1944, Kennedy and Lieutenant Wilford John Willy were designated as the first Navy flight crew. Willy had "pulled rank" over Ensign James Simpson (who was Kennedy's regular co-pilot) to be on the mission. 

They flew a BQ-8 "robot" aircraft (a converted B-24 Liberator) for the U.S. Navy's first Aphrodite mission. Two Lockheed Ventura mother planes and a Boeing B-17 navigation plane took off from RAF Fersfield at 1800 on 12 August 1944. Then the BQ-8 aircraft, loaded with 21,170 lb (9,600 kg) of Torpex, took off. It was to be used against the Fortress of Mimoyecques and its V-3 cannons in northern France.

Following behind them in a USAAF F-8 Mosquito to film the mission were pilot Lt. Robert A. Tunnel and combat camera man Lt. David J. McCarthy, who filmed the event from the perspex nose.

As planned, Kennedy and Willy remained aboard as the BQ-8 completed its first remote-controlled turn at 2,000 feet near the North Sea coast. Kennedy and Willy removed the safety pin arming the explosive package and Kennedy radioed the agreed code Spade Flush, his last words.

Two minutes later (and well before the planned crew bailout, near RAF Manston), the Torpex explosive detonated prematurely and destroyed the Liberator, killing Kennedy and Willy instantly. 

Wreckage landed near the village of Blythburgh in Suffolk, England, causing widespread damage and small fires, but no injuries on the ground. According to one report, a total of 59 buildings were damaged in a nearby coastal town.







Drone B-17 used as a guided missile during World War II
ATTEMPTED FIRST APHRODITE ATTACK TWELVE AUGUST WITH ROBOT TAKING OFF FROM FERSFIELD AT ONE EIGHT ZERO FIVE HOURS PD ROBOT EXPLODED IN THE AIR AT APPROXIMATELY TWO THOUSAND FEET EIGHT MILES SOUTHEAST OF HALESWORTH AT ONE EIGHT TWO ZERO HOURS PD WILFORD J. WILLY CMA SR GRADE LIEUTENANT AND JOSEPH P. KENNEDY SR GRADE LIEUTENANT CMA BOTH USNR CMA WERE KILLED PD COMMANDER SMITH CMA IN COMMAND OF THIS UNIT CMA IS MAKING FULL REPORT TO US NAVAL OPERATIONS PD A MORE DETAILED REPORT WILL BE FORWARDED TO YOU WHEN INTERROGATION IS COMPLETED
— Top Secret telegram to General Carl Andrew Spaatz from General Jimmy Doolittle, August 1944


According to USAAF records, the trailing Mosquito "was flying 300 feet above and about 300 yards to the rear of the robot. Engineer photographer on this ship was injured and the ship was damaged slightly by the explosion."

The Mosquito, which made an immediate emergency landing at RAF Halesworth, belonged to the 325th Reconnaissance Wing, a unit under the command of the son of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, then Colonel Elliott Roosevelt. Years later, Roosevelt claimed to have been aboard this trailing aircraft, and his version of the event has gained wide currency.

However, Air Force records cannot substantiate this. Instead, an after-action account by the 8th Combat Camera Unit (CCU) noted that:

"...'the Baby just exploded in mid-air as we neared it and I was knocked halfway back to the cockpit. A few pieces of the Baby came through the plexiglass nose and I got hit in the head and caught a lot of fragments in my right arm. I crawled back to the cockpit and lowered the wheels so that Bob could make a quick emergency landing,' Lt. McCarthy reported from his hospital bed."


The 8th CCU film of the event, has, so far as is known, not been found.
The Navy's informal board of review, discussing a number of theories, discounted the possibility of the crew making a mistake, or that suspected jamming or a stray signal could have armed and detonated the explosives. 
An electronics officer who believed the wiring harness had a design defect had warned Kennedy of this possibility the day before the mission.Kennedy was posthumously awarded the Navy Cross, the Distinguished Flying Cross, and the Air Medal. His Navy Cross citation reads:




For extraordinary heroism and courage in aerial flight as pilot of a United States Liberator bomber on August 12, 1944. Well knowing the extreme dangers involved and totally unconcerned for his own safety, Kennedy unhesitatingly volunteered to conduct an exceptionally hazardous and special operational mission


Intrepid and daring in his tactics and with unwavering confidence in the vital importance of his task, he willingly risked his life in the supreme measure of service and, by his great personal valor and fortitude in carrying out a perilous undertaking, sustained and enhanced the finest traditions of the United States Naval Service.






The Bay of Pigs

The Pivotal Operation of the JFK Era

by L. Fletcher Prouty








Col. L.Fletcher Prouty


Few, if any, international events of the Twentieth Century have been so misunderstood and so viciously misrepresented by the media and by "historians" as that which is popularly known as the anti-Castro "Bay of Pigs" operation that took place when a Brigade of about 1,400 U.S. supported Cuban-exiles landed on the shores of the island of Cuba at dawn on April 17, 1961.

Because of the passage of years and the growing mass of untrue and contrived reporting, few people have had an opportunity to discover the truth behind this notionally "Clandestine" operation that was created and directed by the CIA. Furthermore, to fully understand this operation, it is imperative that one becomes aware of its antecedent roots that grew so profusely in the mire of underground operations during the fifties. We need to understand the concealed, and frequently distorted, events many of which had their origin during the Truman and Eisenhower administrations. The "Bay of Pigs" plan did not originate during the Kennedy administration. It had been inherited, full-blown. During the last few months of 1958, it had become clear that the Cuban President/Dictator Fulgencio Batista y Zaldivar, was being forced to flee; and that Fidel Castro was leading his band of well financed rebels out of the Sierra Maestra mountains into Havana, unchecked. By late December 1958, Castro was close to Havana. The country was his to take.

At that time, on the Washington Mall near the reflecting pool beside the Jefferson Memorial there were several World War II "Tempo" buildings that had been hastily converted into offices for the clandestine services of the CIA. Here, during the last week of December 1958, the CIA had called together an inter- departmental task force under J.C.King, the Chief of its Western Hemisphere Division, and his deputy Jake Esterline. Its objective was to be ready to move American armed forces instantly if/when the U.S. Government decided to stop Castro before he reached Havana.

As the representative of the U.S. Air Force I was there, among five or six others in the Alcott Building, during the long night of New Year's Eve '58, awaiting the order that would have caused thousands of American troops to be landed in Cuba to block Castro's entry. However, shortly after midnight...as the festive New Years Bells were ringing all around town...the Government decided to take no action at that time. Castro entered Havana undeterred. Batista had fled, and Washington remained cautious and undecided.


[ NOTE: ]
Some may recall that the CIA had mounted its biggest "Clandestine" operation against the government of Sukarno in Indonesia during that same year, 1958; and that the agency's active support of more than 42,000 anti-Sukarno rebels ended in an ignoble defeat at the hands of General Nasution of the loyal Indonesian army.

It did not take long to find out that Castro was a ruthless dictator. Hundreds of Cubans died at the wall. Thousands fled the country. Castro met with Vice President Nixon early in 1959 and Nixon later declared that if Castro was not a Communist, he certainly acted like one. The ranks of Cuban refugees swelled, and began to innundate Florida. President Eisenhower thought the Cuban males would be most effective and manageable if placed in camps under the care of the Army. Later it was decided to put them in special Cuban training camps, in other countries, to keep them together without involving the regular armed forces of the United States, except in the role of trainers and suppliers.


[ NOTE: ] 

Because so much of the "historical record" is erroneous, contrived and weakened by omissions, I am for the most part using a copy of the original "Letter to the President" dated 13 June 1961 written and signed by Maxwell D. Taylor in response to an earlier letter written to him by President Kennedy dated April 22, 1961...the day after the surrender of the Brigade. The President's letter charged General Taylor in association with Attorney General Robert Kennedy, Admiral Arleigh Burke and Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles, i.e. The Cuban Study Group:


"to study our governmental practices and programs in the areas of military and paramilitary, guerrilla and anti-guerrilla activity which fell short of outright war with a view to strengthening our work in this area," and to... "direct special attention to the lessons which can be learned from the recent events in Cuba."


Gen. Taylor made special note of the fact that:


"As we have found no difficulty in reaching a unanimous

view on all essential points under consideration, we are
submitting this view as a jointly agreed study."


This later statement is most important. When one considers the enormous pressure on this group as a result of the failure of that operation; and the widely divergent interests of the members, it is remarkable that General Taylor was able to cite that this review was "a unanimous view" and "a jointly agreed study." Most historical accounts have failed to consider the enormous significance of that statement at that time.


Those selected to testify before the Cuban Study Group did so under oath, and--for the most part--their testimony is as valid as could be obtained. However, one thing the report lacks is direct testimony from the key CIA operational-level principals, and their active duty military counterparts who actually drew up the master plan, recruited and trained the Cuban exiles and who provided the supporting elements of the entire operation.


By the time this rebel "Brigade," landed on the beach it had at least 25,000 weapons in reserve on the ships, the largest combat and transport air force in Latin America and the supplies necessary to support the expected rising of anti-Castro Cubans from inside the country. They were trained, well equipped and well supported.


This failure to obtain testimony from those tactical leaders was a serious omission, and it was not accidental. Neither Taylor, Burke nor Bobby Kennedy knew who they were; therefore.and for the most part with a few notable exceptions the testimony was taken from a list prepared by Allen Dulles. Much of it, as a result, was self-serving and not objective. This omission has made it very difficult for otherwise meticulous historians to get to the true facts of the matter. I have yet to see a worthwhile book or article with material derived from those real sources.


I possess a copy of this original "Report" by Gen. Taylor. At the top right hand corner of the cover-page the Study Group cited its Pentagon location as "Room 2E980." My room number in the Joint Chiefs of Staff area of the Pentagon was 2D958. During the hearings, I was a short distance from their office. Since many of the men called to testify were long-time working associates of mine in the CIA and the Military, I was kept up-to-date with what was going on as they came and went via my office for a "coffee break" while awaiting their call for testimony.


This Cuban Study Group was made up of four totally different people: Gen. Maxwell Taylor, whom the President had not met before this period; Admiral Burke, Chief of Naval Operations and the member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff closest to the anti-Castro activities since March 1960; Allen Dulles who was, at least nominally, in charge of the entire operation; and Bobby Kennedy who, they all knew, sprinted from that room each day for a meeting with his brother in the White House.


Often the participants said to me after being in that room that it was like being among "Four Scorpions in a Bottle." They wondered if any would come out alive. All of them said that the dominant one was that young man, sitting stiffly in a "GI" office chair, saying little but hearing all. Of course that man was Bobby Kennedy.

[ end note ]

On March 17, 1960, President Eisenhower approved the basic policy paper "A Program of Covert Action Against the Castro Regime." This policy document, developed by the Central Intelligence Agency and indorsed by the "Special Group," i.e. a nondescript euphemism for a creation of that National Security Council, provided for a program divided into four parts to bring about the replacement of the Castro regime by covert means. They were:

"a) The creation of a responsible and unified Cuban

opposition to the Castro regime located outside of Cuba.

"b) The development of means for mass communication to the

Cuban people as a part of a powerful propaganda offensive.

"c) The creation and development of a covert intelligence

and action organization within Cuba which would be
responsive to the orders and directions of the exile
opposition, and...

"d) The development of a paramilitary force outside of Cuba

for future guerrilla action."

Shortly after the approval of this policy paper by President Eisenhower, the latter section was further modified, as follows:

"d) Preparations have already been made for the development of an adquate paramilitary force outside of Cuba, together with mechanisms for the necessary logistics support of covert military operations on the island. Initially a cadre of leaders will be recruited after careful screening and trained as paramilitary instructors. 

In a second phase a number of paramilitary cadres will be trained at secure locations outside of the United States so as to be available for immediate deployment into Cuba to organize, train and lead resistance forces recruited there both before and after the establishment of one of more active centers of resistance. 

The creation of this capability will require a minimum of six months [ Sept 17, 1960 ] and probably closer to eight [ Nov 17, 1960 ]. In the mean time, a limited air capability for resupply and for infiltration already exists under CIA control and can be rather easily expanded if and when the situation requires. Within two months it is hoped to parallel this with a small air supply capability under deep cover as a commercial operation in another country."


NOTE: 

It is important to add here that Senator Lyndon Johnson, in his role as Senate Majority Leader, had appointed Senator John F. Kennedy, Mass. to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1957, under its illustrious chairman, Sen. J.W. Fullbright. As a result, we may be certain that Kennedy was well aware of these early developments as they were initiated and that expanded by the CIA and the military in support of Agency.


As these activities progressed, Kennedy through his good friends Sen. Smathers, Florida, and Sen. Mansfield, Montana, among others, became aware of developments among the Cuban exile community. Manuel Artime, who was one of the Revolutionary Council's leaders, told me, during August 1960 just after Kennedy had accepted the Democratic nomination for President, that they had visited with Sen. Kennedy at the Kennedy family's vacation home at Palm Beach, Florida. In many ways Kennedy was as well aware of this undercover planning against Fidel Castro as anyone on Capitol Hill. It may not have missed his notice that the six to eight month period, devised by the CIA for the "creation of this capability" neatly bracketed the date of the coming election on Nov 8, 1960. As we shall see, these became two of the most important dates in the whole scheme of things. 

[end note]


With this March 17th Presidential approval in hand, the CIA began at once to implement these policy decisions. A target for 300 male Cuban exiles was set for the recruitment of guerrillas to be trained covertly outside the United States. As a function of my office within the Headquarters staff of the U.S. Air Force, it was my responsibility to provide "Military support of the clandestine activities of the CIA." 

Therefore, before the end of March 1960 a few CIA men, whom I knew well after working with them for more than four years, visited my office and, among other things, asked if I knew of a base, perhaps in Panama, that could be used for the housekeeping and training of 300 Cuban exiles.

Shortly thereafter we visited Panama and found that Ft. Gulick was on stand-by, and would be available for what the CIA wanted. This is where the training and organizing of the "Brigade" began.
At this point it must be made clear that it was during the administration of Eisenhower that the United States Government had, in 1954, for the first time, defined and approved the concept of "Covert Operations." That decision led to the establishment of the policy structure for such an activity. The measures that were taken during 1960 and 1961 in support of the Anti-Castro program were strictly in accord with the limits of that National Security Council directive.

The approval of NSC 5412, "National Security Council Directive on Covert Operations" on March 15, 1954 marked the first official recognition and sanctioning of anti-Communist covert activities by the U.S. Government throughout the world. The NSC had determined that the overt foreign activities of the U.S. Government should be supplemented by covert operations. This had not been done by the National Security Act of 1947 that had established the National Security Council and the Defense Department, and had created the CIA.

NSC 5412 defined "covert operations" as:



"all activities conducted pursuant to this directive which

are so planned and executed that any U.S. Government
responsibility for them is not evident to unauthorized
persons and that if uncovered the U.S.Government can
plausibly disclaim any responsibility for them."

To provide a mechanism for the approval and coordination for most covert operations, NSC 5412 directed the establishment of the "5412 committee," (later the "303 committee," and the "40 committee"). To conceal its purpose it was generally known only as the "Special Group." This "5412 Committee" consisted of the Deputy Under Secretary of State, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the President's Special Assistant for National Security Affairs and the Director of Central Intelligence, who also was designated as the "Action Officer." During 1957, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff became a member.

A major consideration behind this action, on the part of President Eisenhower, was his insistence that the CIA must not become a "Fourth Force" for pseudo-military Peacetime Operations, (Allen Dulles' term for Clandestine Operations) similar to the Army, Navy and Air Force during wartime. Therefore, the military services were instructed to establish "Focal Point" offices that would be charged with the responsibility to "Provide the military support of the clandestine operations of the CIA."

The frequently high cost of such an arrangement was worked out with the assistance of the General Counsel of the CIA, Larry Houston and his counterparts in the Department of Defense. In general, permanent transfers of military equipment were made under the provisions of the National Economy Act of 1932, as amended, and augmented as necessary by the CIA's agreement to reimburse each service for additional "out-of-pocket" costs.

The idea of the "Focal Point" office, as required under NSC 5412, was to reduce CIA contacts, in the Pentagon--for matters other than its Intelligence function--to a single office in each service for security reasons, and to enable that office to become familiar with the CIA's limited number of agents who would be authorized to make such contacts.

In keeping with this stricture, when I had completed the establishment of the "Focal Point" office with its global affiliates for the Air Force in 1956, Allen Dulles sent me and one of his key officials on a "Round the World" trip to become acquainted with a number of his Station Chiefs, among others. Fundamental to this procedure was the fact that both parties recognized that "military support" was not to be provided unless the NSC had first approved the operation.

Under the authority of NSC 5412, the U.S. Government launched in 1954-1955 a large "covert" CIA-operated program in Vietnam, as well as related programs in Laos, Cambodia and Thailand. This major program, by 1965, had escalated to the point that the military had to assume responsibility for its operational control, initially by the invasion at Da Nang. At the same time the U.S. Marines invaded Vietnam openly, not "Covertly," military operations became the norm for the remaining decade of that 30 year struggle.

This NSC 5412 program provided the policy guidance for support of the anti-Castro Cuban exile program that Eisenhower approved in March 1960; and that continued in effect throughout the Kennedy administration.

Both Presidents knew that "covert operations" are against the principles of International Law, the Charter of the United Nations, the Treaty of the Organization of American States and the long-time practices of this country. Covert operations are a denial of national sovereignty.

President Eisenhower made it clear that the active duty military establishment would have no operational role whatsoever in the Cuban exile support program. That prohibition was made ironclad, and in no way changed with the arrival of a new administration on Jan 21, 1961

This policy established why the "Air Cover" problem so frequently named as a Kennedy failure was not a Kennedy decision to make. That policy against the use of active-duty U.S. Armed Forces in Covert Operations had been promulgated in 1954. President Kennedy and his administration were bound by its terms.

In keeping with the injunction that the military remain behind the scenes, the CIA made use of its equipment left over from that huge, and distant operation in Indonesia. It had been gathered at key bases in the Pacific Rim and in the United States. The large number of WW II-type B-26 bombers that had been modified for the Indonesian action were available. Because much of the equipment that was eventually needed for the Bay of Pigs operation was already available, the CIA did not have to go through the process of getting additional approval for a good share of the aircraft and other heavy equipment needed for the anti-Castro operation. It did need ships that were acquired from storage locations, refurbished and loaded at Elizabeth City, North Carolina.

Initially this made it appear that the CIA's master plan was relatively modest, and might be limited to the initial 300 men who were training in Panama. This is a significant factor when it is realized that the decision to create a full-sized invasion force was not made until after the election of Senator John F. Kennedy as President of the United States, when the CIA began a sudden escalation of the program from that approved 300 Cubans to approximately 4,000 five months later. In fact, President Eisenhower had approved nothing more than such operations as air- drop, over-the-beach landings and other moderate activities. He had never approved any plan for an invasion of Cuba by the CIA- trained exile force...not the General who had directed the Normandy invasion. He knew better. The CIA did that on their own by taking advantage of the post-election "Lame Duck" period.

These changes did not catch Kennedy off guard. He continued his own contacts with the political leaders of the Cuban exile community.

By August, Kennedy had been nominated for the Presidency.

During that month the Republican candidate, Vice President Nixon, delivered a speech before the American Legion convention in Detroit. At that same convention a swarthy, charismatic Cuban exile aroused thousands of Legionaires with a promise to liberate Cuba under the flag of the exile brigade. This magnetic Cuban speaker in Detroit, Manuel Artime, was the ace in the CIA's anti-Castro deck; but JFK got to him early. On the very same day Artime and his other inner circle Cuban exiles were in Washington for a meeting in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, they made a stop in the Senate office building for a meeting with Senator Kennedy.

I had been transferred, from the Air Force to the Office of Special Operations, a division of the immediate office of the Secretary of Defense, by that time. I was asked to obtain a military limousine and go to the Senate Office building to pick up a group of four men. All I had been given was a certain room number. To my surprise when I entered that office, I met Sen. Kennedy

With him were Artime and the other Cuban exile leaders. JFK had not missed a beat. He knew them well from their visits at his home in Florida.

During the lull between the Indonesian campaign and the origin of the Bay of Pigs plan, the CIA had decided to create a major air establishment headquarters in the United States. I discussed several sites with their Air Division officials and it was decided to utilize a little-used, interior site at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The CIA pulled together much of its equipment from bases all over the world and moved it to Eglin.

The CIA's very able and potent Air Division already had C-130, C-118 (DC-6), C-54 (DC-4), C-46, C-47 (DC-3), C-97 and C-45 transport aircraft. It had very special Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) air craft designated L-28 (single engine) and U-5 (twin engine); and it had the versatile B-26 bombers that had been modified by the Air Force for the CIA to carry eight 50-cal aircraft-type machine guns in the nose. It also had some U.S. Navy aircraft , called P2V-7's, that had been highly modified and were kept under Air Force cover as "RB-69's," as well as the U-2's and other reconnaissance aircraft that were supported by the Air Force in a separate organization. Additionally, it had the largest airline operation in the world with its Air America and some 101 other names under the Pacific Corporation leadership.

As stated in the Taylor letter to the President, 13 June 196:


"Sometime in the summer of 1960 the paramilitary concept for the operation began to change. It appears that leaders in the CIA Task Force set up in January 1960 to direct the project were the first to entertain the thought of a Cuban strike force to land on the Cuban coast in supplementation of the guerilla action contemplated under the March 17, 1963 policy paper. These CIA officers began to consider the formation of a small force of infantry (200-300 men) for contingency employment in conjunction with other paramilitary operations, and in June began to form a small Cuban tactical air force. Eventually it was decided to equip this force with B-26 aircraft which had been widely distributed to foreign countries including countries in Latin America."

Without any specific mention of the November Presidential election, the Taylor letter continued with its chronological account of the build-up and changing structure of the CIA's "Anti-Castro" master plan. This is a most important period and it reveals how the Eisenhower-approved plan for air-drop and over-the-beach limited activities began to be expanded during the summer and then was accelerated by the CIA during the "Lame Duck" period between Kennedy's election and his inauguration in Jan 1961 A careful study of this phase of the development of the Master Plan confirms that this was not an incidental deviation from the approved plan.

At the same time, one must keep in mind that Sen. Kennedy had his own "eyes and ears" tuned to developments as cited above.

The Taylor letter again provides an accurate and significant inside view of this course of action:
"There were ample reasons for this new trend of thought The Air drops into Cuba were not proving effective. There were increasingly heavy shipments of Communist arms to Cuba, accompanied by evidence of increasingly effective control of the civilian population by Castro. The Special Group became aware of these adverse factors which were discussed repeatedly in the Committee meetings during the fall of 1960. 

(Note again avoidance of any mention of the Presidential Election.) 

The minutes of the conferences indicate a declining confidence in the effectiveness of guerrilla efforts alone to overthrow Castro. "In this atmosphere the CIA began to implement the new concept, increasing the size of the Cuban force in training and reorienting the training toward preparation for its use as an assault force on the Cuban coast. On November 4th,


(NOTE: It has become obvious that the CIA, along with most of the administration, were convinced that Nixon would be elected President in Nov,'60.) 

CIA In Washington dispatched a cable to the project officer in Guatemala describing what was wanted. The cable directed a reduction of the guerrilla teams to 60 men and the introduction of conventional training for the remainder as an amphibious and airborne assault force.


"From that time on the training emphasis was placed on the assault mission and there is no evidence that the members of the assault force received any further preparation for guerrilla-type operations. The men became deeply imbued with the importance of the landing operation and its superiority over any form of guerrilla action to the point that it would have been difficult later to persuade them to return to a guerrilla-type mission. The final training of the Cubans was done by specialists from the U.S. Armed Forces in Guatemala where more than 400-500 Cubans had been assembled."

It is unfortunate that so few writers have learned that at the time of this build-up, so thoroughly outlined by the Taylor report above, the services had been asked to provide experts in this type of warfare for the development of the Master Plan, for the build-up of the force and its logistical needs, and for the training of the Cuban exiles. This is clear evidence that the Bay of Pigs operation was not a Kennedy plan. All of this had been set in concrete before the election.

It may be added here, that a U.S. Marine Corps Colonel with considerable amphibious landing and beach-head experience was appointed the chief of this all-military contingent of leaders of the tactical training programs. He was responsible for the actual invasion plan that had been taken to the Joint Chiefs of Staff for final approval

Had his tactical plan been carried out as visualized, the Brigade would have achieved its goal, according to the Cuban Study Group Report:


"Capture of the beach zone, provide a nucleus for the loyal

Cubans who, the CIA believed would rise to join them, and
hold Cuban territory for seventy-two hours, after which time
the Organization of American States would respond to their
call for recognition as the true Cuban government by
providing military land, sea, and air support immediately."

All of this had been planned, and agreed upon before the invasion. Fate played the cards differently.
It is imperative to note that even the Taylor Report itself enters into this game of obfuscation with regard to the Cuban- exile, anti-Castro plans. At one point it states:



"In the period December 10, 1960 to February 8, 1961, former Ambassador Whiting Willauer and Mr. Tracy Barnes of the CIA were charged with keeping the President and the Secretary of State informed."


Of course we all know that between those dates there were two Presidents, Eisenhower and Kennedy, and two Secretaries of State, Herter and Rusk. Although the Report refers to a single President, it makes no reference to which one.

Furthermore this Report states:


"The Director of Central Intelligence briefed President

Eisenhower on the new paramilitary concept on 29
November 1960 and received the indication that the President
wished the project expedited."

At that time: 


"the new concept was one consisting of an amphibious landing on the Cuban coast of 600-750 men equipped with weapons of extraordinary heavy firepower. The landing would be preceded by preliminary air strikes launched from Nicaragua..."

This brief outline of the newly developed Cuban invasion plan proves beyond doubt that it originated during the Eisenhower administration, and that the plan emphasized that the landing had to be preceded by "Preliminary air strikes launched from Nicaragua..." This was its fundamental tactical parameter.

It was the cancellation, on the eve of the landing, of the crucial air strike that caused the failure of the Bay of Pigs operation. This fact was confirmed by the Group Report that was signed by Gen. Maxwell Taylor...more on that later.

The Cuban Study Group Report continues with its rather obscure narrative of these developments prior to the inauguration of President Kennedy with the following:


"On January 11th, Ambassador Willauer representing State and

Mr. Barnes of CIA first discussed with representatives of
the Joint Staff the over-all problem of effecting the
overthrow of Castro. As a result, a working committee
including representation of CIA, State, Defense and the JCS
was formed to coordinate future actions..."

That's Jan 11, 1961, and still during the Eisenhower term. As the date confirms, these representatives were still Eisenhower people.

The Report then clarifies these notes:


"On January 22nd, [ the day after the Kennedy inauguration ]

several members of the new administration including Mr. Rusk,
Mr. McNamara, Mr. Bowles, and Mr. Robert Kennedy were
introduced to the Cuba protect at a briefing at the State Department.
General Lemnitzer and Mr. Dulles were also present... ."


NOTE: 

It is imperative to keep in mind that two of the men present at that Jan 22, 1961 meeting, Robert Kennedy and Allen Dulles, were also members of the Cuban Study Group that began its meetings only three months later. This serves to emphasize that this Cuban Study Group Report to the President of 13 June 61 had to be the most accurate account of the entire "Bay of Pigs" historical record. 

END NOTE



" John F. Kennedy received his first briefing on the

developing plan as President on January 28 at a meeting
which included the Vice President [Johnson], Secretary of
State [Rusk], Secretary of Defense [McNamara], the Director
of Central Intelligence [Dulles], the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff [Lemintzer], Ass't Sec. Mann, Ass't Sec. Nitze,
Mr. Tracy Barnes, and Mr. McGeorge Bundy."


The fact that McGeorge Bundy was present at this first meeting is significant because it was Bundy who made the telephone call to Gen Cabel, Deputy Director of Central Intelligence at 9:30 P.M. the evening before the landing of the Brigade in Cuba, that ordered cancellation of the crucial air strike from Nicaragua, as confirmed by the Cuban Study Group's unanimous report. That Report cites that cancellation as 


"probably the most serious" of its finding of "Immediate Causes of Failure of the Operation Zapata."

At this point the Taylor Report itself appears to have over- looked this important meeting of January 28, 1968 when it stated:



"The cancellation seems to have resulted partly from the

failure to make the air strike plan entirely clear in
advance to the President and the Secretary of State..."

Earlier this same Report had made it clear that Kennedy had been briefed as early as November 18, 1960 by Dulles and Bissell, the CIA official in charge of the operation and again on January 2 1961; and that both Allen Dulles and Robert Kennedy had attended that same Jan 28, 1961 meeting with the President. What the Study Group may not have realized was that Kennedy also had kept himself informed of the anti-Castro plans from as far back as March 1960 by many personal meetings with the Cuban leaders, as noted above. He knew what was going on. He knew very well how vital that final air strike was to the success, or failure of the Brigade's landing. He certainly did not cancel that attack that he had directed himself on April 16th; and it would have been ridiculous for the Cuban Study Group to attempt to weave such an idea into its Report...not with Bobby Kennedy sitting right there with them.

The Taylor Report followed with:


"The [Joint] Chiefs [of Staff] approved and forwarded to the

Secretary of Defense on 3 Feb 1961, JCSM-57-61, Military
Evaluation of the CIA Paramilitary Plan-Cuba."


At that time they considered that "timely execution of this plan has a fair chance of success..."

Again we find one of those most important bits of historical information buried in the pages of this Report. Following a detailed study made by a team of three officers from the Joint Staff during 24-27 Feb 1961 with visits to Retalhuleu, Guatemala and Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua:


"The JCS evaluation pointed out that if surprise were not achieved, the attack against Cuba would fail, adding that one Castro aircraft [ T-33 jet ] armed with 50 caliber machine guns could sink all or most of the invasion fleet.



"The JCS in approving this report on 10 March 1961 commented to the Secretary of Defense that...the plan could be expected to achieve initial success. Ultimate success will depend on the extent to which the initial assault serves as a catalyst for further action on the part of anti-Castro elements throughout Cuba."

At this point we again find that the NSC Directive ~5412 , March 1954, on "Covert Operations" remained an over-riding factor in this plan. The Taylor Report continues by emphasizing that point:

"From its inception the plan had been developed under the ground rule that it must retain a covert character, that is, it should include no action which, if revealed, could not be plausibly denied by the United States and should look to the world as an operation exclusively conducted by Cubans. This ground rule meant, among other things, that no U.S. military forces or individuals could take part in combat operations."

These statements from the JCS report and the later Taylor Report are high-lighted historically by the charge that President Kennedy refused to provide "Air Cover" for the Brigade once it hit the beach. This charge has been contrived since the earliest days following the landings. Anyone, at all familiar with the policy promulgated during the Eisenhower administration since March 1954, must realize that the entire framework of the anti- Castro planning was necessarily shaped by that highest level doctrine. There was no way that the Kennedy administration could lawfully ignore that earlier, and still active, doctrine by providing for the use of U.S. Navy "air cover" in any case.

For his part Kennedy had authorized and directed the first, exile Cuban, air strike of Saturday, April 15, 1961. That strike had succeeded in destroying all but the last, and most-potent three of Castro's combat-capable air force. He knew beforehand:



"One Castro jet armed with 50 caliber machine guns could sink all, or most the invasion fleet." (See above)


That is why President Kennedy again directed (April 16th) another, exile Cuban, air strike to be made at dawn, just before the landing on April 17th, to eliminate those last three jets on the ground. They had been located by U-2 reconnaissance after the April 15th strike that had destroyed the other combat-capable aircraft in Castro's small air force.

It had become that simple, and that imperative. Those remaining aircraft had to be destroyed to assure the success of the operation. President Kennedy well knew all of this antecedent tactical planning. He also knew that he could not order active duty U.S. armed forces into the fray. He knew that the dawn air strike from Nicaragua by four specially modified Cuban B-26's could easily destroy the last of Castro's air force while it sat on the ground. After all he knew that this is precisely what the combined French and British Air Forces had done to Nasser's superior air force at the time of the Israeli invasion of the Negev in 1956.

From Feb 1961 the plan of the invasion and the logistics preparation for it went forward even to the extent that CIA's top covert operator, Edward G. Lansdale had obtained the support of skilled Philippine Special Forces officers, chief among them was the President's military aide Col. Napoleon Valeriano, to aid the Cuban exiles. Meanwhile the military "Focal Point" offices were doing all they could to get the supplies and transport ready at the port in North Carolina.

On March 15th the Joint Chiefs of Staff reviewed and approved the CIA's latest tactical plan and reported to the Secretary of Defense that the ZAPATA concept "was considered the most feasible" of those considered and "did not oppose the plan." They were unable to review that plan in its final form because it had not been submitted to them until April 15th when the Brigade was already at sea.

On that earlier day, March 15th, the President was briefed and as a result, "The President again with-held approval of the plan and directed certain modifications be considered." Mr Bissell returned the next day with minor modifications and "The President authorized them to proceed with the plan, but still without giving it his formal approval."

During this period a memo had been given to J. C. King, Chief, CIA Western Hemisphere operations stating:


"The Cuban air force and naval vessels capable of opposing

our landing must be knocked out or neutralized before our
amphibious shipping makes its final run onto the beach. If
this is not done we will be courting disaster."

Although the name of the author of this most important tactical fact has been removed from the record, I am quite certain that I know who it was. There were some experienced Marines working with the CIA and the Cuban exiles. This admonition sounds like the voice of experience.

As D-Day approached, even without approval of the President, the Report states,



"A compromise was reached with regard to the air plan.

Early in April, it was decided to stage limited air strikes
on D-2...to give the impression of being the action of Cuban
pilots defecting from the Cuban Air Force...The Joint Chiefs
of Staff did not favor these D-2 air strikes because of
their indecisive nature and the danger of alerting
prematurely the Castro force."


The Taylor Report adds another most important item:


"Mr. Bissell of CIA also later stated at a meeting of April

6 that CIA would prefer to conduct an all-out air strike on
the morning D-Day rather than perform the D-2 defection
strikes followed by limited strikes on D-Day...

In summary the Taylor Report states:


"...the realization is that main reliance for the

destruction of the Castro Air Force must be placed on the D-Day strikes."

It must be noted that throughout this growing discussion of how and when to eliminate the Castro combat-capable Air Force there is not a single mention, by any of the many parties involved, of the utilization of U.S. Armed Forces aircraft for the air strikes or for air cover. This was not, and could not be a part of the plan as a result of seasoned Government policy.

Throughout this period of discussion the D-Day date slipped back from April 5th to April 17th, the date of the landing.

On April 12th an important conference took place with the President, the Secretary of State, the JCS and other NSC officials during which Mr. Bissell presented a paper outlining the latest changes in the ZAPATA Operation including the air strikes of D-2 and D-Day.

Even as late, in time, as this meeting was the President did not give final approval to the plan at this meeting, April 12th. Meanwhile, the ships of the invading force were at sea and approaching Cuba.

The D-2 strikes did take place with effective results. However, U-2 reconnaissance revealed that the three T-33 jets had been away from Havana and avoided damage. They were located at another airfield in effective range of the Cuban-exile B-26 aircraft at Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua.

The Report states:


"At about mid-day on D-l, April 16th, the President formally

approved the landing plan..."

The "Landing Plan," as you will recall from the above data, was premised upon the pre-dawn air strike by Cuban-exile B-26's from Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua. It is at this point that the Taylor Report reveals its inadquacies as a result of the fact that key U.S. military tactical air and over-the-beach amphibious experts were not questioned.

I had assigned an Air Commando tactical expert to the camp at Retalhuleu to train the Cuban B-26 pilots. The CIA had placed its finest Air Operations officer at Puerto Cabezas. The Marine Corps had assigned an experienced Amphibious Landing Colonel to head the Brigade training; and the Army and Navy officers were as highly qualified.

Among these men there was absolutely no question or doubt about the extreme significance of this D-Day air strike to destroy the three T-birds on the ground. With no combat aircraft Castro would have been helpless against the Brigade's tactical ground attack aircraft and its potential fire-power.

The Cuban Study Group's Report makes it appear that there was some doubt and some lack of understanding about this operation. At the combat level where it really mattered there was absolutely no misunderstanding.

Without introductory comment, the Report states starkly:


"At about 9:30 P.M. on 16 April, Mr. McGeorge Bundy, Special
Assistant to the President, telephoned General C. P. Cabell
of CIA to inform him that the dawn air strikes the following
morning should not be launched until they could be conducted
from a strip within the beachhead."

 NOTE: 

That Bay of Pigs site had been selected, because--among other advantages--
there was a suitable air-strip on the beach. The Brigade's
B-26's would operate from there once it had been secured.
That was the plan; but it was predicated upon the
destruction of Castro's jet aircraft first.

Gen Cabell and Mr Bissell tried to persuade Secretary Rusk to permit the dawn D-Day strikes.


"The Secretary indicated that there were policy

considerations against air strikes before the beachhead
airfield was in the hands of the landing force..."

The Secretary added, with reference to the air strikes that
President Kennedy had ordered, 


"They were not vital."

The Report continues:


"The order cancelling the D-Day strikes was dispatched to

the departure field in Nicaragua, arriving when the pilots
were in their cockpits ready for take-off."

That CIA Air Operations chief in Nicaragua is an old friend of mine. After he had received that order from General Cabell, he called me at my home, at about 2 A.M. on the morning of April 17th and told me about that catastropic order. I could hear the B-26 engines roaring nearby. He urged me to call the CIA command section and convince them to cancel it. We all knew that the entire operation depended upon that air strike. I called them; but as we all know now, that order was never reversed, and as the Cuban Study Group reported:



"The cancellation of the strikes planned at dawn on D-Day...was probably the most serious of the causes of failure of the operation as it eliminated the last favorable opportunity to destroy the Castro Air Force on the ground."


Sometime later, I met my CIA friend who had called me that night. He had been absolutely shattered by that reversal. He told me, 


"If I had gotten on my bicycle, and left the operations tent after that call those fired-up Cubans would have revolted and taken off. If they had left they would have destroyed those jets. The Brigade's landing would have succeeded."

That is how close the Bay of Pigs operation came to victory. Even failing that, many of us believe that General Cabell and Richard Bissell ought to have called off the landing once they had received that call from McGeorge Bundy. They certainly knew its significance. At least that would have prevented the horrible losses that followed.





What Oliver Stone thinks was said during the 18 1/2 minute gap.



I'm very fond of Hopkins' "...I had nothing to do with that...!" ,moment...


But...the story can not end here. Why did Nixon frequently refer to that "Bay of Pigs" thing? Why has the Kennedy role been so terribly contrived and dishonestly fabricated? Why has the Air Cover issue been ballooned all out of shape? To put it in more simple terms, 

"Why did McGeorge Bundy make that telephone call?"

As a result of the Cuban Study Group Report to the President, a report that contained Bobby Kennedy's vote for unanimity as well as Allen Dulles', it is clear that President Kennedy had not ordered Bundy to make that call. Does anyone believe that Bobby would have sat there silently and let Bundy blame that call on the President, if he heard Bundy give that testimony? Or, if he did and returned to the White House with that news, his brother would have known what Bundy said that evening and that issue would have been settled before it got on paper...or did the Kennedys have other ideas?

In a most unusual Op-Ed page item in the New York TIMES of October 23, 1979 McGeorge Bundy wrote a somewhat garbled column under the title "The Brigade's My Fault." 

It was a somewhat elaborate and confusing confession. At least it's an answer. Because of the fact that I was so close to the anti-Castro planning from December 1958 to January 1964, I find great significance in the testimony, before the Cuban Study Group, of a man whom most historians have failed to notice at all, with reference to the Bay of Pigs and the following Study Group Report.

For my money, the most important man to have been interrogated by the Cuban Study Group was none other than General Eisenhower's Chief of Staff during the European Campaign in WW II, the Ambassador to Moscow immediately following the end of that war, and President Truman's Director of Central Intelligence from 7 October 1950 to 9 February 1953. This was General Walter Bedell Smlth...a man whose role in this pivotal hearing was as significant as that of General Taylor, if not more so. He and General Taylor were the weathervanes pointing the course john F. Kennedy had decided to travel

His appearance before the Group meant more in the long run than any, and all of the others. General Smith was there to signal President Kennedy's plan for the future, "Don't get mad: Get even." The Kennedys were going to fight back, not just for the Bay of Pigs failure; but for the many other failures and errors of the CIA.

This is no place to continue the Study Group's Report in detail; but it does contain some little-known and priceless clues to the history of the past quarter-century, General W.B. Smith set the tone when he testified:

a) "A democracy cannot wage war."

b) "When you are at war, Cold War if you like, you must have an amoral agency which can operate secretly and which does not have to give press conferences."

And, from the man who had been Director of Central Intelligence for more than two years,

c) "Covert operations can be done up to a certain size."

d) Then he began to lift the corner of the tent:
"The covert work might have to be put under another roof)

The following question was, "Do you think you should take covert operations from CIA?" and his answer was direct and unmistakable,

e) "It's time we take the bucket of slop and put another cover over it."

That was the General's testimony, and the Study Group might have ended its ordeal right there; but before General Taylor was finished with that Letter to the President he added certain most important section "Recommendations." They led to the formulation and publication of three of the most powerful policy papers signed by President Kennedy: the basic source of Kennedy's plan to "Break the CIA into 1,000 pieces."

They are:


1) National Security Action Memorandum No. 55, June 28,

1961.

In part it reads:



"I wish to inform the Joint Chiefs of Staff as follows with regard to my views of their relations to me in Cold War Operations:

a) I regard the Joint Chiefs of Staff as my principal military advisor responsible for initiating advice to me and for responding to requests for advice. I expect their advice to come to me direct and unfiltered.

b) The Joint Chiefs of Staff have a responsibility for the defense of the nation in the Cold War similar to that which they have in conventional hostilities. etc.

c) I expect the Joint Chiefs of Staff to present the military viewpoint in governmental councils in such a way as to assure that the military factors are closely understood before decisions are reached. etc.

d) While I look to the Chiefs to present the military factor without reserve or hesitation, I regard them to be more than military men and expect their help in fitting military requirements into the over-all context of any situation, recognizing that the most difficult problem in Government is to combine all assets in a unified, effective pattern.

John F. Kennedy"

The second policy directive, NSAM #56, June 28, 1961 requested an "Evaluation of Paramilitary Requirements." The third was NSAM #57, June 28, 1961. It defined the "Responsibility for Paramilitary Operations."

With the formal publication of these unquestionably definitive papers it became clear that Kennedy had set the course as his paramount objective following his re-election in 1964. Before the year was out he had accepted the resignations from the CIA of its long-time Director Allen W. Dulles, it's long-time Deputy Director Charles P. Cabel and it's Deputy Director, Plans and formerly the man principally responsible for the "Bay of Pigs" operation, Richard Bissell.

By July 1961, John F. Kennedy was not getting mad, rather he was getting even; and since that date things in Washington, in this country and throughout the world have never been the same; because he was not permitted to finish his self-assigned task.