bureaucracybusters

Posts Tagged ‘BAY OF PIGS’

THE IDEAL REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR 2016

In Humor, Social commentary on November 23, 2012 at 12:10 am

Right-wingers are still reeling from the election-night defeat of Mitt Romney, their nominee for Plutocrat-in-Chief.

As President John F. Kennedy put it, after his humiliation at the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba: “Victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan.”

Thus, many high-ranking Republicans are now looking for excuses for the stunning setback they suffered.

Among those excuses:

  • The voters were stupid.
  • Romney wasn’t conservative enough.
  • Romney wasn’t ruthless enough.
  • President Barack Obama “suppressed the vote”–through negative campaigning.
  • Hurricane Sandy took people’s attention away from Romney’s message.
  • New Jersey Governor Chris Christie actually praised Obama for the help FEMA gave to the storm’s victims.
  • The fact-checkers were out to get Romney.
  • The news media were out to get Romney.

It’s all highly reminiscent of another blame-game that occurred in post-World War 1 Germany: “We didn’t lose the war.  We were stabbed in the back by criminals, Communists and Jews.”

At least, that was Adolf Hitler’s take on the war.

And it made sense–if you were a German who didn’t want to blame Germany for starting a war it could not hope to win, only to be  defeated by the armies of France, Britain and the United States.

Similarly, the far-Right leadership of the Republican Party refuses to accept any blame for the loss.

It couldn’t be that

  • large numbers of women were outraged by the party’s attacks on abortion and even birth control;
  • large numbers of blacks were outraged by the party’s venomous, often racist attacks on Obama;
  • large numbers of Hispanics were outraged by the party’s attacks on them as all illegal aliens who must be deported;
  • large numbers of voters generally were outraged by the party’s blatant efforts to suppress voting rights.

Or could it?

Since Republican leaders seem unwilling to learn from their mistakes, only one course lies open to them: Repeat those mistakes.

And that means finding another “severely conservative” candidate to run for President.

But who might be “conservative” enough to gain the support of the right-wingers controlling the Republican party?

Perhaps the science of cloning can provide the answer.

By 2016, scientists may have perfected cloning–and thus allow Republicans to create their ideal Presidential candidate.

Imagine how this could affect the outcome of the 2016 election:

The top officials of the Republican Party decide to create the perfect, unbeatable Presidential candidate.

They direct scientists from the National Institute of Health to resurrect–via DNA samples–several past, hugely popular Republican leaders.

The first of these, of course, is Abraham Lincoln: Savior of the Union and destroyer of slavery.

The scientists then introduce him to a sample of Republican voters to gauge his current popularity.

The test audience erupts–but not the way party officials expect.

“Race-mixer!”

“He’s the reason we have all these damn civil rights laws.”

“He destroyed states’ rights!”

To head off a riot, the scientists rush the startled Lincoln-clone off the stage.

Then they introduce their next resurrected candidate: Theodore Roosevelt: warrior, Nobel Prize winner and trust-busting conservationist.

Again, the test-audience goes wild:

“Tree-hugger! Tree-hugger!”

“He’s the guy who broke up the big corporations–lousy Commie!”

Once again, there is a near-riot as startled Republican officials hustle Roosevelt out of the building.

Finally, they bring out their third choice for victory: A cloned Ronald Reagan.

“Not him! He legalized abortion in California when he was Governor!”

“Yeah, and his first wife, Jane Wyman, divorced him. We can’t have a divorced guy in the White House!”

Desperate, Republican leaders go into a huddle.

“What are we going to do?” asks one. ”Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan were our most popular Presidents.”

“Yeah, but that was in the PAST,” says another. “We need a candidate who speaks to our base TODAY.”

“Hey, I’ve got an idea, but it’s a bit radical. The guy I have in mind wasn’t actually born in the United States.”

“So what?”

“That would violate the Constitution.”

“You know what our friends in the oil industry say: Why spoil the beauty of the thing with legality?”

So the Republicans once again call in the scientists and tell them to go back to work one last time.

When the last resurrected candidate is presented to the test-audience, the crowd rises as one, shouting: “That’s him! That’s him!”

“The one we’ve been waiting for!”

“The one who REALLY speaks for us!”

“He’s totally anti-abortion and he REALLY hates uppity women!”

“Yeah–he hates Commies, gays and non-whites, and he REALLY believes in a STRONG military!”

“All right, all right, I’ll do it,” says the clone-candidate. ”But the last time I tried to lead people to greatness, they proved unworthy of me.

“So I’ll do it again–but only under VON condition!”

“Yes, yes!” screams the test-audience. “Anything you want! What is it?”

“Ziss time….”

….no more Mister Nice Guy!”

THE POWER OF EGO

In History, Politics, Social commentary on October 31, 2012 at 12:09 am

It’s commonplace to read about the role sex plays in motivating behavior.  But the power of ego to determine history is often ignored.

Consider the role that ego played in igniting the American Civil War (1861 – 1865).

According to The Destructive War, by Charles Royster, it wasn’t the cause of “states’ rights” that led 13 Southern states to withdraw from the Union in 1960-61.

It was their demand for “respect,” which, in reality, translates into “e-g-o.”

“The respect Southerners demanded did not consist simply of the states’ sovereignty or of the equal rights of Northern and Southern citizens, including slaveholders’ right to take their chattels into Northern territory.

“It entailed, too, respect for their assertion of the moral superiority of slaveholding society over free society,” writes Royster.

It was not enough for Southerners to claim equal standing with Northerners; Northerners must acknowledge it.

But this was something that the North was less and less willing to do.  Finally, its citizens dared to elect Abraham Lincoln in 1860.

Lincoln and his new Republican party damned slavery–and slaveholders–as morally evil, obsolete and ultimately doomed.

And they were determined to prevent slavery from spreading any further throughout the country.

Southerners found all of this intolerable.

The British author, Anthony Trollope, explained to his readers:

“It is no light thing to be told daily, by our fellow citizens…that you are guilty of the one damning sin that cannot be forgiven.

“All this [Southerners] could partly moderate, partly rebuke and partly bear as long as political power remained in their hands.

“But they have gradually felt that this was going, and were prepared to cut the rope and run as soon as it was gone.”

Only 10% of Southerners owned slaves.  The other 90% of the population “had  dog in this fight,” as Southerners liked to say.

Yet they so admired and aspired to be like their “gentleman betters” that they threw in their lot with them.

There were some Southerners who could see what was coming–and vainly warned their fellow citizens.

One of these was Sam Houston, the man who had won Texas independence at the 1836 battle of San Jacinto and later served as that state’s governor.

Sam Houston

On April 19, addressing a crowd in Galveston, he said:

“Let me tell you what is coming. After the sacrifice of countless millions of treasure and hundreds of thousands of lives, you may win Southern independence if God be not against you.

“But I doubt it.

“I tell you that, while I believe with you in the doctrine of states’ rights, the North is determined to preserve this Union. They are not a fiery, impulsive people as you are, for they live in colder climates.

“But when they begin to move in a given direction, they move with the steady momentum and perseverance of a mighty avalanche; and what I fear is, they will overwhelm the South.”

Four years later, on April 9, 1865, Houston’s warning became history.

Confederate General Robert E. Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia to Union General Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse.

Huge sections of the South had been laid waste by Union troops and more than 258,000 Southerners had been killed.

The South had paid an expensive price for its fixation on ego.

Even more proved at risk a century later, when President John F. Kennedy faced off with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev.

In April, Kennedy had been humiliated at the Bay of Pigs when a CIA-sponsored invasion failed to overthrow the Cuba’s Fidel Castro.

So he was already on the defensive when he and Khrushchev met in Vienna.

Khrushchev pressed his advantage, threatening Kennedy with nuclear war unless the Americans abandoned their protection of West Berlin.

That August, faced with the embarrassment of East Berliners fleeing by the thousands into West Germany, the Soviet leader backed off from his threat.

In its place, he erected the infamous Berlin Wall, sealing off East and West Berlin.

Kennedy’s reaction: “That son of a bitch won’t pay any attention to words. He has to see you move.”

Then, most ominously: “If Khrushchev wants to rub my nose in the dirt, it’s all over.”

In short: Kennedy was prepared to incinerate the planet if he felt his almighty ego was about to get smacked.

Nuclear missile in silo

What has proved true for states and nations proves equally true for those leading every other type of institution.

Although most people like to believe they are guided by rationality and morality, all-too-often, what truly decides the course of events is their ego.

For pre-Civil War Southerners, it meant demanding that “Yankees” show respect for slave-owning society.  Otherwise, they would leave the Union.

For Kennedy, it meant playing a game of “chicken,” backed up with nuclear missiles, to show Khrushchev who Numero Uno really was.

It is well to keep these lessons from history in mind when making our own major decisions.

MICHAEL CORLEONE IS SMILING – PART THREE (OF FOUR)

In History, Politics on January 30, 2012 at 10:17 am

Following the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion, President John F. Kennedy and his brother, Robert–then Attorney General–created  their own covert operation to depose Fidel Castro.

Known as the Special Group, and overseen by Robert Kennedy, it launched a secret war against the Castro regime, code-named Operation Mongoose.

“We were hysterical about Castro at about the time of the Bay of Pigs and thereafter,” Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara later testified before Congress about these efforts.  “And there was pressure from JFK and RFK to do something about Castro.”

Nor was everyone in the CIA enthusiastic about the “get Castro” effort.

“Everyone at CIA was surprised at Kennedy’s obsession with Fidel,” recalled Sam Halpern, who was assigned to the Cuba Project.  “They thought it was a waste of time.  We all knew [Fidel] couldn’t hurt us.  Most of us at CIA initially liked Kennedy, but why go after this little guy?

“One thing is for sure: Kennedy wasn’t doing it out of national security concerns.  It was a personal thing.  The Kennedy family felt personally burnt by the Bay of Pigs and sought revenge.”

It was all-out war.  Among the tactics used:

  • Hiring Cuban gangsters to murder Cuban police officials and Soviet technicians.
  • Sabotaging mines.
  • Paying up to $100,000 per “hit” for the murder or kidnapping of Cuban officials.
  • Using biological and chemical warfare against the Cuban sugar industry.

“Bobby (Kennedy) wanted boom and bang all over the island,” recalled Halpern. “It was stupid.  The pressure from the White House was very great.”

Among that “boom and bang” were a series of assassination plots against Castro, in which the Mafia was to be a key player.

Chicago Mobster Johnny Rosselli proposed a simple plan: through its underworld connections in Cuba, the Mafia would recruit a Cuban in Castro’s entourage, such as a waiter or bodyguard, who would poison him.

The CIA’s Technical Services division produced a botulinus toxin which was then injected into Castro’s favorite brand of cigars. The CIA also produced simpler botulinus toxin pills that could be dissolved in his food or drink.

But the deputized Mafia contacts failed to deliver any of the poisons to Castro.

As Rosselli explained to the CIA, the first poisoner had been discharged from Castro’s employ before he could kill him, while a back-up agent got “cold feet.”

Other proposals or attempts included:

  • Planting colorful seashells rigged to explode at a site where Castro liked to go skindiving.
  • Trying to arrange for his being presented with a wetsuit impregnated with noxious bacteria and mould spores, or with lethal chemical agents.
  • Attempting to infect Castro’s scuba regulator with tuberculous bacilli.
  • Trying to douse his handkerchiefs, tea and coffee with other lethal bacteria.

Americans would rightly label such methods as ”terrorist” if another power used them against the United States today.  And the Cuban government saw the situation exactly the same way.

So Castro appealed to Nikita Khrushchev, leader of the Soviet Union, for assistance.

Khrushchev was quick to comply:  “We must not allow the communist infant to be strangled in its crib,” he told members of his inncer circle.

By October, 1962, the Soviet Union had sent more than 40,000 soldiers, 1,300 field pieces, 700 anti-airctaft guns, 350 tanks and 150 jets to Cuba to deter another invasion.

Khrushchev also began supplying Castro with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles–whose discovery, on October 15, 1962, ignited the single most dangerous confrontation of the Cold War.

Suddenly, the two most powerful nuclear countries–the United States and the Soviet Union–found themselves on the brink of nuclear war.

At the time, Kennedy officials claimed they couldn’t understand why Khrushchev had placed nuclear missiles in Cuba.  “Maybe Khrushchev’s gone mad” was a typical musing.

None of these officials admitted that JFK had been waging a no-holds-barred campaign to overthrow the Cuban government and assassinate its leader.

The crisis ended when, after 13 harrowing days, Khrushchev agreed to remove the missiles from Cuba.  Behind its resolution lay a  promise by the Kennedy administration to not invade Cuba.

But President Kennedy was not finished with Castro.  While continuing the campaign of sabotage throughout Cuba, the Kennedys were preparing something far bigger: A fullscale American invasion of the island.

On October 4, 1963, the Joint Chiefs of Staff submitted its latest version of the invasion plan, known as OPLAN 380-63.  Its timetable went:

  • January, 1964:  Infiltration into Cuba by Cuban exiles.
  • July 15, 1964:  U.S. conventional forces join the fray.
  • August 3, 1964:  All-out U.S. air strikes on Cuba.
  • October 1, 1964:  Full-scale invasion to install “a government friendly to the U.S.”

During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Robert Kennedy–referring to the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor–had resisted demands for a “sneak attack” on Cuba by saying: “I don’t want my brother to be the Tojo of the 1960s.”

Now the Kennedys planned such an attack on Cuba just one month before the November, 1964 Presidential election.

But then fate–in the otherwise unimpressive form of Lee Harvey Oswald–suddenly intervened.

MICHAEL CORLEONE IS SMILING – PART TWO (OF FOUR)

In History, Politics on January 27, 2012 at 12:50 pm

On January 23, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney played to the huge–and influential–Cuban community in Florida, especially in Miami.

All three GOP Presidential candidates had carefully avoided military service.  But all three “chickenhawks” now wanted to show how eagerly they could send others into harm’s way.

Former House Speaker Gingrich spoke for all three when he said: “I would suggest to you the policy of the United States should be aggressively to overthrow the regime and to do everything we can to support those Cubans who want freedom.”

Of course, this “chickenhawk” bravado ignored a great many ugly historical truths.  Among these:

  • In 1959, Fidel Castro swept triumphantly into Havana after a two-year guerrilla campaign against Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista.
  • Almost immediately, hundreds of thousands of Cubans began fleeing to America.  The first emigres were more than 215,000 Batista followers.
  • The exodus escalated, peaking at approximately 78,000 in 1962.
  • In October, 1962, Castro stopped regularly scheduled travel between the two countries, and asylum seekers began sailing from Cuba to Florida.
  • Between 1962 and 1979, hundreds of thousands of Cubans entered the United States under the Attorney General’s parole authority.
  • The overwhelming majority of Cubans who immigrated into the United States settled in Florida, whose political, economic, and cultural life they transformed.
  • By 2008, more than 1.24 million Cuban Americans were living in the United States, mostly in South Florida, where the population of Miami was about one-third Cuban.
  • Many of these Cubans viewed themselves as political exiles, rather than immigrants, hoping to eventually return to Cuba after its communist regime fell from power.
  • The large number of Cubans in South Florida, particularly in Miami’s “Little Havana,” allowed them to preserve their culture and customs to a degree rare for immigrant groups.
  • With so many discontented immigrants concentrated in Florida, they became a potential force for politicians to court.
  • And the issue guaranteed to sway their votes was unrelenting hostility to Castro.  Unsurprisingly, most of their votes went to right-wing Republicans.

John F. Kennedy was the first President to face this dilemma.

Click to show "John Kennedy" result 14

During the closing months of the administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the CIA had begun training Cuban exiles for an invasion of their former homeland.

The goal: To do what Castro had done–seek refuge in the mountains and launch a successful anti-Castro revolution.

But word of the coming invasion quickly leaked: The exiles were terrible secret-keepers.  (A joke at the CIA went: “A Cuban thinks a secret is something you tell to only 300 people.”)

Kennedy insisted the invasion must appear to be an entirely Cuban enterprise.  He refused to commit U.S. Marines and Air Force bombers.

The invasion force was quickly overwhelmed at the Bay of Pigs, with hundreds of its men taken prisoner.

Kennedy publicly took the blame for its failure: “Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan.”  But privately he seethed, and ordered the CIA to redouble its efforts to remove Castro at all costs.

To make certain his order was carried out, he appointed his brother, Robert–then Attorney General–to oversee the CIA’s “Castro removal” program.

It’s here that America’s obsession with Cuba entered its darkest and most disgraceful period.

The CIA and the Mafia entered into an unholy alliance to assassinate Castro–each for its own benefit:

The CIA wanted to please Kennedy.  The Mafia wanted to regain its casino and brothel holdings that had made Cuba the playground of the rich in pre-Castro times.

The CIA supplied poisons and explosives to various members of the Mafia.  It was then up to the mobsters to assassinate Castro.

The available sources differ widely on what actually happened.  Some believe that the Mob made a genuine effort to “whack” Fidel.

Others are convinced the mobsters simply ran a scam on the government.  They would pretend to carry out their “patriotic duty” while in fact making no effort at all to penetrate Castro’s security.

The mobsters hoped to use their pose as patriots to win immunity from future prosecution.

The CIA asked Johnny Roselli, a mobster linked to the Chicago syndicate, to go to Florida in 1961 and 1962 to organize assassination teams of Cuban exiles.

They were to infiltrate their homeland and assassinate Castro.

Rosselli called upon two other crime figures: Chicago Mafia boss Sam Giancana  and the Costra Nostra chieftain for Cuba, Santos Trafficante, to help him.

Giancana, using the name “Sam Gold” in his dealings with the CIA, was being hounded by the FBI on directr orders of Attorney General Kennedy.

The mobsters were authorized to offer $150,000 to anyone who would kill Castro and were promised any support the Agency could yield.

Giancana was to locate someone who was close enough to Castro to be able to drop pills into his food.

Trafficante would serve as courier to Cuba, helping to make arrangements for the murder on the island.

Rosselli was to be the main link between all of the participants in the plot.

MICHAEL CORLEONE IS SMILING – PART ONE (OF FOUR)

In History, Politics on January 25, 2012 at 9:29 pm

For Presidential candidate Ron Paul, the Cold War is over–and the United States should recognize it.

But for his three competitors in the GOP Presidential debate in Tampa, Florida, on January 23, it’s still raging.

Moderator Brian Williams:  “….There was a lot of talk in the last presidential campaign about that 3:00 a.m. phone call. Let’s say ….it is to say that Fidel Castro has died. And there are credible people in the Pentagon who predict upwards of half a million Cubans may take that as a cue to come to the United States. What do you do?”

Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum played to the huge–and politically influential–Cuban community in Florida, and especially Miami.

All three pledged to continue the dcades-old policy of refusing to trade with Cuba or open diplomatic relations while it held to a nominally Communist government.

And all three are draft-dodging “chickenhawks” eager to prove how “tough” they are at the risk of other men’s lives.

Former Speaker of the House Gingrich promised: “A Gingrich presidency will not tolerate four more years of this dictatorship.”

Former Massachusetts Governor Romney declared that he would ”work very aggressively with the new leadership in Cuba to try and move them towards a more open degree than they have had in the past.”

And former U.S. Senator Santorum insisted “the sanctions have to stay in place, because we need to have a very solid offer to come forward and help the Cuban people.”

Finally, it was the turn of Texas Congressman Ron Paul to respond:

“No, I would do pretty much the opposite. I don’t like the isolationism of not talking to people. I was drafted in 1962 at the height of the Cold War when the missiles were in Cuba. And the Cold War’s over.

“And I think we propped up Castro for 40-some years because we put on these sanctions, and this–only used us as a scapegoat. He could always say, anything wrong, it’s the United States’ fault.

“But I think it’s time…to quit this isolation business of not talking to people. We talked to the Soviets. We talk to the Chinese. And we opened up trade, and we’re not killing each other now.

“We fought with the Vietnamese for a long time. We finally gave up, started talking to them, now we trade with them. I don’t know why…the Cuban people should be so intimidating.

“I don’t know where you get this assumption that all of a sudden all the Cubans would come up here. I would probably think they were going to celebrate and they’re going to have a lot more freedom if we would only open up our doors and say, we want to talk to you, and trade with you, and come visit….

“I think we’re living in the dark ages when we can’t even talk to the Cuban people. I think it’s not 1962 anymore.  And we don’t have to use force and intimidation and overthrow of a–in governments. I just don’t think that’s going to work.”

* * * * *

Paul’s answer reveals–and leaves out–a great deal.

It reveals an awareness that:

  • We’ve learned to live, talk and trade with our once-sworn enemies in China and Russia.
  • We’ve learned to live, talk and trade with our former battlefield enemies in Vietnam.
  • We can do the same with the Cubans–who are far weaker than the Russians and Chinese.
  • To avoid war, a great power like the United States must maintain diplomatic relations with its enemies.
  • Fidel Castro has been able to blame United States sanctions for the continuing poverty of his island–instead of a failed  economic system: communism.

But Paul’s answer does not reveal:

  • Before Castro’s takeover in 1959, Cuba had been a playground for wealthy American businessmen–and Mafiosi.
  • Castro quickly nationalized Cuban businesses–especially the sugar-producing ones.
  • Gangsters who had been heavily involved in running casinos were arrested, imprisoned or unofficially deported to the United States.
  • The Mob–eager to reclaim its casino investments–agreed to help the CIA assassinate Castro.
  • Among the conspirators were such powerful mobsters as Santos Trafficante, Carlos Marcello, Johnny Roselli and Sam Giancana.
  • On April 17, 1961, the U.S. Navy landed 1,700 Cuban exiles onshore at the Cuban Bay of Pigs.
  • Long forewarned of the coming invasion, Castro sent in his forces to decimate the invaders.
  • President John F. Kennedy–wanting the attack to seem the work of Cuban exiles–refused to commit U.S. Marines or Air Force bombers to the invasion.
  • Kennedy took responsibility for the failure.  But he blamed Castro for not allowing himself to be overthrown.
  • The CIA–and the Mafia–continued to plot the death of Castro and the overthrow of his regime.
  • In the end, it was not Fidel Castro who died at the hands of an assassin, but John F. Kennedy.

We will more fully explore the embarrassing results of this poisonous mixture in the next posting.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 49 other followers

%d bloggers like this: