A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

Cuban jet shoots down American airliner

Blackcat | 21.11.2001 20:04

In 1962 the Pentagon and the CIA were desperate for a war with Cuba.

OPERATION NORTHWOODS

In 1962 the Pentagon and the CIA were desperate for a war with Cuba. How desperate? Desperate enough to plan attacks against American bases, equipment and personnel. Desperate enough to dress up American trained Cubans as Communists to make the attacks on American bases. Desperate enough to manufacture an airplane that looked like a Russian MiG to shoot down an American airliner.

Why?

“The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.”

And you think that the United States wouldn’t do this or worse to control the largest remaining untapped oil reserves in the world, along with more than half of the world’s heroin trade?

Taken from:

http://www.copvcia.com/stories/nov_2001/operation_northwoods.html

Blackcat
Homepage: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=operation+northwoods&btnG=Google+Search

Comments

Hide the following 9 comments

seriously misleading title

22.11.2001 00:28

1. The title of this post is seriously misleading.

2. The period in question was during one of the periods of great tension of the Cold War.

3. The military cannot take such actions without the approval of the president, and, as is obvious, no such action occurred.

4. Action against Afghanistan is counter productive from the US point of view. Afghanistan has no oil, and is a very long way from any oil producing area.

5. The Taliban were actually very much against the production of opium. Hence removing them will probably increase opium prodcution, which the US Govt does not want.

sceptic

Some replies

22.11.2001 01:08

1. I agree. It suggests it's just happened - to grab attention maybe? :P

2. How is that relevant? Does it justify the plan? OK - so this was in the past - but there's no evidence that the American government's attitude to the rest of the world (and its own citizens for that matter) has changed much since then.

3. Yes, this action was not carried out. Many others may have been. At any rate, it shows how far they (the highup military/government ppl) will consider going, and so has a possible bearing on the current situation.

4. There are large reserves of oil in Central Asia. In order to reach them the oil industry's best bet is a pipeline through Afghanistan. Go look at a map.

5. What I heard was that the Taliban banned the production and use of opium, but continued to sell it themselves. Not sure about this one, so you're probably better off checking that out yourself.

GtR
mail e-mail: genoseize@AtlasWebmail.com

shootdown by R W Johnson

22.11.2001 07:47

good book about KAL 007 , a 747 shot down by the ruskies
over sakalin, talks about black box flight recorders and the
US tech spec capabilities, in radar ect, and how they nicked a russian jet from the Ocean floor.. having failed to find a black box in 100 feet of water ...

LB

Luther Blissett

yank responds

22.11.2001 07:54

1. No matter what "tension" existed shooting down an airliner is still barbaric, regardless.
We did indeed think this one up its in the records. Our own CIA also considered the
NAZI methods as "inefficient". Now why on earth would you defend this? We have butchers like Madeline Albreight who pretty much led foreign policy continuing the blockade and bombing of Iraq with full aproval
of the White House (which has said "no" a few times but has said "yes" even more).

2. Massive oil fields lie above Afghanistan Our oil industry wants pipelines through
Afghanistan.

3. the Taliban enjoyed profits from opium production and had it stockpiled.

Condoleeza Rice will continue Albreight's legacy. In fact the whole present administration has not a shred
of humanity.

I would be very, very, concerned for the next 8 years if I were you.

Allen T

Heroin

22.11.2001 11:01

Sceptic, why does the US government want production of heroin to remain low? Do you think that the military planes flying 'aid' and guns to the northern alliance were flying home empty? The CIA have always made lots of money through drugs, and they 'ain't gonna stop anytime soon.

Andy O'C

drug trade

22.11.2001 13:00

The Taliban spent years profiting from enormous opium sales. They suspended production for one year, last year, and were given a huge cash reward by the USA. The only opium grown in Afghanistan last year was produced in Northern Alliance held territory. (This doesn’t take account of opium stockpiled in other countries, e.g. Pakistan and Turkey.) Anyone noticed how Blair has fallen strangely silent on the subject of evil drug traffickers in the last couple of weeks, now that the Northern Alliance are our friends? Likewise the KLA in Kosovo are/were notorious heroin traffickers.

military plan was rejected

22.11.2001 17:26

The plan concocted by the military chiefs of staff, which included "terrorist" attacks on US cities, was never implemented because the Kennedy adminsitration rejected it.

Kennedy was subsequently assassinated.

nice to see conspiracy theories

22.11.2001 22:18

any evidence that the CIA sells heroin?

and any evidence that Kennedy's assination was linked the this paper?

or are just all guessing?

sceptic

The proof is there........

24.11.2001 20:22

There is a rich documentary record of the role of the CIA in supporting the Afghan "resistance" to Soviet forces from which the Taleban emerged. Together with the Northern "Alliance" they earned considerable sums from Afghan opium production. Using George Bush's logic - you are with us or against us - the CIA is clearly with the drug dealers and therefore ARE drug dealers themselves.

Anti-septic

UK Indymedia