• Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Robert Howard

The Crash of the U-2 on November 20, 1963

150 posts in this topic

News did not travel as fast in 1963 as it does in the third millenium. For that development, Technological advancements in the realm of Fiber Optics have created a culture where incredibly detailed stories and events are transmitted in seconds or even less. The crash of the U-2 near Key West on Wednesday November 20, 1963 did not register in some locales until quite some time had elapsed.

The following are three newspoaper stories of the crash of the U-2 piloted by Capt Joe Hyde as transmitted via the wire service's AP & UPI.

DMN 11-21-1963

U-2 Plane Reported in Crash

KEY WEST, Fla - (UPI)

A U-2 "spy" plane believed to be on a reconnaissance mission over Communist Cuba crashed Wednesday in the Gulf of Mexico Wednesday, 40 miles northwest of here. Military sources in Washington said the U-2 pilot did not radio any indication of trouble before the crash and the plane presumably went down due to mechanical trouble. However they said the crash could have been the result of a Cuban attack.

The pilot of the U-2 was identified as Capt. Joe E. Hyde Jr., 33 of La Grange, Ga

DMN 11-22-1963

Wreckage of Pilotless U-2 Located

KEY WEST, Fla - (AP) The wreck of a U-2 plane was found Thursday on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. But its cockpit was empty, holding out hope that its pilot Capt. Joe G. Hyde Jr., might have survived the crash.

Presumably returning from a mission over Fidel Castro's Communist Cuba, the high flying reconnaissance aircraft suddenly vanished from radar scopes at 10:32 AM. Wednesday, some 40 miles northwest of Key West and 188 miles north of the Cuban coast. It was there that debris was sighted Thursday morning by the searching Coast Guard cutter Nemesis. By 11:30 A.M. divers from the Navy salvage vessels Petrel and Shrike were on the wreckage in 100 foot-deep water and had confirmed that the pilot was not in the cockpit. At La Grange, Ga., Hyde's home his mother clung desperately to the belief that her 33 year-old son was still "living somewhere."

Navy and Coast Guard planes and surface craft plunged into a search for the pilot. But a Navy spokesman said, "I don't hold much hope for him."

The Navy denied a rumor that a parachute had been sighted. Both the Defense Department and the Strategic Air Command headquarters at Omaha, Nebraska said that there was no evidence that the sleek one man plane which flies at admitted heights of 75,000 feet had met with hostile action over Cuba.

This is the last of the three stories which ran in late 1963.....

DMN 12-2-1963

U-2 Pilot Dead AF Discloses

LaGrange, Ga., - (AP) The Air Force has disclosed that a U-2 plane pilot died in the crash of his plane which went down in the Gulf of Mexico Nov. 20, after a mission over Cuba.

A Coast Guard cutter found the plane's wreckage about 40 miles northwest of Key West, Fla., the following day.

The Air Force notified the family Saturday that it had substantiated that Capt. Joe G. Hyde Jr. the pilot, went down with the plane. Notification was in the form of a telegram. Cause of the crash has not been announced. The victims wife said plans are being made for a memorial service at LaGrange.

Ponder for a moment the fact that when the U-2 was shot down before the diffusing of the Cuban Mussile Crisis in October 1962, the story was common knowledge, while the downing of Hyde's U-2 recieved markedly less coverage

While there has not been, to my knowledge, any clarification on the part of our Government as to the circumstances which led to the U-2 crash on Nov. 20, 1963and it's aftermath; the point that should be rasied is, why did a very similar scenario to the one detailed in the historical record of October of 1962 garner only three wire-service reports and then vanish as a news story, to the degree that it was practically, as if it never happened?

The question is a valid one, and the answers invariably enter into that very unpopular realm known as "conspiracy theory."

It is my assertion that "conspiracy theories" thrive and flourish in an informational vacuum, inversely if an issue is addressed in a manner befitting a culture known for placing a premium on the "truth" and a fully informed body politic, then if there is no merit to conspiratorial speculation, it will simply collapse under the weight of its own lack of validity. If, however the topic is one that is addressed in a manner that is not truthful or, forthright, then the gas is added to the fire in a time-released manner so to speak in which the questions and speculations never go away, they just smolder and eventually die out.

Their is a body of thought which asserts in relation to the U-2 crash near Key West that the reason the story was buried, [for the most part] was that "it" was a stand-by event, in which, if the linking of the assassination of JFK was made with the connivance of the Castro government then the "downing" of Capt. Hyde's U-2 could have been added on to the "flow of news stories" emaniating in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination, which could have helped present a de facto causus belli for the annihilation of the Castro Regime, either by invasion or massive retaliatory air-strikes.

In the revelation that the new-President "did not warm" to either idea, presented in the last paraagraph. So the question beg's to be asked.....Was the burying of the news surrounding the loss of the U-2, part of the abandoning of the "plan to invade and/or unleash a massive air to ground assault on Cuba, once it was apparent that LBJ was not going to do anything rash?"

With the aid of hindsight, the argument can be made that the reason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following are three newspoaper stories of the crash of the U-2 piloted by Capt Joe Hyde as transmitted via the wire service's AP & UPI.

DMN 11-21-1963

U-2 Plane Reported in Crash

KEY WEST, Fla - (UPI)

A U-2 "spy" plane believed to be on a reconnaissance mission over Communist Cuba crashed Wednesday in the Gulf of Mexico Wednesday, 40 miles northwest of here. Military sources in Washington said the U-2 pilot did not radio any indication of trouble before the crash and the plane presumably went down due to mechanical trouble. However they said the crash could have been the result of a Cuban attack.

The pilot of the U-2 was identified as Capt. Joe E. Hyde Jr., 33 of La Grange, Ga

DMN 11-22-1963

Wreckage of Pilotless U-2 Located

KEY WEST, Fla - (AP) The wreck of a U-2 plane was found Thursday on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. But its cockpit was empty, holding out hope that its pilot Capt. Joe G. Hyde Jr., might have survived the crash.

Presumably returning from a mission over Fidel Castro's Communist Cuba, the high flying reconnaissance aircraft suddenly vanished from radar scopes at 10:32 AM. Wednesday, some 40 miles northwest of Key West and 188 miles north of the Cuban coast. It was there that debris was sighted Thursday morning by the searching Coast Guard cutter Nemesis. By 11:30 A.M. divers from the Navy salvage vessels Petrel and Shrike were on the wreckage in 100 foot-deep water and had confirmed that the pilot was not in the cockpit. At La Grange, Ga., Hyde's home his mother clung desperately to the belief that her 33 year-old son was still "living somewhere."

Navy and Coast Guard planes and surface craft plunged into a search for the pilot. But a Navy spokesman said, "I don't hold much hope for him."

The Navy denied a rumor that a parachute had been sighted. Both the Defense Department and the Strategic Air Command headquarters at Omaha, Nebraska said that there was no evidence that the sleek one man plane which flies at admitted heights of 75,000 feet had met with hostile action over Cuba.

This is the last of the three stories which ran in late 1963.....

DMN 12-2-1963

U-2 Pilot Dead AF Discloses

LaGrange, Ga., - (AP) The Air Force has disclosed that a U-2 plane pilot died in the crash of his plane which went down in the Gulf of Mexico Nov. 20, after a mission over Cuba.

A Coast Guard cutter found the plane's wreckage about 40 miles northwest of Key West, Fla., the following day.

The Air Force notified the family Saturday that it had substantiated that Capt. Joe G. Hyde Jr. the pilot, went down with the plane. Notification was in the form of a telegram. Cause of the crash has not been announced. The victims wife said plans are being made for a memorial service at LaGrange.

Robert, I happily posted the articles from DMN I have saved on this matter.

Sounds like a freedom of information request could get the ball rolling. Do you think it was damaged by a near hit by soviet missile and managed to make it back to US soil(waters)?

27 October - Maj. Rudolf Anderson was shot down by SA-2 over Cuba; Anderson was killed when shrapnel punctured pressure suit causing suit to decompress at altitude and was posthumously awarded Air Force Cross.

Could Hyde's loss be more of the same bad news and pressure by the pentagon kept it on the back page?

Other shoot downs:

1 May 1960 near Sverdlovsk, Russia. Shot down by multiple SA-2s, CIA Pilot Francis Gary Powers survived and was put on trial and convicted as a spy, he was later traded for a convicted Russian spy.

9 September 1962 A Chinese Nationalist U-2C was shot down over Mainland China.

1 November 1963 A Chinese Nationalist U-2C was shot down over Mainland China.

7 July 1964 A Chinese Nationalist U-2C was shot down over Mainland China.

10 January 1965 A Chinese Nationalist U-2C was shot down over Mainland China.

The question is was this pilot error, equipment malfunction or a shoot down, albeit delayed. How did they know? There would be a lot of paper work on this through several channels. It just needs to be looked at again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an article about Captain Joe Hyde jr. published by his son Joe:

http://www.swtexaslive.com/october2006/hyde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's an article about Captain Joe Hyde jr. published by his son Joe:

http://www.swtexaslive.com/october2006/hyde

To Ed and Dave, many thanks for the contributions to this thread, Ed as far as whether a Soviet made SAM took out Capt. Hyde's U-2, any answer on my part would be purely speculative, and..honestly I have no idea, I would state the obvious, that it is a either or, proposition, unless it was damaged by a near miss and made it back a few miles before crashing, there is another more sinister possibility that I will not elaborate on except to say, that it involves a similar set of circumstances to the downing of Francis Gary Powers U-2 "before it took off."

A F.O.I.A request does not seem unreasonable, but I would expect a great deal of foot dragging [see George Joannides.]

Dave, it is always good to see your posts I had seen the article you posted, in some form but without the photo's.

When I think of the Hyde family and what they have suffered regarding the circumstances of Capt. Hyde's death

it can be argued it is not terribly unlike what the family of Dr Frank Olsen felt. Dr Olsen was the scientist who fell or, was pushed out of a building, while, during the same time period he was personally involved in the MK/ULTRA program see - Dr Sidney Gottlieb.

I understand the ramifications of "authentic" issues involving National Security concerns, but it is a valid question to ask "why," when even the next of kin are subject to the same information blackout, that the Great Unwashed are all too familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert –

You’re ignoring some obvious differences between the two incidents that made the earlier one far more newsworthy.

1960 (not 1962)

-At the height of the cold war Gary Powers, a USAF pilot, was captured by the US’s arch enemy’s the USSR and was jailed for nearly 2 years after being sentenced to 10 years.

-The U-2 had previously been secret.

- It was only a few weeks before a summit between Ike and Khrushev. The summit collapsed because Ike refused to apologize. This increased cold war tensions.

-The plane had been shot down.

-The US tried to cover up what had happened claiming it was a weather research plane that had gone off course.

Presumably by late Nov 1963 several other U-2 had crashed or been shot down. According to the BBC

“Defence experts say the original U-2 aircraft were highly unsafe and 80-90% of them eventually crashed or were shot down.

But later versions, the U-2R and U-2S, though 40% bigger, are much more reliable. ”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4119344.stm

The safer models were only introduced in the late 60’s.

According to Wikipedia (the source is a book not available on line but it fits with the BBC statistic)

“The U-2 had a very high loss rate initially. Of about 86 airframes produced, 40 were destroyed or severely damaged in crashes through 2001, and at least four were shot down, over the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China. Some airframes were rebuilt from parts of crashed aircraft. Transitioning into the aircraft was hazardous; the U.S. Air Force lost 9 aircraft in 1½ years when they started operating the U-2 in 1957.[2]”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_U-2#Losses

“there has not been, to my knowledge, any clarification on the part of our Government as to the circumstances which led to the U-2 crash on Nov. 20, 1963… Why did a very similar scenario to the one detailed in the historical record of October of 1962 garner only three wire-service reports and then vanish as a news story, to the degree that it was practically, as if it never happened?”

How closely have you researched this incident? Is it possible?:

- The crash was “clarified” but you are not aware of it. Normally the USAF carries out an investigation after a crash. I’m sure the report would have been classified at the time but that was 43 years ago and it might have been released. If not you could try filing a FOIA request.

-There were more than those 3 wire reports?

“Was the burying of the news surrounding the loss of the U-2, part of the abandoning of the "plan to invade and/or unleash a massive air to ground assault on Cuba, once it was apparent that LBJ was not going to do anything rash?"

Your proposed scenario doesn’t make much sense to me.

-The story was being ignored before LBJ became president. Why didn’t the CIA arrange for more press coverage?

-If it was part of a plan to stir up trouble why not make it appear as if the plane had been shot down?

-Wouldn’t it have made more sense to wait till LBJ was president?

-Why would the case qualify a “causus belli” if the plane even according to press reports had flown over Cuba and the downing of Gary Power’s plane was a source of embarrassment for the US rather than motive for hostilities?

Len

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's an article about Captain Joe Hyde jr. published by his son Joe:

http://www.swtexaslive.com/october2006/hyde

The son’s article reinforces the notion that U-2’s were crash prone planes and that Hyde’s was especially dangerous and probably crashed without outside interference:

“Flying the U-2 without an autopilot is dangerous, especially at high altitude where the air is extremely thin. The airspeed indicator allows for only three knots (about 5 mph) of deviation. If you fly too slow, the U-2 will stall and lose altitude quickly. If you fly too fast, the U-2 will enter a regime called “mach tuck” where the aircraft will exceed the speed of sound and probably break apart. This regime is referred to as the “coffin corner” by U-2 pilots.

The U-2C the pilot was flying that day was a former “Agency Bird,” a term used to describe U-2 airframes that were once inventoried by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)…

Agency birds, because of their origin in the clandestine world, were modified on occasion to improve mission effectiveness, sometimes at the expense of safety. In this case, the U-2C flying that day had previously had its “stall strips” removed to improve range and maneuverability. Stall strips were installed on the wings of most U-2s then to create a more noticeable stall warning by creating more turbulence over the wings that would warn the pilot of an impending stall. Without the strips, inadvertent stalls were more likely.

With no stall strips, no functioning autopilot, and an airspeed tolerance of only three knots, even a small deviation in temperature or turbulence can quickly put the U-2C in an out-of-control situation.

<snip>

During the 4080th SRW reunion in Del Rio in 1993, I learned the details of dad’s accident from some of the pilots who participated in the safety investigation. Although no one knows exactly for sure, the theory is that his U-2 that morning stalled and entered a flat spin. My dad attempted multiple spin recovery maneuvers as the aircraft plunged from 70,000 feet altitude.

<snip>

The U-2 community has a poem that is read as a tribute to comrades who had died while flying the dangerous plane. It goes like this: ”

I didn't see any indication the family was subject an"information blackout". The operations of U-2 was still highly classified and they presumably didn't have clearance. Nor is there any basis for speculation Hyde's or Power's planes were sabotoged. What would the PTB have gained by downing Powers?

Edited by Len Colby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's an article about Captain Joe Hyde jr. published by his son Joe:

http://www.swtexaslive.com/october2006/hyde

The son’s article reinforces the notion that U-2’s were crash prone planes and that Hyde’s was especially dangerous and probably crashed without outside interference:

“Flying the U-2 without an autopilot is dangerous, especially at high altitude where the air is extremely thin. The airspeed indicator allows for only three knots (about 5 mph) of deviation. If you fly too slow, the U-2 will stall and lose altitude quickly. If you fly too fast, the U-2 will enter a regime called “mach tuck” where the aircraft will exceed the speed of sound and probably break apart. This regime is referred to as the “coffin corner” by U-2 pilots.

The U-2C the pilot was flying that day was a former “Agency Bird,” a term used to describe U-2 airframes that were once inventoried by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)…

Agency birds, because of their origin in the clandestine world, were modified on occasion to improve mission effectiveness, sometimes at the expense of safety. In this case, the U-2C flying that day had previously had its “stall strips” removed to improve range and maneuverability. Stall strips were installed on the wings of most U-2s then to create a more noticeable stall warning by creating more turbulence over the wings that would warn the pilot of an impending stall. Without the strips, inadvertent stalls were more likely.

With no stall strips, no functioning autopilot, and an airspeed tolerance of only three knots, even a small deviation in temperature or turbulence can quickly put the U-2C in an out-of-control situation.

<snip>

During the 4080th SRW reunion in Del Rio in 1993, I learned the details of dad’s accident from some of the pilots who participated in the safety investigation. Although no one knows exactly for sure, the theory is that his U-2 that morning stalled and entered a flat spin. My dad attempted multiple spin recovery maneuvers as the aircraft plunged from 70,000 feet altitude.

<snip>

The U-2 community has a poem that is read as a tribute to comrades who had died while flying the dangerous plane. It goes like this: ”

I didn't see any indication the family was subject an"information blackout". The operations of U-2 was still highly classified and they presumably didn't have clearance. Nor is there any basis for speculation Hyde's or Power's planes were sabotoged. What would the PTB have gained by downing Powers?

I find your counter-arguments, typical of your posts here on the JFK Forum. [self appointed? defender of the 'there's nothing unusual here folks, move along.']

Len Colby wrote:

"You’re ignoring some obvious differences between the two incidents that made the earlier one far more newsworthy.

1960 (not 1962)"

You Mr Colby, are ignoring? the fact that I was comparing the 1962 downing of the U-2 during the Cuban Missile Crisis with the crash of Capt Hyde's U-2; I view that, as seemingly attempting to inform people of what I meant, which I do not appreciate, and think is, disingenious

The reason, I didn't bother to address your other critiques, is that the other point's you mentioned were based on taking the points I raised which were admittedly speculative, and challenging the logic of my assertions. What I wrote is what I wrote, if you feel motivated to question everything I wrote, feel free to continue to do so.

...I noticed that you didn't feel out of your element, when you were critiquing points raised by Capt. Hyde's own son.

Len Colby wrote:

I didn't see any indication the family was subject an"information blackout".

Really....So why was Capt. Hyde's son researching said topic in the first place? Your point that the information was classified and they did not have access is however well taken, and I do agree about that.

Len Colby wrote:

The operations of U-2 was still highly classified and they presumably didn't have clearance. Nor is there any basis for speculation Hyde's or Power's planes were sabotoged.

Why? Because Len Colby say's so...Sheesh.

Edited by Robert Howard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find your counter-arguments, typical of your posts here on the JFK Forum. [self appointed? defender of the 'there's nothing unusual here folks, move along.']

I’m not sure what your talking about 90% of my posts on the JFK Forum are regarding the authenticity of the Z-film countering the position of the alterationists. My POV on that issue is shared by Josiah “Tink” Thompson, Robert Groden, Martin Shakleford, Bill Miller, Debra Conway and Sherry Gutierrez among other well known researchers. If you were referring to my post on the Political Conspiracies forum the vast majority of them are regarding the Wellstone Crash and 9/11 my position regarding the latter is not that different from John Simkin’s (I think) and Steve Turner’s. I’ve also made posts rebutting Holocaust denial, chemtrails, and Apollo hoax claims, if find my arguments in those cases lacking you should bring your objections up there. In any case your comment didn’t amout to anything more than an ad hominem.

Len Colby wrote:

"You’re ignoring some obvious differences between the two incidents that made the earlier one far more newsworthy.

1960 (not 1962)"

You Mr Colby, are ignoring? the fact that I was comparing the 1962 downing of the U-2 during the Cuban Missile Crisis with the crash of Capt Hyde's U-2; I view that, as seemingly attempting to inform people of what I meant, which I do not appreciate, and think is, disingenuous.

My mistake I had forgotten about the 1962 U-2 downing (I was born in 1965) and thought you had gotten confused about the date. However my basic argument still stands. It’s a cliché that “dog bites man” isn’t news but “man bites dog” is. A crash prone plane crashing isn’t especially newsworthy but that same model plane being shot down during (and escalating) one of most serious crisises this planet has ever faced, one that took it to brink of a catastrophic nuclear war is. You have failed to show that the 1963 incident got suspiciously little press coverage. Calling the 1962 shoot down and the 1963 crash similar events is disingenuous. Your contention that it “garner(ed) only three wire-service reports” was simply incorrect I found additional though similar stories about the crash quickly with little effort. Also as his son pointed out (see below) news of his father’s crash was probably pushed aside by the events in Dallas a few days later.
U-2 Airplane Is Believed Down Over Gulf of Mexico

November 21, 1963, Thursday

Page 2, 107 words

KEY WEST, Fla., Nov. 20 (UPI)--A U-2 airplane of the type that makes reconnaisance missions over Cuba appeared to have crashed today in the Gulf of Mexico 40 miles northwest of here.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78AD95F478685F9

Wreckage of U-2 Plane Found in Gulf of Mexico; Empty Cockpit Leaves Faint Hope Pilot Survived U.S. Doubts Cuban Attack Mother Retains Hope

November 22, 1963, Friday

Page 2, 304 words

KEY WEST, Fla., Nov. 21 (AP) The wreckage of a United States.U-2 plane was found today on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. Its cockpit was empty, keeping alive a faint hope that the pilot, Capt. Joe G. Hyde Jr., might somehow have survived the crash.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78AD95F478685F9

Divers Seeking Pilot of U-2 That Crashed Off Florida

November 23, 1963, Saturday

Page 21, 50 words

The first paragraph is not available for this article.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78AD95F478685F9

This site lists numerous other U-2 crashes can you show that all got more press coverage than Hyde’s (or just the dozens including US pilots in the 60’s if you prefer).

http://www.blackbirds.net/u2/u2local.html

Robert wrote:

The reason, I didn't bother to address your other critiques, is that the other point's you mentioned were based on taking the points I raised which were admittedly speculative, and challenging the logic of my assertions. What I wrote is what I wrote, if you feel motivated to question everything I wrote, feel free to continue to do so.
-Your speculation was based on a faulty premise.

-You failed to address other points I raised

Robert wrote:

...I noticed that you didn't feel out of your element, when you were critiquing points raised by Capt. Hyde's own son.

What on earth are you talking about? Which of his points did I critique?

If you go back to the article you’ll see he was far from supportive of your theories. He added the following in the comments section:

Submitted by Joe Hyde on Mon, 12/25/2006 - 8:44pm.

There is a body of discussion going around that this U-2 crash was some sort of run-up to the JFK assassination. It is a conspiracy theory that should definietly be debunked. The lead argument in the theory is that news wire reports "vanished" about the incident after the news of JFK's assassination hit the wires November 22nd. The reason was the JFK assassination was such a large story at the time that all other stories were pushed aside, drowned out. I had a security clearance for all of my career, I have been to CIA HQ and talked with people (then retired) about the incident, and talked directly to people who conducted the safety and accident investigation. There are absolutely NO connections between JFK's assassination and this incident. Joe Hyde III”

http://www.swtexaslive.com/node/1610

If you have any doubt he is referring to you there is a link to this thread. You can leave a comment or contact him if you like. If you are really interested in finding out the truth about this case it is an opportunity you can’t pass up. I asked him furthur questions so check back for his reply.

Robert wrote:

Len Colby wrote:

I didn't see any indication the family was subject an"information blackout".

Really....So why was Capt. Hyde's son researching said topic in the first place? Your point that the information was classified and they did not have access is however well taken, and I do agree about that.

Really!

- There is no indication the family at the time sought but was denied additional information. -There is no indication they had any unanswered questions.

- There was no indication he actively researched “said topic” he went to a reunion of veterans of his father’s unit and spoke with some of the people who investigated his father’s crash. In his comment he added that he spoke to other people but neither of us knew that at the time of our earlier posts. It isn’t clear if he was investigating the incident as much as he merely sought out people who knew his father. I met childhood friends of my mother’s while she was still alive and asked them numerous questions, I wasn’t “investigating” her past.

-The son presumably was quite young at the time. Later as a USAF pilot his interest in and understanding of what exactly caused his fathers plane to crash might well have been greater than his mother’s. He didn’t really indicate he spent a great deal of effort researching the topic.

- I meant an “information blackout” beyond disclosing information like under what circumstances a U-2 would become unstable and crash or what kind of stall recovery maneuvers were SOP which was presumably highly classified information at the time. I’d imagine if a similar crashed happened today with a modern plane the military would not disclose such details to next of kin that didn’t have the appropriate security clearance. Though I hate Bush et. al. and oppose the Iraq invasion I wouldn’t see anything wrong with that.

Robert wrote:

Len Colby wrote:

Nor is there any basis for speculation Hyde's or Power's planes were sabotoged.

Why? Because Len Colby say's so...Sheesh.

I edited your reply above to only include the part of my quote I presume you were referring to. Perhaps I should rephrase that, “Nor have I seen any basis for speculation Hyde's or Powers’ planes were sabotaged”. You haven’t really presented any in Hyde’s case do you have any for Powers’?

Len

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find your counter-arguments, typical of your posts here on the JFK Forum. [self appointed? defender of the 'there's nothing unusual here folks, move along.']

I’m not sure what your talking about 90% of my posts on the JFK Forum are regarding the authenticity of the Z-film countering the position of the alterationists. My POV on that issue is shared by Josiah “Tink” Thompson, Robert Groden, Martin Shakleford, Bill Miller, Debra Conway and Sherry Gutierrez among other well known researchers. If you were referring to my post on the Political Conspiracies forum the vast majority of them are regarding the Wellstone Crash and 9/11 my position regarding the latter is not that different from John Simkin’s (I think) and Steve Turner’s. I’ve also made posts rebutting Holocaust denial, chemtrails, and Apollo hoax claims, if find my arguments in those cases lacking you should bring your objections up there. In any case your comment didn’t amout to anything more than an ad hominem.

Len Colby wrote:

"You’re ignoring some obvious differences between the two incidents that made the earlier one far more newsworthy.

1960 (not 1962)"

You Mr Colby, are ignoring? the fact that I was comparing the 1962 downing of the U-2 during the Cuban Missile Crisis with the crash of Capt Hyde's U-2; I view that, as seemingly attempting to inform people of what I meant, which I do not appreciate, and think is, disingenuous.

My mistake I had forgotten about the 1962 U-2 downing (I was born in 1965) and thought you had gotten confused about the date. However my basic argument still stands. It’s a cliché that “dog bites man” isn’t news but “man bites dog” is. A crash prone plane crashing isn’t especially newsworthy but that same model plane being shot down during (and escalating) one of most serious crisises this planet has ever faced, one that took it to brink of a catastrophic nuclear war is. You have failed to show that the 1963 incident got suspiciously little press coverage. Calling the 1962 shoot down and the 1963 crash similar events is disingenuous. Your contention that it “garner(ed) only three wire-service reports” was simply incorrect I found additional though similar stories about the crash quickly with little effort. Also as his son pointed out (see below) news of his father’s crash was probably pushed aside by the events in Dallas a few days later.
U-2 Airplane Is Believed Down Over Gulf of Mexico

November 21, 1963, Thursday

Page 2, 107 words

KEY WEST, Fla., Nov. 20 (UPI)--A U-2 airplane of the type that makes reconnaisance missions over Cuba appeared to have crashed today in the Gulf of Mexico 40 miles northwest of here.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78AD95F478685F9

Wreckage of U-2 Plane Found in Gulf of Mexico; Empty Cockpit Leaves Faint Hope Pilot Survived U.S. Doubts Cuban Attack Mother Retains Hope

November 22, 1963, Friday

Page 2, 304 words

KEY WEST, Fla., Nov. 21 (AP) The wreckage of a United States.U-2 plane was found today on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. Its cockpit was empty, keeping alive a faint hope that the pilot, Capt. Joe G. Hyde Jr., might somehow have survived the crash.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78AD95F478685F9

Divers Seeking Pilot of U-2 That Crashed Off Florida

November 23, 1963, Saturday

Page 21, 50 words

The first paragraph is not available for this article.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78AD95F478685F9

This site lists numerous other U-2 crashes can you show that all got more press coverage than Hyde’s (or just the dozens including US pilots in the 60’s if you prefer).

http://www.blackbirds.net/u2/u2local.html

Robert wrote:

The reason, I didn't bother to address your other critiques, is that the other point's you mentioned were based on taking the points I raised which were admittedly speculative, and challenging the logic of my assertions. What I wrote is what I wrote, if you feel motivated to question everything I wrote, feel free to continue to do so.
-Your speculation was based on a faulty premise.

-You failed to address other points I raised

Robert wrote:

...I noticed that you didn't feel out of your element, when you were critiquing points raised by Capt. Hyde's own son.

What on earth are you talking about? Which of his points did I critique?

If you go back to the article you’ll see he was far from supportive of your theories. He added the following in the comments section:

Submitted by Joe Hyde on Mon, 12/25/2006 - 8:44pm.

There is a body of discussion going around that this U-2 crash was some sort of run-up to the JFK assassination. It is a conspiracy theory that should definietly be debunked. The lead argument in the theory is that news wire reports "vanished" about the incident after the news of JFK's assassination hit the wires November 22nd. The reason was the JFK assassination was such a large story at the time that all other stories were pushed aside, drowned out. I had a security clearance for all of my career, I have been to CIA HQ and talked with people (then retired) about the incident, and talked directly to people who conducted the safety and accident investigation. There are absolutely NO connections between JFK's assassination and this incident. Joe Hyde III”

http://www.swtexaslive.com/node/1610

If you have any doubt he is referring to you there is a link to this thread. You can leave a comment or contact him if you like. If you are really interested in finding out the truth about this case it is an opportunity you can’t pass up. I asked him furthur questions so check back for his reply.

Robert wrote:

Len Colby wrote:

I didn't see any indication the family was subject an"information blackout".

Really....So why was Capt. Hyde's son researching said topic in the first place? Your point that the information was classified and they did not have access is however well taken, and I do agree about that.

Really!

- There is no indication the family at the time sought but was denied additional information. -There is no indication they had any unanswered questions.

- There was no indication he actively researched “said topic” he went to a reunion of veterans of his father’s unit and spoke with some of the people who investigated his father’s crash. In his comment he added that he spoke to other people but neither of us knew that at the time of our earlier posts. It isn’t clear if he was investigating the incident as much as he merely sought out people who knew his father. I met childhood friends of my mother’s while she was still alive and asked them numerous questions, I wasn’t “investigating” her past.

-The son presumably was quite young at the time. Later as a USAF pilot his interest in and understanding of what exactly caused his fathers plane to crash might well have been greater than his mother’s. He didn’t really indicate he spent a great deal of effort researching the topic.

- I meant an “information blackout” beyond disclosing information like under what circumstances a U-2 would become unstable and crash or what kind of stall recovery maneuvers were SOP which was presumably highly classified information at the time. I’d imagine if a similar crashed happened today with a modern plane the military would not disclose such details to next of kin that didn’t have the appropriate security clearance. Though I hate Bush et. al. and oppose the Iraq invasion I wouldn’t see anything wrong with that.

Robert wrote:

Len Colby wrote:

Nor is there any basis for speculation Hyde's or Power's planes were sabotoged.

Why? Because Len Colby say's so...Sheesh.

I edited your reply above to only include the part of my quote I presume you were referring to. Perhaps I should rephrase that, “Nor have I seen any basis for speculation Hyde's or Powers’ planes were sabotaged”. You haven’t really presented any in Hyde’s case do you have any for Powers’?

Len

Deleted

Edited by John Woods

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joe Hyde jr.'s widow wrote a book about her husband and other U-2 pilots.

http://www.publishersbookstore.com/browse/...N=0-7392-0239-1

Len Colby's customary precision.....

Book Description

To See His Goodness is a spiritual autobiography. When the author lost her first husband when his Air Force reconnaissance plane went down, she turned to God for healing for her grief and direction into a new life. This story recounts her journey with particular emphasis on God's influence and what she learned about Him at each stage. Those stages include the birth of a son, graduate school, a second marriage, a second widowhood, a third marriage, releasing her son to become an Air Force pilot, and becoming a grandmother--all told engagingly and conveying a message of hope.

From the Publisher

Marianne Smith has accomplished two things with this book. First, she has paid tribute to a group of unsung heroes who, at great risk and sacrifice, worked to preserve the peace for a decade during the coldest days of the Cold War. Her husband, Captain Joe Hyde, Jr., one of that select company, made the ultimate sacrifice in 1963 when his U-2 aircraft crashed while returning from a reconnaissance mission over Cuba. Secondly, she has recounted and reflected upon her own experiences to illuminate the spiritual dimension of the new life she was given. The book is entertaining, captivating, and inspiring--a good story that will encourage the reader as it confirms the reality of God's goodness in one ordinary life.

http://www.amazon.com/See-Goodness-Mariann...TF8&s=books

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marianne Smith has accomplished two things with this book. First, she has paid tribute to a group of unsung heroes who, at great risk and sacrifice, worked to preserve the peace for a decade during the coldest days of the Cold War. Her husband, Captain Joe Hyde, Jr., one of that select company, made the ultimate sacrifice in 1963 when his U-2 aircraft crashed while returning from a reconnaissance mission over Cuba.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marianne Smith has accomplished two things with this book. First, she has paid tribute to a group of unsung heroes who, at great risk and sacrifice, worked to preserve the peace for a decade during the coldest days of the Cold War. Her husband, Captain Joe Hyde, Jr., one of that select company, made the ultimate sacrifice in 1963 when his U-2 aircraft crashed while returning from a reconnaissance mission over Cuba.

Like I said, your customary precision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To John Woods:

John, I am a little confused over the information you posted, are you able to tell me what the entire sentence say's..the part at the end I am having a little trouble de-ciphering, also can you tell me what it is from and what the context is concerning its content? I apologize for the questions, but I simply cannot read all of it, and am genuinely interested in understanding what it means in relation to the topic thread. Thank You.

I would also appreciate it if, John is allowed to respond to my question, as the question is directed to him and no one else.

In the meantime I am reposting a article which ran in the Village Voice as it is most certainly pertinent to the subject matter

Reprint of Article from the Village Voice

The Moving Target

The Oswald Connections:

Bad News for the C.I.A.

By Alexander Cockburn & James Ridgeway

The Village Voice - February 6, 1978

Though already dismissed as a baseless rumor, the allegation that Jack Ruby is still alive and was given a new identity by the Central Intelligence Agency was not dreamed up by the veteran conspiracy buffs but was, in fact advanced by a former employee of the Agency itself. The Ruby story—to the effect that the CIA, in cooperation with the KGB, sponsored Ruby’s murder of Oswald before the latter could disclose damning details of U.S.-Soviet intelligence links--- has been put forward recently by Frank Snepp, formerly of the CIA. Snepp recently published Decent Interval, a harsh denunciation of the CIA’s conduct in the last days of the Vietnam War.

This allegation is surfacing just at a time when the CIA is mounting an ardent publicity campaign, signaled by cover stories in Time and Newsweek, to refurbish its woebegone image. The campaign comes shortly before the publication of a book which will probably do as much to discredit the CIA, and other intelligence agencies as any other disclosures in the last decade.

Edward J. Epstein’s book Legend, on Lee Harvey Oswald—and financed by Readers Digest, to the tune of $500,000 is scheduled to be published later this month. By all accounts, it is a devastating portrait of the CIA, particularly in its response to Oswald’s assassination of President Kennedy. Contrary to a report in New Times, Legend does not contain anything about Ruby. New Times armed with a sixth-hand report of Snepp’s views mistakenly ascribed them to Epstein. But directly quoting such former CIA executives such as James Angleton, as well as relying on extensive information from other CIA veterans, Epstein chronicles an intelligence organization so decrepit and so compromised that one of his CIA sources sent him a 40-page handwritten memorandum propounding, with names and vivid details, all the reasons the CIA should be abolished forthwith. For good measure, Epstein related the intimacy of other U.S. agencies with the Soviets, leading him to conclude that Hoover was gathering information for the Soviet Union, not as an act of espionage, but as part of regular cooperative arrangements.

As he angrily denied last week that his book presented any new information about Jack Ruby, Epstein speculated that the CIA is already putting out ‘inoculation stories’ as he phrased it, to discredit his own charges. His investigative mission has indeed, not been without problems. His contacts with George DeMohrenschildt, the Russian friend of Marina Oswald, were broken off when DeMohrenschildt committed suicide in the brief interval when Epstein went for a bicycle ride on the grounds of his Florida hotel. While Epstein was conducting interviews with William Sullivan, a former high executive in the FBI, the latter had the misfortune to be mistaken for a deer and was shot dead in a hunting accident.

Central to Epstein’s inquiry was his research on Lee Harvey Oswald’s relationship

with the Soviet Union and the KGB. This led him inevitably to Francis Gary Powers, the U-2 pilot. Epstein conducted a number of interviews with Powers, but on the eve of a meeting he had arranged between Powers and a former Marine in the same unit as Oswald’s, Powers was killed in a helicopter accident, in which his chopper mysteriously ran out of fuel and crashed near Los Angeles.

The Oswald-Powers connection, vital in assessing how much work Oswald did for the Soviets, runs roughly as follows. It is known that Oswald, in September of 1957, was assigned to Marine Air Control Squadron No. 1. This squadron was based at Atsugi, Japan, where its duties included radar scouting for incoming foreign aircraft. In the units equipment was special height-finding radar. Oswald, a trained radar-operator, had access to this equipment.

Beginning in 1957, the U-2 spy aircraft which were making overflights across the Soviet Union on occasion took off and landed from Atsugi. (Although Powers denied to Epstein ever having been to Atsugi, Oswald’s Marine colleagues clearly remembered encounters there between Powers but Powers was killed before Epstein’s arranged confrontation between the two could take place).

Initially, the U-2 pilots overflying the Soviet Union on occasion took off and went beyond the range of Soviet tracking systems, and that although the Soviets knew the flights were taking place, they could do nothing about them. It was subsequently argued that if the Soviet Union were in possession of the technical radar information known to a radar operator such as Oswald, then it would have been in a position to knock out the U-2’s.

Oswald was in Japan until November 1958, and was then returned to the United States where he was assigned to a Marine Air Control Squadron at El Toro, California. In September 1959, he got a hardship discharge from the Marine Corps. In October he went to the Soviet Union where he told American consular officials that he had offered to tell the Soviets everything he knew about the Marine Corps and his specialty-- radar operations.

Oswald’s familiarity with height-finding radar gear and radar radio codes are mentioned at various points in the Warren Commission investigation. Power’s himself raises the question of Oswald’s activities in his book Operation Overflight:

“During the six months following the October 31, 1959 embassy meeting [between Oswald and American consular officials in Moscow] there were only two overflight missions of the USSR. The one which occurred on April 9, 1960 was uneventful, the one which followed on May 1, 1960, wasn’t. “The May 1st flight was, of course, made by Powers when he crashed. The suggestion, posed by Power’s himself is that Oswald gave the Soviet officials detailed technical information, which enabled them to shoot down the plane. And, indeed, CIA officials have subsequently claimed that what Oswald disclosed were details of the radar countermeasure beam emitted by the U-2, which would have thrown Soviet tracking devices off target. They suggest that once the Russians knew details of the counter-beam they used it to track their rocket up to the U-2 itself.

All of this is puzzling, for it seems clear enough that the CIA knew, following Oswald’s visit to the American Embassy what he was likely to have told the Russians. And, indeed, Richard Helms has told Edward Epstein that a CIA source in Soviet military intelligence also told the Agency that the Russians had acquired the capability to shoot down a U-2.

In which case, why, on the eve of the summit between Eisenhower and Khruschshev, was Powers permitted to make such a hazardous mission.

There are, however, indications that the CIA may have been engaged in a cover-up of far more ludicrous inefficiency. We recently spoke with a former officer in the Air Force who, by reason of his intelligence duties, reported to the National Security Agency. At the time of the Powers flight, this officer was stationed in a U.S. listening post at Peshawar, in north Pakistan. He was intimately involved in intelligence tracking of radio communications, monitoring Soviet rocket launchings and the like.

He recalled the U-2 flights and particularly the one made by Powers. He explained that the U.S. Buba Ber base just outside Peshawar, had no airstrip and that the U-2, indeed all planes, had to land and take off at the towns civilian and military airstrip in the Reshowar Cantonment nearby. The U-2 used by Powers was stored the night before under a tarpaulin at the airstrip and was guarded only by the local Pakistani constabulary. The CIA, he recalls, seemed satisfied with this security. Immediately following the news of Power’s descent in the Soviet Union there was a postmortem at the base. The officer maintains to us that it became common knowledge that two Pakistani mechanics seen near the plane the night before the flight had been picked up by Pakistani police and were later handed over to Pakistani military intelligence and executed for sabotage of the plane. Shortly thereafter, an East German woman, living in Deans Hotel in Peshawar, was arrested as the agent who had hired the Pakistani mechanics. This woman was later taken to a border crossing on the frontier between Pakistan and Afghanistan and exchanged for an Armenian agent working for U.S. intelligence, who had penetrated the Soviet Army. The exchange, the former Air Force officer say’s was organized by the CIA. He can well recall the East German agent, a stocky 36 year-old woman with dyed-blonde hair. His conclusion, and those of his colleagues at the base, was that the CIA embarrassed at the security foul-ups at Peshawar had gone along with the missile story as a cover-up.

This account does not round with the stories put forward by Powers himself, the CIA, or indeed by the Soviet Union. All Power’s knew was that there was a flash and his plane went down. But the Soviets and the Americans—notably the CIA—had reason to cooperate in saying that it was a missile that brought down the plane, the Soviets exalting their missilry and the CIA avoiding unwelcome questions about their performance at Peshawar.

Part of Oswald’s significance in history, depends upon exactly what happened to the U-2—whether he, indeed, played a crucial role in aborting the Summit Conference of 1960, as well as in later assassinating the President of the United States.

I also will respond to Mr Colby's comments and witty criticisms on my own terms, and in my own time. I will elaborate to those reading this post that are impartial.

How would you feel if a fellow forum member contacted Mr Hyde's son and told him you were refuting a conspiracy theorist, maybe you might not feel like that is kosher so to speak. I do not respect Mr Colby because I do not understand the necessity of habitually aproaching certain Forum members, [in this case me] as if we were both member's of the high school debating team, it reeks of agenda setting, and other supporters and friends of Mr Colby will just have to excuse me, but I do not trust him or his motivations, and I most certainly will not have a back and forth with any forum member, as if I am having my deposition taken

My initial post was intended in the context of many posts here on the Forum, in which a subject is taken and it is discussed, in the context of a back and forth of ideas, note I personally feel that this thread has been turned around to the degree that it is as if my initial post is ostensibly a book on sale at your local bookstore, and I am being placed in the position of going over what I wrote practically on a sentence by sentence basis.

If Mr Colby can act as if he "doesent understand" certain point I mentioned, I am not responsible for his inability to understand, and I will not engage in a pissing contest with him or anyone else.

Edited by Robert Howard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To John Woods:

John, I am a little confused over the information you posted, are you able to tell me what the entire sentence say's..the part at the end I am having a little trouble de-ciphering, also can you tell me what it is from and what the context is concerning its content? I apologize for the questions, but I simply cannot read all of it, and am genuinely interested in understanding what it means in relation to the topic thread. Thank You.

I would also appreciate it if, John is allowed to respond to my question, as the question is directed to him and no one else.

In the meantime I am reposting a article which ran in the Village Voice as it is most certainly pertinent to the subject matter

Reprint of Article from the Village Voice

The Moving Target

The Oswald Connections:

Bad News for the C.I.A.

By Alexander Cockburn & James Ridgeway

The Village Voice - February 6, 1978

Though already dismissed as a baseless rumor, the allegation that Jack Ruby is still alive and was given a new identity by the Central Intelligence Agency was not dreamed up by the veteran conspiracy buffs but was, in fact advanced by a former employee of the Agency itself. The Ruby story—to the effect that the CIA, in cooperation with the KGB, sponsored Ruby’s murder of Oswald before the latter could disclose damning details of U.S.-Soviet intelligence links--- has been put forward recently by Frank Snepp, formerly of the CIA. Snepp recently published Decent Interval, a harsh denunciation of the CIA’s conduct in the last days of the Vietnam War.

This allegation is surfacing just at a time when the CIA is mounting an ardent publicity campaign, signaled by cover stories in Time and Newsweek, to refurbish its woebegone image. The campaign comes shortly before the publication of a book which will probably do as much to discredit the CIA, and other intelligence agencies as any other disclosures in the last decade.

Edward J. Epstein’s book Legend, on Lee Harvey Oswald—and financed by Readers Digest, to the tune of $500,000 is scheduled to be published later this month. By all accounts, it is a devastating portrait of the CIA, particularly in its response to Oswald’s assassination of President Kennedy. Contrary to a report in New Times, Legend does not contain anything about Ruby. New Times armed with a sixth-hand report of Snepp’s views mistakenly ascribed them to Epstein. But directly quoting such former CIA executives such as James Angleton, as well as relying on extensive information from other CIA veterans, Epstein chronicles an intelligence organization so decrepit and so compromised that one of his CIA sources sent him a 40-page handwritten memorandum propounding, with names and vivid details, all the reasons the CIA should be abolished forthwith. For good measure, Epstein related the intimacy of other U.S. agencies with the Soviets, leading him to conclude that Hoover was gathering information for the Soviet Union, not as an act of espionage, but as part of regular cooperative arrangements.

As he angrily denied last week that his book presented any new information about Jack Ruby, Epstein speculated that the CIA is already putting out ‘inoculation stories’ as he phrased it, to discredit his own charges. His investigative mission has indeed, not been without problems. His contacts with George DeMohrenschildt, the Russian friend of Marina Oswald, were broken off when DeMohrenschildt committed suicide in the brief interval when Epstein went for a bicycle ride on the grounds of his Florida hotel. While Epstein was conducting interviews with William Sullivan, a former high executive in the FBI, the latter had the misfortune to be mistaken for a deer and was shot dead in a hunting accident.

Central to Epstein’s inquiry was his research on Lee Harvey Oswald’s relationship

with the Soviet Union and the KGB. This led him inevitably to Francis Gary Powers, the U-2 pilot. Epstein conducted a number of interviews with Powers, but on the eve of a meeting he had arranged between Powers and a former Marine in the same unit as Oswald’s, Powers was killed in a helicopter accident, in which his chopper mysteriously ran out of fuel and crashed near Los Angeles.

The Oswald-Powers connection, vital in assessing how much work Oswald did for the Soviets, runs roughly as follows. It is known that Oswald, in September of 1957, was assigned to Marine Air Control Squadron No. 1. This squadron was based at Atsugi, Japan, where its duties included radar scouting for incoming foreign aircraft. In the units equipment was special height-finding radar. Oswald, a trained radar-operator, had access to this equipment.

Beginning in 1957, the U-2 spy aircraft which were making overflights across the Soviet Union on occasion took off and landed from Atsugi. (Although Powers denied to Epstein ever having been to Atsugi, Oswald’s Marine colleagues clearly remembered encounters there between Powers but Powers was killed before Epstein’s arranged confrontation between the two could take place).

Initially, the U-2 pilots overflying the Soviet Union on occasion took off and went beyond the range of Soviet tracking systems, and that although the Soviets knew the flights were taking place, they could do nothing about them. It was subsequently argued that if the Soviet Union were in possession of the technical radar information known to a radar operator such as Oswald, then it would have been in a position to knock out the U-2’s.

Oswald was in Japan until November 1958, and was then returned to the United States where he was assigned to a Marine Air Control Squadron at El Toro, California. In September 1959, he got a hardship discharge from the Marine Corps. In October he went to the Soviet Union where he told American consular officials that he had offered to tell the Soviets everything he knew about the Marine Corps and his specialty-- radar operations.

Oswald’s familiarity with height-finding radar gear and radar radio codes are mentioned at various points in the Warren Commission investigation. Power’s himself raises the question of Oswald’s activities in his book Operation Overflight:

“During the six months following the October 31, 1959 embassy meeting [between Oswald and American consular officials in Moscow] there were only two overflight missions of the USSR. The one which occurred on April 9, 1960 was uneventful, the one which followed on May 1, 1960, wasn’t. “The May 1st flight was, of course, made by Powers when he crashed. The suggestion, posed by Power’s himself is that Oswald gave the Soviet officials detailed technical information, which enabled them to shoot down the plane. And, indeed, CIA officials have subsequently claimed that what Oswald disclosed were details of the radar countermeasure beam emitted by the U-2, which would have thrown Soviet tracking devices off target. They suggest that once the Russians knew details of the counter-beam they used it to track their rocket up to the U-2 itself.

All of this is puzzling, for it seems clear enough that the CIA knew, following Oswald’s visit to the American Embassy what he was likely to have told the Russians. And, indeed, Richard Helms has told Edward Epstein that a CIA source in Soviet military intelligence also told the Agency that the Russians had acquired the capability to shoot down a U-2.

In which case, why, on the eve of the summit between Eisenhower and Khruschshev, was Powers permitted to make such a hazardous mission.

There are, however, indications that the CIA may have been engaged in a cover-up of far more ludicrous inefficiency. We recently spoke with a former officer in the Air Force who, by reason of his intelligence duties, reported to the National Security Agency. At the time of the Powers flight, this officer was stationed in a U.S. listening post at Peshawar, in north Pakistan. He was intimately involved in intelligence tracking of radio communications, monitoring Soviet rocket launchings and the like.

He recalled the U-2 flights and particularly the one made by Powers. He explained that the U.S. Buba Ber base just outside Peshawar, had no airstrip and that the U-2, indeed all planes, had to land and take off at the towns civilian and military airstrip in the Reshowar Cantonment nearby. The U-2 used by Powers was stored the night before under a tarpaulin at the airstrip and was guarded only by the local Pakistani constabulary. The CIA, he recalls, seemed satisfied with this security. Immediately following the news of Power’s descent in the Soviet Union there was a postmortem at the base. The officer maintains to us that it became common knowledge that two Pakistani mechanics seen near the plane the night before the flight had been picked up by Pakistani police and were later handed over to Pakistani military intelligence and executed for sabotage of the plane. Shortly thereafter, an East German woman, living in Deans Hotel in Peshawar, was arrested as the agent who had hired the Pakistani mechanics. This woman was later taken to a border crossing on the frontier between Pakistan and Afghanistan and exchanged for an Armenian agent working for U.S. intelligence, who had penetrated the Soviet Army. The exchange, the former Air Force officer say’s was organized by the CIA. He can well recall the East German agent, a stocky 36 year-old woman with dyed-blonde hair. His conclusion, and those of his colleagues at the base, was that the CIA embarrassed at the security foul-ups at Peshawar had gone along with the missile story as a cover-up.

This account does not round with the stories put forward by Powers himself, the CIA, or indeed by the Soviet Union. All Power’s knew was that there was a flash and his plane went down. But the Soviets and the Americans—notably the CIA—had reason to cooperate in saying that it was a missile that brought down the plane, the Soviets exalting their missilry and the CIA avoiding unwelcome questions about their performance at Peshawar.

Part of Oswald’s significance in history, depends upon exactly what happened to the U-2—whether he, indeed, played a crucial role in aborting the Summit Conference of 1960, as well as in later assassinating the President of the United States.

I also will respond to Mr Colby's comments and witty criticisms on my own terms, and in my own time. I will elaborate to those reading this post that are impartial.

How would you feel if a fellow forum member contacted Mr Hyde's son and told him you were refuting a conspiracy theorist, maybe you might not feel like that is kosher so to speak. I do not respect Mr Colby because I do not understand the necessity of habitually aproaching certain Forum members, [in this case me] as if we were both member's of the high school debating team, it reeks of agenda setting, and other supporters and friends of Mr Colby will just have to excuse me, but I do not trust him or his motivations, and I most certainly will not have a back and forth with any forum member, as if I am having my deposition taken

My initial post was intended in the context of many posts here on the Forum, in which a subject is taken and it is discussed, in the context of a back and forth of ideas, note I personally feel that this thread has been turned around to the degree that it is as if my initial post is ostensibly a book on sale at your local bookstore, and I am being placed in the position of going over what I wrote practically on a sentence by sentence basis.

If Mr Colby can act as if he "doesent understand" certain point I mentioned, I am not responsible for his inability to understand, and I will not engage in a pissing contest with him or anyone else.

Sorry for the confusion!

The image I wanted to post is of a cuban solider at guard on a hidden artillery position

at a carribbean cost. Image was taken Oct 27 1962. I visited the agency's reading room

and must have pick up a bug...

johnw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now