Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Robert wrote

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.
My replies to your posts were meant to be informative not witty

Robert wrote

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 don’t think leaving a comment to an article (or more accurately a reply to an author’s comment) really qualifies as contacting someone. He was the one who first classified your posts on this thread as constituting “a conspiracy theory that should definietly be debunked”. I said I was ‘the guy debunking that "conspiracy theory" ’.to identify myself note that I used the term “conspiracy theory” in quotations and echoed his language. He clearly isn’t buying your theory. I don’t see how asking the author of an article cited and witness to events debated on this forum for clarification can be construed as improper.

Robert wrote

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

I don’t understand your point. I found your posts to have been unfounded, should pretend like I agree with when I don’t? Should we refrain from commenting if disagree with each other? If you look at my replies to you you’ll see that their tone is quite respectful, your replies to me are unduly hostile.

Robert wrote

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.
I don’t think asking you to back your claims and theories with evidence and logical thinking is akin to having ones deposition taken or should be considered unduly burdensome. Would you prefer it if everyone just told you how clever you were every time you post even if you’d failed to make your case? I have no hidden agenda but hey insinuating I do throws in an element of FUD.

Robert wrote

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… I will not engage in a pissing contest with him or anyone else.

My replies to you were intended to be part of a “back and forth of ideas”. YOUR replies to me by their hostile tone and attacking the messenger rather than the message have given this thread the air of a pissing contest.

I’ll make a deal with you let’s leave personalities aside and concentrate on the issues directly related to the topic instead, I get the impression you are using the former to avoid the latter.

Len

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert wrote
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.
My replies to your posts were meant to be informative not witty

Robert wrote

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 don’t think leaving a comment to an article (or more accurately a reply to an author’s comment) really qualifies as contacting someone. He was the one who first classified your posts on this thread as constituting “a conspiracy theory that should definietly be debunked”. I said I was ‘the guy debunking that "conspiracy theory" ’.to identify myself note that I used the term “conspiracy theory” in quotations and echoed his language. He clearly isn’t buying your theory. I don’t see how asking the author of an article cited and witness to events debated on this forum for clarification can be construed as improper.

Robert wrote

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

I don’t understand your point. I found your posts to have been unfounded, should pretend like I agree with when I don’t? Should we refrain from commenting if disagree with each other? If you look at my replies to you you’ll see that their tone is quite respectful, your replies to me are unduly hostile.

Robert wrote

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.
I don’t think asking you to back your claims and theories with evidence and logical thinking is akin to having ones deposition taken or should be considered unduly burdensome. Would you prefer it if everyone just told you how clever you were every time you post even if you’d failed to make your case? I have no hidden agenda but hey insinuating I do throws in an element of FUD.

Robert wrote

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… I will not engage in a pissing contest with him or anyone else.

My replies to you were intended to be part of a “back and forth of ideas”. YOUR replies to me by their hostile tone and attacking the messenger rather than the message have given this thread the air of a pissing contest.

I’ll make a deal with you let’s leave personalities aside and concentrate on the issues directly related to the topic instead, I get the impression you are using the former to avoid the latter.

Len

From the Greeley Daily Tribune 10-30-1976

DENVER (UPI) - An attorney who made a recent trip to Havana with several other members of the Ripon Society said Friday Cubans claim to have the body of an American pilot who crashed 13 years ago.

John Head said he and other members of the progressive Republican group were told of the body when they asked to see some of the eight American prisoners being held [sic] in Cuban prisoners.

He said Cuban interpreter Juan Ortega, in the presence of ministry officer Reinaldo Legon, told him about the body. "There's one prisoner down here you can see that nobody wants," he quoted Ortega as saying. "He's in a block of ice. In fact, you can take his body home with you."

Head said he and others were skeptical of the claims and asked for documents and other proof that the body of the flier, identified to them as only "Johnson"

actually existed. He said they never heard any more reports about it, although one Cuban official told him. "If your government wants him back, your government knows he's here, and they can go through official channels to get him back." Head said Cuban officials claimed the body and the wreckage had been displayed to the foreign press in either 1962 or 1963. There were at least two crashes involving the high altitude U-2's during or after reconnaissance over Cuba in 1962 or 1963.

The first occurred in October 1962, when Major Rudolph Anderson Jr., of Greenville S.C. was shot down and killed during a picture taking mission. The body was returned by the Cuban government in December. The second crash involved Capt. Joseph Hyde Jr., of LaGrange, Ga. whose plane went down on November 20, 1963. Wreckage of the spy plane was found the following day in the Gulf of Mexico, 40 miles northwest of Key West, Fla and 100 miles north of the Cuban coast. His body was not found.

The same edition of the Greeley Tribune ran a concurrent story

October 30, 1976

Pilots Body Preserved in Ice

By William C. Mann

Associated Press Writer

DENVER (AP) - The body of an American spy-plane

pilot has been preserved in a block of ice for 13 years Cuban officials have told a group of visiting American's. One of the Americans said Friday the group was told, the body could be reclaimed and that Washington is aware of its existence. The pilot's name was "Johnson," and his U-2 was shot down in 1963. Denver attorney John F. Head said the group was told. Head said he and others in his seven-member group from the liberal Republican Ripon Society tried repeatedly to get the Cubans to let them see the body during a visit this month. After being told several times a viewing would be arranged, Head said he was refused on grounds that any actions concerning the corpse would have to be on a government to government basis. In Washington, a spokesman for the State Department said the only known U-2 incident in Cuba concerned a plane piloted by Major Rudolph Anderson Jr., of Greenville S.C. Anderson's spy plane was shot down by [sic] surface-to-air missile, and his body was returned and buried two months later. Published reports from that era, however, that a U-2, a high-flying glider-like jet reconnaissance plane was lost in the Caribbean on November 20, 1963. That pilot, Capt. Joseph G. Hyde Jr., of LaGrange, Ga. was never found, although pieces of his aircraft were found on November 21, in the Gulf of Mexico, 40 miles northwest of Key West, Fla and 180 miles north of Cuba. Head said the Ripon group's interpreter Juan Ortega, mentioned the body during a conversation over cocktails in the presence of a foreign ministry officer. The lawyer said the subject came up during a discussion of how the Ripon society members could help Cuba in the United States. "They were probing the depth of influence in this country," Head said. "There's one prisoner down here you can see that nobody wants," he quoted Ortega as saying. "He's in a block of ice. In fact, you can take his body home with you." See earlier story on page 21

Members of the Forum may have head their curiousity piqued by the mention of the Ripon Society. Ironically, the Society was formed in the aftermath of the Kennedy Assassination.

"Taking its name from Ripon, Wisconsin, the birthplace of the Republican Party, a loosely knit association of young business, academic and professional women and men formed the Ripon Society in 1964 to revive the Grand Old Party’s commitment to inclusion and reform. Founded on the values of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, Ripon believes in their legacy of innovation, equality of opportunity for all people, mutual responsibility, and self-government."

But back to the topic at hand, I am not familiar with a U-2 crash in the specified time period involving a "Johnson," if anyone is, I would like to know. I also believe that within the context of the articles I posted, the Cuban government officials may indeed be using the whole topic as a propaganda ploy, anyone else?

I would also like to point out that the State Dept. official who is referenced in the above article, if you will notice, failed to mention the downing of Capt. Hyde's U-2 in November 1963, and the author of the piece had to make mention of it in order to give the reader a full accounting of all the facts, which is how I characterize it, forum members are obviously free to draw their own conclusions.

I would also like to say a few words about the idea concerning why this particular topic thread was started in the first place, as it seems as if my words and meanings are hidden in some type of undecipherable code.

I would also hope that Forum members might actually go to the trouble of reading my initial post, and hopefully everyone else's comments, in the process.

The idea behind creating this thread was based on the fact, that the crash of Capt. Hyde's U-2 did not recieve a great deal of attention, whether my logic was faulty or accurate is not the point. The point is I was 'exploring the idea and hoped to create a dialogue among forum members' as to whether my idea was valid or not.

For some reason, maybe someone will "share" this with me, that fact seems to have gone un-noticed.

I also do not share sentiments that talking to people at the CIA and being assured there was no relationship, settles any and all arguments re the issue, if anyone on the Forum is mildly acquainted with the dilemma of obtaining the CIA's, cooperation in releasing the files of one George Joannides, perhaps one will not treat me as if I were some type of raving lunatic, but I am not holding my breath. It was never my idea for this post to be a "one-man enterprise, me providing all the information, everyone else sitting back and reading", I had hoped, that other's who perhaps shared my view, might do a little digging and the idea would develop. There was once a man who said "The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society," I would add, "that not only is it no longer considered repugnant but we are collectively being molded into a culture of secrecy regarding anything & everything in matters of importance to the American people."

There seems to be a perception that one is a bad American or anti-government or anti-U.S. if one holds unpopular views, it seems to go without saying that many people automatically think that if one does not hold mainstream opinions, that one's patriotism or love of country is automatically suspect. I have the highest regard for our democratic institutions, our Armed Forces and especially those who have made the Ultimate Sacrifice, but that does not mean that I love politicians, or that I love War, or most importantly, that I have any less right to question the Government when it's actions betray fundamental precepts of Democratic government, I do not think it is right to coddle or protect individuals like Luis Posada Carilles, and call him a war-hero, when his actions were just as inhuman as any Islamic fundmentalist, but that's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert wrote
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.
My replies to your posts were meant to be informative not witty

Robert wrote

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 don’t think leaving a comment to an article (or more accurately a reply to an author’s comment) really qualifies as contacting someone. He was the one who first classified your posts on this thread as constituting “a conspiracy theory that should definietly be debunked”. I said I was ‘the guy debunking that "conspiracy theory" ’.to identify myself note that I used the term “conspiracy theory” in quotations and echoed his language. He clearly isn’t buying your theory. I don’t see how asking the author of an article cited and witness to events debated on this forum for clarification can be construed as improper.

Robert wrote

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

I don’t understand your point. I found your posts to have been unfounded, should pretend like I agree with when I don’t? Should we refrain from commenting if disagree with each other? If you look at my replies to you you’ll see that their tone is quite respectful, your replies to me are unduly hostile.

Robert wrote

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.
I don’t think asking you to back your claims and theories with evidence and logical thinking is akin to having ones deposition taken or should be considered unduly burdensome. Would you prefer it if everyone just told you how clever you were every time you post even if you’d failed to make your case? I have no hidden agenda but hey insinuating I do throws in an element of FUD.

Robert wrote

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… I will not engage in a pissing contest with him or anyone else.

My replies to you were intended to be part of a “back and forth of ideas”. YOUR replies to me by their hostile tone and attacking the messenger rather than the message have given this thread the air of a pissing contest.

I’ll make a deal with you let’s leave personalities aside and concentrate on the issues directly related to the topic instead, I get the impression you are using the former to avoid the latter.

Len

From the Greeley Daily Tribune 10-30-1976

Attorney Says Group Recovers U-2 Pilot

DENVER (UPI) - An attorney who made a recent trip to Havana with several other members of the Ripon Society said Friday Cubans claim to have the body of an American pilot who crashed 13 years ago.

John Head said he and other members of the progressive Republican group were told of the body when they asked to see some of the eight American prisoners being held [sic] in Cuban prisoners.

He said Cuban interpreter Juan Ortega, in the presence of ministry officer Reinaldo Legon, told him about the body. "There's one prisoner down here you can see that nobody wants," he quoted Ortega as saying. "He's in a block of ice. In fact, you can take his body home with you."

Head said he and others were skeptical of the claims and asked for documents and other proof that the body of the flier, identified to them as only "Johnson"

actually existed. He said they never heard any more reports about it, although one Cuban official told him. "If your government wants him back, your government knows he's here, and they can go through official channels to get him back." Head said Cuban officials claimed the body and the wreckage had been displayed to the foreign press in either 1962 or 1963. There were at least two crashes involving the high altitude U-2's during or after reconnaissance over Cuba in 1962 or 1963.

The first occurred in October 1962, when Major Rudolph Anderson Jr., of Greenville S.C. was shot down and killed during a picture taking mission. The body was returned by the Cuban government in December. The second crash involved Capt. Joseph Hyde Jr., of LaGrange, Ga. whose plane went down on November 20, 1963. Wreckage of the spy plane was found the following day in the Gulf of Mexico, 40 miles northwest of Key West, Fla and 100 miles north of the Cuban coast. His body was not found.

The same edition of the Greeley Tribune ran a concurrent story

October 30, 1976

Pilots Body Preserved in Ice

By William C. Mann

Associated Press Writer

DENVER (AP) - The body of an American spy-plane

pilot has been preserved in a block of ice for 13 years Cuban officials have told a group of visiting American's. One of the Americans said Friday the group was told, the body could be reclaimed and that Washington is aware of its existence. The pilot's name was "Johnson," and his U-2 was shot down in 1963. Denver attorney John F. Head said the group was told. Head said he and others in his seven-member group from the liberal Republican Ripon Society tried repeatedly to get the Cubans to let them see the body during a visit this month. After being told several times a viewing would be arranged, Head said he was refused on grounds that any actions concerning the corpse would have to be on a government to government basis. In Washington, a spokesman for the State Department said the only known U-2 incident in Cuba concerned a plane piloted by Major Rudolph Anderson Jr., of Greenville S.C. Anderson's spy plane was shot down by [sic] surface-to-air missile, and his body was returned and buried two months later. Published reports from that era, however, that a U-2, a high-flying glider-like jet reconnaissance plane was lost in the Caribbean on November 20, 1963. That pilot, Capt. Joseph G. Hyde Jr., of LaGrange, Ga. was never found, although pieces of his aircraft were found on November 21, in the Gulf of Mexico, 40 miles northwest of Key West, Fla and 180 miles north of Cuba. Head said the Ripon group's interpreter Juan Ortega, mentioned the body during a conversation over cocktails in the presence of a foreign ministry officer. The lawyer said the subject came up during a discussion of how the Ripon society members could help Cuba in the United States. "They were probing the depth of influence in this country," Head said. "There's one prisoner down here you can see that nobody wants," he quoted Ortega as saying. "He's in a block of ice. In fact, you can take his body home with you." See earlier story on page 21

Members of the Forum may have head their curiousity piqued by the mention of the Ripon Society. Ironically, the Society was formed in the aftermath of the Kennedy Assassination.

"Taking its name from Ripon, Wisconsin, the birthplace of the Republican Party, a loosely knit association of young business, academic and professional women and men formed the Ripon Society in 1964 to revive the Grand Old Party’s commitment to inclusion and reform. Founded on the values of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, Ripon believes in their legacy of innovation, equality of opportunity for all people, mutual responsibility, and self-government."

But back to the topic at hand, I am not familiar with a U-2 crash in the specified time period involving a "Johnson," if anyone is, I would like to know. I also believe that within the context of the articles I posted, the Cuban government officials may indeed be using the whole topic as a propaganda ploy, anyone else?

I would also like to point out that the State Dept. official who is referenced in the above article, if you will notice, failed to mention the downing of Capt. Hyde's U-2 in November 1963, and the author of the piece had to make mention of it in order to give the reader a full accounting of all the facts, which is how I characterize it, forum members are obviously free to draw their own conclusions.

I would also like to say a few words about the idea concerning why this particular topic thread was started in the first place, as it seems as if my words and meanings are hidden in some type of undecipherable code.

I would also hope that Forum members might actually go to the trouble of reading my initial post, and hopefully everyone else's comments, in the process.

The idea behind creating this thread was based on the fact, that the crash of Capt. Hyde's U-2 did not recieve a great deal of attention, whether my logic was faulty or accurate is not the point. The point is I was 'exploring the idea and hoped to create a dialogue among forum members' as to whether my idea was valid or not.

For some reason, maybe someone will "share" this with me, that fact seems to have gone un-noticed.

I also do not share sentiments that talking to people at the CIA and being assured there was no relationship, settles any and all arguments re the issue, if anyone on the Forum is mildly acquainted with the dilemma of obtaining the CIA's, cooperation in releasing the files of one George Joannides, perhaps one will not treat me as if I were some type of raving lunatic, but I am not holding my breath. It was never my idea for this post to be a "one-man enterprise, me providing all the information, everyone else sitting back and reading", I had hoped, that other's who perhaps shared my view, might do a little digging and the idea would develop. There was once a man who said "The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society," I would add, "that not only is it no longer considered repugnant but we are collectively being molded into a culture of secrecy regarding anything & everything in matters of importance to the American people."

There seems to be a perception that one is a bad American or anti-government or anti-U.S. if one holds unpopular views, it seems to go without saying that many people automatically think that if one does not hold mainstream opinions, that one's patriotism or love of country is automatically suspect. I have the highest regard for our democratic institutions, our Armed Forces and especially those who have made the Ultimate Sacrifice, but that does not mean that I love politicians, or that I love War, or most importantly, that I have any less right to question the Government when it's actions betray fundamental precepts of Democratic government, I do not think it is right to coddle or protect individuals like Luis Posada Carilles, and call him a war-hero, when his actions were just as inhuman as any Islamic fundmentalist, but that's just my opinion.

Sorry For Duplicate Post

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The coverage the Anserson shoot down was roughly compatible to the Hyde crash considering the latter was a less newsworthy event that happened days before the JFK assassination and didn’t involve the complication of having the pilot’s body being returned by Cuba. A search of the NY Times archives turns up 9 articles from 1962 that mention the Anderson incident. Only 4 were specifically about Anderson as opposed to the missile crisis or U-2 planes etc, by comparison there were 3 articles about the Hyde crash. Below are the headlines and summaries of the articles about Anderson and an earlier one which was the 1st mention the plane was missing and presumably shot down.

http://tinyurl.com/yj6mc8

AIRMEN CALLED UP; 24 Reserve Squadrons of Troop Carriers Are Affected 24 AIR SQUADRONS CALLED UP BY U.S. 14,214 Reservists Affected as McNamara Prepares for Any Emergency'

*Please Note: Articles in The Archive from 1851-1980 will open in PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader is required.

More information.

October 28, 1962, Sunday

By JACK RAYMOND Special to The New York Times

Page 1, 721 words

DISPLAYING FIRST PARAGRAPH - WASHINGTON, Oct. 27--A U-2 reconnaissance plane is missing and presumed lost over Cuba. Other unarmed planes on surveillance missions over Cuba have been fired upon.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78BD95F468685F9

Use of Soviet Rocket Seen in Loss of U-2; LOSS OF U-2 IS LAID TO SOVIET ROCKET First Report in Miami

*Please Note: Articles in The Archive from 1851-1980 will open in PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader is required.

More information.

November 2, 1962, Friday

Special to The New York Times.

Page 1, 218 words

DISPLAYING FIRST PARAGRAPH - WASHINGTON, Nov. 1-- Some Pentabon experts believe that the U-2 reconnaissance plane lost over Cuba Saturday was brought down by Russian crews manning an advanced type of antiaircraft missile.

FREE PREVIEW

U.S. Honors Pilot Lost Over Cuba

*Please Note: Articles in The Archive from 1851-1980 will open in PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader is required.

More information.

October 29, 1962, Monday

Page 16, 78 words

The first paragraph is not available for this article

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...78BD95F468685F9

U.N. Aide to Bring Pilot's Body to U.S. From Cuba Today

*Please Note: Articles in The Archive from 1851-1980 will open in PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader is required.

More information.

November 4, 1962, Sunday

Page 35, 140 words

DISPLAYING FIRST PARAGRAPH - UNITED NATIONS, N.Y., Nov. 3--The military adviser to U Thant, the Acting Secretary General, will fly to Havana tomorrow to bring back the body of a United States U-2 pilot shot down while carrying out air surveillance of Soviet missile bases in Cuba.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.htm...4D9415B828AF1D3

Body of U-2 Pilot Downed By Cuba Returned to U.S.

*Please Note: Articles in The Archive from 1851-1980 will open in PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader is required.

More information.

November 5, 1962, Monday

Page 14, 66 words

The first paragraph is not available for this article

Many other U-2’s crashed. In 1967 for example “USAF Pilot: Robert D. Hickman became unconscious and his plane flew out over the Gulf of Mexico, eventually crashing into the side of a mountain [near Oruro, Bolivia], destroying the plane. Robert Hickman died in the crash.

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

There were only 2 mentions of the Hickman crash in the NY Times archives.

http://tinyurl.com/yz4x3a

Robert wrote:

“I would also like to point out that the State Dept. official who is referenced in the above article, if you will notice, failed to mention the downing of Capt. Hyde's U-2 in November 1963, and the author of the piece had to make mention of it in order to give the reader a full accounting of all the facts, which is how I characterize it, forum members are obviously free to draw their own conclusions.”

Even if there was a cover up in 1963 would we expect a State Dept. spokesman in 1976 to have been in on it? In any case he answered accurately Hydes plane crashed 40 miles northwest of Key West over 100 miles from Cuba.

Also there is no evidence Hyde’s plane was “downed” all we know is that it crashed.

Robert wrote:

“The idea behind creating this thread was based on the fact, that the crash of Capt. Hyde's U-2 did not recieve a great deal of attention, whether my logic was faulty or accurate is not the point. The point is I was 'exploring the idea and hoped to create a dialogue among forum members' as to whether my idea was valid or not. ”

And I replied as part of a dialogue saying why I didn’t think it was valid. What’s the problem? The amount of press coverage it received was comparable to other U-2 crashes of the period.

Robert wrote:

“I also do not share sentiments that talking to people at the CIA and being assured there was no relationship, settles any and all arguments re the issue”

I agree but that was not the extent of Hyde’s argument, he spoke to the people who investigated the crash and there was no sign the crash was due to anything but a stall

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't see anything linking the crash to the events of JFK. U2s crashed before and after the events, and under similar circumstances. What's the deal?

U2s were shot down or crashed before the USA-USSR summit, which caused its cancelation, during the Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis, and now, as Robert points out, within days of JFK's assassination.

I would say the loss of a U2 is a harbanger of things to come.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't see anything linking the crash to the events of JFK. U2s crashed before and after the events, and under similar circumstances. What's the deal?

U2s were shot down or crashed before the USA-USSR summit, which caused its cancelation, during the Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis, and now, as Robert points out, within days of JFK's assassination.

I would say the loss of a U2 is a harbanger of things to come.

BK

Bill do you think anything sinister was at play?

before the USA-USSR summit

The summit had already been planned, though I guess the possibility that the PTB wanted to sabotage the summit can’t de totally discounted. Is there any evidence Ike and Krushev might have reached a break though that would have challenged their interests. The Cockburn-Ridgeway article seem to suggest the Russians might have sabotaged Powers’ plane.

during the Bay of Pigs

nope no U-2’s were shotdown during the BOP

Cuban Missile Crisis

Anderson was shot down well into the crisis the superpowers reached a deal the next day. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/cuba-62.htm

I am now in correspondence with Joe Hyde III, he told me the following (he gave me permission to quote anything he writes me):

regarding the shoot down of Rudy Anderson a year earlier: That was a catalyst for resolving the Cuban Missile Crisis. What the US didn't know at the time was that the Soviets had a brigade of their army in Cuba armed with tactical nukes. The Soviets did not want to have to deal with a small scale nuclear war over the shoot down of Rudy Anderson. And, the shoot down was conducted WITHOUT the consent of the Kremlin. All of these facts came out in the CIA symposium in 1998 where they declassified the U-2 program. There were some former (retired) Soviet generals attending and participating in panel discussions a la CSPAN.
Does anybody know anything more about the symposium?

within days of JFK's assassination

But Robert has been unable to come up with any reason to believe the events were linked.

And hey Bill don't forget the U-2 that crashed near Oruro, Bolivia (see earlier post) a few months before and about 200 miles from Che's capture and execution in Valle Grande

Vallegrandescboliviamine02.jpg

I asked Hyde:

I also wonder even if someone wanted to sabotage the plane how exactly they'd do it. I image they'd had to have corrupted several members of the ground crew and do so in a way that your dad would not have noticed during his pre-flight check and the investigators and divers not discovered (unless they were in on it too).

And he replied:

There is a book written called "Me and U-2" http://www.habu.org/meandu2/. The author was a member of my dad's ground crew. My dad was well liked and respected. I am confident none of them would be in on a conspiracy.

Apperently the book mentions the Hyde crash if anyone's interested.

Hyde also told me:

In 1993 and 1996 I attended the 4080 SRW reunion in Del Rio where I spoke with the Deputy Commander of Operations at the time who headed the safety and accident investigation. He told me exactly what I wrote. I believe him.
Regarding the possibility that his dad’s plane had been made to crash as an aborted pretext for an invasion he wrote (emphasis Hyde's):
If it was, the crash occurred at a really silly place to make a connection. He went down 40 miles NORTHWEST of Key West, far away from the shores of Castro's Cuba.

Also, the U-2 was flimsy and the thin air would amplify the damage, surely downing the plane near the point of impact (or proximity explosion which took out Rudy Anderson and Gary Powers). If ANYTHING exploded near it, it went down immediately. There was no "nursing" the plane back. Therefore, if you are going to make a crash of a U-2 a credible reason to invade Cuba, wouldn't it make sense to explode it OVER the island, not northwest of Key West?

He wrote the following regarding Cuba’s “Gringo” “on the rocks” story:
“We had a Georgia US Congressman look into this for us in 1977. In fact, my grandfather, Joe Hyde, Sr was all over it (I was in 7th grade). There never was any U-2 pilot in ice in Cuba. They did retrieve a body or two of some Bay of Pigs mercenaries, but not US G.I.'s

I followed up on this story again in 1987 and talked via phone to a lawyer involved in this trip. I believe he was from Denver. He said the newspapers got it all wrong and never followed up. The body was of a B-25/26 mercenary pilot or crew member. No U-2 pilot; no US GI.

Also, it would be quite remarkable for the Cubans to retrieve the body of a U-2 pilot 40 miles NORTHWEST of Key West when US military search and rescue craft and personnel were in the vicinity within 10 minutes of the crash!”

Len

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len/Bill/Robert,

Forgive my ignorance, but am I right in recalling that JFK transferred control of the U2 programme from CIA to Pentagon/DIA in either 1961 or 1962? I dimly recollect a senior CIA figure resigned in protest against the transfer. True or false?

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len/Bill/Robert,

Forgive my ignorance, but am I right in recalling that JFK transferred control of the U2 programme from CIA to Pentagon/DIA in either 1961 or 1962? I dimly recollect a senior CIA figure resigned in protest against the transfer. True or false?

Paul

"In November 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized the U-2 program. In 1956 the term "Dragon Lady" was born with a major Central Intelligence Agency(CIA) operation by the same name using the U-2. "Dragon Lady" was the name of a popular comic strip during this time that seemed to represent the nature of U-2. The word dragon is associated with earlier British projects to gain information about German rocket programs. Eventually, in the reconnaissance world, the term dragon was used to refer to individuals processing scientific or technical information.

On 14 December 1960, Detachment(Det) H was created in Taiwan. The "Blackcat" nickname associated with today's 5th Reconnaissance Squadron(5RS) was started by Det H. Det H flyers would frequent an establishment called the "Blackcat" in a nearby town. The name "Blackcat" soon became synonymous with the members of the U-2 Det. The original Blackcat patch was designed in 1961 by Lieutenant Colonel Chen, Whei-Shen. Lt Col Chen was shot down on 1 September 1962. The U-2 program remained under the reigns of the CIA from 1954 until 1974 when it was turned over to the United States Air Force.

The above information is from the website globalsecurity.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The U-2 program remained under the reigns of the CIA from 1954 until 1974 when it was turned over to the United States Air Force.

The above information is from the website globalsecurity.org

Robert,

Thanks for the impressively certain pronouncement from the global-thingyme website. Central claim true, do you think?

It certainly prompted me to a rummage through my chaotic files & book shelves. In order of discovery, the following:

1) Michael R. Beschloss. Mayday: Eisenhower, Khrushchev and the U-2 Affair (London: Faber & Faber, 1986), p.391:

“In September 1962, U-2 pilots brought back the first concrete evidence of Soviet missiles in Cuba. Stepping up the flights, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara had the fliers formally transferred from CIA back to the Air Force.”

2) Mark J. White. The Cuban Missile Crisis (London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1996), pp.98-99:

“An interesting footnote…was the fact that during the missile crisis the president himself began to question the loyalty of the CIA. On the evening of 25 October Ray S. Cline, deputy director of intelligence, was attending a party hosted by Mrs. Anna Chennault, when an angry Kennedy called. According to Cline, the president said:

he had heard stories that CIA officers were alleging that intelligence on offensive missile bases in Cuba had been available for several days before it was called to the attention of the President. He asked me to confirm that I was responsible for the analysis of this kind of intelligence and appropriate dissemination of it to higher authorities, and to tell him the facts in the case.”

Cline proceeded to assure Kennedy that these rumours were unfounded, an explanation that apparently satisfied the President. (28)

(28) Cline memorandum, “Notification of NSC Officials of Intelligence on Missile Bases in Cuba,” 27 October 1962, in ibid., 149.

3) Stewart Alsop, “CIA: The Battle for Secret Power,” Saturday Evening Post, July 27, 1963, p.19:

“As this is written, the job of McCone’s fifth key man is open. Until mid-June, it was occupied by Herbert (Pete) Scoville, an able scientist highly regarded in the White House. Scoville was D.D.R. – deputy director for research, a post newly created by McCone. A more accurate title might be deputy director for technical espionage. Mata Hari, in fact, is rapidly giving ground to such scientific intelligence devices as the U-2, reconnaissance satellites, side-viewing radar, long-range communications intercepts and other unmentionable technical means of finding out what the other side is up to.

At the height of the Cuban crisis, the job of overflying Cuba in U-2s was taken out of Scoville’s hands, and assigned to the Pentagon. The deed – the fell deed in the CIA’s eyes – was done with McCone’s approval after a bloody jurisdictional hassle at Scoville’s level, although the hassle did not, contrary to published report, lead to any ‘surveillance gap.’ Scoville is not talking, but it is a good guess that the Pentagon’s tendency to move in on him, and McCone’s tendency to remain above the resulting battle, had a lot to do with his resignation in June. The search for a successor is under way.”

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The U-2 program remained under the reigns of the CIA from 1954 until 1974 when it was turned over to the United States Air Force.

The above information is from the website globalsecurity.org

Robert,

Thanks for the impressively certain pronouncement from the global-thingyme website. Central claim true, do you think?

It certainly prompted me to a rummage through my chaotic files & book shelves. In order of discovery, the following:

1) Michael R. Beschloss. Mayday: Eisenhower, Khrushchev and the U-2 Affair (London: Faber & Faber, 1986), p.391:

“In September 1962, U-2 pilots brought back the first concrete evidence of Soviet missiles in Cuba. Stepping up the flights, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara had the fliers formally transferred from CIA back to the Air Force.”

2) Mark J. White. The Cuban Missile Crisis (London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1996), pp.98-99:

“An interesting footnote…was the fact that during the missile crisis the president himself began to question the loyalty of the CIA. On the evening of 25 October Ray S. Cline, deputy director of intelligence, was attending a party hosted by Mrs. Anna Chennault, when an angry Kennedy called. According to Cline, the president said:

he had heard stories that CIA officers were alleging that intelligence on offensive missile bases in Cuba had been available for several days before it was called to the attention of the President. He asked me to confirm that I was responsible for the analysis of this kind of intelligence and appropriate dissemination of it to higher authorities, and to tell him the facts in the case.”

Cline proceeded to assure Kennedy that these rumours were unfounded, an explanation that apparently satisfied the President. (28)

(28) Cline memorandum, “Notification of NSC Officials of Intelligence on Missile Bases in Cuba,” 27 October 1962, in ibid., 149.

3) Stewart Alsop, “CIA: The Battle for Secret Power,” Saturday Evening Post, July 27, 1963, p.19:

“As this is written, the job of McCone’s fifth key man is open. Until mid-June, it was occupied by Herbert (Pete) Scoville, an able scientist highly regarded in the White House. Scoville was D.D.R. – deputy director for research, a post newly created by McCone. A more accurate title might be deputy director for technical espionage. Mata Hari, in fact, is rapidly giving ground to such scientific intelligence devices as the U-2, reconnaissance satellites, side-viewing radar, long-range communications intercepts and other unmentionable technical means of finding out what the other side is up to.

At the height of the Cuban crisis, the job of overflying Cuba in U-2s was taken out of Scoville’s hands, and assigned to the Pentagon. The deed – the fell deed in the CIA’s eyes – was done with McCone’s approval after a bloody jurisdictional hassle at Scoville’s level, although the hassle did not, contrary to published report, lead to any ‘surveillance gap.’ Scoville is not talking, but it is a good guess that the Pentagon’s tendency to move in on him, and McCone’s tendency to remain above the resulting battle, had a lot to do with his resignation in June. The search for a successor is under way.”

Paul

Thanks for the impressively certain pronouncement from the global-thingyme website. Central claim true, do you think?

Well, Paul that is a good question, and an honest answer on my part would be, I am not really sure, because while globalsecurity.org may be correct in the general sense, there may [probably?] be some exceptions. as the information you have provided concerning [u-2 overflights re: Cuba turned over to Pentagon at the height of the Missile Crisis]. I also have a rather extensive collection, and when the question was asked I was searching thru various CIA histories, Wise/Ross books et cetera, and did not find out the information being asked, so for the sake of time constraints I went to the Net, and found that link.....In the realm of controversial historical information, as in say, the chronology and details concerning "who did not allow the U.S. airstrikes during the Bahía de Cochinos [bay of Pigs] you will more than likely discover there is conflicting information from various sources, while there is yet indeed a "historical consensus" nonetheless.

Your question may run along a similar dynamic. As far as the info you posted re: when the missiles were discovered, I personally am of the school of thought that certain aspects regarding the Missiles in Cuba and when they were discovered in reality versus what newspaper stories at the time were saying were probably politicized on someone's part.

For Example - I would go out on a limb and offer that Senator Smathers of Florida, may have learned of the missiles presence before JFK did, but that is a very opinionated comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CIA had its own (small) fleet of U-2s, and the USAF had their own fleet (albeit not as advanced in ECM or performance as the CIA fleet).

Formal responsibility for U-2 overflights of Cuba was turned over to the USAF on 12 OCT 62. This was because it was thought that the cover story for the CIA pilots (Lockheed employees ferrying aircraft) was too weak, and it would be better to use USAF pilots and claim it was a mission which had strayed off course. This was agreed, but it was pointed out the CIA aircraft were more capable and the USAF pilots were not familiar with them. It was decided to use USAF pilots after they had done a familiarisation with the CIA aircraft.

(Memorandum for DCI McCone from McGeorge Bundy, "Reconnaissance of Cuba", 12 OCT 62)

The person who objected to the transfer of responsibility was the Acting DCI, GEN Marshall S. Carter, US Army. He felt that the CIA already had demonstrated command & control of such flights, whereas the USAF lacked experience in controlling overflights. carter thought that changing C&C at such a crucial time was a mistake.

(The CIA and the U-2 Program 1954-1974, Gregory W. Pedlow & Donald E. Welzenbach, 1998)

Edited by Evan Burton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CIA had its own (small) fleet of U-2s, and the USAF had their own fleet (albeit not as advanced in ECM or performance as the CIA fleet).

Formal responsibility for U-2 overflights of Cuba was turned over to the USAF on 12 OCT 62. This was because it was thought that the cover story for the CIA pilots (Lockheed employees ferrying aircraft) was too weak, and it would be better to use USAF pilots and claim it was a mission which had strayed off course. This was agreed, but it was pointed out the CIA aircraft were more capable and the USAF pilots were not familiar with them. It was decided to use USAF pilots after they had done a familiarisation with the CIA aircraft.

(Memorandum for DCI McCone from McGeorge Bundy, "Reconnaissance of Cuba", 12 OCT 62)

The person who objected to the transfer of responsibility was the Acting DCI, GEN Marshall S. Carter, US Army. He felt that the CIA already had demonstrated command & control of such flights, whereas the USAF lacked experience in controlling overflights. carter thought that changing C&C at such a crucial time was a mistake.

(The CIA and the U-2 Program 1954-1974, Gregory W. Pedlow & Donald E. Welzenbach, 1998)

Thanks for the clarification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CIA had its own (small) fleet of U-2s, and the USAF had their own fleet (albeit not as advanced in ECM or performance as the CIA fleet).

Formal responsibility for U-2 overflights of Cuba was turned over to the USAF on 12 OCT 62. This was because it was thought that the cover story for the CIA pilots (Lockheed employees ferrying aircraft) was too weak, and it would be better to use USAF pilots and claim it was a mission which had strayed off course. This was agreed, but it was pointed out the CIA aircraft were more capable and the USAF pilots were not familiar with them. It was decided to use USAF pilots after they had done a familiarisation with the CIA aircraft.

(Memorandum for DCI McCone from McGeorge Bundy, "Reconnaissance of Cuba", 12 OCT 62)

The person who objected to the transfer of responsibility was the Acting DCI, GEN Marshall S. Carter, US Army. He felt that the CIA already had demonstrated command & control of such flights, whereas the USAF lacked experience in controlling overflights. carter thought that changing C&C at such a crucial time was a mistake.

(The CIA and the U-2 Program 1954-1974, Gregory W. Pedlow & Donald E. Welzenbach, 1998)

Evan,

Thanks for the info.

I'm puzzled Marshall should have advanced such a fantastic argument - he seriously thought wrecking the Paris summit between Ike and Khrushchev was a solid demonstration of CIA judiciousness in the deployment of the U-2?

A second thought occurs: Does the Pedlow/Welzenbach tome omit all reference to Scoville's resignation? Surely not?!

And a final thought: Are we really to believe Kennedy et al were satisfied with the CIA's performance in the run up to the missile crisis? A Republican Senator, Keating, was being spoon fed info that was withheld from the President and his National Security Adviser - didn't Bundy go on TV in late September '62 to deny the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba? - and Kennedy was untroubled by this? After the Bay of Pigs? The Agency revolt over the Genevan settlement on Laos? (To name but two pieces of rank insubordination...)

Forsooth!

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...