|
The founding fathers of the American nation could not imagine
that what they were proclaiming at that time, as
any other historical society, was carrying
within it the seeds of its own transformation.
The attractive Declaration of Independence of 1776,
which celebrated its 231st birthday
last Wednesday, stated something which in one
way or another captivated many of us: “We hold
these truths to be self evident, that all men
are created equal; that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain inalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the
pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these
rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of
the governed. That whenever any Form of
Government becomes destructive of these ends, it
is the Right of the People to alter it or
abolish it, and to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles and
organizing its powers in such form, as to them
shall seem most likely to effect their Safety
and Happiness.”
It was the result of the influence of the best minds and
philosophers of a Europe overwhelmed by
feudalism, the privileges of the aristocracy and
absolute monarchies.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau stated in his famous Social
Contract: “The strongest is never strong enough
to be always the master, unless he transforms
strength into right, and obedience into duty.”
(…) “Force is a physical power, and I fail to
see what moral effect it can have. To yield to
force is an act of necessity, not of will…” (…)
“To renounce liberty is to renounce being a man,
to surrender the rights of Humanity and even its
duties. For him who renounces everything no
indemnity is possible.”
In the Thirteen Colonies that obtained their
independence, there were also forms of slavery
as atrocious as those in ancient times. Men and
women were sold at public auction. The new
nation emerged with its own religion and
culture. The Tea Tax was the spark that set off
the rebellion.
In those vast lands slavery continued for at least 100
years, and after two centuries, slave
descendants are still feeling the consequences.
There were native communities which were the
legitimate natural inhabitants, as well as
forests, water, lakes, herds of millions of
bison, natural species of animals and plants,
abundant and various foods. Hydrocarbons were
unknown then, as was the enormous wasting of
energy carried out by today’s society.
Had the same declaration of principles been
proclaimed in the countries crossed by the
Sahara Desert, it would not have created a
paradise for European immigrants. Today we must
speak about immigrants coming from the poor
countries that cross, or try to cross, the U.S.
borders by the millions each year in the quest
for jobs, and are not entitled even to parental
custody over their children if they are born on
U.S. soil.
The Philadelphia Declaration was written at a time when
there were only small printing presses and
letters took years to get from one country to
another. There were only a few people who could
read and write. Today, images, words and ideas
travel in a fraction of a second from one corner
to another in a globalized planet. Conditioned
reflexes are created in the minds of people. We
cannot speak about the right to use, but rather
about the overuse of free expression and mass
alienation. Likewise, with modest electronic
equipment, anybody, during peacetime, can send
their ideas out into the world without any
authorization from any Constitution. It would
be a battle of ideas; in any case, a mass of
truths versus a mass of lies.
Truths do not need commercial advertisements. Nobody
could disagree with the Philadelphia Declaration
or with Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social
Contract. Both documents support the right to
struggle against the established world tyranny.
Could we ignore the pillaging wars and the slaughters
which are forced upon the poor peoples who make
up three-quarters of the planet? No! Those are
typical of today’s world and of a system that
could not sustain itself otherwise. At an
enormous political, economic and scientific
cost, the human species is being pushed to the
edge of an abyss.
My aim is not to repeat concepts that I have mentioned
in other reflections. Based on simple events,
my purpose is to carry on demonstrating the
immense hypocrisy and the total lack of ethics
which characterize the actions, chaotic by
nature, of the government of the United States.
In "The Killing Machine”, published last Sunday, I said
that it was through one of the declassified CIA
documents that we found out about the attempt to
poison me using an official of the Cuban
government with access to my office. It dealt
with a person about whom I should have sought
out some information, since I didn't have the
elements on hand to make the necessary judgement.
In fact, I offered my apologies if I was hurting
the feelings of any descendants, whether or not
the concerned person were guilty. I later
continued to analyze other important subjects in
the CIA revelations.
During the early days of the Revolution, I used to
visit, almost on a daily basis, the recently
created National Institute of Agrarian Reform,
located where today we have the headquarters of
the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces.
We were not able to use the Palace of the
Revolution yet, since that was the venue of the
Palace of Justice at that time. Its
construction resulted from juicy business deals
made by the overthrown regime. The main profit
came from the increased value of real estate
lands, from which thousands of people had been
evicted. As a recently graduated lawyer, I
worked pro bono as the attorney for the
defense of those people, months before Batista’s
coup d'état.
From the offices of INRA, on March 4, 1960, I heard an
ear-splitting explosion of La Coubre and
I watched a dark column of smoke rising above
the port of Havana. What came to my mind
immediately was the thought of a ship loaded
with anti-tank and anti-personal grenades that
could be used in the FAL rifles we had acquired
from Belgium, a country far from being suspected
of being Communist. Right away I went down to
go to that location. On my way there, because
of the noise and the vehicle’s vibrations, I
could not hear the second explosion. More than
100 people died and dozens were maimed. At the
funeral for the victims, the cry of “Homeland or
Death” (Patria o Muerte) was spontaneously born.
We know that everything was carefully planned by the
Central Intelligence Agency right from the port
where the ship was loaded. The ship had passed
through the ports of Le Havre, Hamburg and
Antwerp. The grenades were loaded at the last
of these, in Belgium. The explosions on the
ship also killed several of the French crew.
Why, in the name of freedom of information, do they not
declassify a single document that will tell us
how the CIA, almost half a century ago, exploded
the steamship La Coubre and cut off the
supply of Belgian weapons which, as the CIA
itself admitted on June 14, 1960, was a very
important concern for the United States?
What was I devoting my time to during the
feverish days previous to the attack through Bay
of Pigs?
The first large-scale clean-up in the Escambray
Mountains took place during the last months of
1960 up until early in 1961. More than 50
thousand men took part, almost all of them
coming from the former provinces of Havana and
Las Villas.
A flood of weapons was arriving in ships from the USSR.
These were not exploding in ports. It was
useless to try to buy them elsewhere, and thus
we avoided the pretext that the United States
used to attack Guatemala, which eventually cost
more than one hundred thousand Guatemalan people
dead or missing.
In Czechoslovakia we bought light weapons and a number
of 20 mm and double-barrelled anti-aircraft
guns. The tanks with 85 mm cannons, 100 mm
armored artillery, 75 mm antitank cannon,
mortars, howitzers and large caliber cannon up
to 122 mm, and light and heavy anti-aircraft,
all came directly from the USSR.
It would have taken at least a year to train by
traditional methods the personnel needed to use
all that weaponry. We did it in a matter of
weeks. We dedicated practically one hundred
percent of our time to that task almost two
years after the triumph of the Revolution.
We were aware of an imminent attack, but didn’t know when
or how it would come. All possible access
points were being defended or guarded. The
leaders all had their headquarters: Raúl in
Oriente, Almeida in the center, and Che in Pinar
del Río. I was headquartered in the capital: a
former bourgeois residence had been adapted for
that purpose on the highest right bank of the
Almendares River, close to the point where the
river flows into the sea.
It was already daylight on April 15, 1961, and there I
was, since the first early morning hours,
receiving news from Oriente, when a ship had
come from the southern United States, skippered
by Nino Díaz, with a group of
counterrevolutionaries on board dressed in olive
green fatigues similar to the ones worn by our
troops, ready to land in the Baracoa area. This
was to create a diversion far from the exact
site of the main attack, in order to create
maximum confusion. The ship was already at the
crosshairs of the antitank cannons, but in the
end the landing did not take place.
On the night of the 14th, we also got
news that one of our three jet fighters, which
were training craft ready for engagement, had
blown up during a reconnaissance flight over the
area of presumptive landing. This was
undoubtedly a Yankee action perpetrated from the
Guantánamo Naval Base or somewhere else in the
sea or the air. There was no radar to exactly
pinpoint the event. The outstanding
revolutionary pilot, Orestes Acosta, died in
that action.
From the headquarters I mentioned, I could see the B-26s
flying low over the spot and, a few seconds
later, I heard the first missiles launched
without warning against our young artillery, who
for the most part were being trained at the
Ciudad Libertad Air Base. The response of those
brave men was practically instantaneous.
Besides, I have no doubt whatsoever that Juan Orta was a
traitor. The pertinent details about his life
and conduct are where they ought to be: in the
archives of the Department of State Security,
born in those years under enemy fire. The most
politically conscious men were the ones assigned
that mission.
Orta had received the poisoned pills which had been
proposed to Maheu by Giancana. Maheu’s
conversation with Roselli, who would play the
part of mob contact, took place on September 14,
1960, months before Kennedy’s election and
inauguration.
The traitor, Orta, had no special merits. We kept
writing each other when we were looking for the
support of Cuban emigrants and exiles in the
United States. He was appreciated for his
apparent training and helpful attitude. That
was where his special talent laid. After the
triumph of the Revolution, he had frequent
access to me during an important period. Based
on his possibilities then, it was believed that
he would be able to put the poison into a soft
drink or a glass of orange juice.
He had received money from the mob supposedly for
helping to reopen the gambling casinos. He had
nothing to do with this. We were the ones who
had made that decision. Urrutia's unilateral
order, issued without previous consultation, was
creating chaos and promoting protests by
thousands of workers in the tourist and business
sectors, at a time when unemployment was running
high.
Some time later, the gambling casinos were shut
down for good by the Revolution.
When he was given the poison, contrary to what used to
happen in the early days, Orta had very little
possibilities to coincide with me. I was fully
involved in the activities I previously
described.
Without saying a word to anybody about the enemy plans,
on April 13th, 1961, two days before the attack
on our air bases, Orta sought asylum at the
Venezuelan Embassy which Rómulo Betancourt had
placed at the unconditional service of
Washington. The numerous counterrevolutionaries
seeking asylum there were not granted exit
permits until the brutal armed aggression by the
United States against Cuba let up.
We already had to put up with the betrayal of Rafael del
Pino Siero in Mexico. After deserting a few
days before our departure for Cuba, a date he
wasn’t aware of, he sold to Batista for 30
thousand dollars some important secrets dealing
with part of the weapons and the boat which
would take us to Cuba. With elegant cunning he
divided up the information in order to gain
confidence and to guarantee compliance with each
part. First, he would receive some thousands of
dollars for delivering two weapons deposits that
he knew about. A week later, he would deliver
the most important information: the boat that
was bringing us to Cuba and the landing site.
They would be able to capture us all along with
the other weapons, but before that, they had to
give him all of the money. Some Yankee expert
surely had advised him.
Despite this betrayal, we left Mexico in the “Granma” on
the set date. Some of our supporters thought
that Pino would never betray us, that his
desertion was due to his dislike of discipline
and the training I demanded of him. I won’t say
how I learned of the operation that had been
hatched between him and Batista, but I learned
about it with full precision, so we were able to
take appropriate measures in order to protect
personnel and weapons that were en route to
Tuxpan, the launch site. That valuable
information didn’t cost a penny.
When the final offensive by the tyranny in the Sierra
Maestra had finished, we had to also fight
against the bold tricks of Evaristo Venereo, an
agent of the regime who, disguised as a
revolutionary, tried to infiltrate the Movement
in Mexico. He was the liaison with the secret
police in that country, a very repressive body
which he advised for the interrogation of
Cándido González; this heroic militant was
blindfolded during his interrogation and was
assassinated after the landing. He was one of
the few comrades who drove the car I moved
around in.
Evaristo returned to Cuba later. He was assigned the
mission of assassinating me when our forces were
advancing towards Santiago de Cuba, Holguín, Las
Villas and the western part of Cuba. We learned
of the details when we took over the archives of
the Military Intelligence Service. These events
are documented.
I have survived numerous assassination plots. Only luck
and the habit of carefully observing every
detail allowed all of us, Camilo, Che, Raúl,
Almeida, Guillermo, who were later known as the
leaders of a triumphant Revolution, to survive
the trickery of Eutimio Guerra during the early
and most dramatic days in the Sierra Maestra.
We might have possibly died when we were at the
verge of being eliminated with a ridiculous
siege laid on our camp by surprise under the
traitor’s guidance. During the brief clash that
ensued, we suffered a sad loss: a wonderful,
black sugar worker and active combatant, Julio
Zenón Acosta, who moved ahead of me and fell at
my side. Others survived the deadly danger, and
fell in combat afterwards, as was the case of
Ciro Frías, an excellent comrade and promising
leader, who died in Imías, in the Second Front;
Ciro Redondo, who fiercely fought the enemy with
the troops of Che’s column, and was killed in
Marverde; and Julito Díaz, who was relentlessly
shooting his caliber 30 machine gun and died a
few steps from our Command Post at El Uvero
battle.
We set up the ambush at a very well chosen spot,
waiting for the enemy, because we were aware of
the moves they intended to make that day. Our
attention slackened for a few minutes when two
men from the group, who had been sent out as
scouts before deciding to move, returned without
news.
Eutimio was guiding the enemy dressed in a white
‘guayabera’ shirt, the only thing visible in the
Alto de Espinosa woods, where we were waiting
for him. Batista had the headlines ready about
the elimination of the whole group, which was
for him a sure thing, and had notified the
press. Out of excessive confidence, we had in
fact underestimated the enemy which was taking
advantage of human weaknesses. At that time, we
were a group of about 22 well-seasoned and
selected men. Ramiro, wounded in one leg, was
recovering at some distance from us.
The column of more than 300 soldiers, who were
advancing one abreast through the sheer and
wooded landscape, was spared a storming blow,
thanks to a last-minute move that we made.
How did that machine work in the face of the
Cuban Revolution?
As early as April of 1959, I visited the United States
as a guest of the Washington Press Club. Nixon
deigned to have me visit him in his private
office. Later he said that I was inexperienced
in the subject of economics.
I was so aware of this inexperience, that I enrolled in
three university degree courses in order to
qualify for a scholarship that would allow me to
study Economics at Harvard. I had already
finished and had written the exams for all the
Law, Diplomatic Law and Social Science courses.
I only had two subjects to be examined on:
History of Social Doctrines and History of
Political Doctrines. I had been studying them
carefully. That year, no other student was
making the effort. The path had been cleared,
but events were on the fast track in Cuba and I
understood that this was not the time to take a
scholarship to go study Economics.
I went to Harvard on a visit at the end of 1948. As I
returned to New York, I bought a copy of The
Capital in English in order to study Marx’s
most notable work and at the same time improve
my command of that language. I was not “an
underground Communist Party member” as Nixon,
with his crafty and penetrating gaze, happened
to think. If there is something I can be sure
of, and I discovered it at the University, is
that I was first a Utopian Communist and then a
radical Socialist by virtue of my own analysis
and studies, and was ready to fight with the
proper strategies and tactics.
My only qualm about speaking with Nixon was the distaste
I had in frankly explaining my philosophy to a
Vice-president and a likely future President of
the United States, an expert in imperialist
economic concepts and governing methods, which I
had ceased to believe in long ago.
What was the gist of that meeting which took hours,
according to the author of the declassified memo
that refers to it? I only have my own memories
of what happened. I have selected the
paragraphs from this memo which, in my opinion,
best explain Nixon’s ideas.
“He (Castro) was particularly concerned about whether he
might have irritated Senator Smathers for the
comments he made with regard to him. I
reassured him at the beginning of the
conversation that 'Meet the Press’ was one of
the most difficult programs a public official
could go to and that he had done extremely well
– particularly having in mind the fact that he
had the courage to go on in English rather than
to speak through a translator.”
“It was also apparent that as far as his visit to the
United States was concerned that his primary
interest was ‘not to get a change in the sugar
quota or to get a government loan but to win
support for his policies from American public
opinion.”
“It was this almost slavish subservience to prevailing
majority opinion –the voice of the mob– rather
than his naïve attitude towards Communism and
his obvious lack of understanding of even the
most elementary economic principles which
concerned me most in evaluating what kind of a
leader he might eventually turn out to be. That
is the reason why I spent as much time as I
could trying to emphasize that he had the great
gift of leadership, but that it was the
responsibility of a leader not always to follow
public opinion (but to help to direct it in the
proper channels,) not to give the people what
they think they want at a time of emotional
stress but to make them want what they ought to
have.”
“I in my turn, tried to impress upon him the fact that
while we believe in majority rule that even a
majority can be tyrannous and that there are
certain individual rights which a majority
should never have the power to destroy.”
“I frankly doubt that I made too much of an impression
upon him but he did listen and appeared to be
somewhat receptive. I tried to cast my appeal
to him primarily in terms of how his place in
history would be affected by the courage and
statesmanship he displayed at this time. I
emphasized that the easy thing to do was to
follow the mob, but that the right thing in the
long run would be better for the people and, of
course, better for him as well. As I have
already indicated he was incredibly naïve with
regard to the Communist threat and appeared to
have no fear whatever that the Communists might
eventually come to power in Cuba.”
“In our discussions of Communism I again tried to cast
the arguments in terms of his own self-interest
and to point out that the revolution which he
had led might be turned against him and the
Cuban people unless he kept control of the
situation and made sure that the Communists did
not get into positions of power and influence.
On this score I feel I made very little
impression, if any.”
“I put as much emphasis as possible on the need for him
to delegate responsibility, but again whether I
got across was doubtful.”
“It was apparent that while he paid lip service to such
institutions as freedom of speech, press and
religion that his primary concern was with
developing programs for economic progress. He
said over and over that a man who worked in the
sugar cane fields for three months a year and
starved the rest of the year wanted a job,
something to eat, a house and some clothing.”
“He indicated that it was very foolish for the United
States to furnish arms to Cuba or any other
Caribbean country. He said ‘anybody knows that
our countries are not going to be able to play
any part in the defense of this hemisphere in
the event a world war breaks out. The arms
governments get in this hemisphere are only used
to suppress people as Batista used his arms to
fight the revolution. It would be far better if
the money that you give to Latin American
countries for arms be provided for capital
investment.’ I will have to admit that as far
as his basic argument was concerned here I found
little that I could disagree with!”
“We had a rather extended discussion of how Cuba could
get this investment capital it needed for
economic progress. He insisted that what Cuba
primarily needed and what he wanted was not
private capital but government capital.”
I was referring to the capital owned by the Cuban
government.
Nixon himself acknowledged that I never asked for
any resources from the U.S. government. He got
a little mixed up and said:
“… that government capital was limited because of the many
demands upon it and the budget problems we
presently confronted.”
It was evident I clarified him on that because
right afterwards he pointed out in his memo:
“… that there was competition for capital throughout the
Americas and the world and that it would not go
to a country where there was any considerable
fear that policies might be adopted which would
discriminate against private enterprise.”
“Here again on this point I doubt if I made too much of
an impression.”
“I tried tactfully to suggest to Castro that Muñoz Marín
had done a remarkable job in Puerto Rico in
attracting private capital and in generally
raising the standard of living of his people and
that Castro might well send one of his top
economic advisors to Puerto Rico to have a
conference with Muñoz Marín. He took a very dim
view of this suggestion, pointing out that the
Cuban people were ‘very nationalistic’ and would
look with suspicion on any programs initiated in
what they would consider to be a ‘colony’ of the
United States.”
“I am inclined to think that the real reason for his
attitude is simply that he disagreed with Muñoz
firm position as an advocate of private
enterprise and does not want to get any advice
which might divert him from his course of
leading Cuba toward more socialism of its
economy.”
“You in America should not be talking so much about your
fear of what the Communists may do in Cuba or in
some other country in Latin America, Asia or
Africa…”
“I also tried to put our attitude toward communism in
context by pointing out that Communism was
something more than just an idea but that its
agents were dangerously effective in their
ability to grasp power and to set up
dictatorships.”
“Significantly enough he did not raise any questions
about the sugar quota nor did he engage in any
specific discussions with regard to economic
assistance.”
“My own appraisal of him as a man is somewhat mixed. The
one fact we can be sure of is that he has those
indefinable qualities which make him a leader of
men. Whatever we may think of him he is going
to be a great factor in the development of Cuba
and very possibly in Latin American affairs
generally. He seems to be sincere, he is either
incredibly naïve about Communism or under
Communist discipline…”
“But because he has the power to lead to which I have
referred we have no choice but at least to try
to orient him in the right direction.”
That was the end of his confidential memo to the
White House.
When Nixon started to talk, nothing could stop
him. He was used to preaching Latin American
presidents. He did not prepare any drafts of
what he intended to say or took notes of what he
actually said. He responded to questions that
were never asked. He dealt with subjects based
only on the opinions he had about his
interlocutor. Not even an elementary school
student would hope to receive so many lessons
altogether on democracy, anti-Communism and
other matters related to the art of governing.
He was fond of developed capitalism and its
domain of the world out of its own natural
right. He idealized the system. He didn’t
conceive otherwise, nor was there the slightest
possibility of getting through to him.
The killings began under the Eisenhower and Nixon
governments. There is no other way to explain
why Kissinger exclaimed, and I quote, that
“blood would flow if we knew, for example, that
Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General, had
personally directed the assassination of Fidel
Castro”. Some blood had flown before. What the
former administrations did, with few exceptions,
was to follow the same policy.
In a memorandum dated on December 11, 1959, the head of
the CIA’s Western Hemisphere Division, J.C.
King, said, and I quote: “We must give thorough
consideration to the elimination of Fidel
Castro. […] Many informed people believe that
the disappearance of Fidel would greatly
accelerate the fall of the government…”
As it was recognized by the CIA and the Church Senate
Committee in 1975, the assassination plans
sprang up in 1960, when the purpose of
destroying the Cuban Revolution was included in
the president’s agenda dated March that year.
The J.C. King memo was sent to Allen Dulles, the
CIA Director, with a note that expressly
requested approval for those and other
measures. They were all accepted and gladly
welcomed, specially the proposal of
assassination, as reflected by the following
annotation in the document signed by Allen
Dulles and dated one day after, on December 12:
“The recommendation contained in Paragraph 3 is
approved.”
In a draft of a book that would contain a detailed
analysis of declassified documents, written by
Pedro Álvarez-Tabío, Director of the Historical
Affairs Office of the Council of State, it is
stated that: "Up to 1993, the Cuban State
Security had discovered and neutralized a total
of 627 conspiracies against the life of the
Commander in Chief Fidel Castro. This figure
includes both the plans that reached some phase
of concrete execution and those which were
neutralized at an early stage, as well as other
attempts that by various ways and for different
reasons have been publicly revealed in the
United States itself. It does not include a
number of cases that could not be verified,
since the only available information was the
testimony of some of the participants. This of
course did not include any of the plans plotted
after 1993.”
Previously, we were able to learn from the report
by Colonel Jack Hawkins, CIA paramilitary chief
during the preparations for the Bay of Pigs
invasion, that “the paramilitary General Staff
studied the possibility of organizing an assault
force of greater magnitude than the small
contingency force planned earlier.”
“It was thought that this force would be landed in Cuba
after effective resistance activity, including
active guerrilla forces had been developed. It
should be noted that guerrilla forces were
operating successfully in the Escambray
mountains during this period. It was visualized
that the landing of the assault force, after
widespread resistance activity had been created,
would precipitate general uprisings and
widespread defection among Castro's armed forces
which could contribute materially to his
overthrow."
“The concept for employment of the force in the
amphibious/airlift assault was discussed at
meetings of the Special Group during November
and December 1960. The group took no definite
position on ultimate employment of such a force
but did not oppose its continued development for
possible employment. President Eisenhower was
briefed on the concept in late November of that
year by CIA representatives. He indicated that
he desired vigorous continuation of all
activities then in progress by all Departments
concerned.”
What did Hawkins report about the results of the
covert operations program against Cuba from
September 1960 to April 1961?
Nothing less than the following:
“a. Introduction of Paramilitary Agents.
Seventy trained paramilitary agents, including nineteen radio
operators, were introduced into the target
country. Seventeen radio operators succeeded in
establishing communication circuits with CIA
headquarters, although a number were later
captured or lost their equipment.”
“b. Air Supply Operations.
These operations were not successful. Of 27 missions
attempted, only four achieved desired results.
The Cuban pilots demonstrated early that they
didn't have the required capabilities for this
kind of operation. A request for authority to
use American contract pilots for these missions
was denied by the Special Group, although
authority to hire pilots for possible eventual
use was granted."
“c. Sea Supply Operations.
These operations achieved considerable success. Boats plying
between Miami and Cuba delivered over 40 tons of
military arms, explosives and equipment, and
infiltrated/exfiltrated a large number of
personnel. Some of the arms delivered were used
for partially equipping a 400 man guerrilla
force which operated for a considerable time in
the Escambray, Las Villas Province. Most of the
acts of sabotage carried out in Havana and other
sites used materials provided in this fashion."
“d. Development of Guerrilla Activity.
Agents introduced into Cuba succeeded in developing a
widespread underground organization extending
from Havana into all of the provinces. However,
there was no truly effective guerrilla activity
anywhere in Cuba except in the Escambray
Mountains, where an estimated 600 to one
thousand ill-equipped guerrilla troops,
organized in bands of 50 to 200 men, operated
successfully for over six months […]. A CIA
trained coordinator for action in the Escambray
entered Cuba clandestinely and succeeded in
reaching the guerrilla area, but he was promptly
captured and executed. Other small guerrilla
units operated at times in the provinces of
Pinar del Río and Oriente, but they achieved no
significant results. Agents reported large
numbers of unarmed men in all provinces who were
wiling to participate in guerrilla activity if
armed.”
“e. Sabotage.
1) From October 1960 through April 15 1961 sabotage activity
included the following:
“(a) Approximately 300 thousand tons of sugar cane
destroyed in 800 separate fires.”
“(b) Approximately other 150 fires were set in 42
tobacco warehouses, two paper plants, a sugar
refinery, two dairies, four stores, 21 Communist
homes.”
“(c) Approximately 110 bombings, including Communist
Party offices, Havana power station, two stores,
railroad terminal, bus terminal, militia
barracks, railroad train.”
“(d) Approximately 200 nuisance bombs in Havana
Province.”
“(e) Derailment of 6 trains, destruction of a
microwave cable and station, and destruction of
numerous power transformers.”
“(f) A commando-type raid launched from the sea
against Santiago, which put the refinery out of
work for about one week.”
So much for what we have known thanks to the Hawkins’
report. Anyone could understand that 200 bombs
planted in the main province of an
underdeveloped country which lived on the single
crop farming of sugar cane, which is a
semi-slave form of production, and on the sugar
quota that had been earned for almost two
centuries for being a guaranteed supplier, and
whose major productive lands and sugar
refineries belonged to large United States
companies, constituted a brutal act of tyranny
against the Cuban people. Add to this all the
other actions that were carried out.
I will say no more. It is enough for today.
Fidel Castro Ruz
July 7, 2007
Time: 3:00pm
|