USAF O-2 Skymaster dropping leaflets over Vietnam
Source:
"O-2 Skymaster,"
Wikepedia
In February [1996], four people were killed when the Cuban Air Force shot down two small planes flown by members of Hermanos al Rescate (Brothers to the Rescue [BTTR]), a Cuban exile group set up to rescue "rafters" trying to escape Cuba by sea and based in Florida, USA. The Cuban Government claimed that the planes had entered Cuban airspace without authorization and that warnings had been given before they were shot down. It said that this and previous incursions were provocative and criticized the US authorities for failing to take steps to prevent them. Following a protest by the US Government, the UN Security Council called on the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to investigate the incident. The ICAO investigation, the conduct and results of which were disputed by the Cuban Government, concluded that the two planes had been shot down without warning in international airspace. The UN Security Council subsequently "condemned the use of weapons against civilian aircraft in flight" without specifically naming Cuba, but also reminded all states of their duty "to take appropriate measures to prohibit the deliberate use of civilian aircraft .for purposes that are incompatible with the aims of the Chicago Convention [the 1944 International Civil Aviation Agreement].
Source: Amnesty International, 1997 Report
USAF O-2 Skymaster dropping leaflets over Vietnam
Source: "O-2 Skymaster," Wikepedia
Pictured above is the US Air Force version of the Cessna 337, the O-2 Skymaster [1], dropping leaflets over Vietnam in what appears to be psychological warfare operation (psyop in military parlance). Notice the the military markings – the US Air Force insignia (the white star), on the body of this aircraft. This was not a civilian plane. It is clearly a military aircraft. Unarmed or not, it would still be a legitimate target for enemy fire under international law. While the version pictured here was unarmed, other versions used in the Vietnam War were fitted with rockets and machine guns. What has this got to do with the BTTR shootdown? The BTTR planes were also Cessna 337's and showed US Air Force insignia. Just like the O-2's in Vietnam, the BTTR planes were being used for military-style psyops over Cuba. Given their appearance and their obvious mission, it is impossible to think of them as "civilian aircraft."
In July 1996, President of the Cuban National Assembly, Ricardo Alarcón, addressed the UN Security Council [9] on the matter of the BTTR shootdown. On the nature of the aircraft used by the BTTR, he reported:
[I]n 1992 and 1993, in Miami, a United States Congresswoman from Florida organized a major campaign to petition the Pentagon to provide several Cessna 337s or O2s to the group that participated in the incident of 24 February. She was very explicit and active, making many statements and taking a number of initiatives. It would seem that she was successful, because on 19 July of that year [1992] the Miami Herald published a report on its editorial page, written not by just any journalist but by Mr. David Lawrence, the editor of the Herald.In this account, Mr. Lawrence tells us of a trip he took with the group known as Brothers to the Rescue, the group in question. Like any good journalist, he accompanies his account with photographs, including some of the plane that was used. In one, the marking "N2432S" is quite sharp; in another, four letters are clearly visible on its wing: "USAF". In other words, this is not merely a type of plane that is used by the military; it is not, as the Congresswoman claimed, just that similar aircraft were to be found in airports in Florida ever since the end of the conflict in Central America; Mr. David Lawrence Jr. actually flew in the one bearing the marking N2432S, from which the United States Air Force marking had not even been erased.
That is one thing. Another is that, today, 26 July [1996], at 4.25 p.m. [five months after the shootdown], this aircraft is at the Opa Locka airport in Miami. It still bears the markings of the United States Air Force; it still belongs to Brothers to the Rescue and may be involved tomorrow, the day after, or at some point in the future in one of that group's operations.
In 2001, at the so-called Miami spy trials, Jose Basulto, the founder of the BTTR and lead pilot the day of the shootdown, admitted under questioning to have been a CIA operative trained in explosives, sabotage and subversion. He also admitted to, even bragged about, shooting up a Cuban hotel in Havana with cannon fire from a speed-boat in August 1962. [4] I understand he killed 20 people that day. This made him a real hero in the eyes of the Cuban exile community in Miami!
Now, what was the mission of the BTTR on the day of the shootdown? Were they indeed looking for "rafters" trying to "escape" from Cuba as the ICAO report contended? Basulto acknowledged that the group's focus had shifted after changes in immigration policy meant rafters got sent back to Cuba. He also conceded that they hadn't seen a single rafter for several months. And to what had the focus "shifted?" At the very least, it seemed to include illegal, military-style psychological warfare operations (psyops) aimed at toppling the Cuban government.
From an opinion piece in the Miami Herald by Florida-based, humanitarian pilot-activist, Dr. Anthony F. Kirkpatrick MD [5], we have the following description of one such a "psyop" in July 1995, seven months prior to the shootdown:
Basulto was on Miami television bragging about his illegal exploits,
calling them "civil disobedience."Viewers saw him "roaring over Havana at rooftop level," as described by the on-board TV reporter, dropping propaganda leaflets and religious medals, which seriously could have injured people below. A Cuban fighter plane flying above him took no action, even though Basulto was flying in a manner later described by the FAA as reckless or careless "so as to endanger the life and property" of others.
With the jet fighter shadowing them from above, it is apparent that these cowboys were not about to be peaceably "escorted" anywhere, as required by international protocols in these situations.
It should also be noted that his was not the only illegal incursion by US aircraft on that day. According to Basulto himself, after his subsequent run-in with the FAA, "I am being accused of that [illegal over-flight], but eight other aircraft were with me on that day!" [9]
Dr. Kirkpatrick continued:
We may never know if the tragic shootdown seven months later might have been averted had the FAA exercised its authority to revoke Basulto's pilot's license or seize his aircraft. Despite Cuba's numerous warnings that it would shoot down any intruding aircraft, the Brothers continued their efforts to destabilize the Cuban government by flying into airspace controlled by Cuba and dropping political leaflets into the island.
On that ill-fated day, the pilots deviated from their filed flight plan without notifying the aviation authorities. This deviation in flight plan made the Cubans nervous because the aircraft were heading directly toward Havana instead of along the coastline of Cuba as they had promised.
According to the U.N. report, the pilots acknowledged that they were warned in Miami through the FAA and in the air by the Cubans that they would be flying into airspace under Cuban control and 'activated' by Cuban military during that period. Although all three aircraft were equipped with sophisticated GPS navigational systems, they intruded directly into the activated area.
According to expert testimony by retired US Air Force (USAF) Colonel George E. Buchner, the BTTR planes had "given up their civilian status because they still carried the markings of the U.S. Air Force and had been used to drop leaflets condemning the Cuban government." [2] Buchner was testifying at the so-called Miami spy trials five years after the publication of the ICAO report. He was described as "a decorated Vietnam War fighter pilot and former commander of a region of NORAD, the North American Air Defense Command, the military network charged with protecting the United States from nuclear missile attacks." [3] It is interesting to note that even the Security Council resolution seemed to imply that these aircraft were being used "for purposes that are incompatible with the aims of the Chicago Convention [the 1944 International Civil Aviation Agreement]," that is, not for ordinary civilian purposes of transporting passengers and cargo for peaceful purposes.
Buchner also testified that the three planes were acting as one. And that Cuba was within its sovereign rights to attack them – even in international airspace – based on Basulto's incursion the day of the shootdown. And all sides agree that Basulto did indeed enter Cuban airspace on that day. [7] "The trigger was when the first aircraft crossed the 12-mile territorial limit," Buchner said. "That allowed the government of Cuba to exercise their sovereign right to protect its airspace." [2] (This may explain why the USAF commanders did not respond to the Cuban attack. They probably knew the law as well as Buchner, himself a former regional USAF air defense commander.)
What if the tables were turned? Kirkpatrick writes [5]:
Suppose that a known enemy from abroad was to enter U.S. airspace in a small private plane heading toward Washington, D.C. As several "administration officials" told The Washington Post, such an intruder is likely to be shot down quickly over water before it enters the United States because shooting down the plane over a populated area would create "significant risks to large numbers of innocent bystanders."
And in the case of the BTTR shootdown, it was not just one small private plane, but a formation of three twin-engine planes similar to those used by the US military in Vietnam, the lead pilot having a history of terrorist attacks against the Cuban people!
Supposedly to prove that the BTTR planes were shot down in international airspace, US officials gave the ICAO electronic recordings of US radar data on the incident. But they only let the ICAO listen to a tape recording of radio calls between the MiG pilots and their ground controller, supposedly to "hide U.S. intelligence-gathering capabilities." They also gave the ICAO a transcript of the Spanish original and an English translation. [6] Interestingly, the transcript seems to have been incomplete. (It should also be noted that, due to numerous irregularities, even the Council of ICAO itself pointedly refused to endorse its own report! [9])
Judging by the ICAO transcript at the BTTR website [7], almost all of the vital portion leading up to the shooting down of the first BTTR plane was missing. At the Miami spy trials five years later, Buchner testified that, based on what was apparently a complete transcript, there were "numerous distances of less than 12 miles from Cuban coastal cities, indicating to him that the chase took place in Cuban airspace and the planes were shot down five to six miles off Cuba." [2]
Radar plots from US and Cuban are so different as to be irreconcilable. Inconsistent with both is a report by an officer on the Miami-based cruise-ship, Majesty of the Sea, who was called by the prosecutors to testify. Defense attorney Paul McKenna hinted this report couldn't be trusted because the ship, which didn't report the shootdown to any authorities, may have been sailing in Cuban waters and may have disguised its own position. [2] Buchner also testified that captain and owner of this ship refused to turn over the ship's log to the US Coast Guard the day of the shootdown. Buchner placed the ship off the Cuban coast at Santa Fe to the west of Havana (perhaps in violation of US law?). [8]
It should also be noted that coverage of Buchner's testimony at the 2001 Miami spy trials was widely reported in the mainstream media. [2] [3] [8] And yet I have not found a single article on the internet to refute even one iota of Buchner's testimony. Not at any at the websites of any US government-funded propaganda organs. Not at any Cuban exile websites. Not even at the BTTR website. Not anywhere. The silence of the Cuban exile community and their apologists on this matter has been absolutely deafening!
The evidence supporting US claims that the
BTTR planes were shot down in international airspace is incomplete and
inconsistent. Critical portions of the evidence supporting Cuban claims–specifically, large portions of the transcript of Cuban communications between
the fighter pilots and their ground controller–were either ignored or suppressed
in the ICAO report. A US expert, some years later, was able to determine, from
what was apparently a complete transcript, that the BTTR planes were
indeed shot down in Cuban territory. Even claims that these were truly civilian aircraft are
tenuous. As corroborated by the same expert, they had US Air Force markings and had previously been engaged in
illegal, military-style
psychological warfare operations (psyops) against the Cuban government. The
planes used were similar to those used by the US Air Force in
the Vietnam War for just this purpose. And on the day of the shootdown, a formation of three such planes was
personally led by an admitted anti-Cuban terrorist! Can there be any doubt that the
US Air Force today would not hesitate to shoot down such a formation,
piloted by known enemies and terrorists, headed toward Washington DC, and
refusing to heed warnings from civil air traffic controllers to turn away?
1.
"O-2 Skymaster,"
Wikepedia
2.
Catherine Wilson, "Cruise ship officer describes deadly Cuban MiG
attack on planes," Associated Press, March 21,
2001
3.
Gail Epstein Nieves, " Fliers downed by MiGs violated Cuban
airspace, [USAF] colonel says," Miami Herald,
March 22, 2001
4.
Gail Epstein Nieves, "Basulto testifies on
role as anti-Castro
operative," Miami Herald, March 13, 2001
5.
Anthony F. Kirkpatrick, "In Brothers To
The Rescue Shootdown, U.S.Shares the Blame."
Miami Herald, March 1, 2001
6.
Juan A. Tamayo, "Tracking the Brothers
Flight," Miami Herald, June
16, 1996
7.
"ICAO Report, Exhibit G-1,"
BTTR website
8. Rui Ferreira, "Contradicción en los informes de Cuba sobre avionetas," (Spanish) El Nuevo Herald, March 23, 2001
9.UN Security Council Document S/PV.3683, UN Security Council Meetings (1996)
10. "Free the Miami Five," Granma International
11.
Declaration of the Cuban National Assembly
Skymaster N2432S shown here at Tamiami
Florida in September 1998, was said in UN
Security Council debate to belong to the BTTR
from 1992 until sometime after July 1996
(see above). If that is the case, it seems
likely to have been repainted with a Navy-style
colour-scheme by new owners after that date.
There is some controversy about the history
of this plane. Claims have been made that the BTTR never used this plane.
Or that, while
the previous owner may have flown
with them, the BTTR did not own the plane.
Interesting.
Photo credit:
Skymaster
Photo Index