Kissinger planned to bomb Cuba for supporting Angolan

[Islandman]

liberation.

US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger drew up plans to "smash Cuba" with air strikes nearly 40 years ago, government papers obtained by researchers show.
He was angered by Cuba's 1976 military intervention in Angola and was considering retaliation if Cuban forces were deployed elsewhere in Africa.

http://www.bbc.com/news/29441281

[Rudi]

I wonder if the One Don would have helped...... Nah that would have been a stretch. wouldn't happen Principles and non-interference and all.

[Don1]

I wonder if the One Don would have helped...... Nah that would have been a stretch. wouldn't happen Principles and non-interference and all.

Merely "moral support" from the DayWalker

[Willi]

Not even. DayWalker was a strong anti-apartheid supporter. One must be fair and render onto Caesar...

[Willi]

Admiral Lemnitzer Drew up plans in early 1962 to bomb downtown Kgn or PtofSpain to blame the Cubans and get the Brits on their side to invade Cuba.

The SecyOf State at the time convinced Kennedy that it was a bad move and the Prez agreed and vetoed it. This came from declassified info I read online 15 years ago.

[Don1]

Not even. DayWalker was a strong anti-apartheid supporter. One must be fair and render onto Caesar...

The DayWalker perhaps was a strong YAPPER re Apartheid. It took armed struggle against the US/UK/West and their racist allies to defeat that Shitstem. The DayWalker allied himself firmly with that Western cabal...suh mi nuh gi dat nuh ratings inna wi struggle. Face card tings

DayWalker prove himself when im align im party wid di Kissinger/CIA regime change operation against the JA Governments of the 1970s. Dat name treason in my book

Dat fair judgment mi render to Caesar...mi nuh too bizniz wid yappin....juss a guy works mi evaluate...yuhzimi??

[Willi]

No sir, dont forget he shared a plan to attack the Rand and so hasten the end of apartheid. He got major props locally and abroad for what was seen as a workable plan.

Nobody agreed totally with any grouping and that was one point on which all jamaicans were united. NO TO APARTHEID.

[Sir X]

Now isnt that some [email]sh@T....labarites ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7g-niDevcU

[Don1]

No sir, dont forget he shared a plan to attack the Rand and so hasten the end of apartheid. He got major props locally and abroad for what was seen as a workable plan.

Nobody agreed totally with any grouping and that was one point on which all jamaicans were united. NO TO APARTHEID.

DayWalker's Western associates neva inna nuh plan fi dun Apartheid...They were engaged in propping it up ...Hard @ Work right inna dem Devil's Workshop

Babylon control currency...suh ah Babylon wudda affi mek dat supposed plan manifest...Wi know seh DayWalker & Babylon wrap up inna deviltry ....suh dat mean im plan ah..Face Cyard tings fi cover Babylon tracks

Mi nuh get tricked...by mercenary

None atall. Mi suss dem out & bun dem out...strait

[Rockman]

I do not know why Blinds is the subject of discussions when today we have indications that our PM still holds true to Seaga's CIA induced opinion that Castro is public enemy #1, clearly he does not want to start on the wrong foot(a freaking compromise) with President elect Trump,that sucks and Castro's refusal to compromise the Angola operation even after being promised an end to the embargo rocks.
It doesn't become any clearer,one is a leader and the other a follower.We can forget about having Marcus wrongful conviction expunge .
Very disrespectful of Holness not to officially acknowledge the passing of the World leader,the most significant leader to emerge from our region.
RIP Castro.

[Willi]

The plan was given to the G77 and CWealth...not to Babylon...who was not in favour.

[Willi]

He was also in the forefront of the international campaign to intensify and expand economic sanctions against South Africa as a means of bringing apartheid to an end. Mr. Seaga addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1985 and made his memorable call for an intensified attack on the South African rand. In October 1987, at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Vancouver , he demonstrated statistically that sanctions were working against South Africa .

also

http://www.commonwealthoralhistories...-edward-seaga/

SO: It’s interesting that questions of parliamentary procedure came to the top of your mind in thinking about your interaction with the Commonwealth.

ES: No, the most important was the situation in which I found myself in 1987, when the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) was held in Vancouver, Canada. This brought to a head the question [of] whether there should be continued sanctions against South Africa. Mrs Thatcher fought very strongly for not continuing, because sanctions were in trade and they hadn’t worked. I had prepared myself for the discussion. I found in the United Nations that there was an organisation that was particularly concerned with trading with South Africa – the United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations – and what had been done in sanctions. I used the data to expose the fact that the imposition of sanctions was in the wrong area. Instead of trying to create trade barriers which largely did not work, we should turn to attacking the South African rand. Once the rand started to fall in value, all that had been built up over the decades by the elite of South Africa would start to fall with it. Trade would be dislocated because South African goods would be cheaper for exports, but far more expensive for imports, and a dislocation of trade and investment would result in adverse movement of the exchange rate. This, they couldn’t deal with.

That’s exactly what happened [cf. Edward Seaga, ‘Impact of Economic Sanctions on the South African Economy’, The Round Table 306 (1988), pp.136-41.] The Conference accepted my position and the Africans, especially, were overjoyed. They had come to an end themselves on how we could continue sanctions, and they accepted this. Acceptance brought a strain between myself and Mrs Thatcher, because she was flying quite high before that. She walked by me when the break came right after that: she walked right by me and didn’t say a word.

[Willi]

SO: It’s interesting that questions of parliamentary procedure came to the top of your mind in thinking about your interaction with the Commonwealth.

ES: No, the most important was the situation in which I found myself in 1987, when the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) was held in Vancouver, Canada. This brought to a head the question [of] whether there should be continued sanctions against South Africa. Mrs Thatcher fought very strongly for not continuing, because sanctions were in trade and they hadn’t worked. I had prepared myself for the discussion. I found in the United Nations that there was an organisation that was particularly concerned with trading with South Africa – the United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations – and what had been done in sanctions. I used the data to expose the fact that the imposition of sanctions was in the wrong area. Instead of trying to create trade barriers which largely did not work, we should turn to attacking the South African rand. Once the rand started to fall in value, all that had been built up over the decades by the elite of South Africa would start to fall with it. Trade would be dislocated because South African goods would be cheaper for exports, but far more expensive for imports, and a dislocation of trade and investment would result in adverse movement of the exchange rate. This, they couldn’t deal with.

That’s exactly what happened [cf. Edward Seaga, ‘Impact of Economic Sanctions on the South African Economy’, The Round Table 306 (1988), pp.136-41.] The Conference accepted my position and the Africans, especially, were overjoyed. They had come to an end themselves on how we could continue sanctions, and they accepted this. Acceptance brought a strain between myself and Mrs Thatcher, because she was flying quite high before that. She walked by me when the break came right after that: she walked right by me and didn’t say a word.

[Sir X]

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Article...irmingham.html

The brotherhood of man is not confined within a narrow, limited circle of select people.

https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/n...nelson-mandela

MLK


We believe that the Negro should adopt every means to protect himself against barbarous practices inflicted upon him because of color…

“…We believe in the freedom of Africa for the Negro people of the world…

“…We strongly condemn the cupidity of those nations of the world who, by open aggression or secret schemes, have seized the territories and inexhaustible natural wealth of Africa, and we place on record our most solemn determination to reclaim the treasures and possession of the vast continent of our forefathers…

“…We believe in the self-determination of all peoples…

“…We demand complete control of our social institutions without interference by any alien race or races…

“…That the colors, Red, Black and Green, be the colors of the Negro race…

“…We proclaim the 31st day of August of each year to be an international holiday to be observed by all Negroes…

“…We want all men to know that we shall maintain and contend for the freedom and equality of every man, woman and child of our race, with our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor…”


Marcus Garvey


Labarites nuh inna dat ! well some only when it affect dem personally.

[Don1]

SO: It’s interesting that questions of parliamentary procedure came to the top of your mind in thinking about your interaction with the Commonwealth.

ES: No, the most important was the situation in which I found myself in 1987, when the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) was held in Vancouver, Canada. This brought to a head the question [of] whether there should be continued sanctions against South Africa. Mrs Thatcher fought very strongly for not continuing, because sanctions were in trade and they hadn’t worked. I had prepared myself for the discussion. I found in the United Nations that there was an organisation that was particularly concerned with trading with South Africa – the United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations – and what had been done in sanctions. I used the data to expose the fact that the imposition of sanctions was in the wrong area. Instead of trying to create trade barriers which largely did not work, we should turn to attacking the South African rand. Once the rand started to fall in value, all that had been built up over the decades by the elite of South Africa would start to fall with it. Trade would be dislocated because South African goods would be cheaper for exports, but far more expensive for imports, and a dislocation of trade and investment would result in adverse movement of the exchange rate. This, they couldn’t deal with.

That’s exactly what happened [cf. Edward Seaga, ‘Impact of Economic Sanctions on the South African Economy’, The Round Table 306 (1988), pp.136-41.] The Conference accepted my position and the Africans, especially, were overjoyed. They had come to an end themselves on how we could continue sanctions, and they accepted this. Acceptance brought a strain between myself and Mrs Thatcher, because she was flying quite high before that. She walked by me when the break came right after that: she walked right by me and didn’t say a word.

This is not a "battle" to which I accord any particular significance. The DayWalker's Babylon allies had zero interest in tanking the rand. Sanctions generally don't work...especially when the West doesn't implement them.

The DayWalker is a non-factor in overcoming our "little trouble".... with his puny administrative maneuvering among his Babylon friends.

It's the battle in fields of Africa which made a difference. That's where Fidel run di cut