Partly trustable

Hersh’s latest scoop is about CIA’s conflict with the Kennedys.

His “retired” CIA source told the story of the Castro campaign from the CIA’s angle, which doesn’t sound right to me.

The facts are well known. CIA trained and armed Castro as Our Revolutionary, but Castro broke his promise and supported his own people, then understandably picked up Russia as an ally. After that, he was a permanent target. These events happened from 1956 to 1959, before JFK was in office. CIA didn’t start running its campaign until JFK was there.

Hersh’s CIA source claimed that the agency was reluctant to do these jobs, but JFK was pushing them. This is consistent with the order of events, but it doesn’t ring true with the basic tendencies of all the players.

CIA always wants to create chaos, and had a personal grudge against Castro. Ike was solidly opposed to foreign involvement. JFK was more in favor, though maybe not as gung ho as LBJ. In terms of basic talents and tendencies, the simplest assumption is that Ike was blocking CIA, then Kennedy let them run free.

The main topic of Hersh’s article is the CIA takeover of Italy in the ’60s. Here his assumption does agree with basic character:

The CIA had thrown its money into the corrupt Christian Democrats, the Mafia, and the media after World War II in fear that the left — that is, the Italian Communist Party — with its emphasis on social programs and worker stability, would gain power.

The demon’s creed: Always make chaos. Always torture and kill the peasants. Never allow PROSPERITY AND STABILITY anywhere on earth.

= = = = =

Footnote for clarity: Hersh takes great pains to define HIS level of trust for his sources, which adds to Hersh’s trustability. Sammy was very old school: the only reason he ever talked to a reporter was to spread a lie. The better reporters in the Fairness Doctrine period followed the same rule, which is also the ideal rule for science and other branches of knowledge.