Did Bush Sr. Kill Kennedy and Frame Nixon?
By David Swanson
Russ Baker's new book presents an account of the U.S. government that is both remarkably new and extensively documented. According to this account, George H. W. Bush, the father of the current president, devoted his career to secret intelligence work with the CIA many years before he became the CIA director, and the network of spies and petroleum plutocrats he began working with early on has played a powerful but hidden role in determining the direction of the U.S. government up to the current day.
New research and newly highlighted information assembled by Baker presents at least the strong possibility that Bush was involved in assassinating President Kennedy, and that Bush was involved in staging the Watergate break-in (and the break-in at Dan Ellsberg's psychiatrist's) with the purpose of having these break-ins exposed and the blame placed on President Nixon. In this account, those in on the get-Nixon plot included John Dean and Bob Woodward. While this retelling of history would make a certain Robert Redford movie look really, really silly, it would -- on the other hand -- make Woodward's performance during Watergate fit more coherently with everything he's known to have done before and since. It would also give new meaning to Dean's recent book title "Conservatives Without a Conscience." I would love to see either of these men's response to Baker's book.
Many readers of this review may now be rushing off to declare Baker either profoundly insane or (probably in fewer cases) indisputably correct in his views regarding the removal of Kennedy and Nixon from the White House, but I would strongly urge reading the book before doing so. It's called "Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It In The White House, And What Their Influence Means for America."
Those of us who have pushed for years now to have Bush Jr. impeached or prosecuted have heard all imaginable excuses and then some. One has been this: "Punishing the figurehead puppet president would amount to excusing the real powers behind the throne." And, of course, some of us have never doubted that such powers existed, but considered letting Bush and Cheney walk free as a surer way to protect other guilty parties than punishing them would be. There are guilty parties in Congress too, of course, but how the pervasiveness of guilt justifies letting everyone off the hook has always escaped me. The arrests have to begin somewhere. In any case, I bring up the image of presidents as puppets because Baker provides a new variation on that theme. In his account, Bush Jr. is indeed not the driving force, but a clique centered around his father is.
Baker does not focus on Bush Jr.'s grandfather, Prescott Bush, and does not even mention his role in the plot to overthrow President Roosevelt in 1933 ( http://davidswanson.org/node/1337 ). Baker's focus is on Poppy, although Prescott and his anger toward Kennedy are in the background. It is not a completely new idea to suppose that Kennedy was killed because he angered the CIA and powerful Americans with business interests in Cuba. It is, as far as I know, new to show, as Baker extensively documents and then summarizes, that:
"Poppy Bush was closely tied to key members of the intelligence community including the deposed CIA head with a known grudge against JFK; he was also tied to Texas oligarchs who hated Kennedy's politics and whose wealth was directly threatened by Kennedy; this network was part of the military/intelligence elite with a history of using assassination as an instrument of policy.
"Poppy Bush was in Dallas on November 21 and most likely the morning of November 22. He hid that fact, he lied about knowing where he was, then he created an alibi based on a lead he knew was false. And he never acknowledged the closeness of his relationship with Oswald's handler George de Mohrenschildt.
"Poppy's business partner Thomas Devine met with de Mohrenschildt during that period, on behalf of the CIA.
"Poppy's eventual Texas running mate in the 1964 election, Jack Crichton, was connected to the military intelligence figures who led Kennedy's motorcade.
"Crichton and D. Harold Byrd, owner of the Texas School Book Depository building, were both connected to de Mohrenschildt -- and directly to each other through oil-business dealings.
"Byrd brought in the tenant that hired Oswald shortly before the assassination.
"Oswald got his job in the building through a friend of de Mohrenschildt's with her own intelligence connections -- including family ties to Allen Dulles."
You start to get a taste of the sort of case Baker builds. It's persuasive, but not conclusive. If you buy into the basic outlines of it, you come up against a history of American politics in which our top "elected" officials are not just chosen through a process openly corrupted by money and media and parties, but are also chosen through a process of covert ops. Kennedy was replaced by Johnson because he was more obedient to Texas oilmen. Nixon was replaced by Ford for similar reasons. Bush Sr. made a deal with Iran not to release American hostages until Reagan defeated Carter. (Baker recounts but adds nothing new to this story, already reported elsewhere.) Bush Sr. and Jr. ran election campaigns that employed CIA-like techniques. It's a compelling narrative with probably a great deal of truth to it, and the viciousness of Republican attacks on President Clinton fits into it. So does the reluctance of Carter, Clinton, Obama, and others to stray too far from positions acceptable to those (like Robert Gates) with places in the more permanent power structure. So does the possibility that Michael Connell was murdered last week.
The interesting thing about Baker's claims regarding Kennedy and Nixon is that they would suggest that the CIA actually succeeded at something, that -- in fact -- the CIA or members thereof managed to keep major secrets for decades. Of course, they were morally reprehensible secrets and provide further rationale for eliminating the CIA and all secret government agencies, not any sort of justification for keeping them going.
While Nixon and Kennedy appear in this account almost exclusively in the role of victims, we should remember that their failures to please a certain powerful group do not absolve them of their own sins, even if that group may have done them in. While Kennedy may have courted the wrath of certain powers by refusing to do to Cuba what Dubya later did to Iraq, Nixon's failing was not any deficiency in the area of war criminality. While part of what Nixon was covering up may have been staged to frame him, his most serious offenses -- those involving the mass slaughter of human beings -- have been marginalized in all accounts, old and new, of our attempts to hold him accountable. And Nixon himself secretly derailed a possible peace agreement in order to get himself into the same White House that he was later chased out of in disgrace.
- Login or register to post comments
-
- Email this page
- Printer-friendly version
- Spotlight this page
www.VelvetRevolution.us
Bush Sr put his own figurehead son in harm's way for the NWO,
so ANYTHING is possible with the Bush Crime Family.
ARREST BUSHCO & RICO PNAC/FARA AIPAC...PNAC is Bush/Cheney's "Helter Skelter" !
UNITE IN SOLIDARITY !!!
Yes and No.
Yes:
According to JFKMURDERSOLVED site, there was some kind of involvement by Bush Sr:
http://jfkmurdersolved.com/bush.htm
No:
By the contrary Nixon was an ALL times BODDY of the BUSHES:
http://jfkmurdersolved.com/page193.htm
According to HISTORY CHANNEL program: The Men Who Killed Kenneddy (Only aired Unce):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaWUcyjAeIk&mode=related&search=
Nixon, Johnson and Hoover were part of the plot. All of them had a secret meeting the day before the Murder at Clint Merchinson's (An OIL Billonarie)in texas:
Don't Miss OUT this Chapter by the HC:
TMWKK, The Final Chapter, ep.9 The Guilty Men, seg.1-5
JFK Assassination
Watch this 90 minute video:
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=70566
Click on Bush link to Kennedy ...
It lays it all out!
Good catch David
I worked in the early '80's for a standing Bohemian Grove member who knew both Ford personally and Nixon and worked on his "Marijuana Task Force". One day I challenged him in his capacity as the founder of that think-tank on his reasoning for defending Nixon's crimes in some news-related issue that brought the subject back into the spotlight. Mind you, this man was probably the brightest person I've ever personally known and had a long history of DC involvement. He responded by quickly turning his head to the right, eyes nearly shut then slowly turning toward me, looking down and saying quietly, "Nixon's not guilty". His internationally esteemed colleague standing there with the two of us, and who's been published in 65 languages and also was recent Bohemian Grove "Guest", responded to my obviously puzzled look saying, "He was framed". That "guest", btw, died not long after he gave me a little better than "vague" details about BG. He was a very healthy 62 with a beautiful 39 year old wife.
I tell you this somewhat meaningless detail just to say much of what Russ is saying makes a LOT of sense, and I agree that a whole lot of history's "quirks" of the last 50 years make complete sense ONLY WITHIN THIS CONTEXT! After studying some serious, deep, heavy-duty sites dedicated to the Bush Crime Family's connections to Nazi Germany it is apparent that the newly-formed CIA sprouted in the wake of the many unidentified German Intelligence Exiles "looking for work" following WWII. The money of the Nazi military industrial complex was flowing from Wall Street big time. And digging even deeper, just like under the fascist coup of the BushII administration, religion was used to divide the people FIRST, then provide "cover" for ongoing military-intelligence operations, leading to and directly involving the creation of the Israeli State and Occupation.
You mentioned that Russ' work potentially clarifies the complete and utter failure of Congress in prosecuting flagrant Impeachable Crimes... sure does. The DoD-laced Anthrax Attacks on the heels of 9/11, targeting members put an early Shut-Up-Notice to every last one of them. Then look what happened to Max Cleland when he Resigned from the "Now Compromised" Israeli-Zelikow Commission, they spared not one dime driving him out. The pattern is clear what we're up against, but we must remember that our forefathers have already paid a higher price and that today it is our turn.
It is "revolution" today, Truth Revolution. We must propagate this truth as far and wide as possible before they find a reason to shut down the internet.
Also, I came to the conclusion just last night that with all the bright talent floating around in high up circles in the west, and in the context of the fact that I personally have been able to predict a great many of the crises and create solutions for them, that none of the major problems we're facing are a result of "incompetence", but rather a direct consequence of back-room planning. This includes the so-called "recession" which today is enabling even further consolidation and the wiping out of many more thousands of independent businesses and operations.
ixoxi
Framed by who?
By his partner in crime?
Are you Kidding?
You did not watch the links i was pointing to. You will see in TMWKK, three witteness declaring that : Hoover , Johnson and Nixon were conspirators of killing JFK. They met the day before and after the fact, they PARTY for weeks.
This was an operation PLANNED by David A. Philips (CIA) and you can bet BUSH Sr. knew about it.
Partnes in crime protect each others and when they don't trust one member, they kill him.( For Ex. Mike Connell)
NIXON was a protege, a puppet and an old time boddy of the Bushes.
http://jfkmurdersolved.com/page193.htm
Nixon was Prescott Bush's Frankestein.
I heard in some place, that the main reazon for NIXON doing WATERGATE was related to the JFK assascination.
More than 120 people has died (unexpected way) related to this crime.
How many people will die to try covering up 9-11?
I was not kidding, just relating fitting details
I wasn't privy to the root-knowledge of the opinion they were sharing somewhat openly. Their answer about Nixon left me puzzled and with the feeling that they were relaying something "above my level", so to speak. Until relatively recently did I give it much further thought, and it remains all guess-work, but now I believe in the context of things that they were referring to Nixon taking the hit in order to divert attention away from a larger corrupt/criminal organization behind him... it was the look on their face, and they knew Nixon too. (a recent story about George Tenent describes him as drunk and furious that they were trying to use him as the fall-guy) This in no way contradicts the fact that Nixon was a criminal of major proportion. The perspective in this I want you to consider however, is that the first thing the power-elites do is suck you in through "baby-criminality", then they graduate you to "medium-criminality", if you're really a good criminal, they may allow you to exploit your own plans, but when they need distraction because heat is coming from somewhere, and if you're the easy-fall, they get you, you don't have a choice! That's what I read in those answers.
I agree that Nixon was a protege of the "X-Minus-Files", whatever you want to call the shadow-government operated under HW and the CIA... gee, "compartmentalization"... what could we possibly exploit with "Official Compartmentalization"? Anyway, David is right calling for its termination as it neither serves people or government.
I also agree with your other points... I'll try to make time to visit those sites, thanks.
ixoxi
Don't Miss OUT that History Channel's..
Serial in particular Chapter 9 (1 to 5)
Chapter 9 (THE GUILTY MEN) was BANED and only played UNCE.
(Because of a complaint to congress by Ford and Johnson's wife.)
By the Way FORD intentionaly made forgery by changing the location of the entrance wound in Kennedy's BACK, In order to fix the SINGLE BULLET THEORY engineered by A.Specter (Still in Congress today)
However the other chapters are also EXCELLENT
Thanks
It's hard for me to watch anything on The Fascist History Channel after their hit-and-run on 9/11 a while back, but I can see how something may have slipped through way back in '03 that would not get through today. It's a good piece, reminds me of the old days of investigative reporting.
ixoxi
There, you went and said it...
what I fear the most. Shutting down the ... It's medieval time, then.
Did you see this Robin?
http://www.infowars.com/?p=6842
UK culture secretary considers the internet a "dangerous place" and wants ratings and censorship to "protect children"... children of what, the Beast666?
HR1959 is all about it... Oh, and Pravda says the military elite of the US is desperate for a rogue nuke surprise to help them break up the US and permanently install dictatorship. I think the Pravda article is a little late... that the Cheney-faction really did try to lose the nukes a year ago while sitting on the Iran NIE, but AF Patriots refused to fly out from Barksdale, then the NIE was released. But there's just one little bit of confusion: The initial blog-leak reported "six", the main press reported "five".
ixoxi
Affirmative
I'm well aware of HR1959 (and S1955). Gotta love that Janey (not). I see that Putin is "threatening" Obama with increased nuke production (is that how the extra one ties in?). My engines are hardened and electrics faradayed. This would sure take a lot of things "off the table", wouldn't it?
Hi David, Do you have
Hi David,
Do you have contact info for Russ? Love to review his book and get him on the show. I've covered these truths with many experts.
Meria
www.Meria.net
The "Big Event" and LBJ
The "Big Event", code words for the JFK hit, is laid at the doorstep of LBJ. 65% of votes in this OpEdNews POLL, click here, http://www.opednews.com/Poll/LBJ-Was-Behind-the-JFK-Ass-by-Gene-Cappa-08... indicate "YES, LBJ was behind the big event."
The night before the Kennedy assassination, Lyndon Baines Johnson met with Dallas tycoons, FBI moguls, and organized crime kingpins - emerging from the conference to tell his mistress Madeleine Duncan Brown that "after tomorrow those SOB's (Irish Mafia) will never embarass me again, that's no threat, that's a promise". It's a jaw-dropping deposition and it's the biggest JFK smoking gun there is, Click Here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79lOKs0Kr_Y
Kay Griggs' story
While reading this article by David Swanson what I've learned of the story told by Kay Griggs certainly came to mind. I think it's strongly fitting as complementary consideration for what David Swanson and Russ Baker say.
Most readers of ADS content are probably familiar with the story, but for those who aren't, there's a whole long interview with her available on DVD at www.kayGriggsTalks.com , an interview that, if still like a couple of years ago, is around 7.5 hours long. There are also video clips of interviews with her posted at Youtube; I downloaded a couple that are around 20 minutes long.
This is a short clip of her speaking, at first anyway, about Israelis training with U.S. Navy Seals.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=8HUXH3S0f38
"Military wife tells the truth: Kay Griggs. Part 1: Why Would Everybody Be Silent?" (20:28)
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sOaw45B-DWM
"Military wife tells the truth: Kay Griggs. Part 2: The Destruction of America" (22:27)
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx5bkUQSKkw
I'm no expert on these topics, but have some real streets sense and am of the view like David Swanson states about Russ Baker's book, that it's strongly or seriously persuasive. I feel the same about what Kay Griggs says, and my streets sense tells me that her frankness, calm, tonality (of voice), her composure, etcetera and whatever, she certainly seems to be wholly sincere and definitely no lunatic, or mentally unqualified, ... person to me.
(It's one reason why I don't like listening to Barack Obama; he doesn't "ring" true ... to me. Now, I have all the more reason, with this article by David Swanson, to maintain my gutt "feelings" about Obama and not appreciating hearing him speak. This hound dog's flare senses foulness, and of course far from only with him.)
I'd love to view the whole long interview with Kay Griggs, but can't even afford the small amount required to obtain the DVD. However, many other people may be very interested, and I think the dvd was going for something like $10 just a couple of years ago, so it's probably little more now, if it is more. MAJOR story it is; and strongly believable from what I've learned of it.
If what she says is whole truth, then David Swanson's article and Russ Baker's book get plenty of incidental, say, backing from what Griggs says.
Impeaching Bush and Cheney, for starters, well, it clearly isn't going to happen prior to them leaving office; assuming that day will be next month, that is, on official schedule. BUT, they will remain indictable (and so on) for as long as they live! If that's ever done, and a major dream it is, then more of the variously related criminals, hijackers or usurpers of U.S. govt and international laws, etcetera, will be easier "game" to go after; I'd like to see them all "hang".
KAY GRIGGS' STORY
While reading this article by David Swanson what I've learned of the story told by Kay Griggs certainly came to mind. I think it's strongly fitting as complementary consideration for what David Swanson and Russ Baker say.
Most readers of ADS content are probably familiar with the story, but for those who aren't, there's a whole long interview with her available on DVD at www.kayGriggsTalks.com , an interview that, if still like a couple of years ago, is around 7.5 hours long. There are also video clips of interviews with her posted at Youtube; I downloaded a couple that are around 20 minutes long.
This is a short (2:03) clip of her speaking, at first anyway, about Israelis training with U.S. Navy Seals.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=8HUXH3S0f38
"Military wife tells the truth: Kay Griggs. Part 1: Why Would Everybody Be Silent?" (20:28)
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sOaw45B-DWM
"Military wife tells the truth: Kay Griggs. Part 2: The Destruction of America" (22:27)
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx5bkUQSKkw
I'm no expert on these topics, but have some real streets sense and am of the view like David Swanson states about Russ Baker's book, that it's strongly or seriously persuasive. I feel the same about what Kay Griggs says, and my streets sense tells me that her frankness, calm, tonality (of voice), her composure, etcetera and whatever, she certainly seems to be wholly sincere and definitely no lunatic, or mentally unqualified, ... person to me.
(It's one reason why I don't like listening to Barack Obama; he doesn't "ring" true ... to me. Now, I have all the more reason, with this article by David Swanson, to maintain my gutt "feelings" about Obama and not appreciating hearing him speak. This hound dog's flare senses foulness, and of course far from only with him.)
I'd love to view the whole long interview with Kay Griggs, but can't even afford the small amount required to obtain the DVD. However, many other people may be very interested, and I think the dvd was going for something like $10 just a couple of years ago, so it's probably little more now, if it is more. MAJOR story it is; and strongly believable from what I've learned of it.
If what she says is whole truth, then David Swanson's article and Russ Baker's book get plenty of incidental, say, backing from what Griggs says.
Impeaching Bush and Cheney, for starters, well, it clearly isn't going to happen prior to them leaving office; assuming that day will be next month, that is, on official schedule. BUT, they will remain indictable (and so on) for as long as they live! If that's ever done, and a major dream it is, then more of the variously related criminals, hijackers or usurpers of U.S. govt and international laws, etcetera, will be easier "game" to go after; I'd like to see them all "hang".
Mike Corbeil
Quebec, Canada
Treasonous
I understand that oligarchs and top politicos often get away with murder and treasonous activities but I really would like to see the investigation and prosecution of all those who knowingly cover up the criminality of these elites. I'm speaking of the panel which investigated 911 for instance, or the panel that investigated the JFK assassination. There are many reasons to believe that information was discounted or swept under the rug and that the conclusions arrived at were politically inspired rather than the verifiable truth. These individuals who used their reputations to sell a lie should receive the opprobation of history if not actual criminal sanction.
5 part docuimentary series coming out in Febrary on all this
www.CoreOfCorruption.com is a series made that is getting into these details. I know, I wrote and directed the project