Jump to content
The Education Forum

Was George Herbert Walker Bush Involved in Kennedy Assassination?


Recommended Posts

http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=114869

Los Angeles, CA, March 29, 2010 –With all the rancor and acrimony in Washington these days, now’s a perfect time to revisit…The assassination of JFK! And filmmaker John Hankey believes our former president and CIA Director George H.W. Bush had something to do with it.

That black day in November 1963 will never, be put to rest, its ghosts doomed to walk the earth and compel us to keep digging. An issue as durable as it is nonpartisan, conspiracy theorists, mere theorists and armchair speculators will debate the assassination till the end of time. Why? Only 22 percent of the American public believes in the official account of the shooting. A majority believe there was more than one shooter. But no has come along to blow the lid off the case until John Hankey, a Southern California high school teacher who has spent years researching the case and assembling connections from historical sources, interviews and detective spadework.

A spirited, well-documented indictment of George Herbert Walker Bush, the film makes a very strong case establishing Bush was part of the chain of command in the conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. The evidence is compelling; one letter from the FBI places George Bush, an acknowledged CIA agent who rose to the top of its ranks, in Dallas during the assassination.

Patently false the memo gave no indication where "George Bush of the CIA" was but seems to place him in DC because it also mentions a DIA captain and if I'm not mistaken that agency doesn't have feild offices in the US.Thus the Bush mentioned in the memo is probably the one we know was in Washington (Winston) as opposed to the one we know was in Texas (HW).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...we have reason to believe based on some evidence, that he was IN the CIA BEFORE he became the Director in 76. We have MANY more reasons to believe he was involved and an operative far before he joined in 76. My god, they make him director,

John McCone had no intel background either

they then name the Bldg. after him later on, and why is he THAT important?

Not true

Gotta love it: "Operation Zapata",

The landing site was on the Zapata Peninsula near the Zapata swamps

"The Barbara" lol....great stuff.....

The "Barbara J", the former Barbara Piece did not have a middle name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends how one defines "involved." Did GHWB know right-wing Cubans who may have been a part of the plot? Absolutely. But there is absolutely zero evidence Bush was involved in the assassination itself, and Hankey's movie--which is far from new, by the way--only clouds the issue of who was really involved by pretending Bush I and his dad Prescott were central to CIA shenanigans. He's blowing smoke.

Seamus Coogan wrote a review for CTKA dismantling his nonsense.

Coogan dismantles Hankey's nonsense

Nevertheless, it is ironic that the Bush family dynasty has prospered while the Kennedy dynasty has been destroyed. The question seems to be how and to what extent Bush 41 was involved, if not in the assassination itself, in the ongoing cover-up which has included repeated trashing of the Kennedys, rather than whether or not they were involved at all.

Bush 41 may have just stood in the background making sure to use every bit of calamity to his family's advantage. Yet, as president, as well as head of CIA, he was at the center of the documentation that has been released as well as that which is still being suppressed. It is not hard to imagine that the remaining files have been thoroughly combed for anything that might be detrimental to the Bushes or point anyone to their involvement in anything at all.

We're not all that far off. Yes, I believe Bush was CIA in '63. Yes, I believe Zapata offshore was a front for the CIA. Yes, I believe he lied about it later, and that Felix Rodriguez's role in Iran-Contra was no coincidence. But it makes no sense he would be involved in the planning of Kennedy's assassination. He was a business man. A front man. Not a planner. Nor a killer.

He was a BONESMAN. Bonesmen are killers.

Nonsense. Bonesmen are fratdicks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John McCone had no intel background either

GHWB and McCone are 2 completely different individuals. To put it more bluntly, Bush is Eastern Establishment (or stooge, give or take) and McCone is...well, you get the picture. If any, ANY of those 2 men knew the "whats" and the "hows" of JFK's Murder, then I vote for Bush hands down. RFK himself even knew McCone was "out of the loop" in terms of what was going on with the cubans.

Not true

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-...99-00/art9.html. Now here's the "real" question, is it GHWB or the "Mr George Bush of the CIA" they named it after lol....I think we both know the answer.

The landing site was on the Zapata Peninsula near the Zapata swamps

Taken into context however...as well as Prescott Bush's comment concerning "our pilot project in the caribbean..." to Dulles and/or Mallon(?) I think we have all the reason to believe that Zapata Offshore was possibly a (or one of many) cover for the CIA's Cuban activities off the coast. Bush was THE perfect Operative to head it up in that specific area.

The "Barbara J", the former Barbara Piece did not have a middle name.

Both called Barbara lol. Perhaps he has a "habit of naming things in his professional life, after things in his personal life" to quote Hankey lol. Again, these are generally VERY interesting coincidences and when taken together/in context, begin to flesh out a most intriguing picture of the man and his early involvement with career intelligence, so much so that he ends up getting named on a memo concerning the murder of JFK. Prescott dipped his son knee-deep in blood, he knew what he was doing.

Edited by B. A. Copeland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John McCone had no intel background either

GHWB and McCone are 2 completely different individuals. To put it more bluntly, Bush is Eastern Establishment (or stooge, give or take) and McCone is...well, you get the picture. If any, ANY of those 2 men knew the "whats" and the "hows" of JFK's Murder, then I vote for Bush hands down. RFK himself even knew McCone was "out of the loop" in terms of what was going on with the cubans.

You missed the point you expressed disbelief someone without an intel background could have been named director but thre was precident for that. James Schlesinger didn't have an intel background either, there were also some career military men with no direct intelligence experience either. More recently we have Leon Panetta.

Not true

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-...99-00/art9.html. Now here's the "real" question, is it GHWB or the "Mr George Bush of the CIA" they named it after lol....I think we both know the answer.

I stand corrected but since he was an ex-director who'd become president and was very agency friendly having the building named after him is not evidence he'd worked for them before his nomination.

The landing site was on the Zapata Peninsula near the Zapata swamps

Taken into context however...as well as Prescott Bush's comment concerning "our pilot project in the caribbean..." to Dulles and/or Mallon(?) I think we have all the reason to believe that Zapata Offshore was possibly a (or one of many) cover for the CIA's Cuban activities off the coast. Bush was THE perfect Operative to head it up in that specific area.

That was one of your principle proofs, it was shown to be irrelevant.

The "Barbara J", the former Barbara Piece did not have a middle name.

Both called Barbara lol. Perhaps he has a "habit of naming things in his professional life, after things in his personal life" to quote Hankey lol. Again, these are generally VERY interesting coincidences and when taken together/in context, begin to flesh out a most intriguing picture of the man and his early involvement with career intelligence, so much so that he ends up getting named on a memo concerning the murder of JFK. Prescott dipped his son knee-deep in blood, he knew what he was doing.

Except his wife wasn't "Barbara J", IIRC that was the original name of the ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You missed the point you expressed disbelief someone without an intel background could have been named director but thre was precident for that. James Schlesinger didn't have an intel background either, there were also some career military men with no direct intelligence experience either. More recently we have Leon Panetta.

Actually, with all due respect I think you not only misinterpreted my statement, but you actually miss the point. Obviously and logically you do not have to have a career intelligence background to be director. However, it is one thing given the history of McCone and Bush, to have McCone as director, and another to have Bush. When Colby was opening his mouth a bit too much during the HSCA, they did not call a "nobody" they installed someone who can be trusted. Again, there is a major difference. When taken into context (context is key) one can easily see how the man had the bldg. named after him, as well as his being director at a most critical time in '76 as well as his continuous and incredibly powerful rise to power. You cannot take everything at face value. Some things must be taken with a grain of salt, ESPECIALLY when we are dealing with CIA history.

I stand corrected but since he was an ex-director who'd become president and was very agency friendly having the building named after him is not evidence he'd worked for them before his nomination.

Again, it is not evidence, but it must be taken into consideration given his VERY "friendly" agency work. GHWB is what I'd call "ultra CIA" Its quite an honor I would think, his participation in the JFK hit being a very key moment in the "rise and rise" of GHWB.

That was one of your principle proofs, it was shown to be irrelevant.

Irrelevant based on what..? If we're attempting to answer the question of whether or not Bush was involved in the JFK hit, it does not take rocket science to ask oneself "hey, could Barbara & Zapata have anything to do with GHWB?" Just a simple, and honest question/inquiry. I do not believe it is THE case, but it should be pursued as part of a possible chain of evidence of his participation in key Cuban/CIA events.

Except his wife wasn't "Barbara J", IIRC that was the original name of the ship.

Obviously indeed, therefore the common denominator in the "name game" is Barbara. For the sake of this exchange, perhaps it would be pushing it to name it literally after his WW2 plane lol, who knows, IF it was he who was naming things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This just in from John Hankey:

I don't think we are much encouraged to see History as science. Quite the opposite, actually. And of course, that's all politics. The winners write history, and the truth be damned. And even science can have trouble trying to act like science when political issues are involved, as we see with evolution, tobaacco-and-cancer, and global waming. But I think History does have a lot in common with physical science, as I'll explain.

I can remember when the Big Bang was very much considered a theory; and the notion that the continents were once all stuck together was at first ridiculed by some, and regarded with amusement by many, and promulgated as likely by a tiny minority. But as time goes by, the evidence accumulates; and the meaning of that evidence begins to settle in; and ideas that were once considered outrageous gradully get worn in and start to be regarded as obvious common sense. Part of this process is the continual accumulation of new evidence. New pieces are added to the puzzle and the picture becomes clear. And part of what happens is that other evidence, old evidence that may have been around for a while, but that was never much noticed, can suddenly take on huge significance when it is seen, for the first time, as fitting into the bigger picture. Over time, isolated pieces of evidence, which by themselves seemed, at most, curious and puzzling, can suddenly be seen as a key piece when we finally recognize where they fit into the puzzle.

Well, let me try to show you what I'm talking about. Hoover writes a memo, naming George Bush as a CIA officer.

When it is first released, George Bush is some obscure bureaucrat, a virtual unknown. And no one pays any attention. Then he becomes vice president. And then President. And then someone notices. "Hey, Hoover said Bush was in the CIA in 1963" and for the longest time, the focus was on this simple isolated fact. Bush says it wasn't him. He wasn't in the CIA. But over time, people are able to assemble the facts from his personal life, showing his deep involvement with the CIA and the CIA's anti-Castro Cubans. And eventually it becomes undeniable; that Hoover was referring, in his memo, to none other than George Herbert Walker Bush. And for a while, that's it. End of story.

But the title of this Hoover memo was, "Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy". Isn't that important? Well, you'd think so. But for the longest time, people didn't seem to notice. Besides, Hoover scarcely mentions the assassination in the memo, instead focusing on what Hoover calls "misguided anti-Castro Cubans."

The body of the memo appears , at first, not to be in any way related to the title of the memo. But then Mark Lane does this fabulous work demonstrating, and in fact persuading a jury, that E. Howard Hunt, a major lieutenant in the CIA's anti-Castro Cuban program, was in Dallas and involved in the assassination. With this background, with this framework to guide the researcher, it is then possible to assemble the considerable evidence linking Bush to Hunt.\

People might have taken some notice before that Bush made the unusual request, as Nixon's ambassador to the UN, to be given an office in the White House. They may have noticed that Hunt, although he was not being paid by anyone in the White House, or answering to anyone that we know of in the White House, also had a White House office. But with the Hoover memo in hand, establishing Bush as a CIA officer, we can now connect Bush to Hunt at the Bay of Pigs; we can now connect Bush to Hunt, both with offices inside the White House; we can answer, then, who it was that Hunt answered to inside the White House; and how he got the office in the first place; and with all that we can now connect Bush to Hunt, through the Hoover memo written 5 days after the assassination, to Dallas, to Hunt in Dallas, and to the assassins of John Kennedy. Little by little,the pieces start to fall into place. And pieces that in isolation meant nothing, now become key.

But even so, this seems a somewhat vague connection. Hunt killed JFK. Bush supervised Hunt; but Bush probably supervised a lot of CIA people, not all of whom were involved in the assassination. A high-ranking officer may be connected to all of the acts of all of his troops by reason of his being their commander. But that doesn't mean that the officer knows about,or approved of, or was involved in all the actions of those troops.

To establish that sort of direct connection between Bush and Hunt on the day of the assassination, we need the FBI memo, recording Bush's phone call to the FBI, an hour after the asassination. When I first encountered this memo, and when I first put it into my movie, JFK II, I simply called it weird. I saw it only in isolation, a weird, isolated connection between Bush and the assassination. It took me years to see it in context, that is, to see it as demonstrating, clearly, that this CIA officer named Bush was on duty that day, that he was in the Dallas area, supervising his men, involved in the assassination. But it's still weird, no? I mean, how could he have been so stupid as to make this phone call? Without this FBI memo, recording this phone call, we don't know, or even have a good clue as to where Bush was, or what he was doing the day of the assassination. Do we? And he tells us, hands it to us on a silver platter.

What could possibly have motivated him to make such a stupid error as making this phone call to the FBI? It's a valid question. It's not an essential question. We can still value this memo, and extract a great deal of important content from it without answering the question of why, but the question remains. And we can make a stab at answering it. Russ Baker in his fine book, Family of Secrets suggests that Bush was attempting to establish an alibi. Now, by making this phone call, he, in fact, establishes that he was in the Dallas area, and that he was on duty. So if he's trying to establish an alibi to cover-up where he actually was and what he was actually doing, that actually stuff must be some pretty bad stuff, some pretty incriminating stuff, if it's worse than what he gives us with this alibi. And what could be worse? Well, obviously, he must have been in Dallas. In fact, I think, this situation suggests he must have been in Dealey Plaza.

I mean seriously. Think about it. He must have been in Dealey Plaza, he must have been in the company of the shooters, and he must have felt that there would be evidence to prove that. Or worse. Well, you get the point. If a guilty party believes there is evidence connecting them to a crime, they may develop an explanation, or an alibi that seems like a good idea at the time; but that in fact constitutes a very damaging admission. Anyway, stew on that while you consider the the first photo at http://jfkmurdersolved.com/phpBB3/viewtopi...?f=1&t=1222. You have to hit the pause button here, open another window, and look at the photo. You'll see a tall thin man in a suit, with a receding hair line. Many people claim this is Bush, standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository. And it might be. It might be a lot of people. And perhaps Bush was concerned that he might show up in a picture where he was actually looking towards the camera.

I already thought Bush was involved in the assassination when I first saw this photo; but I didn't think it looked much like him; and in fact, I didn't think he'd be stupid enough to just be hanging around the murder scene. I thought he was sufficiently high ranking that he'd leave such on-scene stuff to his underlings. Right? You plan, you train your people, and then you stand back and watch it happen. Or so I thought. Fletcher Prouty was certain that he saw pictures of Ed Lansdale, a military operative of the highest rank, signaling to the "tramps" arrested behind the grassy knoll to be cool, that everything was alright. So, some of the highest ranking members of the killers' operation were there, to make sure that when things inevitably go wrong, they could be there to fix them. So, given that, this photo of this thin man in a suit might be Bush. And now, hit pause again here, if you will, and look at Exhibit Two, the photo posted by bob franklin on Sat May 09, 2009 9:19 pm at http://jfkmurdersolved.com/phpBB3/viewtopi...?f=1&t=1222. This is a picture of the Dal-Tex building. It is across the street from the Book Depository, and many leading researchers into the assassination say there was certainly a team of shooters in this building. And as you can see, some imaginative individual has added some color to indicate three men in this window.

Now, I think it takes way too much imagination to see people in this photo, much less Bush's face. But now observe this, attached as Exhibit Three (http://www.ratical.com/ratville/JFK/WTKaP.html). Actually, You don't have to stop and read it, because I'll read it to you. It's a statement from Roger Craig, winner of the deputy of the year award for Dallas in 1960, and one of the few honest men working that day in Dallas. He's an amazing and heroic fellow, worthy of all the time you could take looking into his background and character. And here, in this passage I'm about to read, he is describing a conversation he had with Jim Garrison I need to introduce it by saying that, at the time, Bush was pretending to be an independent Oil operator from Houston.

Roger Craig writes:

"Jim also asked me about the arrests made in Dealey Plaza that day. I told him I knew of twelve arrests, one in particular made by R. E. Vaughn of the Dallas Police Department. The man Vaughn arrested was coming from the Dal-Tex Building across from the Texas School Book Depository. The only thing which Vaughn knew about him was that he was an independent oil operator from Houston, Texas. The prisoner was taken from Vaughn by Dallas Police detectives and that was the last that he saw or heard of the suspect."

Holy crap! Bush was arrested coming out of the Dal-Tex building! No wonder he freaked out. But now stop and think a minute: why was he arrested? What was he doing that not only drew this cop's attention, but made this cop think that he needed to arrest Bush? I guess he was not the sort of cold-blooded killer who could take part in the murder of a man, and then act like nothing was going on. At Gerry Ford's funeral Bush nearly laughs out loud while speaking of the Kennedy assassination, so as an old man Bush doesn't have a lot of skill at hiding his feelings; and on the day of the assassination, apparently, he didn't have any skill at this either,and he had the look of a murderer in his eye. And cops are trained to spot that. They can smell guilt. And this cop, Vaughn, spotted it on Bush and arrested him. And being a newbie, Bush didn't have confidence that his patrons, his bosses, could protect him, destroy the records, make it all go away, make water run uphill if need be. And so he acted on his own, stupidly, and created this record of his involvement, by calling the FBI; thinking that he was cleverly proving that that wasn't him who was arrested in Dallas that day.

This statement of Roger Craig's has been around for quite a while. It was first posted on the internet in 1992. Damn! It must have been one of the first things ever posted, way back in the day. But as near as I can tell, no one noticed this "independent oil man from Houston", as being a very unique description of Bush, until last month.

So the pieces continue to fall into place. Little by little, the picture is filled in, the questions get answered. And the conclusions become more incontrovertible. This is just the sort thing that happened with the theory of Evolution; the Big Bang theory; and the the theory of continental drift. And someday they may start to teach history, as a science, based on evidence, in the universities. Really! It could happen!

If this can be found to be substantive, then.....my god, its pretty explosive.

Edited by B. A. Copeland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" memo ought to be investigated stringently for fraud, especially in light of the other allegation that Bush turned in to the FBI a right-wing acquaintance who supposedly threatened JFK.

If the memo stands up, I'm betting that Hoover was covering his chips against the Agency, or that Hoover felt insulted or threatened by something Bush had to say during his visit. Why else blow someone's cover that way?

It is ridiculous, in knowledge of the Zapata Oil involvement with BOP, to think that GHWB was not an Agency operative, or officer, in the 1960s.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed Andrews, I mean if that is not "in your face" I do not know what is honestly. Also, remember that it is quite possible that Hoover and the Bushes go back even further, when the Union Bank was seized as a Nazi Asset during Prescott's time there. It truly makes for an interesting narrative when Prescott's son shows up years later in regard to the JFK hit.

Most of the Info is from another poster on Dankbaar's Forum, but Hankey passed it on to me.

Edited by B. A. Copeland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" memo ought to be investigated stringently for fraud, especially in light of the other allegation that Bush turned in to the FBI a right-wing acquaintance who supposedly threatened JFK.

If the memo stands up, I'm betting that Hoover was covering his chips against the Agency, or that Hoover felt insulted or threatened by something Bush had to say during his visit. Why else blow someone's cover that way?

Blow his cover: The memo wasn't made public for 25 years and probably refers to the George Bush who admits he was a watch officer on the night of the assassination

It is ridiculous, in knowledge of the Zapata Oil involvement with BOP, to think that GHWB was not an Agency operative, or officer, in the 1960s.

What exactly is 'known' about "Zapata Oil involvement with BOP"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and on the day of the assassination, apparently, he didn't have any skill at this either,and he had the look of a murderer in his eye. And cops are trained to spot that. They can smell guilt. And this cop, Vaughn, spotted it on Bush and arrested him. And being a newbie, Bush didn't have confidence that his patrons, his bosses, could protect him, destroy the records, make it all go away, make water run uphill if need be. And so he acted on his own, stupidly, and created this record of his involvement, by calling the FBI; thinking that he was cleverly proving that that wasn't him who was arrested in Dallas that day.

Now I understand it.

Kathy C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an update as requested by John Hankey himself. In the essay posted by myself above, you see that there are 3 Exhibits. I will provide links for each Exhibit the way Hankey requested. I will post them here and in the essay post above.

Exhibit 1: the first photo at http://jfkmurdersolved.com/phpBB3/viewtopi...?f=1&t=1222

Exhibit 2: the photo posted by bob franklin on Sat May 09, 2009 9:19 pm at http://jfkmurdersolved.com/phpBB3/viewtopi...?f=1&t=1222

Exhibit 3: http://www.ratical.com/ratville/JFK/WTKaP.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully
The "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" memo ought to be investigated stringently for fraud, especially in light of the other allegation that Bush turned in to the FBI a right-wing acquaintance who supposedly threatened JFK.

If the memo stands up, I'm betting that Hoover was covering his chips against the Agency, or that Hoover felt insulted or threatened by something Bush had to say during his visit. Why else blow someone's cover that way?

Blow his cover: The memo wasn't made public for 25 years and probably refers to the George Bush who admits he was a watch officer on the night of the assassination

It is ridiculous, in knowledge of the Zapata Oil involvement with BOP, to think that GHWB was not an Agency operative, or officer, in the 1960s.

What exactly is 'known' about "Zapata Oil involvement with BOP"?

There is a copy of a sworn affidavit available online, attributed to George William Bush. It includes his denial of receipt by him of any briefing or contact from the FBI during his six months, temporary service at CIA as a GS-5 grade staffer.

William Butts Macomber, Jr., WWII Capt., USMC, OSS officer who operated in German occupied France and in Burma, spent two years at CIA, moved to State Dept. as CIA liason to State Dept. Macomber, Jr. was best man in Bush's sister's 1946 wedding' he attended the sweaing in ceremony in 1956, of newly elected Senator, JFK, as the invited guest of Sen. Prescott Bush.

In 1960, Macomber, Jr. is documented to have asked that Otepka investigate the defections of Oswald and the few others who had defected to the Eastern Bloc. In 1963, Macomber, Jr. married Phyliss Bernau, personal secretary to the late John Foster Dulles; Macomber had also served as Dulles's assistant at State.

In 1973, Macomber, Jr. served as best man in the wedding of Thomas J. Devine, former CIA officer and Bush Zapata Oil partner who had traveled to Viet Nam with Bush in early 1968 under a CIA requested top secret clearance. As Wubriny-1, Devine had met with Demohrenschildt and Clemard Joseph Charles in June, 1963, at the NY firm managing CIA financial assets, Train, Cabot.

Bush's prep school roommate, Edward Gordon Hooker, goes unmentioned in Bush's autobiography. Hooker happened to be the step-nephew, and later oil exploration business partner of Oswald's "best friend" in Dallas from fall, 1962 until late winter, 1963, George Demohrenschildt.

Hooker's 1946 wedding included best man, S. Willets Meyer. first cousin of Cord Meyer, Jr. Hooker, who died in 1967, was not available to escort his daughter down the wedding ailse in her early 1970's marriage ceremony.

George Bush was Hooker's daughter Susan's escort. Bush handed Susan off to the groom, who was the son of B. Rionda Braga. In the book titled, "The Fish is Red", Braga is described as a Cuban sugar magnate who was reported by the WSJ to have predicted that Castro was about to be removed as Cuban head of state, just weeks before the Bay of Pigs invasion. Braga employed as a V.P. in his sugar business, one Michael J.P. "Jack" Malone, who was a CIA "asset" who also worked, at Braga's instigation, as executive on-loan to Richard Kleberg of the King Ranch corp. in Texas and Cuba. Jack Malone, with funding from Kleberg, restored, equipped, and deployed the mothballed WWII US Navy patrol boat, re-named the Vejana III, part of the CIA's pre Bay of Pigs clandestine fleet of coastal raiders.

The archives of the Rionda Sugar enterprises indicate that Jack Malone was engaged in a kenaf cultivation enterprise with Joseph F. Dryer, who along with his brother, Peter, grew up at in Rochester, NY on the same, affluent side of that city, at about the same time as the Macomber brothers and Thomas J. Devine. Joseph Dryer interacted with Dorothy Matack of US Army intelligence, in her meetings with Demohrenschildt and Clemard Charles, who was introduced on the same day, by a CIA staffer, to James Greene, VP of Manufacturer's Hanover, who later coauthored an Atlantic Council commissioned book, with Bush intimate, Brent Scowcroft.

Kleberg's sister was the widow of a founder and principle executive of the Celanese Corp. Macomber, Jr.'s brother, John became president of Celanese in the 1970's and hired Thomas J. Devine as VP and controller at Celanese.

Before employment at Celanese, John Macomber had been a partner at McKinesy & Co., where he had mentored the recent MBA grad and new Mckinsey hire, Michael Ainslie. After Susan Hooker divorced Braga's son, Ames Braga, she married, and is still married to, Michael Ainslie.

John Macomber was an early investor in George W. Bush's oil exploration "business" in the 1980's, and was rewarded by father George Bush with an appointment to head the Import Export Bank.

John Macomber and William HG Fitzgerald. were two of the most prominent leaders of the right wing, foreign and military policy organization,. the Atlantic Council. Their longtime co-participation in this council ended only with the 2006 death of Fitzgerald, and John Macomber still functions within it in an emeritus role.

In 1943, Ernest Byfield, Jr., a Capt. in the US Army and an OSS officer, served as the best man in Fitzgerald's wedding to Annilese Petschek. Samuel F. Pryor, Prescott Bush, and their Harriman Brothers' partners are on record as the creators of a series of front corporations in the 1930's with American charters, for the purpose of shielding Petschek's father's and uncle's Silesian steel and coal assets from the Nazi Aryanization program, of which the Union Banking Corp., siezed by the US Alien property custodian in 1943, was an associated enterprise.

In 1955, Ernest Byfield, Jr., married Vala Osterman, a white Russian noblewoman whose sister was married to Rionda Braga's first cousin and sugar trading enterprise partner, Placido Ervesun. Byfield Jr. was the co-owner of the Sherman Hotel group in Chicago. Byfield employed as VP and then as President of the Sherman Hotel group, Patrick Hoy, an executive with close ties to Jake Arvey, Sidney Korshak, and Irv Kupcinet. Byfield, Jr. partnered with Hoy's nephew in 1957 in the operation of the Lincoln Park West Hotel and the Left Bank Cafe in this Chicago Hotel.

In 1960, Henry Crown, in financial control of General Dynamics, hired Patrick Hoy and made him first non-Crown family president of Gen. Dyn's Material Service Div., acquired by Gen. Dyn. from Henry Crown, and as a VP of Gen. Dyn. Hoy had no experience other than as a hotel and restaurant executive. Hoy is said to have persuaded Crown and his business partner, Conrad Hilton, to put mob lawyer Sidney Korshak on permanent retainer.

Hoy was later convicted of bank fraud, resigned from Gen. Dyn. and was imprisoned for his crimes.

Irv Kupcinet, and probably Patrick Hoy, either were acquainted with Jack Ruby, or knew of him throught their mutual friends and Kupcinet newspaper column co-authors, Ira and Jimmy Colitz.

Byfield Jr.'s mother, Gladys Tartiere, longtime friend of JFK intimate, William Walton, leased her Middleburg, VA estate to the JFK family from Dec., 1960 to March, 1963, and this estate served the JFK family as the weekend white house.

George Demohrenschildt knew Jackie and her mother from the time Jackie was a pre-teenage child. Prescott Bush's family winter residence was Jupiter Island in Hobe Sound, FL. The island was purchased in 1930 by Harriman partner and Remington Arms president, Samuel F. Pryor. All lots on undeveloped Jupiter Island were purchased from Pryor, and after his death, from his daughter, Permelia. The Valentine Bartlett family of Chicago was in residence on Jupiter by the mid 1930's. Valentine Bartlett died there by suicide during WWII. Bartlett's sons were Charles and David.

David Bartlett and Edward Hooker were ushers in the wedding of S. Willets Meyer, along with Cord Meyer, Jr.

Charles Bartlett was close enough with Prescott Bush and son George Bush, probably because he was, along with the Bushes, and Alexandra Devine (wife of Thomas J. Devine) residents of the Jupiter Island enclave, that Prescott Bush, privy as a member of a Senate committee with oversight of the Secretary of the Air Force, to confidential information, was credited with leaking a tip to journalist Charles Bartlett that won him a Pulitzer prize for an investigative article series resulting in the resignation of the Air Force Secretary. After George Bush lost a 1972 election, it was Charles Bartlett who called Bush to advise that Nixon would be receptive, if Bush asked for the job, to appoint Bush to be US Ambassador to the UN.

Charles Bartlett earlier had become, independently, friends of both JFK and of Jackie. Bartlett invited both to his brother David's wedding, and it was then that he introduced Jackie to JFK. Bartlett was so close a friend of Cord Meyer, Jr. that once when his schedule conflicted to the degree that he could not keep a lunch appointment with an old friend and former Yale classmate, he sent Cord Meyer, Jr. of the CIA to keep that appointment for him.

After Cord Meyer retired from the CIA, Bartlett, author of a twice weekly syndicated newspaper column, split the column's authorship with Cord Meyer, Jr.

JFK was accused, by Washington Post publisher Phil Graham, in front of an assembled audience of journalists in early 1963, of having the former wife of Cord Meyer, Jr., Mary Pinchot, as JFK's "mistress". At that time, Ben Bradlee was employed by Phil Graham and was married to Mary Pinchot Meyer's sister.

JFK was said, all during his presidency, to dine regularly in the company of Charles Bartlett and Ben Bradlee. Bartlett, during JFK's presidency, abandoned his post Pulitzer prize winning investigative journalist track to serve almost silently as a JFK confidant.

The point is that the above description of intertwined relationships challenges, complicates, reinforces, and defies the much simpler observations of Hankey and challenges to them of Len Colby.

If Hankey wants to invoke the simultaneous white house "service" of E. Howard Hunt and George Bush, the circumstances of Bush receiving a tip from Bush/JFK/Meyer intimate, Charles Bartlett, to ask Nixon for the job that resulted in Bush being "positioned" next to Hunt, and also the fact that Hunt implicates, on his deathbed, Cord Meyer, Jr. in the assassination of JFK, ALSO MUST BE CONSIDERED.

Nearly 90 years of age, both Charles Bartlett and Ben Bradlee, once fronting as journalists, close to both JFK and to Cord and Mary Pinchot Meyer, still have some "splainin' " to do, if someone can pry the tongues loose, of either of these two men once at the center of all of this intrigue.

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Len Colby:

"If the memo stands up, I'm betting that Hoover was covering his chips against the Agency, or that Hoover felt insulted or threatened by something Bush had to say during his visit. Why else blow someone's cover that way?"

I should have explained what I meant by "that way." I know that the memo didn't see daylight for many years. But why would Hoover commit Bush's name and affiliation to paper at all, in an FBI organizational document, unless he suspected some risk to himself or to the Bureau in letting the contact with "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" go unreported?

That's why this document needs more scrutiny - to judge if it is genuine (unlike the Dallas PD hoax memo leaked to Mark Lane, e.g.). Once that is decided, we can better judge if the hypothesis of risk protection is a plausible motive or not.

Based not on any documentary film, but on Bush's Zapata Oil activities, involving BOP or not, I'm inclined to answer the question that started the thread by saying, It's my opinion that Bush was a CIA operative, officer, or both, during the 1960s.

I wonder if the memo will someday bear up my opinion. I tried to give a plausible hypothesis for Hoover taking the effort to "out" Bush - like Valerie Plame - within the FBI, and possibly for extramural application of the memo to disarm a future threat.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if it might have been an ever present threat? Undeniably, in public documentation is a list of Strom Thrurmonds Senate Enquiry on behalf of Walker (ret) and last on the list is Prescott. Ultimately these were the ones to protect. This was drawing close to the last line of defense. The CIA was already a monolith that everyone ultimately bows down to.

The rest are expendable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...