Why Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's Critics Are Wrong

[Guest Doug Campbell]

On 10/17/2023 at 2:58 PM, Robert Reeves said:

You position yourself as if you're the gatekeeper of what can be discussed on this forum. Well you may be in an imaginary hierarchy - on this forum - but I don't believe that you have any authority to dispel discussions you do not agree with. You just have the right to allege there is some ''Mysterious new members'' campaign taking place right here to derail your precious beliefs.

 

Like I said, Col. Prouty is a tricky fella.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg2-5NzVdoQ

From clip above: Man stands up at 1:33:45 named Paul Roofer (sic) and asks ''as a voter it seems to be the least I can do is vote for someone who wasn't director of the CIA in the next election (i.e. Bush snr 1992 election) however, I did hear Mark Lane say that George Bush was not only director of the CIA, BUT THAT AS FAR BACK AS 1963 AND EVEN BEYOND HE WAS A MEMBER OF THE CIA --- I would like to ask any of the panelists to confirm what Mark Lane said: based on what they know, and be specific PLEASE!''

Host of the event asks panelists: ''Anyone here have confirmation that George Bush worked for the CIA before he was director?''

Col. Fletcher Prouty is one of the people in attendance and he says nothing. He sits impassively, resting his face on his right hand.

John Judge chimes in detailing the documents mentioning a George Bush of the CIA, in an FBI memo mentioning -- a G Bush of the CIA debriefing anti-Castro Cubans in Miami, the another document mentioned George Bush grassing on someone in the Republican party called Parrot. And lastly Judge mentions the ships used in the Bay Of Pigs raid, the ships, which he says directly link Bush to the CIA, due to the names of the ships - Zapata - Barbara - Houston. 

Prouty still says nothing. Prouty has openly revealed in other instances that during his role as the Chief of Clandestine Ops, he was the purchaser of those ships mentioned by John Judge. That he, Prouty, allegedly supplied the CIA with the ships for the mission. IF TRUE, there couldn't be a person with more knowledge on the subject of those ships. Presumably the questioner wasn't a plant, inserted into the order of questions to tempt Prouty into answering truthfully about the purchases of those ships. Details I'm guessing was still classified?

From Prouty's website letters section, below (undated) source https://www.prouty.org/email.html

"To Jeff Orr

RE: The names of the ships used in the Bay of Pigs operation that were named for the BUSH family.

I was asked to locate three transport vessels to support the Bay of Pigs landing. I was able to get them and sent them to a U.S. Navy base in North Carolina where they were prepared for that operation. In the process they were painted and then given the names: HOUSTON, ZAPATA, and BARBABA. The name Houston was where Bush's business was. Zapata was the name of his oil company. Barbra was the name of his wife. Whoever selected those names certainly knew George Bush in 1960.

L. Fletcher Prouty "
 

So why does Prouty big up himself, at times, and then when cornered he does not speak up and tell the public what he knows. This is duplicitous, to me. 

So Mr Niederhut, are we allowed to ask why Col. Prouty (someone with direct knowledge of the support ships used in the BOP) chooses to sit on his hands when asked to give forth any information he has on the subject? ... in one instance ... and in other instances Prouty openly discusses the theory Bush was almost certainly involved with the CIA purchased supply ships. Even naming them after his wife, his home town, his oil company. Or would you prefer it's not discussed?

 

This is strange to me. Why is Col. Prouty untouchable?!? I say this as someone who actually became interested in this subject because of the brilliant Donald Sutherland role in the movie. I searched out this mysterious figure. So this doesn't come from somewhere bad, like you're trying to allege. There's no ''Mysterious new members'' campaign. There are some inconsistencies with Col. Prouty and the thing's he said. That's all.

 

I'm glad you brought this up. It really is curious that Prouty would clam up and decide not to chime in to help propagate the Disinformation regarding Bush, Zapata, etc., and play dumb in 1992.  Prouty was on the very vanguard of the spread of this particular fiction, casting it like fishing lure in the direction of Harold Weisberg as early as April of 1989 in letter form, not even 4 months removed from Bush's Inauguration. It's just another example of Fletcher Prouty spreading provably-false, made up nonsense. Last (2) paragraphs at the following link:

https://archive.org/details/nsia-ProutyLFletcher/nsia-ProutyLFletcher/Prouty L Fletcher 57/

"He married a girl named 'Barbara J',"  Let's start there. he absolutely did not.

Barbara Bush was not given a middle name of any sort upon her birth. She lived her entire life with no middle name, no middle initial, much less an initial "J". The name of the boat did not relate to her in any way, shape form or fashion whatsoever. Nothing but Fluff. An example of what my dear friend Alan Dale calls "Stories tailor-made for people like us to believe.". (A descriptive that applies to most of Prouty's product, in my opinion.)

If you have the benefit of having studied the Primary Resource Documentation regarding the BOP and the run-up to it (rather than books full of fluff), you already know. You don't have to believe nonsense.

How many people here know what the boat's name was before it was re-named "Barbara J"?

   ( @Rob Clark is not eligible, he already knows the correct answer.)

It was The "BETTY S".

BARBARA J is very simply a variation of the boat's previous name. BETTY S. 

Chosen by the Cuban Exile crew who re-painted and re-named it.

BETTY S.- (2)-syllable female first name that starts with "B", and an initial.

BARBARA J.- (2)-syllable female first name that starts with a "B", and an initial.

It really was that simple. It's not a cryptic reference to an "Oil Tycoon-Secret Agent-Spy Guy"' 's wife. The decidedly-not-conspiratorial-truth of the matter is that the Cuban Exile crew who repainted and re-named it simply chose a variation of the boat's previous name.  Not Bush's wife. No. Stop that. The people who DID re-name it were just not very imaginative. @Larry Hancock can back me up on this, the ship once known as the "BETTY S."

Now, the other bit of disinformation that many people believe, but don't bother to study the Primary Resource Documention ABOUT:

The origin of the operational designation "ZAPATA", as alleged by Prouty in the above-linked letter to Weisberg.

This, too, is provable disinformation. All ya gotta do is reeeeeeeeeeead those documents. it's all there. In the declassified record.

"ZAPATA" is...ready?...a geographic reference.

Here's how "Operation ZAPATA" really got it's name.

The USG had more than one Operational Plan for what eventually became the Bay Of Pigs Invasion. In fact, they had a few. Each Operational Plan was named for the geographic region of Cuba at which that specific plan called for the invasion force to land.

The Oriente Plan. The Oriente Plan called for the invasion force to make landfall somewhere at Oriente Province, Cuba.

The Trinidad Plan. This particular plan called for the invasion force to land somewhere in the vicinity of...? Yep, you guessed it. The area just south of Trinidad, Cuba.

The "Zapata Plan". THIS is the plan that was, in the end, decided upon. The Zapata Plan. WHY was it called The "Zapata Plan"? Because it called for the landfall to take place on Cuba's ZAPATA Peninsula!

That's right! There's absolutely NO mystery here!!! None! 

The "Zapata Plan" became "Operation Zapata." Had they chosen to hit Oriente Province, we'd ALL be talking about "Operation Oriente." Or another choice, and we'd be discussing "Operation Trinidad."

When the absolute final choice was made, The "Zapata Plan" became "Operation Zapata." It really is THAT simple.

(Again, if you've studied the Primary Resource Documentation, you are already aware of this. You've already dismissed the nonsense Prouty was trying to feed Weisberg.)

Now, if you actually go ahead and take a look at a map of Cuba, you will note the greeeeeeat, big'ol' "Zapata Peninsula" there on the south side of Cuba. Notice also WHERE The Bay Of Pigs is actually located. 

That's right! The Bay Of Pigs IS LOCATED AT The ZAPATA Peninsula!

Not ONLY is The Bay Of Pigs actually located AT The ZAPATA Peninsula, The Bay Of Pigs is bordered on 3-of-4 sides by a 1,682 square mile swamp. This giant swamp's name?...The ZAPATA Swamp!!!

"But that's CRAZY! It's BUSH!!!!! It CAN'T be the actual name of the actual place where the actual thing happened, you...you...McADAMS!!!"

...No. Just no. All you have to do is The Research. This is not conjecture on my part. The whats-and-whos-and-whys of the Operational Designations, the different geographic regions that they were named for, it's all in the official Declassified Record of the event. And it has been for YEARS. And many of us read it years ago. We need not continue to believe nonsense.

...but here we have Prouty gleefully spreading this very disinformation,  just-shy of (4) months after Bush's inauguration. (Check out all those question marks after the word "Coincidence" Lol. Tell me THAT ain't "Fishin' ". )

The truth is, it had nothing at all to do with Bush. Many of us have studied the documentation, many know the true circumstances. Because we know the true circumstances, we can identify an untruthful claim REGARDING the circumstances. The "Bush/Zapata/Barbara J"-claims are provable Disinformation. Therefore, in the above-linked letter to Weisberg, we have yet another identifiable instance of Prouty actively, willfully, agressively spreading provably-false, Now-Known-To-Be-Disinformation.

The only source for the story that Prouty had ANYTHING to do with the purchase of those boats is Prouty himself. The claim, therefore, is immediately without legs to stand on. 

 

 

 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

George H.W. Bush founded Zapata Oil in 1953, and the Zapata name was, allegedly, inspired by the 1952 hit movie, Viva Zapata, starring Marlon Brando.  

GHWB worked for Allen Dulles and the CIA beginning in (?) 1953 after graduating from Yale.

GHWB was originally outed as a CIA agent by an un-shredded FBI memo discovered by Joseph McBride, which described J. Edgar Hoover debriefing, "Mr. George Bush of the CIA," on 11/29/63 about the FBI "investigation" of JFK's recent assassination.

I think Joseph McBride originally discovered and publicized this famous Hoover memo about GHWB in 1988-- a few months before the Presidential election between GHWB and Michael Dukakis.

'GEORGE BUSH,' C.I.A. OPERATIVE | CIA FOIA (foia.cia.gov)

So, not only was GHWB a known CIA agent on 11/22/63, he was sufficiently important to have been personally debriefed about the FBI's aborted investigation of JFK's murder by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover!

Zapata Oil was a CIA front company that was actively involved in the CIA's disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion.  Zapata Oil's early associates and investors included CIA agents and assets like Phillip Graham and Dresser Industries.

So, Prouty's private comments to Weissberg (in 1989) about Zapata Oil and GHWB's involvement in the CIA's Bay of Pigs invasion were substantially accurate.

Curiously, Zapata Oil's SEC records from 1960-66 have gone missing, somewhat like George W. Bush's Texas National Guard Records during the Vietnam War.

It's a "family of secrets," as Russ Baker informed us in detail.

HRG Group - Wikipedia

As for Barbara Bush, (nee Pierce) as nearly as I can tell, she had no known middle name.

Not sure what to make of the "Barbara J." reference, if it's accurate.

Edited October 20, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Guest Doug Campbell]

4 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

George H.W. Bush founded Zapata Oil in 1953, and the Zapata name was, allegedly, inspired by the 1952 hit movie, Viva Zapata, starring Marlon Brando.  

GHWB worked for Allen Dulles and the CIA beginning in (?) 1953 after graduating from Yale.

GHWB was originally outed as a CIA agent by an un-shredded FBI memo discovered by Joseph McBride, which described J. Edgar Hoover debriefing, "Mr. George Bush of the CIA," on 11/29/63 about the FBI "investigation" of JFK's recent assassination.

I think Joseph McBride originally discovered and publicized this famous Hoover memo about GHWB in 1988-- a few months before the Presidential election between GHWB and Michael Dukakis.

'GEORGE BUSH,' C.I.A. OPERATIVE | CIA FOIA (foia.cia.gov)

So, not only was GHWB a known CIA agent on 11/22/63, he was sufficiently important to have been personally debriefed about the FBI's aborted investigation of JFK's murder by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover!

Zapata Oil was a CIA front company that was actively involved in the CIA's disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion.  Zapata Oil's early associates and investors included CIA agents and assets like Phillip Graham and Dresser Industries.

So, Prouty's private comments to Weissberg (in 1989) about Zapata Oil and GHWB's involvement in the CIA's Bay of Pigs invasion were substantially accurate.

Curiously, Zapata Oil's SEC records from 1960-66 have gone missing, somewhat like George W. Bush's Texas National Guard Records during the Vietnam War.

It's a "family of secrets," as Russ Baker informed us in detail.

HRG Group - Wikipedia

As for Barbara Bush, (nee Pierce) as nearly as I can tell, she had no known middle name.

Not sure what to make of the "Barbara J." reference, if it's accurate.

I'm sorry. No.

Any member of this forum can type 10 pages worth of facts & factoids about GHW Bush and his Zapata Oil, but it will not change the truth. "Zapata" was a geographic reference, and there was never any connection whatsoever between Bush & his company, and the assignation of the operational designation ZAPATA to the Bay of Pigs Invasion operation. The notion is false, the allegation untrue.

ZAPATA was a geographic reference to the area of Cuba at which that particular plan called for the invasion force to land.

Just like the "Oriente Plan" called for a landing at Oriente Province, Cuba.

Just like the "Trinidad Plan" called for the force coming ashore south of the town of Trinidad, Cuba.

The "Zapata Plan" called for a landing on The Zapata Peninsula.

This is the plan that was ultimately chosen.

The Zapata Plan thus became Operation ZAPATA. 

The Exile force thus landed on The Zapata Peninsula, at The Bay Of Pigs. 

As planned.

There never was a connection between Bush/Zapata and Operation ZAPATA.

It's a myth. A Prouty-pushed myth.

The connection is not real. The Bush/Zapata/BOP Conspiracy Fluff is not true.

It's a lie. 

Edited October 21, 2023 by Doug Campbell

[Greg Kooyman]

8 minutes ago, Doug Campbell said:

I'm sorry. No.

Any member of this forum can type 10 pages worth of facts & factoids about GHW Bush and his Zapata Oil, but it will not change the truth. "Zapata" was a geographic reference, and there was never any connection whatsoever between Bush & his company, and the assignation of the operational designation ZAPATA to the Bay of Pigs Invasion operation. The notion is false, the allegation untrue.

ZAPATA was a geographic reference to the area of Cuba at which that particular plan called for the invasion force to land.

Just like the "Oriente Plan" called for a landing at Oriente Province, Cuba.

Just like the "Trinidad Plan" called for the force coming ashore south of the town of Trinidad, Cuba.

The "Zapata Plan" called for a landing on The Zapata Peninsula.

This is the plan that was ultimately chosen.

The Zapata Plan thus became Operation ZAPATA. 

The Exile force thus landed on The Zapata Peninsula, at The Bay Of Pigs. 

As planned.

There never was a connection between Bush/Zapata and Operation ZAPATA.

It's a myth. A Prouty-pushed myth.

The connection is not real. The Bush/Zapata/BOP Conspiracy Fluff is not true.

It's a lie. 

Doug,

Its refreshing to read your posts quoting the facts.  Glad to see you and Rob Clark fighting the good fight.  Keep it up my friend.   

 

[W. Niederhut]

Not sure what Doug Campbell imagines to be "fluffy" about the involvement of CIA asset George H.W. Bush and his CIA front company, Zapata Oil, in the Bay of Pigs invasion.  It happened.

GHWB worked for the CIA, and his Zapata Offshore company was involved in the Bay of Pigs op.

I think Mr. Campbell is focusing on the issue of Prouty's apparently mistaken belief (in 1989) that CIA Operation Zapata was named for GHWB's CIA front company, Zapata Oil, rather than for Cuba's Zapata Pennisula. 

This is HUGE, folks!  Prouty was assigned to provide supplies for CIA Operation Zapata in 1961, and he thought the CIA named their op after GHWB's Zapata Offshore Oil Company.    Geez...  How "nutty" can an Air Force Colonel be? 🤥

It's the biggest Prouty scandal since John McAdams accused Prouty years ago of being a Holocaust denier and a Scientologist.

Perhaps Mr. Campbell doesn't know that Prouty was never a CIA insider.  He didn't formulate CIA plans or name CIA ops.  He worked as a USAF liaison to the CIA-- providing transportation and resources for their special ops.  And he wrote about his observations of CIA black ops from the outside.

 

 

Edited October 21, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Doug Campbell said:

I'm sorry. No.

Any member of this forum can type 10 pages worth of facts & factoids about GHW Bush and his Zapata Oil, but it will not change the truth. "Zapata" was a geographic reference, and there was never any connection whatsoever between Bush & his company, and the assignation of the operational designation ZAPATA to the Bay of Pigs Invasion operation. The notion is false, the allegation untrue.

ZAPATA was a geographic reference to the area of Cuba at which that particular plan called for the invasion force to land.

Just like the "Oriente Plan" called for a landing at Oriente Province, Cuba.

Just like the "Trinidad Plan" called for the force coming ashore south of the town of Trinidad, Cuba.

The "Zapata Plan" called for a landing on The Zapata Peninsula.

This is the plan that was ultimately chosen.

The Zapata Plan thus became Operation ZAPATA. 

Agreed:  There was no name association between Operation Zapata and Zapata Off-Shore.

How does that preclude an operational association?  Zapata Off-Shore could run supplies from the mainland to moveable oil derricks in the Caribbean and back without a customs check.  The temptation to move contraband had to be intense.

1 hour ago, Doug Campbell said:

The Exile force thus landed on The Zapata Peninsula, at The Bay Of Pigs. 

As planned.

There never was a connection between Bush/Zapata and Operation ZAPATA.

Paul Helliwell and his anti-Castro dope runners never used Zapata Off-Shore to fund off-the-books projects?  I’m not so sure.

[W. Niederhut]

21 minutes ago, Greg Kooyman said:

Doug,

Its refreshing to read your posts quoting the facts.  Glad to see you and Rob Clark fighting the good fight.  Keep it up my friend.   

 

Huh?  The good fight? 

Thanks for the laugh, Kooyman.

I haven't seen you around here since that Swift Boat Vet style attack on Prouty a year or two ago.

As I recall, you posted some allegedly defamatory link at the time that turned out to be another nothing burger.

[W. Niederhut]

Doug Campbell's claim (above) that there was no connection between GHWB's Zapata Oil Company and the CIA's Bay of Pigs/Operation Zapata is inconsistent with evidence described by Russ Baker and other researchers.

Russ Baker wrote in detail about the history of GHWB's Zapata Oil Company in Family of Secrets.

Here are some of Baker's excerpts about Zapata, re-printed at Who What Why in serialized articles.

Bush and the JFK Hit, Part 2: Skull and Bones Forever - WhoWhatWhy

 

Excerpts

Zapata Offshore . . . [was] launched by Poppy in 1954, just as the U.S. government, under an administration dominated by the Dulles-Bush circles, began auctioning offshore mineral rights 

In 1958, Zapata Offshore’s drilling rig Scorpion was moved from the Gulf of Mexico to Cay Sal Bank, the most remote group of islands in the Bahamas and just fifty-four miles north of Isabela, Cuba. The [Cay Sal] island had been recently leased to oilman Howard Hughes, who had his own long-standing CIA ties, as well as his own “private CIA.”

 

By most appearances, a number of CIA-connected entities were involved in the operation. Zapata leased the Scorpion to Standard Oil of California and to Gulf Oil. CIA director Dulles had previously served as Gulf’s counsel for Latin America. The same year that Gulf leased Bush’s platform, CIA veteran Kermit “Kim” Roosevelt joined Gulf’s board. This was the same Kermit Roosevelt who had overseen the CIA’s successful 1953 coup against the democratically elected Iranian prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, after Mossadegh began nationalizing Anglo-American oil concessions. It looked like the Bush-CIA group was preparing for operations in the Caribbean basin.

The offshore platforms had a specific purpose. “George Bush would be given a list of names of Cuban oil workers we would want placed in jobs,” said one official connected to Operation Mongoose, the program to overthrow Castro. “The oil platforms he dealt in were perfect for training the Cubans in raids on their homeland.”

 

Upon coming to power in 1959, Fidel Castro began to expropriate the massive properties of large foreign (chiefly American) companies. The impact fell heavily on American corporations that had massive agricultural and mineral operations on the fertile island, including Brown Brothers Harriman, whose extensive holdings included the two-hundred-thousand-acre Punta Alegre beet sugar plantation. After Castro took power, the Eisenhower administration began a boycott of Cuban sugar, which is a crucial component of the island’s economy. The Cubans in turn became increasingly dependent on the USSR as supplier of goods and protector.

Poppy swung into gear the same year that Castro began nationalizing [American] properties. He severed his ties to the Liedtkes by buying out their stake in Zapata Offshore, and then moved its operations to Houston – which, unlike the remote Midland-Odessa area, had access to the Caribbean through the Houston Ship Channel. Meanwhile, back in Washington, after extensive planning, the Bay of Pigs project began with Eisenhower’s approval on March 17, 1960 . . .

Beyond providing a staging area for Cuban rebels, Zapata Offshore appears to have served as a paymaster. “We had to pay off politicians in Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, and elsewhere,” said John Sherwood, chief of CIA anti-Castro operations in the early 1960s. “Bush’s company was used as a conduit for these funds under the guise of oil business contracts . . . The major breakthrough was when we were able, through Bush, to place people in PEMEX – the big Mexican national oil operation.”

[Guest Doug Campbell]

7 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Doug Campbell's claim (above) that there was no connection between GHWB's Zapata Oil Company and the CIA's Bay of Pigs/Operation Zapata is inconsistent with evidence described by Russ Baker and other researchers.

Russ Baker wrote in detail about the history of GHWB's Zapata Oil Company in Family of Secrets.

Here are some of Baker's excerpts about Zapata, re-printed at Who What Why in serialized articles.

Bush and the JFK Hit, Part 2: Skull and Bones Forever - WhoWhatWhy

 

Excerpts

Zapata Offshore . . . [was] launched by Poppy in 1954, just as the U.S. government, under an administration dominated by the Dulles-Bush circles, began auctioning offshore mineral rights 

In 1958, Zapata Offshore’s drilling rig Scorpion was moved from the Gulf of Mexico to Cay Sal Bank, the most remote group of islands in the Bahamas and just fifty-four miles north of Isabela, Cuba. The [Cay Sal] island had been recently leased to oilman Howard Hughes, who had his own long-standing CIA ties, as well as his own “private CIA.”

 

By most appearances, a number of CIA-connected entities were involved in the operation. Zapata leased the Scorpion to Standard Oil of California and to Gulf Oil. CIA director Dulles had previously served as Gulf’s counsel for Latin America. The same year that Gulf leased Bush’s platform, CIA veteran Kermit “Kim” Roosevelt joined Gulf’s board. This was the same Kermit Roosevelt who had overseen the CIA’s successful 1953 coup against the democratically elected Iranian prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, after Mossadegh began nationalizing Anglo-American oil concessions. It looked like the Bush-CIA group was preparing for operations in the Caribbean basin.

The offshore platforms had a specific purpose. “George Bush would be given a list of names of Cuban oil workers we would want placed in jobs,” said one official connected to Operation Mongoose, the program to overthrow Castro. “The oil platforms he dealt in were perfect for training the Cubans in raids on their homeland.”

 

Upon coming to power in 1959, Fidel Castro began to expropriate the massive properties of large foreign (chiefly American) companies. The impact fell heavily on American corporations that had massive agricultural and mineral operations on the fertile island, including Brown Brothers Harriman, whose extensive holdings included the two-hundred-thousand-acre Punta Alegre beet sugar plantation. After Castro took power, the Eisenhower administration began a boycott of Cuban sugar, which is a crucial component of the island’s economy. The Cubans in turn became increasingly dependent on the USSR as supplier of goods and protector.

Poppy swung into gear the same year that Castro began nationalizing [American] properties. He severed his ties to the Liedtkes by buying out their stake in Zapata Offshore, and then moved its operations to Houston – which, unlike the remote Midland-Odessa area, had access to the Caribbean through the Houston Ship Channel. Meanwhile, back in Washington, after extensive planning, the Bay of Pigs project began with Eisenhower’s approval on March 17, 1960 . . .

Beyond providing a staging area for Cuban rebels, Zapata Offshore appears to have served as a paymaster. “We had to pay off politicians in Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, and elsewhere,” said John Sherwood, chief of CIA anti-Castro operations in the early 1960s. “Bush’s company was used as a conduit for these funds under the guise of oil business contracts . . . The major breakthrough was when we were able, through Bush, to place people in PEMEX – the big Mexican national oil operation.”

You can post all the factoid and book excerpts and quotes you want, post little nuggets about GHWB in dozens of posts all weekend. Make your type-face red, blue, purple, Dupont Chrome-Illusion colored if you want. Hell, Make every other word a different color, but the fact remains:  The operational designation "ZAPATA" was in no way a reference to GHW Bush's company. ZERO. NADA. NONE. It was a geographic reference to the area of Cuba on which the plan called for the invasion force to land. And no amount of copy/paste posting is going to change the reality.

The claim that the operation was named in ANY way for Bush's company is False. The notion that Operation ZAPATA was named for Zapata Offshore is NOT. TRUE.

Doesn't matter who put in in a book. It AIN'T TRUE.

STUDY DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS. DO! THE! RESEARCH! Get your nose in those  ARCHIVES!!! FAST! LEEEEEEEARN SOMETHING REAL.

* It started as an "operational plan" called "The Zapata Plan."

There was also a plan to land at Oriente Province. It's name referencing the gographical area of Oriente Province.

There was also a plan to land south of Trinidad. It's name referencing the geographical area of the town of Trinidad. 

*The "Zapata Plan" called for the invasion force to land at the Zapata Peninsula. 

*This plan~to land at the Zapata Peninsula~was chosen in the end.

*It was thus re-designated "Operation ZAPATA." Had the Oriente Plan been chosen, it would have thus been re-christened "Operation ORIENTE", just as the designation "The Zapata Plan" became "Operation ZAPATA." Had they chosen to land at Trinidad, we would all be discussing "Operation TRINIDAD" rather than Operation ZAPATA.

*The invasion force did, in fact, land on the Zapata Peninsula, as planned, according to The Zapata Plan.

There is not now, nor was there EVER a connection between Zapata Offshore and the operational designation "Operation ZAPATA for the Bay Of Pigs Invasion. 

Never.

It's made up. A story tailor-made for folks like you & I to believe. (Again, all credit to Alan for that line.)

The claim is bogus now, and it was bogus when Prouty tried to feed it to Wiesberg in 1989. 

 

[Guest Doug Campbell]

9 hours ago, Greg Kooyman said:

Doug,

Its refreshing to read your posts quoting the facts.  Glad to see you and Rob Clark fighting the good fight.  Keep it up my friend.   

 

Greg! Where you been, my friend? One day you're sitting in my office talking about William Harvey, then you drop off for 2 years! Lol.

Hope all is well, my friend. Next time you get up here, holla at me.

[Paul Brancato]

Maybe all this misses a point. We didn’t need Prouty’s mistaken evidence of a Bush connection to the Bay of Pigs. McBride’s discovery of the Hoover memo to ‘George Bush of the CIA was a far more important clue. Prouty’s revelation was a misdirection, intentional or not. But that doesn’t amount to a vindication of George Bush, whose explanation for the memo, discovered on the eve of his appointment to CIA director, doesn’t ring true. I realize this is a thread about Prouty, not Bush. 

[Greg Kooyman]

1 hour ago, Doug Campbell said:

Greg! Where you been, my friend? One day you're sitting in my office talking about William Harvey, then you drop off for 2 years! Lol.

Hope all is well, my friend. Next time you get up here, holla at me.

Hey Doug,

No excuses, I really fell off the grid.  Let’s chat offline soon my friend.   Looking forward to your next episode on the Dallas Action.  

[W. Niederhut]

39 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Maybe all this misses a point. We didn’t need Prouty’s mistaken evidence of a Bush connection to the Bay of Pigs. McBride’s discovery of the Hoover memo to ‘George Bush of the CIA was a far more important clue. Prouty’s revelation was a misdirection, intentional or not. But that doesn’t amount to a vindication of George Bush, whose explanation for the memo, discovered on the eve of his appointment to CIA director, doesn’t ring true. I realize this is a thread about Prouty, not Bush. 

True, Paul.  And, as I pointed out above, Prouty's belief that Operation Zapata was named by Allen Dulles and the CIA for the GHWB/CIA Zapata Offshore Oil Company may have been a result of Prouty not being privy to the secret deliberations of the CIA.  Prouty's job was to furnish transportation and equipment to the Dulles/Bush CIA people for their secret ops.

It's a nothing burger.  Another Prouty non-scandal.

As for Zapata Offshore, do Doug Campbell, Greg Kooyman, et.al., sincerely believe that GHWB and his CIA front company, Zapata Oil, were not involved in the CIA's Bay of Pigs op?

What bunk.

[Greg Kooyman]

16 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

True, Paul.  And, as I pointed out above, Prouty's belief that Operation Zapata was named by Allen Dulles and the CIA for the GHWB/CIA Zapata Offshore Oil Company may have been a result of Prouty not being privy to the secret deliberations of the CIA.  Prouty's job was to furnish transportation and equipment to the Dulles/Bush CIA people for their secret ops.

It's a nothing burger.  Another Prouty non-scandal.

As for Zapata Offshore, do Doug Campbell, Greg Kooyman, et.al., sincerely believe that GHWB and his CIA front company, Zapata Oil, were not involved in the CIA's Bay of Pigs op?

What bunk.

Show me the proof that GHWB was involved in the Bay of Pigs operation.  Until I see documentation to support your claim, I will not be swayed by your puffery and conjecture.

[Guest Doug Campbell]

2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Maybe all this misses a point. We didn’t need Prouty’s mistaken evidence of a Bush connection to the Bay of Pigs. McBride’s discovery of the Hoover memo to ‘George Bush of the CIA was a far more important clue. Prouty’s revelation was a misdirection, intentional or not. But that doesn’t amount to a vindication of George Bush, whose explanation for the memo, discovered on the eve of his appointment to CIA director, doesn’t ring true. I realize this is a thread about Prouty, not Bush. 

Yes Sir,  Mr. Brancato, most assuredly a thread regarding Prouty. That said, in the case of the inaccurate, imaginary connection between GHWB/Zapata Offshore and the operational designation "ZAPATA" & the names of the vessels used, I do not believe Prouty had a "mistaken belief". I believe Prouty knew the story was made-up. Not only that, but I believe~ given that the letter to Weisberg is dated less than (4) months after Bush's inauguration~ that it's entirely probable that Prouty was the Original Source OF this diversionary twaddle.

I believe that~ in the case of the letter to Orr cited earlier in this thread by Mr. Reeves, and the letter I cited to Weisberg~ we have in these two examples TWO undeniably identified instances of Prouty wilfully and knowingly feeding false, imaginary conspiratorial connections to Assassination Researchers, specifically designed for them to believe, so that they might not only BELIEVE them, but RUN with them.

Edited October 21, 2023 by Doug Campbell