Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Why Did the FBI Brief Mr. George Bush of the CIA?

A curious memo dated November 29, 1963 from J Edgar Hoover (1895 – 1972), long time FBI director, reports that he briefed a Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency in the wake of the assassination of President Kennedy on November 22, 1963. We have a few theories for this memo which we present below.

Mr. Hoover wrote that pursuant to the State Department informing the FBI that the former feared that some rogue anti-Castro groups may interpret the change in administrations as a signal to raid Cuba, he replied that the FBI had no information of such plans. He also stated that such information was furnished orally to George Bush and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency, both of whom we believe were separately briefed.

Edwards claimed in 1991 that he recalled no such briefing but said that it was plausible that he received the briefing over the phone. He disavowed knowing who George Bush was. Our suspicion is that Edwards was not briefed and that he was named as a foil to give the allusion that the briefing of George Bush was a routine procedural matter.

Although the memo in question was hotly non-denied by Bush – or perhaps denial was only by his mouth pieces – research presented by Russ Baker in his book Family of Secrets shows that George Herbert Walker Bush is the only George Bush capable of matching the name in the memo.

The Bush camp suggested that the George Bush in question was another man with the same name, but further investigation revealed this to be a farce. The other George William Bush was a low level GS-5 night clerk of the CIA working at Langley CIA headquarters from September 1963 – February 1964 – so low and restricted that he was not permitted to speak on the telephone. George William Bush stated in court deposition that he did not receive a briefing at any time from the FBI while working for the CIA.

The only other George Bush fitting the description of George Bush of the CIA is none other than the former 41st president. We know that this match fits because Bush had been involved heavily for years in covert intelligence operations for the CIA under cover of his Zapata Oil venture, a venture without profits but nonetheless capable of maintaining a far-flung presence in the most unlikely of places looking for the ever elusive oil.

Before discussing some speculative theories, we should note that it is entirely possible that the memo should be taken at face value. But as far as we can ascertain, this memorandum was for file which means that it may have served some additional paper trail purposes.

It is also possible that, since George Bush’s Zapata Oil had special operations in the Caribbean, he may have been briefed on some aspect of the Cubans involved in the assassination. Or even better, Bush may have needed to reign in some of the Cuban groups for which he was responsible who were anxious to begin an assault on Cuba under the pretext that Castro was involved in the assassination.

There may have been contingency plans to use the assassination of the President - under the aegis of Operation Northwoods - to launch an invasion of Cuba which saner heads ruled out, and were now informing the CIA through Bush to call off the attack dogs.

So for what other reasons may have the CIA briefed Bush? We present two possibilities. The first is that the FBI provided information to Bush regarding the results of their investigations, making it a somewhat routine status report. We think that this explanation is plausible but it seems less than satisfactory. Why would the FBI give Bush a one-off briefing and make a point to document it? So far as we know, the FBI had no other interactions with Bush of this nature.

Even accepting the stated purpose of the memo, one would have to conclude that Bush held a much higher rank than previously thought, or was far more engaged in CIA operations than anyone had imagined. It seems strange that a cipher agent of the CIA would be sent for a routine briefing – although the occasion was anything but routine.

Our other explanation is that Bush actually performed the briefing, in contrast with the actual wording of the memo, in which he explained to Hoover that he was dealing with a CIA operation and should avoid looking too closely in another agency’s business.

One reason for this explanation is that the CIA had pursued the murder too aggressively and was producing evidence which contradicted the lone nut theory.

One point in support of the second theory is that this briefing occurred less than 1 week after the CIA murdered President Kennedy, meaning that the FBI displayed investigative tendencies which needed to be curbed – especially in light of the establishment of the Warren Commission on 11/27/1963.

If our theory is correct, he would have warned Hoover that Oswald was the lone nut and that he should not deviate from the official storyline. Bush’s presence in Dallas on the morning of 11/22/63 is also a mystery but we surmise that he was coordinating ground spooks and relaying in person sensitive information related to the assassination.

Bush’s association with the agency was so secretive and sensitive that it was nearly invisible until the late 1980s when this memo surfaced. We believe that George Bush was more intimately involved in the murder of the president than anyone has conceived, which explains the highly elaborate steps Bush took to establish plausible deniability about his presence in Dallas on the day the CIA murdered the president.

We know that advanced and veteran JFK murder researchers have long been aware of this memo, but we are delighted that Russ Baker has brought this to a larger audience.

Family of Secrets, Russ Baker

Copyight 2010-12 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.


Anonymous said...

The Bush family patriarch, Prescott Bush was a close associate with the Harrimans and involved in banking services for Hitler. He was able to get the million or so that had been tied up by the government during the war. The founders of the CIA under Truman were his close associates as well. This would have given his Skull and Bones son a secret in with the CIA operations described above through Zapata Oil. Prescott also was instrumental in giving rise to the Frankenstinian Nixon. Remember that Nixon wrote a request for one Jack Rubinstein to help him avoid some hearings in Congress. Rubinstein was Ruby's original name.
Madeleine Brown has spoken out about a meeting the night before the JFK assassination in which her lover, LBJ, emerged saying he would not to worry about the Kennedys anymore. I think he soon found himself with rattlesnakes. Not Madeleine, but the other plotters she named: J. Edgar Hoover, Nixon, Murchison and unnamed Texas oil men. This latter group could well have included one George Herbert Walker Bush. There is a photo of a man looking very much like him outside the Texas School Book Depository that day.
The power and influence of the Bushes extended in a direct line through Gerald Ford, Reagan and probably Clinton who is said to have colluded in the CIA's importation of cocaine by landing planes secretly in Arkansas.
The deaths of MLK, RFK, plus the attempts on Larry Flynt, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan have the bloody but smeared fingerprints of the same elements. Lennon and JFK,Jr. fit into the same modus operandi as does Mike Connell, computer vote thief of Ohio who feared Karl Rove as shown by his lawyer's papers filed to the court in the investigation proceedings.
The deaths of many others from mysterious plane crashes include the investigator of the Boys Town Boys Scandal which Bush was supposedly involved in and the death of Dorothy Hunt, E. Howard Hunt's wife at Midway Airport come to mind. Speculation but not without merit.

Tony Bonn said...

very few of the items you enumerated - except for the bogus madeleine brown story - rely upon speculation. they are all fact based with much substantiation.

court cases are won based upon patterns and connections. there is rarely a case where a photo will show the murderer claiming his victim, and even photographic evidence is subject to fraud.

the smoking gun is to be found in the correlation of facts.