Author Topic: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?  (Read 100674 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #150 on: November 29, 2006, 01:47:50 PM »
Otherwise known as "speculation" or "opinion."

Ample "evidence" of that        ;)
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

larry

  • Guest
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #151 on: November 29, 2006, 04:54:04 PM »
so, at best all one can say is there is unproven evidence.

Otherwise known as "speculation" or "opinion."

One day later after he reported Parrott to the FBI, Bush received a highly sensitive, high-level briefing from the Bureau:

Date: November 29, 1963
To: Director


Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State


From: John Edgar Hoover, Director
Subject: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY NOVEMBER 22, 1963

Our Miami, Florida, Office on November 23, 1963 advised that the Office of Coordinator of Cuban Affairs in Miami advised that the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might herald a change in US policy, which is not true.

Our sources and informants familiar with Cuban matters in the Miami area advise that the general feeling in the anti-Castro Cuban community is one of stunned disbelief and, even among those who did not entirely agree with the President's policy concerning Cuba, the feeling is that the President's death represents a great loss not only to the US but to all Latin America. These sources know of no plans for unauthorized action against Cuba.

An informant who has furnished reliable information in the past and who is close to a small pro-Castro group in Miami has advised that those individuals are afraid that the assassination of the President may result in strong repressive measures being taken against them and, although pro-Castro in their feelings, regret the assassination.

The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr. W.T. Forsyth of this Bureau.

William T. Forsyth, since deceased, was an official of the FBI's Washington headquarters; during the time he was attached to the Bureau's subversive control section, he ran the investigation of Rev. Martin Luther King. Was he also a part of the FBI's harassment of Dr. King? The efforts of journalists to locate Captain Edwards have not been successful.

This FBI document identifying George Bush as a CIA agent in November, 1963 was first published by Joseph McBride in The Nation in July, 1988, just before Bush received the Republican nomination for president. McBride's source observed: "I know [Bush] was involved in the Caribbean. I know he was involved in the suppression of things after the Kennedy assassination. There was a very definite worry that some Cuban groups were going to move against Castro and attempt to blame it on the CIA." 20 When pressed for confirmation or denial, Bush's spokesman Stephen Hart commented: "Must be another George Bush." Within a short time the CIA itself would peddle the same damage control line. On July 19, 1988 in the wake of wide public attention to the report published in The Nation, CIA spokeswoman Sharron Basso departed from the normal CIA policy of refusing to confirm or deny reports that any person is or was a CIA employee. CIA spokeswoman Basso told the Associated press that the CIA believed that "the record should be clarified." She said that the FBI document "apparently" referred to a George William Bush who had worked in 1963 on the night shift at CIA headquarters, and that "would have been the appropriate place to have received such an FBI report." According to her account, the George William Bush in question had left the CIA to join the Defense Intelligence Agency in 1964.

For the CIA to volunteer the name of one of its former employees to the press was a shocking violation of traditional methods, which are supposedly designed to keep such names a closely guarded secret. This revelation may have constituted a violation of federal law. But no exertions were too great when it came to damage control for George Bush.

George William Bush had indeed worked for the CIA, the DIA, and the Alexandria, Virginia Department of Public Welfare before joining the Social Security Administration, in whose Arlington, Virginia office he was employed as a claims representative in 1988. George William Bush told The Nation that while at the CIA he was "just a lowly researcher and analyst" who worked with documents and photos and never received interagency briefings. He had never met Forsyth of the FBI or Captain Edwards of the DIA. "So it wasn't me," said George William Bush. 21

Later, George William Bush formalized his denial in a sworn statement to a federal court in Washington, DC. The affidavit acknowledges that while working at CIA headquarters between September 1963 and February 1964, George William Bush was the junior person on a three to four man watch shift which was on duty when Kennedy was shot. But, as George William Bush goes on to say,

I have carefully reviewed the FBI memorandum to the Director, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State dated November 29, 1963 which mentions a Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency....I do not recognize the contents of the memorandum as information furnished to me orally or otherwise during the time I was at the CIA. In fact, during my time at the CIA. I did not receive any oral communications from any government agency of any nature whatsoever. I did not receive any information relating to the Kennedy assassination during my time at the CIA from the FBI.

Based on the above, it is my conclusion that I am not the Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency referred to in the memorandum. 22

So we are left with the strong suspicion that the "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" referred to by the FBI is our own George Herbert Walker Bush, who, in addition to his possible contact with Lee Harvey Oswald's controller, may thus also join the ranks of the Kennedy assassination cover-up. It makes perfect sense for George Bush to be called in on a matter involving the Cuban community in Miami, since that is a place where George has traditionally had a constituency. George inherited it from his father, Prescott Bush of Jupiter Island, and later passed it on to his own son, Jeb.

bit more than speculation.


Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #152 on: November 29, 2006, 05:11:42 PM »
I concur, larry.

I think I also read somewhere that that OTHER G W Bush was referred constantly as William and not George.

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #153 on: November 29, 2006, 05:30:22 PM »
I concur, larry.

I think I also read somewhere that that OTHER G W Bush was referred constantly as William and not George.


Except that his name is George Herbert Walker Bush.

No William in there.

And again, that article consists of nothing but speculation that George William Bush is really George Herbert Walker Bush. Considering that "George Bush" is a common name (around 90,000 Bush families), I don't think it's a likely scenario.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2006, 05:35:12 PM by Amianthus »
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #154 on: November 29, 2006, 06:16:40 PM »
I concur, larry.

I think I also read somewhere that that OTHER G W Bush was referred constantly as William and not George.


Except that his name is George Herbert Walker Bush.

No William in there.

And again, that article consists of nothing but speculation that George William Bush is really George Herbert Walker Bush. Considering that "George Bush" is a common name (around 90,000 Bush families), I don't think it's a likely scenario.

Well, there you go again.

I was talking about the George William Bush not George HW Bush.  How do you not get that?

And I think I can dig up the article that shows how there was only that one G. William Bush list on any employee list from that time period.  George Herbert Walker Bush was covert and so would not appear on any list from that time, of course.

Here's a little something from Wikipedia.org backing up Larry.


When this second memo surfaced during the 1988 presidential campaign, GHW Bush spokespersons (including Stephen Hart) said Hoover's memo referred to another George Bush who worked for the CIA.[3] CIA spokeswoman Sharron Basso suggested it was referring to a George William Bush. However, others described this G. William Bush as a "lowly researcher" and "coast and beach analyst" who worked only with documents and photos at the CIA in Virginia from September 1963 to February 1964, with a low rank of GS-5.[4][5][6] In fact, this G. William Bush swore an affadavit in federal court denying that Hoover's memo referred to him:

"I have carefully reviewed the FBI memorandum to the Director, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State dated November 29, 1963 which mentions a Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency.... I do not recognize the contents of the memorandum as information furnished to me orally or otherwise during the time I was at the CIA. In fact, during my time at the CIA, I did not receive any oral communications from any government agency of any nature whatsoever. I did not receive any information relating to the Kennedy assassination during my time at the CIA from the FBI. Based on the above, it is my conclusion that I am not the Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency referred to in the memorandum." (United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action 88-2600 GHR, Archives and Research Center v. Central Intelligence Agency, Affidavit of George William Bush, September 21, 1988.)

In his book The Immaculate Deception: The Bush Crime Family Exposed (1991), US Army Brigadier General Russell Bowen wrote there was a cover-up of Zapata's CIA connections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapata_Corporation

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #155 on: November 29, 2006, 07:24:31 PM »
[snip]

Still nothing more than speculation.

Unless you can provide records that George William Bush was the only "George Bush" that ever worked for the CIA?

As I said, 90,000 families are named Bush and George is one of the most popular given names in this country.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #156 on: November 30, 2006, 11:53:19 AM »

Unless you can provide records that George William Bush was the only "George Bush" that ever worked for the CIA?

As I said, 90,000 families are named Bush and George is one of the most popular given names in this country.

What the hell does the popularity of the names Bush and George countrywide have to do with anything?

The important fact would be how many people worked at the CIA on November 29, 1963 (wasn't that the date of the memo?) were named George AND Bush and of those people who would swear that he never took a meeting with JE Hoover?

That's the imperative, not the commonality of the names Bush and George in America.  And the relevance of G. William Bush being referred to in person as William rather than George is pertinent as well.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #157 on: November 30, 2006, 12:01:40 PM »
This older posting deserves to be re-posted in this thread, I do believe.

Holy Sepulcre!
"The Da Vinci Code" shows that conspiracy theories have no limits.


BY DANIEL HENNINGER
Friday, May 19, 2006
 

"The Da Vinci Code" would not be the subject of this column had it not sold 60.5 million copies, according to its publisher Doubleday. Of course this does not make it the best-selling book of all time. That title, as irony would have it, goes to the Bible, half of which one of Dan Brown's characters dismisses as "false."

Like the Bible but unlike Mr. Brown's novel, most of the books in the sales Pantheon have had utilitarian staying power--McGuffey's Reader, the Guinness Book of Records, Noah Webster's "The American Spelling Book," Dr. Spock's baby book and the World Almanac. Now comes "The Da Vinci Code," selling twice as many copies as the 30 million attributed to Jacqueline Susann's "The Valley of the Dolls."

"The Valley of the Dolls" was about people having sex. "The Da Vinci Code" is about Jesus leaving Mary Magdalene pregnant with his baby while he dies on the cross. So in a sense, Mr. Brown's novel respects tradition.

Still, it boggles the mind, and the struggling soul, that "The Da Vinci Code" has sold 60.5 million copies in 45 languages. Sales in the U.S. are 21.7 million, in the U.K. nine million, more than 4.7 million each in France and Japan, 3.6 million in Germany, 1.2 million in China and, no surprise, 143,000 in Romania.

A righteous army has formed to prove everything Dan Brown says about the early Christian church is false, which it most certainly is. Mr. Brown's history pales against the real story of Christianity's first centuries. I recommend two gems: Henry Chadwick's "The Early Church" (Penguin) and Peter Brown's "The Rise of Western Christendom" (Blackwell). Grand, thrilling drama.

But markets don't lie. Clearly Mr. Brown knows something that is true. What is it?

To answer the mystery of Dan Brown's unholy tale, I visited the church-like quiet of Barnes & Noble on Manhattan's Sixth Avenue and asked an attendant where the book was. He arched his brow--as Mr. Brown's characters tend to do every few paragraphs--and whispered, "The Da Vinci table is over there."

The table held many treasures. I discovered the polymathic physician Sherwin B. Nuland's "Leonardo da Vinci," a delightful Penguin biography that has nothing to do with Mr. Brown's book. Checking that no one who knew me was nearby, I opened "The Gospel of Thomas: The Hidden Sayings of Jesus" because its cover promised an "Interpretation" by the eminent English professor Harold Bloom, a sometime contributor to this page, who remarks that the book's first Saying "is not by Jesus but by his twin."

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, preparing for today's opening of Tom Hanks and Ron Howard's apparently awful movie, has created a "Da Vinci Code" Web site addressing such issues as "The Witch Killing Frenzies." A spokesman for the bishops, in a nice touch of self-confident understatement, said the bishops would be concerned "if only one person" came away from "The Da Vinci Code" confused about the church. OK, maybe three or four did.

During my own long, hard slog through "The Da Vinci Code" lectures on the sacred feminine and the pagan roots of iambic pentameter, I most appreciated how Dan Brown, his own authorial eyebrow raised, slyly slips in a wink-wink sentence lest people think he really is nuts.

Chapter 40: "Everyone loves a conspiracy." (Italics, needless to say, Mr. Brown's.)

Chapter 48: "It was all interconnected."

Chapter 55, after Prof. Teabing's arcane summary of eighty gospels (Mr. Brown's italic): "Sophie's head was spinning. 'And all of this relates to the Holy Grail?'" My thoughts exactly, Sophie.

But the final clue to the hoax arrives in Chapter 60: "Langdon held up his Mickey Mouse watch and told her that Walt Disney had made it his quiet life's work to pass on the Grail story to future generations." I'll bet that line isn't in the movie.

Here's my theory of "The Da Vinci Code." Dan Brown was sitting one night at the monthly meeting of his local secret society, listening to a lecture on the 65th gospel, and he got to thinking: "I wonder if there's any limit to what people are willing to believe these days about a conspiracy theory. Let's say I wrote a book that said Jesus was married. To Mary Magdalene. Who was pregnant at the Crucifixion. And she is the Holy Grail. Jesus wanted her to run the church as a global sex society called Heiros Gamos, but Peter elbowed her out of the job. Her daughter was the beginning of the Merovingian dynasty of France. Jesus' family is still alive. There were 80 gospels, not four. Leonardo DiCaprio, I mean da Vinci, knew all this. The 'Mona Lisa' is Leonardo's painting of himself in drag. Da Vinci's secret was kept alive by future members of 'the brotherhood,' including Isaac Newton, Claude Debussy and Victor Hugo. The Catholic Church is covering all this up."

Then Dan Brown said softly, "Would anyone buy into a plot so preposterous and fantastic?" Then he started writing.

The real accomplishment of "The Da Vinci Code" is that Dan Brown has proven that the theory of conspiracy theories is totally elastic, it has no limits. The genre's future is limitless, with the following obvious plots:

- Bill Clinton is directly descended from Henry VIII; Hillary is his third cousin.
- Jack Ruby was Ronald Reagan's half-brother.
- Dick Cheney has been dead for five years; the vice president is a clone created by Halliburton in 1998.
- The Laffer Curve is the secret sign of the Carlyle Group.
- Michael Moore is the founder of the Carlyle Group, which started World War I.
- The New York Times is secretly run by the Rosicrucians (this is revealed on the first page of Chapter 47 of "The Da Vinci Code" if you look at the 23rd line through a kaleidoscope).
- Jacques Chirac is descended from Judas.

None of this strikes me as the least bit implausible, especially the latter. I'd better get started.


http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110008395

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #158 on: November 30, 2006, 12:05:41 PM »
The important fact would be how many people worked at the CIA on November 29, 1963 (wasn't that the date of the memo?) were named George AND Bush and of those people who would swear that he never took a meeting with JE Hoover?

And that's a fact that was never provided.

The argument that George HW Bush was in the employ of the CIA in 1962 goes like this:

  • Someone named "George Bush" viewed some memos.
  • Someone named "George William Bush" admits to having worked for the CIA at that time, but also claims to have not seen those memos.
  • Therefore, George HW Bush was in the employ of the CIA.

Do you not see the leap from step 2 to step 3 of the "logic" chain? The fact that there can be a large number of "George Bushs" running around point out that it's not logic that connects step 2 and step 3, but pure speculation.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #159 on: November 30, 2006, 12:08:25 PM »
The genre's future is limitless, with the following obvious plots:

Buy a copy of the game "Illuminati" from Steve Jackson Games, and you can use the cards within to randomly "deal up" your own custom conspiracy. Many of them are just as believable as stuff I've heard here and around the 'net.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #160 on: November 30, 2006, 12:16:39 PM »
[snip]

Why are you so opposed to the idea of a married Jesus and Mary Magdalen?

That article is rubbish, btw. 

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #161 on: November 30, 2006, 12:44:40 PM »
Why are you so opposed to the idea of a married Jesus and Mary Magdalen?

Since the Bible made it clear they weren't

That article is rubbish, btw. 

Well, that's one opinion.  Can't be having of those commentaries critical of conspiracies being taken seriously now, can we.  There must be a financial incentive to the author of the piece.  Perhaps he works for Haliburton or is relative of the Bush family....twice removed of course.
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #162 on: November 30, 2006, 01:11:39 PM »
Why are you so opposed to the idea of a married Jesus and Mary Magdalen?

Since the Bible made it clear they weren't

That article is rubbish, btw. 

Well, that's one opinion.  Can't be having of those commentaries critical of conspiracies being taken seriously now, can we.  There must be a financial incentive to the author of the piece.  Perhaps he works for Haliburton or is relative of the Bush family....twice removed of course.


Where exactly does it say that Jesus and Mary Magdalen weren't married?

The article was just rubbish. 

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #163 on: November 30, 2006, 01:21:25 PM »
Where exactly does it say that Jesus and Mary Magdalen weren't married?

Prove a negative?  How about showing us where exactly does it say they were?


The article was just rubbish

Yes, your opinion has already been duely noted on the article.  Repetition of the claim doesn't make it any more valid, however.
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?
« Reply #164 on: November 30, 2006, 01:34:34 PM »
Buy a copy of the game "Illuminati" from Steve Jackson Games, and you can use the cards within to randomly "deal up" your own custom conspiracy. Many of them are just as believable as stuff I've heard here and around the 'net.

 8)   Likely much more enlightening than the book Tee was recommending
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle