Bush Senior Early CIA Ties Revealed

[Brassmask]

Bush Senior Early CIA Ties Revealed   
By Russ Baker and Jonathan Z. Larsen | The Real News Project

January 8, 2007

NEW YORK--Newly released internal CIA documents assert that former president George Herbert Walker Bush's oil company emerged from a 1950's collaboration with a covert CIA officer.

Bush has long denied allegations that he had connections to the intelligence community prior to 1976, when he became Central Intelligence Agency director under President Gerald Ford. At the time, he described his appointment as a 'real shocker.'

But the freshly uncovered memos contend that Bush maintained a close personal and business relationship for decades with a CIA staff employee who, according to those CIA documents, was instrumental in the establishment of Bush's oil venture, Zapata, in the early 1950s, and who would later accompany Bush to Vietnam as a “cleared and witting commercial asset” of the agency.

 
Read more...
http://realnews.org/rn/content/zapata.html

[Amianthus]

[snip]

I've had close, personal ties to people in the CIA (and NSA and SS) for years.

Doesn't make me a CIA agent.

[Michael Tee]

You admit it, Bush denied it.

[Amianthus]

You admit it, Bush denied it.

If reality, if I was asked to admit it "on the record" I wouldn't. Because 1) I'm not sure exactly what their position is (though I can guess pretty accurately) and 2) officially, in many of the cases, I don't know.

I just know the "DC code words" to figure out which alphabet soup agency someone works for when they decline to tell you who they work for. ;-)

[Brassmask]

When they have undeniable proof that Bush helped organize the assassination, you guys will be like, "Hey, I've organized lots of assassinations but that doesn't mean that I actually meant for them to go through with it!"

Bush denied he ever had anything to do with the CIA.  He lied.

[sirs]

When they have undeniable proof that Bush helped organize the assassination, you guys will be like, "Hey, I've organized lots of assassinations but that doesn't mean that I actually meant for them to go through with it!"

When you actually can produce valid proof, much less undeniable proof, then see what us "you guys" actually respond with.  You'd be amazed at what facts & proof can produce vs continued conspiratorial blatherings, devoid of such proof

[Brassmask]

So, Bush's oil company being a CIA front company is no big shocker to you, then, sirs?

[sirs]

So, Bush's oil company being a CIA front company is no big shocker to you, then, sirs?

Proof of what??  That continues to be the question you have had no ability in making.  Accusatory innuendo only goes so far, when your credibility and "objectivity" are next to nil

[Plane]

How long have you been working for the CIA Brassmask?

[BT]

So, Bush's oil company being a CIA front company is no big shocker to you, then, sirs?

I didn't see in any of your links where that is an established fact.

[Brassmask]

And no matter what I post, you never will.

[BT]

And no matter what I post, you never will.

Brilliant non answer. And you don't know that. I can see where it might be possible, in the context of the times, but i don't see where you established that fact. And it would be nice if for once you dealt with facts instead of wild eyed angry conjecture.

Know what i mean?