Home | About | Donate

Bush-41 Finally Speaks on Iraq War


#1

Bush-41 Finally Speaks on Iraq War

Ray McGovern

Media reports on Jon Meacham’s biography of George H. W. Bush, the 41st President, have brought me a painful flashback to the deceptive, destructive – yet at the same time highly instructive – years 2002 and 2003, when his son George W. Bush, the 43rd President, attacked Iraq.

Reality should trump rhetoric regarding that godforsaken war – in my view the most unprincipled and consequential foreign policy blunder in U.S. history. This may be reason enough to renew focus on those years because, for many Americans, those events remain cloaked in mystery and misunderstanding.


#2

Perhaps it's the habit for codifying disinformation that has Mr. McGovern right on the mark in defining the War of Aggression's character and its violation of the Geneva Conventions, only to begin his piece with the premise of innocence:

"Reality should trump rhetoric regarding that godforsaken war – in my view the most unprincipled and consequential foreign policy blunder in U.S. history. "

To term the False Flag trigger and subsequent disasters as a "policy blunder" is itself totally misleading. As is this apparent paean to George Bush, Sr.

"Maybe it is partly because I know the elder Bush personally, but it does strike me that, since we are all human, some degree of empathy might be in order. I simply cannot imagine what it must be like to be a former President with a son, also a former President, undeniably responsible for such trespass on law – for such widespread killing, injury and abject misery."

Mr. McGovern leaves out his family's direct influence in funding the Nazis, and it also leaves out Bush, Sr's role in the C.I.A.

Since the C.I.A surely was a beneficiary of all that top Nazi brass and its "progress" into the field of human mind control (added to that of the skillful use of propaganda), Bush, Sr. is HARDLY the innocent that Mr. McGovern indicates.

I notice the same homage to Bush, Sr. in Oliver Stone's film, "W." While Stone did a pretty expert job uncloaking the mysteries surrounding the death of J.F.K and pointing to some people with dubious connections to that horrific assassination, he sure went light on Bush, Sr.

Was Jr. set up to be the family's fall guy?

The use of allegories from the patriarchal Bible are just so much more fluff added as STORY to disguise the culpable actions of a family neck-deep in horrors.

I don't think there's anything more immoral or spiritually-retrograde than using religion or the Bible to justify what a long line of warriors (and their make-war "Intelligence-producing" agencies) do and continue to do in the way of spreading massive campaigns of violence.

THAT is not what Jesus would do! No matter how you dress it up, Mr. McGovern. You boy-men confuse religion's teams with sports and make war on the basis of false man-made terms of segregation.


#3

There's a lot of if's here--If Bush 2 hadn't been such a loser. If he had listened to daddy. If Cheney and Rumsfeld had been reined in. If Bush 2 hadn't wanted to impress daddy, blah, blah...If there was a Bush legacy politically, Bush 2 began to burn that house to the ground and Jeb is putting the nails in the coffin. This is almost biblical: The sins of the son coming back to haunt the father. Jeb deserves some credit here so let's not leave him out of this familial suicide. Once more Bush 2 is very proud of being such a monumental failure. Isn't love grand? Daddy should have spoken up when he had the chance so he has no one to blame but himself. It's a little late to be falling on the sword.


#4

"Mr. McGovern leaves out his family's direct influence in funding the
Nazis, and it also leaves out Bush, Sr's role in the C.I.A. "
I admit I hadn't known about McGovern's family's involvement in funding the Nazis. This hasn't been mentioned before. Not sure what to think about it as you don't give us any sources.


#5

I meant the BUSH family. I apologize if the term "his" was taken to mean Mr. McGovern.

Reading the rest of the article, two things strike me. First, since Bush, Sr. was educated within the CIA, he'd know a thing or two about "plausible deniability."

Therefore, all the feigning against the war could have been part of THAT protocol:

"And so, with the month of August seeing a phalanx of senior Bush foreign policy advisers and other experts, as well as key Congressional leaders, speaking out in a troubling way against the war, an ever decisive Cheney decided he could not abide by the proverbial maxim that Andrew Card actually let drop publicly in early September: ”From a marketing point of view, you don’t introduce new products in August.” Just to be clear, the White House chief of staff was talking about marketing war."

The second point is that no institution more clearly demarcates how patriarchy's top-down hierarchy operates than the military. With the head honchos calling the shots and those further down the power pyramid enacting them, the idea of following orders is held as sacrosanct.

Tenet and Powell were good soldiers who indeed followed orders. They didn't have the chutspah to challenge the case being fixed for war since it was evident to them that their superiors were intent upon making war.

THIS is how "the sins of the fathers get passed down to the sons." It's through romanticizing war; and THAT is the tone of this ridiculous paean to not just Father Bush, but the whole father-son "war is holy" syndrome that's been so deeply conditioned into males for centuries!

"A half-year later on Feb. 15, 2003, as the elder Bush watched 30 million demonstrators in 800 cities around the world marching against the war for which Bush-43 was so keen, I suspect there may have been a tinge of regret at having pulled strings to ensure young George would not have to experience war by serving in Vietnam.

"Unlike his father, George W. had not the foggiest notion of what war is like, and Bush-41 can be thought to have been painfully aware of that. It may have occurred to him to belatedly apply some tough-love to 43 or to even go public in a last-ditch effort to prevent the coming catastrophe. He probably knew that it was unrealistic to expect that the likes of Scowcroft and Baker could influence 43 to change course."

This reads like a bad fable. Seems like Mr. McGovern still has his OLD loyalties in place.


#6

Thanks Siouxrose11for pointing out the Bush history. Those of us who are aware of the lifetime criminality of the Bush family must make sure that they are not allowed to wiggle away from their many dastardly deeds.
It is truly painful to read Mr. McGovern's run down of the Bush War Making Machinery, to yet again experience the agony of realizing that the intelligence was being "fixed" to support the War. Real people would die, and I for one, realized that Junior didn't have a clue about what he was actually doing, and probably didn't give a damn anyway...
It's s story of truly epic per portions, a tragedy, and it has diminished our country. Still, there are even worse revelations still due from the Bush family.


#8

"If he had listened to daddy?" Really, I don't doubt that he did. George HW Bush, the first fully CIA president if guilty of war crimes around the world not the least of which happened in Central America. Ray McGovern knows this close up and personal as he was an CIA analyst reporting directly to the Senor Bush (and many other Presidents). McGovern has turned his life around exposing the crimes and working for accountability in intelligence. Part of the reason, it seems to me from my conversations with him, is assuaging and making up for previous participation in those crimes and working to prevent more of them. He's a brave and decent man -- unlike "daddy."


#9

The Bush Family is the tip of the iceberg.

Don't you find it disgusting that McGovern lends them a sort of homage by picking on Bush, the lesser to essentially wipe off whatever would tarnish Bush. Sr's veneer and reputation?

Elite families use attorneys in a manner that runs akin to Organized Crime families.

In this era where lies told often are substituted for the truth, and media is 100% complicit with fabricating and relaying false narrative after false narrative; it's quite difficult to produce--in citizens--a consensus based On truth.

These families are in the process of designing treaties that make the law of nations as irrelevant as their blatant disregard for The U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights (right to privacy), Habeas Corpus, and The Geneva Conventions.

These criminal cartels which increasingly control weapons, mass media, food production, medicines, and of course... banking... are making major inroads in turning the entire global population into 21st century slaves. They are the new corporate pharaohs as I've rightly defined them for some time.

In their view, slaves have NO rights. "Let them eat Soylent Green!"

The impossible levels of depraved indifference stink to high heaven. Perhaps David icke is correct that they are not human, but hybrids of a lesser reptilian god.


#13

Precedents to protect Presidents. The corporatist oligarchy continues to consolidate its rule but they are running against the clock as their destruction of the planet undermines their delusions. Radical consciousness is growing. Their defeat globally is our only chance of survival and that is getting slimmer by the day.


#14

With each passing year more and more of this chronology recedes deeper into the mists of time. Power disdains history, as Henry Ford said, "history is bunk." During the Kerry campaign for president, I happened on a site called Eschaton where the "young" lights of that era were bemoaning the Vietnam War, why it was still a topic of discussion. Eschaton said he couldn't wait until the Vietnam generation was out of the picture, he was tired of hearing about it. So too, in a few years, establishment type "liberals" will bemoan the few lone souls unwilling to drop the unpleasant reminders of the immoral, illegal, and barbaric War in Iraq. Thanks for the Chronology Mr. McGovern, keep history alive.


#16

Thanks for the insight Jaded_Prole, i appreciate Ray McGovern's courage and commitment to the truth. He has been the rare breath of fresh air and sanity through the last two administrations, and has been heroic in displaying truth to power...


#17

I agree with you MarkJNovitsky, there is much more to that story than we know. It reminds me of the Bush Air Guard story in that it is there somewhere, but yet to be totally revealed...


#18

Read "The Devil's Chessboard" by David Talbot to see how these families think and operate...

http://www.amazon.com/The-Devils-Chessboard-Americas-Government/dp/0062276166%3FSubscriptionId%3DAKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q%26tag%3Dduckduckgo-d-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D0062276166


#19

I will never believe that Iran Contra could operate out of Mena, Arkansas without the knowledge of Bill Clinton, so he must have been complicit.


#20

Yes, he has and his past and inside knowledge give him powerful credibility.


#22

Thanks Mark, Can't wait... Maybe it's finally unraveling!


#24

Though this may seem ancient history, we need to mention Ford's pardoning of Nixon.

And I mean NEED. Without taking the time to articulate Nixon's criminal activity in a trial, Americans can easily be led to believe that the events surrounding Watergate were merely political gamesmanship. And so, many in the Republican party still eagerly anticipate their Watergate reckoning for the Democrats.

Why else the Clinton impeachment, the incessant Benghazi hearings, and the "you lie!" atmosphere during the Obama administration?

Why else the mythmaking ascendancy among the current Republican presidential field? Write your own history and write it big, big, big, because it will take a month of Sundays before the truth comes out, and another month of Sundays before the truth can dissuade the true believers.


#26

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#27

From Russ Baker's "Family of Secrets", Poppy Bush had a hand in the JFK assassination. I would like to see him affirm or deny that for his posterity. No doubt Presidents don't want their legacy tarnished before or after they die with some evidence of a crime they committed and lied about afterwards.

It is revealing that most of the cons that sent us and our kids to fight and die have never been to war.


#28

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.