Webster Griffin Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin - Unauthorised Biography Of Geroge Bush [New Wold Order .pdf

(3282 KB) Pobierz
INTRODUCTION: American Caligula
4349659.001.png
 
INTRODUCTION: American Caligula
The thesis of this book is simple: if George Bush were to be re- elected in November 1992 for a second term as the
president of the United States, this country and the rest of the world would face a catastrophe of gigantic
proportions.
The necessity of writing this book became overwhelming in the minds of the authors in the wake of the ghastly
slaughter of the Iraq war of January-February 1991. That war was an act of savage and premeditated genocide on the
part of Bush, undertaken in connivance with a clique in London which has, in its historical continuity, represented
both the worst enemy of the long-term interests of the American people, and the most implacable adversary of the
progress of the human species.
The authors observed George Bush very carefully as the Gulf crisis and the war unfolded, and had no doubt that his
enraged public outbursts constituted real psychotic episodes, indicative of a deranged mental state that was full of
ominous portent for humanity. The authors were also horrified by the degree to which their fellow citizens willfully
ignored the shocking reality of these public fits. A majority of the American people proved more than willing to lend
its support to a despicable enterprise of killing.
By their role-call votes of January 12, 1991, the Senate and the House of Representatives gave their authorization
for Bush's planned and imminent war measures to restore the Emir of Kuwait, who owns and holds chattel slaves.
That vote was a crime against God's justice.
This book is part of an attempt to help them to survive anyway, both for the sake of the world and for their own
sake. It is intended as a contribution to a process of education that might still save the American people from the
awesome destruction of a second Bush presidency. It is further intended as a warning to all citizens that if they fail
to deny Bush a second term, they will deserve what they get after 1993.
As this book goes to press in the autumn of 1991, public awareness of the long-term depression of the American
economy is rapidly growing. If Bush were re-elected, he would view himself as beyond the reach of the voters and
the popular will; with the federal deficit rising beyond a billion dollars a day, a second Bush administration would
dictate such crushing austerity as to bring the country to the brink of civil war. Some harbingers of what might be
coming are described in the last chapter of this book. Our goal has been to assemble as much of the truth about Bush
as possible within the time constraints imposed by the 1992 election. Time and resources have not permitted us
meticulous attention to certain matters of detail; we can say, nevertheless, that both our commitment to the truth and
our final product are better than anything anyone else has been able to muster, including news organizations and
intelligence agencies with capabilities that far surpass our own.
How can we hope to fight the mightily Bush power cartel with a biography, a mere book? We have no illusions of
easy success, but we were encouraged in our work by the hope that a biography might stimulate opposition to Bush
and his policies. It will certainly, if only by virtue of its novelty, pose a new set of problems to those seeking to get
Bush re-elected. For although Bush is now what journalists call a world leader, no accurate account on his actual
career exists in the public domain.
The volume which we submit herewith to the court of world public opinion is, to the best of our knowledge, the first
and only book- length, unauthorized biography of George Bush. It is the first approximation of the truth about his
life. This is the first biography worthy of the name, a fact that says a great deal about the sinister power and
obsessive secrecy of this personage. None of the other self-announced biographies (including Bush's campaign
autobiography) can be taken seriously; each of these books is a pastiche of lies, distortions and banalities that run the
gamut from campaign panegyric to the Goebbels Big Lie to fake but edifying stories for credulous children. Almost
without exception, the available Bush literature is worthless.
But with Bush, this is only the beginning of the problem. Bush's family pedigree establishes him as a network asset
of Brown Brothers, Harriman, one of the most powerful political forces in the United States during much of the
twentieth century, and for many years the largest private bank in the world. It suffices in this context to think of
Averell Harriman negotiating during World War II in the name of the United States with Churchill and Stalin, or of
the role of Brown Brothers, Harriman partner Robert Lovett in guiding John F. Kennedy's choice of his cabinet, to
begin to see the implications of Senator Prescott Bush's post as managing partner of this bank. Brown Brothers,
Harriman networks pervade government and the mass media. Again and again in the course of the following pages
we will see stories embarrassing to George Bush refused publication, documents embarrassing to Bush suspiciously
disappear, and witnesses inculpatory to Bush be overtaken by mysterious and conveniently timed deaths. The few
relevant facts which have found their way here and there into the public domain have necessarily been filtered by
this gigantic apparatus. This problem has been compounded by the corruption and servility of authors, journalists,
news executives and publishers who have functioned more and more as kept advocates for Bush.
George Bush wants key aspects of his life to remain covert. At the same time, he senses that his need for coverup is
a vulnerability. The need to protect this weak flank accounts for the steady stream of fake biographical and historical
material concerning George, as well as the spin given to many studies of recent history that may never mention
George directly. Over the past several months, we have seen a new book about Watergate that pretends to tell the
public something new by fingering Al Haig as Deep Throat, but ignoring the central role of George Bush and his
business partners in the Watergate affair. We have a new book by Lt. Col. Oliver North which alleges that Reagan
knew everything about the Iran-contra affair, but that George Bush was not part of North's chain of command. The
latter point merely paraphrases Bush's own lame excuse that he was "out of the loop" during all those illegal
transactions. During the hearings on the nomination of Robert Gates to become Director of Central Intelligence,
nobody had anything new to add about the role of George Bush, the boss of the National Security Council's Special
Situation Group crisis staff that was a command center for the whole affair. These charades are peddled to a very
credulous public by operatives whose task goes beyond mere damage control to mind control-- the "MK" in the
government's MK Ultra operation.
Part of the free ride enjoyed by George Bush during the 1988 elections is reflected in the fact that at no point in the
campaign was there any serious effort by any of the so-called news organizations to provide the public with
something approaching an accurate and complete account of his political career. At least two biographies of Dukakis
appeared which, although hardly critical, were not uniformly laudatory either. But in the case of Bush, all the public
could turn to was Bush's old 1980 campaign biography and a newer campaign autobiography, both of them a tissue
of lies.
Early in the course of our research for the present volume it became apparent that all books and most longer articles
dealing with the life of George Bush had been generated from a single print-out of thoroughly sanitized, approved
and canonically admitted "facts" about Bush and his family. We learned that during 1979-1980, Bush aide Pete
Roussel attempted to recruit biographers to prepare a life of Bush based on a collection of press releases, news
summaries, and similar pre-digested material. Most biographical writing about Bush consists merely of the points
from this printout, strung out chronologically and made into a narrative through the interpretation of comments,
anecdotes, embellishments, or special stylistic devices.
The canonical Bush-approved printout is readily identified. One dead giveaway that became a joke among the
authors of the present study was the inevitability with which the hacks out to cover up the substance of Bush's life
refer to a 1947 red Studebaker which George Bush allegedly drove into Odessa, Texas in 1948. This is the sort of
detail with which such hacks attempt to humanize their subject, in the same way that horseshoes, pork rinds, and
country and western music have been introduced into Bush's real life in a deliberate and deceptive attempt to
humanize his image. It has been our experience that any text that features a reference to Bush's red Studebaker has
probably been derived from Bush's list of approved facts, and is therefore practically worthless for serious research
into Bush's life. We therefore assign such texts to the "red Studebaker school" of coverup and falsification.
Some examples? This is from Bush's campaign autobiography, Looking Forward, ghost-written by his aide Vic
Gold:
Heading into Texas in my Studebaker, all I knew about the state's landscape was what I'd
seen from the cockpit of a Vultee Vibrator during my training days in the Navy. [fn 1]
Here is the same moment as recaptured by Bush's crony Fitzhugh Green, a friend of the Malthusian financier Russell
Train, in his George Bush: An Intimate Portrait, published after Bush had won the presidency:
He [Bush] gassed up his 1948 Studebaker, arranged for his wife and son to follow, and headed for Odessa,
Texas. [fn 2]
Harry Hurt III wrote the following lines in a 1983 Texas magazine article that was even decorated with a drawing of
what apparently is supposed to be a Studebaker, but which does not look like a Studebaker of that vintage at all:
When George Herbert Walker Bush drove his battered red Studebaker into Odessa in the summer of 1948, the
town's population, though constantly increasing with newly-arrived oil field hands, was still under 30,000. [fn
3]
We see that Harry Hurt has more imagination than many Bush biographers, and his article does provide a few useful
facts. More degraded is the version offered by Richard Ben Kramer, whose biography of Bush is expected to be
published during 1992, and is thus intended to serve as the campaign biography to pave the way for Bush's second
election victory. God help us. Cramer was given the unenviable task of breathing life once more into the same tired
old printout. But the very fact that the Bush team feels that they require another biography indicates that they still
feel that they have a potential vulnerability here. Cramer has attempted to solve his problem by recasting the same
old garbage into a frenetic and hyperkinetic, we would almost say hyperthyroid style. The following is from an
excerpt of this forthcoming book that was published in Esquire in June, 1991:
In June, after the College World Series and graduation day in New Haven, Poppy packed up his new red
Studebaker (a graduation gift from Pres), and started driving south. [fn 4]
Was that Studebaker shiny and new, or old and battered? Perhaps the printout is not specific on this point; in any
case, as we see, our authorities diverge.
Joe Hyams's 1991 romance of Bush at war, the Flight of the Avenger, does not include the obligatory "red
Studebaker" reference, but this is more than compensated by the most elaborate fawning over other details of our
hero's war service [fn 5]. The publication of Flight of the Avenger, which concentrates on an heroic retelling of
Bush's war record, and ignores all evidence that might tend to puncture this myth, was timed to coincide with the
Gulf crisis and Bush's war with Iraq. This is a vile tract written with the open assistance of Bush, Barabara Bush,
and the White House staff. Flight of the Avenger recalls the practice of totalitarian states according to which a war
waged by the regime should be accompanied by propaganda which depicts the regime's strong man in an
appropriately martial posture. In any case, this book deals with Bush's life up to the end of World War II; we never
reach Odessa.
Only one of the full-length accounts produced by the Bush propaganda machine about their candidate neglects the
red Studebaker story. This is Nicholas King's George Bush: A Biography, the first book-length version of Bush's
life, produced as a result of Pete Roussel's efforts for the 1980 campaign. Nicholas King had served as Bush's
spokesman when he was US Ambassador to the United Nations. King admits at the beginning of his book that he
can be impugned for writing a work of the most transparent apologetics: "In retrospect," he says in his preface, "this
book may seem open to the charge of puffery, for the view of its subject is favorable all around." [fn 6] Indeed.
Books about Barbara Bush slavishly rehearse the same details from the same printout. Here is the relevant excerpt
from the warmly admiring Simply Barabara Bush: A Portrait of America's Candid First Lady, written by Donnie
Radcliffe and published after Bush's 1988 election victory:
With $3,000 left over after he graduated in June, 1948, he headed for Texas in the 1947 red Studebaker his
father had given him for graduation after George's car died on the highway. [fn 7]
Even foreign journalists attempting to inform their publics about conditions in the United States have fallen victim
to the same old Bush printout. The German author and reporter Rainer Bonhorst, the former Washington
correspondent of the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, in his 1988 book George Bush: Der neue Mann im Weissen
Haus, named a chapter of this Bush political biography "Im roten Studebaker nach Texas." Bonhorst writes as
follows:
Dann war da noch die Sache mit dem roten Studebaker. Sie spielt--gleich nach dem Weltkriegseinsatz-- eine
zweite zentrale Rolle in der Lebensgeschichte des George Bush. Es ist die Geschichte seiner Rebellion. Der
Schritt, der aus dem steifen Neuenglaender einen laessigen Texaner machte, aus dem reich geborenen
Patriziersohn einen Selfmademann. [...] Also packten George und Barbara Bush, 24 und 23 Jahre alt, er gerade
mit dem Studium fertig, sie vorzeitigaus ihrer Universitaet ausgeschieden und seit ein paar Monaten Mutter, ihr
Baby und ihre Koffer und luden sie auf ihr knallrotes Studebaker-Coupe. "Ein supermoderner, schnittiger
Wagen, allerdings etwas laut fuer den neuenglischen Geschmack," erinnerten sich die Bushs spaeter. Aber
schliesslich ging es ja ab nach Texas. [fn 8]
We see that Bonhorst is acutely aware of the symbolic importance assumed by the red Studebaker in these
hagiographic accounts of Bush's life.
What is finally the truth of the matter? There is good reason to believe that George Bush did not first come to
Odessa, Texas, in a red Studebaker. One knowledgeable source is the well-known Texas oil man and Bush
campaign contributor Oscar Wyatt of Houston. In a recent letter to the Texas Monthly, Wyatt specifies that "when
people speak of Mr. Bush's humble beginnings in the oil industry, it should be noted that he rode down to Texas on
Dresser's private aircraft. He was accompanied by his father, who at that time was one of the directors of Dresser
Industries." "I hate it when people make statements about Mr. Bush's humble beginnings in the oil industry. It just
didn't happen that way," writes Mr. Wyatt. [fn 9] Dresser was a Harriman company, and Bush got his start working
for one of its subsidiaries. One history of Dresser Industries contains a photograph of George Bush with his parents,
wife, and infant son "in front of a Dresser company airplane in West Texas." [fn 10 tris] Can this be a photo of
Bush's arrival in Odessa during the summer of 1948? In any case, this most cherished myth of the Bush biographers
is very much open to doubt.
Fawning biographies of bloodthirsty tyrants are nothing new in world literature. The red Studebaker school goes
back a long way; these writers of today can be usefully compared with a certain Gaius Velleius Paterculus, who
lived in the Roman Empire under the emperors Augustus and Tiberius, and who thus an approximate contemporary
of Jesus Christ. Velleius Paterculus was an historian and biographer who is known today, if at all, for his
biographical notes on the Emperor Tiberius, which are contained within Paterculus's history of Rome from the
origins down to his own time.
Paterculus, writing under Tiberius, gave a very favorable treatment of Julius Caesar, and became fulsome when he
came to write of Augustus. But the worst excesses of flattery came in Velleius Paterculus's treatment of Tiberius
himself. Here is part of what he writes about that tyrannical ruler:
Of the transactions of the last sixteen years, which have passed in the view, and are fresh in the memory of all,
who shall presume to give a full account? [...] credit has been restored to mercantile affairs, sedition has been
banished from the forum, corruption from the Campus Martius, and discord from the senate- house; justice,
equity and industry, which had long lain buried in neglect, have been revived in the state; authority has been
given to the magistrates, majesty to the senate, and solemnity to the courts of justice; the bloody riots in the
theater have been suppressed, and all men have had either a desire excited in them, or a necessity imposed on
them, of acting with integrity. Virtuous acts are honored, wicked deeds are punished. The humble respects the
powerful, without dreading him; the powerful takes precedence of the humble without condemning him. When
were provisions more moderate in price? When were the blessings of peace for abundant? Augustan peace,
diffused over all the regions of the east and the west, and all that lies between the south and the north, preserves
every corner of the world free from all dread of predatory molestation. Fortuitous losses, not only of
individuals, but of cities, the munificence of the prince is ready to relieve. The cities of Asia have been repaired;
the provinces have been secured from the oppression of their governors. Honor promptly rewards the deserving,
and the punishment of the guilty, if slow, is certain. Interest gives place to justice, solicitation to merit. For the
best of princes teaches his countrymen to act rightly by his own practice; and while he is the greatest in power,
he is still greater in example.
Having exhibited a general view of the administration of Tiberius Caesar, let us now enumerate a few
particulars respecting it. [...] How formidable a war, excited by the Gallic chief Sacrovir and Julius Florius, did
he suppress, and with such amazing expedition and energy, that the Roman people learned that they were
conquerors, before they knew that they were at war, and the news of the victory outstripped the news of the
danger! The African war too, perilous as it was, and daily increasing in strength, was quickly terminated under
his auspices and direction. [...] What structures has he erected in his own name, and those of his family! With
what dutiful munificence, even exceeding belief, is he building a temple to his father! [...] With what perfect
ease to the public does he manage the raising of troops, a business of constant and extreme apprehension,
without the consternation attendant on a levy! [fn 11 ]
All of this was written in praise of the regime that crucified Jesus Christ, and one of the worst genocidal tyrannies in
the history of the world. Paterculus, we must sadly conclude, was a sycophant of the Tiberius administration. Some
of his themes are close parallels to the propaganda of today's Bush machine.
In addition to feeding the personality cult of Tiberius, Paterculus also lavished praise on Lucius Aelius Sejanus, the
Prefect of the Pretorian Guard and for many years Tiberius's number one favorite, second in command, and likely
successor. In many respects Sejanus was not unlike James Baker III under the Bush regime. While Tiberius spent all
of his time in seclusion on his island of Capri near Naples, Sejanus assumed day to day control of the vast empire
and its 100,000,000 subjects. Paterculus wrote of Sejanus that he was "a most excellent coadjutor in all the toils of
government...a man of pleasing gravity, and of unaffected cheerfulness...assuming nothing to himself." That was the
voice of the red Studebaker school in about 30 AD. Paterculus should have limited his fawning to Tiberius himself;
somewhat later the emperor, suspecting a coup plot, condemned Sejanus and had him torn limb from limb in
gruesome retribution.
But why bring up Rome? Some readers, and not just registered Republicans, may be scandalized by the things that
truth obliges us to record about a sitting president of the United States. Are we not disrespectful to this high office?
No. One of the reasons for glancing back at Imperial Rome is to remind ourselves that in times of moral and cultural
degradation like our own, rulers of great evil have inflicted incalculable suffering on humanity. In our modern time
of war and depression, this is once again the case. If Caligula was possible then, who could claim that the America
of the New World Order should be exempt? Let us therefore tarry for a moment with these old Romans, because
they can show us much about ourselves.
In order to find Roman writers who tell us anything reliable about the first dozen emperors, we must wait until the
infamous Julio-Claudian dynasty of Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero and the rest had
entirely passed from the scene, to be supplanted by new ruling houses. Tiberius reigned from 14 to 37 AD; Caligula,
his designated successor, from 37 to 41 AD; and Nero from 54 to 68 AD. But the first accurate account of the crimes
of some of these emperors comes from Publius Cornelius Tacitus, a very high Roman official, and it appeared about
115-117 AD, late in the reign of the emperor Trajan. It was feasible for Tacitus to write and publish a more realistic
account of the Julio- Claudian emperors because one of the constant themes of Trajan's propaganda was to glorify
himself as an enlightened emperor through comparison with the earlier series of bloody tyrants.
Tacitus is important because he manages to convey something of how the destructiveness of these emperors in their
personal lives correlated with their mass executions and their genocidal economic policies. Tacitus was familiar with
the machinery of Roman Imperial power: he was of senatorial rank, served as consul in Italy in 97 AD, and was the
governor of the important province of western Anatolia (today's Turkey) which the Romans referred to simply as
Asia. Tacitus writes of Tiberius:
...his criminal lusts shamed him. Their uncontrollable activity was worthy of an oriental tyrant. Free-born
children were his victims. He was fascinated by beauty, youthful innocence, and aristocratic birth. New names
for types of perversions were invented. Slaves were charged to locate and procure his requirements. [...] It was
like the sack of a captured city.
Tiberius was able to dominate the legislative branch of his government, the senate, by subversion and terror:
I t was, indeed, a horrible feature of this period that leading senators became informers even on trivial matters--
some openly, many secretly. Friends and relatives were as suspect as strangers, old stories as damaging as new.
In the Main Square, at a dinner-party, a remark on any subject might mean prosecution. Everyone competed for
priority in marking down the victim. Sometimes this was self-defense, but mostly it was a sort of contagion, like
an epidemic. [...] I realize that many writers omit numerous trials and condemnations, bored by repetition or
Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin