"WE WILL EXTERMINATE THEM"
This article has
been reinforced by a series of articles that
appeared on the internet in 2003, in the wake of the alleged killing of
Saddam Hussein's sons and the subsequent alleged capture of Saddam
Hussein:
"Uday and Qusey Dead. Again."
See also this article from New Scientist magazine online:
the
seven hour DNA test to determine Saddam's identity, allegedly completed
in six hours.
This new material takes on special significance in light of data
revealed here at The George
Bush-Undercurrents Website/annotated bibliography regarding the
Dulles cover-up and protection of Tsuji Masanobu, Japanese war criminal
that Dulles kept from war crimes trials, but then apparently had
murdered by CIA personnel in Laos in the 1960s to silence him as to
Dulles's ties to him. Similarly, Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney may not want
the world to see the real Saddam on the stand revealing their lucrative
ties to his horrific regime. So, a Saddam double could stand trial,
while the real Saddam is silenced forever, unannounced.
On first glimpse, one wouldn't think that Saddam Hussein would have
much appeal in the West.
But Loftus and Aarons point out that Saddam has long been allied with
the major petrochemical
conglomerates. With the release of their book, the ghastly story has
been revealed in its entirety.
They show that horrible German chemical and biological weaponry was
developed in Iraq and
other Middle Eastern nations by the same "German scientists" who worked
for Hitler during
World War II. The nerve gases Soman, Sarin and Tabun all originated in
Nazi concentration
camps. (Loftus and Aarons 573-4).
George Bush has mysterious ties to Saddam
Hussein. Through them, he
had an awesome power
on hand at the time of the Iranian hostage crisis--one which he used to
provide a "carrot and
stick" incentive to Iran and Iraq to vary from previous negotiations
with the Carter
Administration. Clearly, Bush has usually been an ally of Saddam
Hussein. I've learned through
detailed research that the real reason for this goes all the way back
to World War II. Bush is an
ally, not just of Saddam but of Saddam's party, the Ba'ath Party. And
in particular, Bush is an ally
of Saddam's wing of the Ba'ath Party. That's because that wing of the
party is the original one,
with which Bush's father allied his family's wealth in World War II.
Loftus and Aarons add that for ten years prior to press disclosures,
the US government protested
to the West German government to no avail concerning its tolerance of
the export of genocidal
gas factories to the Middle East. (573-4).They say that, according to
one Israeli source, Jonathan
Pollard's discovery of this led him to leak information to
Israel.(Loftus and Aarons 573-4).
In a seemingly distant event is a conversation
between Saddam
Hussein and U. S. Ambassador to
Iraq April Glaspie on July 25, 1990, shortly before Saddam invaded
Kuwait. Bowen provides a
complete transcript of their discussion. In part, the transcript
reveals the following:
<>
"Glaspie: (Pause, then she speaks very carefully)
'We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab
conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary [of State James]
Baker has directed me to
emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's, that the
Kuwait issue is not associated
with America. "Saddam smiled. "On August 2, 1990, four days later,
Saddam's massed troop~
invaded and occupied Kuwait." (Bowen 145-8).
<>Bowen also noted that, on August 29, 1990, the Miami
Herald reported
that the State
Department had been ordered to give its files concerning the meeting
between Hussein and
Glaspie to a federal judge to decide whether they must be released. He
noted the AP reported the
State Department's fighting a lawsuit filed by Public Citizens
contending the files must be released
under the Freedom of Information Act. State contended that the
documents were "either
'classified in the interest of national defense or foreign policy, or
reflected the agency's deliberative
process (Bowen 145-8)." Bowen further notes that the meeting between
Glaspie and Hussein was
a critical issue in the debate over whether the United States led
Hussein to believe it would not
interfere if he invaded Kuwait, which he did a week later.(Bowen
145-8). Bowen points out that
Iraq: released the transcript of the meeting in which Glaspie said the
United States would not take
sides in 'Arab-Arab' conflicts such as the dispute with Kuwait. (Bowen
145-8).
"However, Glaspie declared in Congressional
testimony that she also
told Hussein that the United
States would insist that any dispute be settled peacefully." (Bowen
145-8).
Bowen describes how, a month after
Saddam's invasion of Kuwait,
British journalists obtained a
tape and transcript of the Hussein-Glaspie meeting. Astounded, they
confronted Ms. Glaspie:
"Journalist 1: (Holding the transcripts up) 'Are the
transcripts correct, Madam Ambassador?'
(Ambassador Glaspie did not respond).
"Journalist 2: 'You knew Saddam was going to invade
[Kuwait], but you didn't warn him not to.
You didn't tell him America would defend Kuwait. You told him the
opposite that America was
not associated with Kuwait.'
"Journalist 1: 'You encouraged this aggression,
his invasion. What were you thinking?'
"U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:
'Obviously, I didn't think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were
going to take all of Kuwait.'
"Journalist 1: 'You thought he was just going to take
some of it? But, how could you? Saddam told you that, if
negotiations failed, he would give up his Iran [Shaft al Arab waterway]
goal for "the
<>whole of Iraq, in the shape we wish it to be." You know that
includes
Kuwait, which the Iraqis have always viewed as an historic part of
their country!'
" (Ambassador Glaspie said nothing, pushing past the two
journalists to leave.)
"Journalist 1: 'America greenlighted the invasion.
At a minimum, you admit signaling Saddam that some aggression was okay
that the U.S. would not oppose a grab of the alRumeilah oil field,
the
<>disputed border strip and the Gulf islands, territories claimed
by
Iraq?'
"(Again, Ambassador Glaspie said nothing as a limousine door
slammed and the car drove off.)" (Bowen 145-8).
In order to make a little more sense
of the connection between these
two events, we must refer to
Charles Higham's book, Trading with the Enemy. He describes
the foundation of Saddam's Ba'ath
Party by Nazi agent Charles Bedaux, who "helped pledge Syria as a base
for a prospective Battle
of Suez...worked with Vichy Admiral Darlan in planning to destroy the
British Empire..[and]
presented the German government his plans for camouflaging refineries
at Abadan against Allied
bombing...On April 12,1943, J.Edgar Hoover (arrested) Bedaux (for
treason)...Bedaux... died on
February 14, 1944..." (Higham 178-88).
Matching the dates and times of Bedaux's
operations for the Axis in
the Middle East, Bennis and
Moushabeck tell us that Ba'athism is a form of Pan-Arabism founded in
Syria in the "mid-1940's"
by Michel Aflaq and two colleagues. Pan-Arabism focuses on Baghdad as
the central city of all
the Arab nations because it is the capital city of present-day Iraq and
the traditional capital city of
the Arab world. This is probably the reason Saddam Hussein's faction of
the Ba'ath Party is the
original Ba'ath Party. It is also why it came to make Baghdad rather
than Syria its permanent
home.
Khomeini did not declare the monarchy itself
to be illegitimate by
nature and didn't claim the right
to rule. (Bakhash 22-3). He accepted a limited role of cooperating even
with bad governments in
upholding the state. (Bakhash 22-3). Khomeini may have been reluctant
to offend Ayatollah
Mohammed Hosaim Boujerdi, the religious leader, who pursued a policy of
quietism and a
nonpolitical clergy, since Khomeini's activism started only after
Boujerdi's death in 1961.
(Bakhash 22-3).
<> In February, 1963, the Ba'ath Party entered Iraq
from
Syria again.
It retook power and began to
exterminate Communists, Jews and other opponents.(Bakhash 22-3). But
now the CIA was no
longer headed by Allen Dulles, who had been ousted by Kennedy shortly
after the failed Bay of
Pigs invasion in Cuba. Ba'ath's Hitlerlike beliefs were no longer
viewed sympathetically at CIA.
Even so, Ba'ath was possibly in possession of
crucial documents
about George and Prescott
Bush's activities during World War II. These had occurred in connection
with Standard
Oil's Pacific Ocean shipment to "neutral" Thailand from "neutral" Saudi
Arabia in 1944. But
although these documents were a powerful blackmail item against the
Bush family, the Bushes
were powerless to influence events in Iraq since the ouster of Allen
Dulles. Ba'ath was ousted
from the alliance of power in Iraq on November 22,1963. (Bakhash, 2-3).
<> But twenty-four hours later, JFK
was
shot. Therefore, no
attempt to exploit Ba'ath's fall from
power could be made. The documents, which otherwise would have been
vulnerable to
investigation, were safe in the confusion which followed in the wake of
JFK's death. The
documents could be hidden or moved to a safer location by agents of
George Bush. They
couldn't, however, be destroyed, because they were a valuable
negotiating tool. In 1963 they
showed the Arab regimes in the Middle East the Bush family's genuine
commitment to the Arab
cause, even on pain of treason during World War 2. It wasn't until some
years later, in 1968, with
America tied down in Vietnam, that Ba'ath retook power in Iraq (Bakhash
20-3).
Ba'ath was founded in Syria in the mid40's by
VichyNazi agents with
connections with Charles
Bedaux and, through him, with the Windsors and Standard Oil. Ba'ath's
original platform, which
hasn't changed much since, is antiMarxist, adopting a vague notion of
socialism and virulent
antiSemitism. (Bennis and Moushabeck 30). Many Nazi agents were in
formerly Vichy Syria until
1945 (Higham 177-88). Syria was also the base for the Nazi agent
Bedaux, who had strong ties to
the Windsors (Bush's relatives) to 1943. He was arrested in April of
1943 (Higham 177-88).
In Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf,
New York:
Random House, 1990, 85-7) Judith
Miller, a reporter for the New York Times, and Laurie
Milroie, a Harvard Mid-East
expert, describe the pre-and post-World War II history of
Ba'ath and its founders and give a
more detailed history of the beginnings of the Ba'ath Party in the
Middle East:
<>
<>"The February 1964 coup against Qassim marked the arrival of a
new
and ruthless player in Iraqi
politics--the Baath Party of Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr and, later, Saddam
Hussein. The Baath
(Arabic for 'renaissance') began as a political movement in Syria in
the 1930s. It soon cmae to be
dominated by two Damascus high school teachers, Michel Aflaq and Salah
Bitar, who had studied
together at the Sorbonne between 1928 and 1932....
"As a student in Paris, Aflaq was attracted to the
fascist ideas
then fashionable in Europe. He was
'full of enthusiasm for Hitler' and other German fascists, according to
the Syrian-born historian
Bassam Tibi. Aflaq saw in Nazi Germany a model for his ideas of a
synthesis between nationalism
and socialism. At the time of the 1941 coup of the pro-German Rashid
Ali, he and Bitar formed a
"Society to Help Iraq," the nucleus of what later became that country's
Baath party, according to
the Princeton historian Bernard Lewis. Aflaq's view of Arab nationalism
was quite romantic and
far more radical than that of the Arabs as a race, as expressed in the
Baathist slogan, 'One Arab
nation with an eternal mission.'...
"Though the Ba'ath were strongly anti-communist, they were
organized
as a secret political party
along Leninist lines. The basic unit of the party was the cell...Cell
leaders were organized in cells
of their own in a hierarchical order extrending all the way to the
party's regional command in each
Arab country...The Baath... moved to secure their hold on power through
the National
Guard...Despite the bloodiness by which the Baath had seized power [in
their first coup of
February, 1963], they initially enjoyed the support of those elements
in Iraqi society who had
opposed the Communists, including the business community...The success
of the Baath in Iraq
encouraged the Baath party in Syria to make a similar bid for power,
and in March 1963 they
succeeded in overthrowing the parliamentary regime in Damascus again in
cooperation with
Nasserite army officers...[But] Nasser's increasingly hostile attitude
[to the Baath] began to
undermine the Baath in Iraq...friction was growing between the army and
the Baath, and public
opinion in Iraq was growing restive. The Baath's popularity was further
diminished when the
National Guard inaugurated a campaign of harassment in the cities.
Members of the guard broke
into homes, intimidated the occupants and stole their property. They
accorded themselves the
power to arrest people without warrant and to take them for
interrogation to the Palace of the
End, where the young Saddam Hussein was a torturer...(Miller 85-7)."
<>
In 1958, Sheol Bakhash tells us, the Ba'ath
Party in Iraq ousted the
pro-British Nuri (19-24). Nuri
had retained power in 1941 with British help against a coup led by
Raschid Ali and Axis elements
operating out of Vichy-held Syria (Baker 278-81). But Ba'ath had grown
in power in Iraq by
1958 with help from the CIA headed by Allen Dulles, whom we
now know was a friend of Nazis
seeking escape from Nuremberg prosecutors. Dulles was also attorney for
George's father,
Prescott Bush (Bowen 4-11). Qassim, in ousting Nuri had help from
Dulles's CIA in seizing
power (Bakhash 20-3).
Meanwhile Khomeini, in Iran, had been silent while
the "old" Shah
(who was pro-Nazi) was in
power. He spoke out only to criticize the new, pro-British Shah, who
had been installed in August
1941 by Britain and Russia to thwart an Axis
takeover.
His criticism
was couched in supposed
"historical" criticism of the by-then deposed old Shah. Khomeini became
actively opposed to the
"new" Shah in 1961 and ousted him in 1978 (Bakhash 20-3). Bakhash notes
that, shortly after
Reza Shah's abdication in 1941, Khomeini gave vent to his feelings
about the Old Shah in his
book, The Unveiling of Secrets. He treated Reza Shah as a
usurper, without a legitimate
parliament. He said that the old Shah, before his ouster by the British
for pro-Nazi sympathies in
1941, had created bad laws that were too Western. He said that his
advisors and policies toward
women had also been too Western (Bakhash 22-3). Since the new Shah was
even more Western
than the old, all of these criticisms, it might be inferred, "went
double" for the new Shah. But
Khomeini did not declare the monarchy itself to be illegitimate by
nature and didn't claim the right
to rule (Bakhash 22-3). He accepted a limited role of cooperating even
with bad governments in
upholding the state (Bakhash 22-3). Khomeini may have been reluctant to
offend Ayatollah
Mohammed Hosaim Boujerdi, the religious leader, who pursued a policy of
quietism and a
nonpolitical clergy, since Khomeini's activism started only after
Boujerdi's death in 1961 (Bakhash
22-3).
<> In February, 1963, the Ba'ath Party entered Iraq
from
Syria again.
It retook power and began to
exterminate Communists, Jews and other opponents (Bakhash
22-3). But now the CIA was no
longer headed by Allen Dulles, who had been ousted by Kennedy shortly
after the failed Bay of
Pigs invasion in Cuba. Ba'ath's Hitler-like beliefs were no longer
viewed sympathetically at CIA.
Even so, Ba'ath was possibly in possession of
crucial documents about
George and Prescott
Bush's traitorous activities during World War II. These had occurred in
connection with Standard
Oil's Pacific Ocean shipment to "neutral" Thailand from "neutral" Saudi
Arabia in 1944. But
although these documents were a powerful blackmail item against the
Bush family, the Bushes
were powerless to influence events in Iraq since the ouster of Allen
Dulles. Ba'ath was ousted
from the alliance of power in Iraq on November 22, 1963 (Bakhash 20-3).
To see why Iraq was such a pivotal point in all this,
we must go
back to 1941. We noted that the Nazis had agents in Iraq who backed the
overthrow of the pro-British Nuri. These agents staged a coup which
briefly seized power in Iraq. I quote here from the "on the
spot" book, Oil, Blood and Sand by Robert L. Baker:
"The pro-Axis, anti-British campaign culminated in the revolt let by
General
Raschid Ali el Gailaini in the spring of 1941. He had the support of
several
prominent politicians and high army of ficers and of a part of the
army. An
illegal session of Parliament ratified his acts, and, ironically, he was
recognized by the Soviet Government. He had expected German aid, and
had apparently been promised it. When it failed to arrive he was
doomed.
Only a part of the army followed him, and the country failed to rise,
though
the river tribes below Baghdad cut the dikes in an attempt to obstruct
the
British troops that were coming up from the Persian Gulf. Though
besieged, the British air base at Habbaniya, sixty miles west of
Baghdad,
held out. A rift occurred between Rashid and his generals, and the
British
encountered little resistance. After Rashid's flight to Iran with the
ex-Grand
Mufti, who had been permitted to escape by the Vichy government in Syria
to help stage the revolt, and a few other supporters, it was reported
that he
had pleaded for German help. Dr. Grobba...had made such help conditional
upon the restoration of the original German concession for the Baghdad
Railway, the transfer of the Iraq Oil Company's concession to Germany,
and German control of all airdromes for the duration of the war. Rashid
agreed, but the generals who had joined him in the revolt flatly
refused the
terms... The pro-British government that took control after Rashid's
flight
explained that the revolt had been engineered by Fifth Columnists
cooperating with a foreign power in order to reduce military pressures
in
another theater of the war. A number of the rebels were tried for
treason
Rashid Ali appears to have struck before the Germans gave the
word...(Baker 216-17)."
Japan had a powerful interest in the Middle East dating
from the early
thirties. And he notes that,
in both Iran and Iraq, Japanese influence and imports persisted for
some time because of anti-British sentiment in their governments (Baker
278-81). In
Iran, Reza Shah (the "old" Shah who was ousted by Britain in 1941)
brought in Japanese
engineers to supervise new railway construction in 1938 as a purposeful
barb at the British (Baker
278-81). The Japanese legation in Teheran gave refuge to Amin el
Husseini,
the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, after his flight from Iraq, and then aided
him to escape to Turkey (Baker 278-81). For its part, the Iraqi
government permitted Japan to maintain a large trade mission at Baghdad
that is said to have aided Rashid Ali and the ex-Mufti in
staging the revolt in 1941 (Baker 278-81). It was not ordered to leave
undl the revolt had been
crushed and a pro-British government assumed power. (Baker 278-81).
Baker further notes that
the Japanese were able to make capital of Moslem fears of atheist,
Communist Russia, in 1938
officially inviting one hundred and twenty Moslem notables to attend
the inauguration of a
Mosque in Tokyo. Among them were fanatic opponents of Britain in the
Middle East. Amin el
Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hitler's main ally in the
Middle East, however, was
unable to attend because of his internment by the British in Syria.
(Baker 278-81). Baker noted,
however, that the Mufti, though depending mainly on Berlin and Rome to
restore him to power
was determined to insure his future in the event that the Japanese got
to the Middle East first.
(Baker 278-81).
There are thus hints in Baker's book that the Iraqi coup
of 1941 may
have been as much Japanese
as German inspired. Interestingly, too, we note that Standard Oil may
have been responsible for
some of the activities of the "tribes" hostile to Britain, since Baker
points out that oil companies in
the area were concerned about the "safety" of their oil pipelines in
the midst of such a civil war.
(Baker 278-81). Even if only to get what seemed the inevitable over
with sooner, Standard Oil
clearly had temptation to help the pro-Axis Iraqi rebels defeat
Britain.
The reason why the possible Ba'ath Party documents are
important is
that they may reveal that Standard
Oil supported the Raschid Ali coup and sought to help it to succeed.
Standard agents may have
hampered efforts by British intelligence to stop the coup and
re-instate Nuri in power in Iraq.
Some evidence that this was the case is provided in Foreign
Relations of the United States:
Diplomatic Papers, 1941 (Washington, DC: 1956, GPO) which was
written by the US State
Department at the time. In relation to pro-Axis activities in Iran, the
US Minister in Iran, Dreyfus,
wired Sumner Welles that:
"...the German fifth column organization... is large...it is more
likely that the organization is the
routine Nazi fifth column type with its agents and branches in
important German business
concerns throughout the country. Its activities have increased since
the beginning of the
German-Russian war particularly among White Russians, Americans
and disaffected elements in
the north [of Iran]. While Iranian police have been fully aware of
fifth column activities...police
action has been too desultory and weak to prevent the building up
of...German forces...[emphasis
added]." (Foreign Relations, 383-4).
This event occurred in July 1941. (Foreign
Relations
383-4). It gains in significance when we
note that, in Iraq, earlier in the year, January 1941, Britain's
ambassador Sir Basil Newton noted
that "the Iraq Government were contemplating obtaining arms from Japan (Foreign
Relations
487)." Closer in time to the July events in Iran, the US Minister
Resident in Iraq, on April 30,
1941, cabled to Washington that "a mixed lot of Americans and
miscellaneous foreigners and
some Iraqi subjects numbering about 100 fearing mob violence have taken
refuge in Legation."
(Foreign Relations 504). He further notes that
"160 men, women
and children of various
nationalities have taken refuge in the legation since April 30th (Foreign
Relations 505)." On May
5, he cabled Washington that "I am informed by the Ministry for Foreign
Affairs that the Jesuit
Fathers of the Jesuit College and Dr. and Mrs. Staudt of American Boys
School who elected
remain at their respective schools are well and also that one American
Jesuit Father and a Miss
Adams at the British Embassy are presumably still there...American
women ...left here for Basra
via Habbaniya and also regarding Americans at Basra [as to their safety
and/or evacuation]
(Foreign Relations 506)."
<> The Resident Minister also notes
(513) that during the pro-Axis
occupation of Baghdad, "British Air Force...evacuated American women
with their own." He
states shortly before this that "inquiries" were then being made
regarding efforts to evacuate
virtually all Americans, male and female, from Iraq (Foreign
Relations 506). This means that
virtually the only "Americans" left in the Middle East a month later,
at the time of Dreyfus' cable
to Welles, were Standard Oil/oil industry employees. And some of these,
we recall from Dreyfus'
cable, were engaged in aiding the Axis coup attempt in Iran in July,
1941 (Foreign Relations
383-4).
Significantly, too, since the coup was
partially inspired by Japan,
authorities there would have
been aware of any assistance rendered by Standard Oil, which had sent
them "cables...promising to continue trading with Japan
regardless of any
conflict or break in trade
(Higham 42-53)."
It seems reasonable to believe that
Prescott Bush, as a top official
of Standard Oil and its related
banking companies during this time, may have put his signature on
documents authorizing funds
for activities which helped Japanese agents in Iraq. What seems equally
evident is that, later in the
war, this document was delivered to the Japanese on Guam by George Bush
in 1944. It was
useful to George in proving that his family and his company were
friends of the Japanese. With
such a detailed knowledge of Japanese activity in 1941, George was
clearly a friend of Japan. And
with a new negotiated peace offer from Allen Dulles for the OSS to
accompany it, Bush was
assured of a ticket out of Guam and back to his carrier.
Having been delivered to the Japanese, the
documents could then
proceed back to Ba'ath Party
headquarters in Syria, where they ended up after the war. Or at least,
this is the charge that could
have been made about them. How else could the Ba'ath Party of the
Middle East have known
about oil shipments to "neutral" nations like India and Thailand unless
they had been delivered by
an Axis courier?
Barbara Honnegar speculates that the document which
Licio Gelli had
on George Bush in the
1970's when he joined the P-2 organization may have been related to his
membership in the CIA
much earlier than he has ever admitted. Bush would have been forced to
give Gelli such an
incriminating document as part of his initiation into the membership of
P-2, a Fascist political
organization in Italy (Honnegar 229-44). She points out that Bush's
"Zapata oil" company is listed
as a CIA "assist" during the Bay of Pigs invasion preparations of 1960
(Honnegar 229-44). This
powerfully suggests that Bush was a CIA agent before 1963. This, in
turn, means he could have
been an agent in Allen Dulles's CIA. This also fits due to his father's
ties to Dulles and Standard
Oil.
Allen Dulles was Prescott Bush's attorney and,
by some method,
Prescott was able to get George
into the Navy at the age of 18, rather than 21, and without two years
of college. Both of these
were normally requirements to get into the Navy as an aviator in 1942.
Dulles at OSS could have
"pulled strings" to get George in.
Dulles headed the CIA at the end of World War II.
Dulles had
originally been an OSS station
chief in Switzerland in the war and OSS was the forerunner of the CIA.
It would fit that the
connection Prescott had used to get George into the Navy as an aerial
photographer, was Allen
Dulles. He could then be an "asset" of the OSS as an aerial
reconnaissance photographer as well
as a pilot.
Ironically, in a strategic and sensitive national
security position,
Bush had been able to behave as
an OSS agent during the summer of 1944. This was during the time when
Dulles was engaged in
his "Sunrise" and "Safehaven" negotiations with the Axis. George helped
when it came time to
shut down radio transmissions and switch to couriers in order to
continue to preliminary
negotiations with the Axis and avoid FDR's surveillance. (Loftus and
Aarons 367). George was
the courier to get the job done.
At the very highest levels of the Japanese government, it
was known
a courier was to land on
Guam on June 19, 1944, in advance of the US landings on Saipan. This
was a good will gesture
from Secretary of the Navy Forrestal. Forrestal, an early critic of the
bombing of Japan (Bagby
273) had wanted to give the Japanese government a chance to negotiate,
avoiding the ugly
bombing of Japan proper that would follow America's seizure of the
Saipan airstrips. He wanted,
instead, an alliance with Japan against Mao and Russia.
Therefore, the highest Japanese government officials
had ordered all
planes--both naval and
land-based--attacking the US task force off Saipan to circle around for
a few moments (Hoyt
271). There was no military advantage at all to the Japanese in
this maneuver. It was a signal to
the Standard Oil courier. And that courier was George Bush.
Forrestal covered George's tracks after he left
Guam. He arrived on
Guam shortly after the
airfield there was secured on July 29, 1944. He'd then flown Bush's
unmarked, off-limits Avenger
to Saipan, an area the OSS was to keep under a continuous high security
blanket from then on
(Goerner 130-50). There, a night or two later, Forrestal, perhaps with
George's help, set fire to
George Bush's airplane. He was seen involved in these things by Thomas
Devine, who, however,
didn't comprehend what was going on, and remembered these events in
distorted form later, as
someone burning "Amelia Earhart's plane." (Devine 39-42).
The Japanese within a month had reshuffled their
cabinet, ousting
Hideki Tojo. (Butow 131). This
may have been upon receipt of the message from Dulles, Forrestal,
Standard Oil and maybe even
the GOP faction supporting Thomas Dewey. The Cabinet shuffle was their
response to the offer
of negotiations, a peace gesture.
At the same time, a major Japanese offensive in China was
greeted by
Chiang Kai Shek with
cooperation rather than opposition. Chiang saw the Japanese as a force
to make his position in
China more secure against the Communists and other opponents (Bagby
130-6). He no doubt had
been encouraged in this by right-wing elements in the OSS (Bagby
130-6). It became fairly clear
to General Wedemeyer that Chiang had collaborated with the Japanese
during this offensive
(Bagby, 133-4). Rumors of a deal between Chiang and the Japanese were
rampant as Wedemeyer
confronted Chiang about them (Bagby 133-4). Chiang would "neither
confirm nor deny" but
merely laughed. Wedemeyer regarded this as an admission by Chiang that
he had in fact
collaborated with the Japanese (Bagby 133-4). In fact, Bagby flatly
says Chiang did so (134). As a
result of the success of the Japanese Ichigo offensive, seventeen major
US air bases in China were
destroyedand this destroyed for a time America's ability to bomb
Japanese shipping (Bagby 130-6).
It's interesting that shipping
should have been rendered less
vulnerable to US bombers during this time of a Standard Oil plans for
shipments to fascist-leaning
"neutral" countries. Allen Dulles was conniving to negotiate with the
Axis behind FDR's back. He
was also sneaking his Nazi gold into Japanese-occupied Manchuria
(Loftus and Aarons 367). This
latter was an area sure to be attacked by the USSR if the US remained
allied with it. Hence,
Dulles concern lest it fall to Soviet troops.
The reason why the Ba'ath Party documents are
important is that they
may reveal that Standard
Oil (the "Americans" referred to by Dreyfuss in his cable to Sumner
Welles) supported this coup
and sought to help it to succeed. They hampered efforts by Britain to
stop the coup and reinstate
Nuri in power in Iraq. They appear to have encouraged "tribesmen" in an
area below Baghdad to
obstruct British troop movements, including destroying dikes and
flooding an area the British
were attempting to travel through (Baker 216-17). It seems evident that
Prescott Bush, as a top
executive at Standard Oil, could have signed documents authorizing
funding for these operations.
What seems equally evident is that later in the war
this document
was delivered to Japanese
commander on Guam as a courier activity by George Bush. They ended up
in the hands of the
Ba'ath Party again because Ba'ath was a pivotal connecting point to the
whole activity. Utilizing
Ba'ath Party personnel, Iraq, Syria and Saudi Arabia would all be used
by Standard Oil for this
potentially most profitable of all late war oil shipment to Japan.
Having been delivered to the
Japanese on Guam by George Bush in 1944, the documents would have
proceeded back to Ba'ath
Party headquarters in Syria in 1944. Or at least, this is the charge
that could have been made
about them. How else could the Ba'ath Party of the Middle East have
known about oil shipments
to the "neutral" nations, India and Thailand, unless they had been
delivered by an Axis courier?
And, to paraphrase Russell Bowen in his book's
advertising and final
pages (and the Democrats in
the 1984 and '88 conventions) where was George from July 4,
1944, (the official date of his
downing off Chichi Jima) and September 2, 1944, when he was filmed
being picked up? Where was George for 24-48 hours off Guam? Did he land
his plane on
Guam?
Marines stationed on the neighboring island of
Saipan state an
aircraft without military markings
was seen in flight into Saipan from a neighboring island during mopping
up operations on Guam
and Saipan (Goerner 270). Goerner also intriguingly notes that, during
a search for signs of
Earhart's plane on Saipan in 1960, while the CIA was under the command
of Allen Dulles, he had
been "tailed" by three unidentified agents (136). He confronted the San
Francisco CIA head about
this, and, though he denied a CIA connection for Goerner's tail,
shortly afterward it stopped
(Goerner 145).
Marine Tom Devine stated he saw an aircraft without
military
markings being discussed among
top officers near the captured Japanese airfield on Saipan (39-42).
Devine alleged that he later
saw this plane on fire in an "off limits" area (Devine 39-42). Devine
says that one of the
non-uniformed officers guarding the plane in its "off limits" hangar,
was Secretary of the Navy
James Forrestal (Devine 39-42). He says that Forrestal had been
instrumental in flying the civilian
plane into Saipan from a nearby island (Devine 39-42). Guam is near
Saipan.
Loftus and Aarons state that Forrestal was a
business partner in
Standard Oil and other
Nazi-oriented corporations with such lights as William Draper, William
Stamps Farrish, Allen
Dulles and Nelson Rockefeller, all known traitors during World War II
(Loftus and Aarons 378).
Devine assumed at the time that the secret being
held was Amelia
Earhart's plane. However, the
aircraft he saw--at least three--were at a distance (Devine 39-42). The
twin-engine aircraft he saw
could have been a captured Japanese "Betty" bomber, with its markings
removed. And,
intriguingly, also, Devine described how, in the distance, he'd seen
two single-engine planes, far
enough away that he couldn't readily discern their identity or model
(Devine 39-42). He assumed
that they had military markings, since he wasn't looking as closely at
them as at the twin-engine
aircraft (Devine 39-42).
Intriguingly, equally reliable sources have recently
found what
appear to be the remains of Amelia
Earhart's plane off Howland Island, near where her last radio broadcast
was heard (Wilkinson 26).
This powerfully suggests that the plane seen flying into Saipan was not
Amelia's plane.
And if it wasn't Amelia Earhart's plane which was
seen on Saipan
(near Guam) in 1944, whose
plane was it ? Devine himself notes that Amelia Earhart's own
sister, even in the 1970's before this
latter find, "abandoned the belief that her sister had crashed near
Howland Island after hearing
[Fred Goerner's] progress report in September-October 1961 and after
his second expedition to
Saipan. By 26 June 1962, however, Mrs. Morrissey had returned to her
original conclusion. She
wrote to me somewhat bitterly,
'The claims of Captain Brian and CBS
have been shown to be
completely false and unsubstantiated, so why continue the discussion?
Amelia's plane went down
near Howland Island [and] because of a radio failure...the Coast Guard
cutter could not home in
on her."'(Devine 82 footnote).
Devine also acknowledges that one of the main
sources of all "Amelia
Earhart" afficionados,
Thomas J. O'Hare, one of the Itasca Coast Guard cutter radiomen who
recorded messages from
Earhart "accepted the idea that Earhart had run out of gas and had
'splashed' within 200 miles of
the Itasca [near Howland Island]." (Devine 165).
George Bush didn't really land in the water off
Guamhe landed on
Guam itself, carrying Allen
Dulles's offer of a negotiated peace. Dulles's plan had been that the
Standard Oil documents
would proceed on to Saudi Arabia, where the King would sign off on the
shipment to Thailand.
The shipment would then leave Saudi, go through the Persian Gulf and
the Indian Ocean to
Bombay, and from there head for Thailand.
Once again, the time frame here is intriguing. In
May, 1944,
Standard Oil had succeeded in
pressuring the Roosevelt Administration to allow it to sell oil again
to "neutral" nations such as
Spain. Roosevelt had, in January, 1944, attempted to ban such oil sales
on the grounds that Spain
and a group of other socalled "neutral" countries were not nearly
neutral enough. Virtually all oil
sent to Spain went almost directly to Germany from there. And Thailand
was in a similar
relationship with Japan as Spain was to Germany. Technically, it was
neutral, but it was an open
secret that Thailand sympathized with Japan and had willingly provided
roads and even aircraft
runways for Japanese forces invading Malaya. Like Spain, Thailand was
nonindustrialyet
shipments of oil could have been sent there. Now, in May and June of
1944, with the trade route
with Germany through Spain reopened, Standard Oil (and its attorney
Allen Dulles) had no reason
to believe FDR would really stand up to them if they attempted to also
deliver oil to Thailand.
Radioing the Japanese ahead of time of the
tanker's route would
allow Japanese forces from
Burma to be waiting on the Thai-Burma coast to waylay the sympathetic
Standard Oil tanker. It
could be rationalized as a normal business deal, through a neutral
nation. So what if it enhanced
Standard Oil's reputation with the Japanese enemies? Perhaps in 1944,
an election year, the
Japanese would talk sense, negotiating a settlement with Republican
Party "spokesmen" such as
Allen Dulles, who was even then deeply involved in negotiations to get
his gold and money out of
Germany and other Axis countries or Swiss banks which might be subject
to investigation, into
Japanese-occupied Manchuria.
So paperwork and documentation was arranged and
later this was back
in the hands of top leaders
of the Ba'ath Party, delivered back to them all the way from Guam in
the Pacific. Through his
membership in Ba'ath in the 1960's, Saddam Hussein came into possession
of this document.
But it isn't only the Ba'ath Party which had access
to these
documents. Through his group's World
War II ties to Ba'ath, they were probably accessed by Licio Gelli as he
founded P-2 in the 1960s.
In setting up his blackmail network, Gelli had to get powerful,
scandalous information on key
military, police and political figures around the world, in nations
that were important to his
operations. Barbara Honneggar tells us that in order to become a member
of P-2, George Bush
had to give an incriminating document about himself to Gelli (Honnegar
229-44). It could be that
the document which Gelli was given by Bush was the Iraqi document
implicating both Prescott
and George in treason during World War II. This document may tie in
with the J. Edgar Hoover
memo described by Honnegar which proves George's early membership in
Dulles's CIA
(Honnegar 229-44).
In 1980, with political pressure on George Bush at a
white heat,
Gelli made his move. At first, he
was simply intrigued to have a man of his own so close to the White
House. But later in 1980, as
the Iranians seized the Poet, with his agents and tons of heroin
aboard, he had an even more
urgent reason to pressure Bush to turn against Iraq in favor of
Iran--at least, temporarily
(Honnegar 229-44). To do this, he saw to it that the documents were
placed into the hands of a
rebelling CIA agent named Russell S. Bowen.
Bowen wanted to write about the CIA by 1979, as did
Phillip Agee, a
fellow renegade agent who
had written exposes of his own about the CIA (Bowen ix).
Gelli may have learned from sources
around Agee--such as Alexander Haig, a "double agent" who was a member
of P2 and the
Knights of Maltaof Bowen's plans for a book. Gelli then got the
scandalous document to Bowen
and allowed him to write about it in his book, the first edition of The
Immaculate Deception.
Gelli presented the book and a request for an ad for it in
the
American media to British publishing
tycoon (and British and Israeli secret agent) Robert Maxwell. Maxwell
was an Israeli agent
interested in stymieing Saddam's efforts to destroy Israel in 1980 via
prolonging the Iran-Iraq
War. He'd have been willing to threaten Bush, a pivotal person in plans
to use the "carrot and
stick" approach, into agreeing to work with a renegade faction of
Mossad (then coincidentally in
alliance with Licio Gelli). He did this by threatening to advertise and
publish the first edition of
Russell S. Bowen's book, The Immaculate Deception.
Alexander Haig
also conveyed Bowen's book plans to George Bush.
Gelli's thinking was that he
would leave Bush an out. By providing information to Bowen and Bush at
the same time, he gave
Bush a chance to silence Bowen on this matter and save his reputation.
After Bush agreed to Haig
and Maxwell's demands, they agreed to put off publication of the book
until after Bush's election
as vicepresident. Once elected, Bush pressured Bowen to rejoin the CIA,
at which point he
promptly seized Bowen's materials, preventing his publication of his
original charge of treason
against Bush in World War 2. Instead, Bowen wasn't able to retire from
the CIA until the late
'80's, at which time he was able to write and get into print a later
version of The Immaculate
Deception, minus the original World War II allegation (the
evidence for which was now no longer
in Bowen's possession).
Haig may also have seen an excellent
opportunity to exploit the
situation for Israeli intelligence
and possibly to help insure there was no investigation of his earlier
assistance to Israel during the
Yom Kippur War (Loftus and Aarons 304-25; also Honnegar 178-81). Bush
was a much more
vulnerable target than Carter, in terms of his usefulness in such a
cover-up. In the shake-up of the
change from Carter to Reagan, Haig's 1973 activities could definitely
be covered up.
And clearly, something would have had to have been
done by Bush to
placate Gelli. Gelli himself
was under a lot of pressure. Barbara Honneggar notes that, during the
same time that they took
the embassy hostages in Tehran, the Iranian radicals also seized a
group of Gelli's agents on the
heroin-carrying ship, the Poet. Not only this: the Iranian
radicals had also seized several tons of
heroin in the process (Honneggar 236-40). Without ties to any
established regime, the Iranian
radicals had no pressure on them to release any of these hostagesor
even allow them to live. The
only reasonable source for pressure on these radicals must come from a
world power. This, in an
election year, would have been America. It fit Republican presidential
campaign's needs to have a
lever to extend the hostage crisis and hurt Carter politically. But
even if such an activity had not
benefited the GOP one iota, Bush would still have been under tremendous
pressure to see to it
that Gelli was placated in his blackmail demands.
So Bush made use of his connection with Saddam
Hussein's Ba'ath
Party, the one spoken of in the
Ba'ath Party document implicating he and his father in treason during
World War 2. He had to
have that document silenced. Otherwise, his vice-presidential and then
presidential ambitions
would be doused with cold water. So he must have flashed back to his
family's ties with Ba'ath in
Iraq to find a way to speed up negotiations with the Iranian radicals
via a "stick" as well as a
"carrot."
In 1968, when the Ba'ath Party retook power in Iraq,
Saddam Hussein
had been Vice President of
Security Forces. But after that there had been infighting, with a
proSoviet faction of Ba'ath
opposing Saddam's "original" anti-Communist faction of Ba'ath. In
January, 1977, outgoing CIA
head George Bush had helped Saddam's faction, the rabidly
anti-Communist and un-apologetically
anti-Semitic one, to seize ascendancy in Iraq, according to Robert
C.Aldridge in Desert Folly: A
Background Paper On the War with Iraq. Saddam's faction was the
one with the closest direct
link to the Ba'ath Party founded by Nazi agents in Syria in WW2. Bush
may have been under
pressure to support this faction due there being persons in that
faction who had the incriminating
document about Prescott and George's WW2 treason in their possession.
In return for a promise
of being anti-Communist to give George Bush a cover for his support,
Ba'ath began a long drive
to seize power in Iraq.
In 1978, 1979 and 1980, Saddam's faction, the
original Ba'ath Party,
had lived up to its word,
completing the extermination of all Communists in Iraq. Concentration
camps became the norm
and there was a widespread use of poison gas, both in battle and in the
extermination camp
format. Saddam, in short, was "Hitler-esque." This is not surprising to
us now that we see that
Saddam's party was originally founded, in essence, by Adolf Hitler. In
a remarkable coincidence of
events, Saddam's army attacked Iran after Gelli's agents were seized,
just as admittedly
Republican operatives, including Richard Allen, met with Iranian
radicals in New York--though
they today deny their discussion of the hostages (Honnegar 200).
Skeptics of the "October Surprise" scenario have
pointed out that
the "carrot" of an offer of better
arms shipments to Iran during this time wouldn't have been a sufficient
incentive to have prodded
the Iranians to act fast enough change their position before the U.S.
election--or even to have
guaranteed the safety of the American hostages. An additional
incentive, a threat or "stick" would
have been needed. Clearly, Bush sympathized with Iraq more than Iran
anyway. He may have
been willing to have provided proof of his ties to Saddam--perhaps
proof of his assistance to him
in 1977 as outgoing CIA head--to pressure the Iranians to spare Gelli's
people as well as the
embassy hostages. Showing he had old ties to the Ba'ath Party may have
been the message Bush
sent to Iran to ensure the radicals there "acted right" in relation to
Gelli's people.
We are supposed to believe that some years later,
this same Ba'ath
party, under the same Saddam
Hussein, would have willingly fought the Gulf War against the same
George Bush. It is at this
point that we begin to see a possible connection to the "friendly fire"
casualties and other
mysteries of the Gulf War.
Without much doubt, the Gulf War has become one of the
most
controversial wars the United
States has ever fought. While initially appearing to be a dramatic
military success, several
intriguing mysteries surround its conduct. Given George and Prescott
Bush's somewhat shady
records in the whole area of national security even during the second
world war, one might
wonder what might have been going on.
For example, we've seen how a close examination of
the comments of
US Ambassador to Iraq
April Glaspie before Saddam's invasion of Kuwait has convinced several
observers that her words
were a thinly-veiled invitation by the United States government for
Saddam's Iraq to in fact invade
Kuwait. It was only after those words were closely read by agencies
such as the governments of
Israel, Kuwait and, above all, Saudi Arabia--that the US administration
claimed it had not
authorized Glaspie's words or intended them as such an invitation. But
none of this came out, in
any great substance, until after the war was over.
During the war, US military commanders made a number
of
mysterious--and, to some,
troubling--moves. (House/GAO: Operation Desert Storm: Evaluation
of Air Campaign). Overall
commander in the field Schwartzkopf demanded that all US forces move
ahead rapidly to capture
the Iraqi Republican Guard forces as they retreated across a large
plain before Baghdad.
However, a major central column advanced slowly and cautiously through
the thick smoke and
fire which the Iraqi military was, somewhat mysteriously at the time,
leaving in its wake.
As a result of this caution, there may be an
interesting correlation
between the level of "Gulf War
Syndrome" casualties for those forces versus other allied forces that
rushed on ahead of the center
columns into the massive smoke and flames (Ember 7-8).
We now know--from memos and documents made
public by investigators
such as the erstwhile
nurse Joyce Reilly--that the Iraqi military was in fact transporting
huge amounts of chemical and
biological weaponry in this same area during this same period of time
(Ember 7-8).
One is almost irresistibly drawn to the
conclusion, just by
examination of the battlefield scenario,
that Iraqi chemical and/or biological weapons were thus either
accidentally or purposely leveled
against advancing Allied forces pursuing the Republican Guard. In the
huge smoke and flames on
this area of open plain, it would almost have been impossible for them
not to have been.
One must also wonder about other things, as well.
Were there other
reasons besides the
"geopolitical" and military alliance with Arab nations which caused
Bush to choose to leave
Saddam Hussein in power in Iraq, after initially calling him "Saddam
Hussein the dictator" and "a
Hitler?"
The massive petrochemical complex that Bush has been
a major part of
most of his life was a
major supplier of the poisonous gases and even biological weaponry
which Saddam used to
destroy his opposition in Iraq (Friedman 171). Bush, we've seen, was a
major supporter of
Saddam in 1977--indeed being the pivotal factor in Saddam's success in
seizing power in Iraq
(Aldridge 198).
The "October Surprise" of 1980 involved Bush in a
slight variation
on the earlier theme involving
the scenario of Bush using a Kissinger-esque "carrot and stick"
approach to Iran during 1979 and
1980. This involved not only a promise of arms but the threat of Bush's
"war dog" Saddam
Hussein. Bush let the Iranians know of his connection to Saddam's
Ba'ath Party. Saddam, after all,
had also, like them, "opposed Communism."
According to a National Public Radio report on
Morning Edition
of June 18, 1993, a study of US
intelligence reports during the Gulf War reveals that US intelligence
was in fact seriously
compromised and that this was known at the very highest levels of the
allied command structures,
including the White House (NPR 6/18/93). Satellite photography of
military activity within and
around Iraq was transmitted directly to the Iraqi military even after
hostilities had begun--and this
continued to occur, sporadically, throughout the months of the allied
build-up and even during the
actual battlefield combat (NPR 6/18/93).
This breach of intelligence security occurred via
Jordan, whose
interior ministry seemed quite in
sympathy with Saddam (NPR 6/18/93). It saw to it that he got a sizable
chunk of any military
intelligence sent Jordan's way by Allied forces, including sensitive
satellite photographs (NPR
6/18/93). But when this fact was presented to headquarters, it was
promptly passed higher and
still higherand then it seems to have disappeared for periods of time.(House
Report On Desert
Storm, 1997). No action was taken of any lasting impact, since the
breach occurred again and
again (NPR 6/18/93).
The suggestion is thus powerful that George Bush was
in fact "hip
deep" in Saddam Hussein for
several compelling reasons. And some of them may go all the way back to
World War II. Those
scandals involve the ties of Bush's father's company, Standard Oil, to
the Ba'ath Party founded by
the Nazis in Syria. They were reinforced by Bush's possible activities
in the "October Surprise"
scenario. Saddam and his party now had several blackmail items on Bush.
These gave Saddam
several levers to use against George Bush. He could use these to keep
himself in power.
This unpleasant possibility is reinforced by the
troubling issue of
the high level of "friendly fire"
casualties in the Gulf War. These casualties occurred at such a high
level--almost an impossibly
high on--that one must become suspicious. At the beginning of the
Second World War shortly
after Pearl Harbor America's soldiers and sailors were admittedly
"green" and panicked by the
Japanese attacks, and a few friendly fire casualties occurred. It
should be remembered, however,
that these occurred over a very large area of the Pacific Ocean.
<>And even then, these were only one-tenth of the level of the
friendly
fire casualties that occurred in the relatively short Gulf War and in
an extremely limited area. In fact, no other war in
history--by any nation, anywhere--has produced as many friendly fire, percentage-wise,
as were produced during the Gulf War
among US forces (GAO: Fratricide Incident Senate Report).
Such a level of friendly fire casualties is just
too high to be merely the result of pure chance and accident, it would
seem.
In the context of all the other
mysteries about the Gulf War,
including Gulf War Syndrome, one is
forced to come to the conclusion that young Americans may have died as
part of a cover-up by
higher commanders in the Gulf War area. Exactly what the cover-up
entailed is not clear.
Perhaps in one case--that of a helicopter which was
attempting to
fly over an area of Iraq
supposedly held by friendly forces--it may have been that the fly-over
produced a view of
something someone didn't want seen. That someone may have been in the
US high command.
Even though no adequate explanation has been offered for the downing of
this helicopter by
America's own forces, little media coverage has continued about it.
This, despite the fact that it
came out during the investigation that the copter was sending out radio
signals to all US forces in
the area that it was a "friendly." It was also clearly marked as a
friendly US 'copter (GAO:
Fratricide Incident Senate Report). The American forces that shot
down this copter were
commanded to do so by American officers (GAO: Fratricide Incident
Senate Report). And the
radio message which was the original source of this command to fire is
alleged to have come from
outside of the immediate area (GAO: Fratricide Incident Senate
Report).
The one characteristic which this flight had in
common with several
other harassed or fired on
missions by Allied forces or subsequent UN inspection teams, was that
it was attempting to fly
over an area which has long been suspected to be a location for Iraqi
nuclear reactor
development.
European banks and industries have put pressure on their
respective
governments not to
investigate the funding of Saddam Hussein's development of chemical and
biological weapons,
missiles, and the vaunted "super gun." (Friedman, 8 and 285-7).
According to some sources, a real investigation of
these companies'
funding of such Iraqi research
would reveal that many of the same corporations which had supported
Hitler illegally during
World War 2 have also been instrumental in the rise and continuance in
power of Saddam
Hussein. These companies appear to have been a prime source of
materials for his development of
poison gases and biological weapons,long thought to be beneath the
dignity of "civilized" Western
industries. (See, for example, United States Steel Export Company as
referred to in Friedman 8
and in Foreign Relations, 1941, 360).
Was the Iraqi attack with chemical-biological
weaponry in fact planned
by right-wing fanatics in
the Pentagon and petrochemical industry with ties to both the
petrochemical conglomerates and
racial-supremacist groups such as the ones Prescott Bush had belonged
to? Did such groups in
fact tolerate and even encourage biological experimentation upon our
soldiers who belonged to
racial groups whom they deemed to be inferior? Were such tests also
conducted on soldiers
whose families were lower class or had been members of the forbidden
labor union movement?
Many of these fanatics have been tied to the Ba'ath
Party since the
Second World War. Their
number included William Stamps Farrish, William Draper and Prescott
Bush, George Bush's
father. They helped design, build and fund the Auschwitz concentration
camp. They'd have
thought nothing of performing such "medical experiments" on allied
troops in the field against
their ally the Ba'ath Party in Iraq.
A way for George Bush to please them and
simultaneously meet the
blackmail demands of
Saddam's Ba'ath Party against his family, would have been to expose
thousands of American
troops to experimental Iraqi poison gases and biological weaponry.
There, on that plain as they
pursued the fleeing Iraqi Republican Guard forces, is this what
happened to them? Is this what
produced much of the "Gulf War Syndrome?" Is this part of the reason
why Gulf War Syndrome
is being covered up and denied by segments of the Pentagon?
As if to answer these questions, English author
Charles Higham tells
us of the Bush family's
company, Standard Oil, and its old ties to Fascism:
<>
"The Chairman of the Texas Company and partner in
Standard Oil of
California, Torkild 'Cap'
Rieber...supplied Franco in the Spanish Civil War...with orders not to
stop for inspection by any
man-of-war, including United States gunships... supplied polymerization
techniques to I.G. Farben
in the Ruhr and to I.G. Farben-connected companies in Iran, Saudi
Arabia, Egypt and Syria... flew
with Goering in a plane piloted by Pan American Airways pilot Pete
Clausen on a
personally-conducted tour of the main industrial centers of Germany...
sailed his vessels through
the British blockade to fuel U-boats after 1939, and simultaneously
sent more to aid Nazi
corporations in South America. [and] told Life magazine in
1940: 'If the Germans ever catch any
of my ships carrying oil to the Allies, they will have my heartfelt
permission to fire a torpedo into
her.' [But] on August 20, [1940] fifteen directors for the
corporation...trying to
improve...image...[replaced] Rieber with W.S. Rodgers and Harry D.
Collier ...[Their subsidiary
Caltex] jointly brought up millions of dollars worth of oil from the
Arabian Sea. (in the
1940's)...Saudi Arabia had intricate economic and political links with
Adolf Hitler. On June
8,1939, Khalid Al-Hud Al-Qarqani, royal counsel of Ibn Saud, was
received by Ribbentrop in
Berlin...On June 17, Hitler received him...[making arrangements for
trade that] were in effect on
November 21,1941, [when]the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem...among the
bitterest enemies of the
Jews, met with the Fuehrer in Berlin... [and] with the authorization of
the Arab world, expressed
his admiration of Hitler and named the same enemies..." (Highsm 76-92).
"Named the same enemies" is an interesting
point in connection with
Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath
Party and its longstanding ties to the Allen Dulles CIA after WW2.
Ba'ath was frequently used by
Dulles and subsequent CIA heads in GOP
administrations.
The reason for
the partisan nature of
this particular act becomes clearer when we remember that FDR's party
had no incentive not to
investigate this treason. Only the GOP was desperate enough for support
and votes--and
ideas--during this time not to expose them. Not until July 17,1968,
when Ba'ath again seized
power, with Ahmed Hassan AlBakr as Premier and Saddam Hussein as head
of the secret police
and all security forces, including the National Guard (Bennis and
Moushabeck 32), was the Bush
family's secret really secure again. Helping this was the fact that one
of the special "appeals"
Saddam made to the West in his bid for funding was a promise to stay
with the Ba'ath Party's
original goals of opposition to Communism.
Founded in Syria with the assistance of Axis
agents in 1943, Ba'ath
was in communication with
Charles Bedaux, Standard Oil, Ibn Saud and the Mufti of Jerusalem. One
of Khomeini's main
bodyguards during the Iranian hostage crisis was a man who was a head
disciple of the Mufti of
Jerusalem, that Jew-hating ally of Hitler (Honnegar 117).
But it isn't only the Middle East where these
events going back to
World War 2 still have an
effect. What about George Bush's original host, Japan? Japan has been
rearming, and much faster
than one might think. Most of that rearming went on in the ReaganBush
years. According to Julie
McCarthy on NPR's April 18, 1995, "Morning Edition," Japan also wants a
seat on the UN
Security Council. In the 1980s, America had difficulty getting Japan to
abide by its guidelines for
supplying chemical and biological weapons to Middle Eastern terrorist
states, especially Ba'athist
Iraq (Shultz 190-5).
Finally, in their eyebrow-raising book G.
Friedman and Lebard tell
us:
"1990 was a turning point for Japan in two ways:
first, it was the
year in which the Cold War
ended; second, it was the year in which Japan's largest postwar
rebuilding plan, its 1976 National
Defense Program Outline, was completed...In developing their forces,
Japan frequently went
beyond the role of supplementing the U.S. toward capabilities that
would prove themselves useful
to Japan in its own right...The sense that the Japanese are in a
position to rapidly expand their
military force and are restrained only by the American presence is not
based solely on the views of
the America military leaders in Japan. It can also be gleaned from
looking at the
weaponsprocuring policies pursued by the Japanese. The Japanese have
the wherewithal in place
to rapidly expand their forces should the need arise." (Friedman and
Lebard 347-48).
Old chums, old ties.
Click on "Back" (above) to return to the Tim, George Bush and Me
Table of Contents on the
George Bush-Undercurrents Website.
Works Cited:
Aldridge, Robert C. Folly in the Desert: A Background Paper on
the War with Iraq. Santa Clara,
CA: Pacific Life Research Center, 1991
Bagby, Wesley Marvin. The Eagle-Dragon Alliance: America's
Relations With China in World War II. Cranbury, NJ: Associated UP,
1992
Baker, Robert L. Oil, Blood and Sand. New York: D.
Appleton-Century, 1942.
Bakhash, Shaol. In the Reign of the Ayotollahs. New York:
Basic, 1984.
Bennis, Phyllis and Michel Moushabeck. Beyond the Storm: A Gulf
Crisis Reader. New York:
Olive Branch, 1991.
Bowen, Brig. Gen. Russell S. (Ret.). The Immaculate Deception:
The Bush Crime Family
Exposed. Carson City, NV: America West, 1991.
Butow, Robert J.C. Tojo and the Coming of the War.
Stanford, CA: UP, 1961
Devine, Thomas. Eyewitness: The Amelia Earhart Incident.
Frederick, CO: Renaissance House,
1980.
Ember, Lois. "Panel Looks for Causes of Gulf War Illnesses," Chemical
and Engineering News,
February 19, 1996. 7-8
Friedman, Alan. Spider's Web: The Secret History of How the
White House Illegally Armed Iraq.
New York: Bantam, 1993
Friedman, George, and Meredith Lebard. The Coming War with Japan.
New York: St. Martin's,
1991
Goerner, Fred. The Search forAmelia Earhart. New York:
Doubleday, 1966
Higham, Charles. Trading with the Enemy: An Exposé of
the Nazi-American Money Plot, 1933-1947. New York: Delacorte, 1983
Honneggar, Barbara. October Surprise. New York: Tudor,
1989
Hoyt, Edwin P. To the Marianas: War in the Central Pacific,
1944. New York: Avon, 1980
<>Loftus, John and Mark Aarons. The Secret War Against the
Jews:
How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People. New York: St.
Martin's, 1994,
McCarthy, Julie, "Report from Japan," Morning Edition.
NPR. KUAR, Little Rock, AR, April
18, 1995.
Morning Edition. Narr. Bob Edwards. NPR. KUAR, Little Rock,
AR, June 18, 1995.
Shapiro, Laura and Ray Sawhill. "Amelia Earhart: Was She Or Wasn't
She?" Rev. of Lost Star by
Randall Brink. Newsweek. January 31, 1994. 59
<>Shultz, George P. Turmoil and Triumph: My Years as
Secretary of
State. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993
Tirnmerman, Kenneth R. "Whatever Happened to Iraqgate?" American
Spectator, November,
1996. 34-41
<>United States Congress. House Committee on National Security. United
States Policy Toward Iraq.Washington,
DC: GPO, 1997
United States Congress Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Intelligence Assessments of the
Exposure of U.S. Military Personnel to Chemical Agents During Operation
Desert Storm: Joint
Hearing Before the Select Committee on Intelligence, United States
Senate, One Hundred Fourth
Congress, Second Session, Wednesday, September 25, 1996.
Washington, DC: 1997, GPO
<>United States Department of State. Foreign Relations of
the
United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1941. Washington, DC: GPO, 1956
United States General Accounting Office. Operation Desert Storm
Investigation of A U.S. Army
Fratricide Incident: Report to the Honorable Fred Thompson, U.S. Senate.Washington,
DC: GPO, 1995
---------. Operation Desert Storm: Evaluation of the Air
Campaign: Report to the
Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Commerce, House of
Representatives/United States
General Accounting Office. Washington, DC: GPO, 1997
Click on "Back" (above) to return to the Tim, George Bush and Me
Table of Contents on the
George Bush-Undercurrents Website.