Outings & Sightings

There are so many it's hard to keep up. I was following the theories of Wayne Madsen and Michael Ruppert but lost faith after their "Bush/Cheney indictments are looming!" last year. Now I'm not sure I understand the theory this pair is pushing but apparently it's along the line that the wrath of the CIA is working against the Bush family empire.

In a Ruppert article Beyond Bush II he writes: "A simple way to look at this is to say that the CIA represents the interests of Wall Street and the global economic powers, while the Bush Neocons represent the interests of only one American faction of the global economy. It is inevitable that the Neocons will be replaced. Several US presidents have fought the CIA and they have always emerged on the short end of the stick. This time will be no different."

So the agency that Poppy Bush once directed is out to overthrow his son? Poppy Bush became director of CIA at a time when the agency was being scrutinized for dirty tricks, the Allende in Chile assassination, Diem in Vietnam, various other nasty deeds. When Bush was confirmed as CIA director he promised to make : "CIA an instrument of peace and an object of pride for all our people."

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 was signed into law by President Clinton on October 20, 1998. Among its provisions, the Act directed that the Headquarters compound of the Central Intelligence Agency located in Langley, Virginia, shall be known and designated as the "George Bush Center for Intelligence." That designation now makes me chuckle (and think send your son there GHW). Nice honor for a guy who only served as CIA Director for one year. I would expect things are named after men who help promote an agenda or occasionally to please the public, i.e. all the MLK boulevards across the country.

Some have theorized that Nixon's downfall was also a silent CIA coup. Perhaps a setup by CIA covert operator James McCord, one of the Watergate "plumbers." Nixon attempted to get the CIA to take responsibility for Watergate, as a CIA job or claiming "national security" to shut down the investigation. Director Richard Helms would have none of that. Nixon fired Helms but the House cleared CIA of any involvement in Watergate.

During the Watergate era polls were showing the public disinterest in the matter until a media hype campaign began to turn the polls against Nixon. Even so, most folks felt Nixon stealing info on his opposition and subsequent coverup was how all pols played the game. It was hard for many to accept that burglary and coverup were so awful a crime considering we assassinated foreign heads, overthrew governments, waged wars for profit, etc. What was the big deal people asked at the local diner. One theory proposed that Nixon had threatened the CIA with his knowledge concerning JFK assassination and/or Bay of Pigs. Did the CIA show a sitting president how impotent his position really is?

But why, according to Ruppert's theory, would the CIA do a silent coup on Son of Bush? Because BushCo is only one small American faction of global interest as Ruppert states? Mighty powerful little faction. Is it because BushCo put the blame on CIA intel failures as leading to 9/11?

Luckily, the finger then pointed away from the CIA to the FBI, and Sibel Edmonds comes forth as a convenient whistleblower to show how the FBI is negligent, incompetent, guilty. Who does Ms. Edmonds really work for? Wilson and Plame also conveniently come forth as victims, again making the CIA a circuitous victim of BushCo, as the Plame outing damaged their NOC and corporate cover Brewster Jennings. Although nothing trustworthy (for me) regarding Plame's career or Brewster Jennings has been put forth; a lot of heresay and bloggers hypothethetical speculation from bits of information from unidentified anonymous sources. Are these whistleblowers, among others, just doing their job: deflecting blame from CIA?

At one point it was claimed that George Tenet was falling on the sword for Bush and Tenet has now resigned. His replacement, Floridian Porter Goss, is long time buddy of the Bushes. Would Goss participate in or thwart a silent coup against the Bush dynasty? Personally I don't see the fight against the CIA by BushCo and the CIA's counter silent ongoing coup that Ruppert speaks of.

Maybe it's all going as planned. Boy Bush falling on the sword for the new world order. Intentionally made to look so odious and treasonous that most everyone will breathe a sigh of relief when he's gone, and welcome the replacements, be it McCain or a Clinton or Dean or "anybody but Bush."

As the accusations and theories disappear to the corners of internet archives, the programs for a police state are set, profits made, internal power struggles shift, and the global realignment moves further ahead. It's all the same agenda, just different ideas on who's driving and who's along for the ride. All the confusion and lies of the past few years will fade with folks believing one or a combination of theories. It was intel failure, it was the CIA, it was Bush and neocons, it was FBI incompetence, it was our foreign policy, it was evildoers, Illuminati, it is God, and/or democrats rolling over. It seems "inevitable" that just as with JFK, Vietnam, Nixon, the Contras, Noriega, Vince Foster, etc. there will be little hard truth revealed but enough theory to keep everyone busy for a lifetime.

Today's information "outings" remind me of UFO sightings. Plenty of folks claiming they have firsthand knowledge but no smoking gun proof. Convincing stories sometimes but who knows for certain there aren't little gray men abducting earthlings or if every whistleblower is a truth telling hero here to save the day and clear things up. Either way, there's always some rectal probing for the Joe Average faction.