Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #236 Trouble on Oiled Waters, Part 4: Climbing the Bush Family Tree

MP3 One Seg­ment

1. Sup­ple­ment­ing dis­cus­sion and analy­sis pre­sent­ed in FTR-214, this broad­cast high­lights the role of George W. Bush in petro­le­um indus­try pol­i­tics, as well as that of his father. (Both are career oil men.) In FTR-214, the delib­er­ate manip­u­la­tion of oil and gaso­line prices, the delib­er­ate fal­si­fi­ca­tion of Sovi­et and Mid­dle East­ern petro­le­um pro­duc­tion esti­mates, the dis­cred­i­ta­tion of the Carter admin­is­tra­tion, the elec­tion of Ronald Rea­gan and the sub­se­quent mil­i­tary build-up and expo­nen­tial increase of the nation­al debt were ana­lyzed as orig­i­nat­ing from a CIA report, gen­er­at­ed by the Agency when George Bush was direc­tor. (The Secret War Against the Jews by John Lof­tus and Mark Aarons, St. Mar­t­in’s Press, copy­right 1994.) FTR-214 set forth the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the rise in oil and gas prices in 2000 may also have been gen­er­at­ed delib­er­ate­ly, in order to help engi­neer the demise of Al Gore.

2. FTR-236 begins where FTR-214 left off, with dis­cus­sion of Sau­di Ara­bi­a’s fail­ure to raise pro­duc­tion, thus giv­ing rise to an increase in oil futures. (The Wall Street Jour­nal, 7/13/2000, p. C19.)

3. Next, the pro­gram dis­cuss­es George W’s lav­ish cam­paign sup­port from the oil com­pa­nies ($1.5 mil­lion, con­trast­ed with Al Gore’s $100,000.) The oil com­pa­nies are hope­ful that Bush, if elect­ed, will help ease drilling restric­tions in an Alas­ka wildlife refuge, ease explo­ration and drilling restric­tions in oth­er nation­al parks, ease EPA attempts to elim­i­nate sul­fur in gaso­line and relax an attempt by the Clin­ton admin­is­tra­tion to reclaim mil­lions of dol­lars that the com­pa­nies have stolen from the tax­pay­ers. (The San Jose Mer­cury News, 7/3/2000, p. 4A.)

4. The oil com­pa­nies’ expec­ta­tions appear to be on sol­id ground, because Bush’s advi­so­ry board fea­tures peo­ple promi­nent in, and sym­pa­thet­ic to, the petro­le­um indus­try. Both Don Evans and for­mer Sec­re­tary of Defense Dick Cheney are oil men and key Bush advi­sors. (Finan­cial Times, 6/23/2000, p. 4.)

5. George W has a his­to­ry of going to bat for the oil indus­try. In 1992, he attempt­ed to inter­vene on behalf of the oil indus­try with his father’s admin­is­tra­tion, lob­by­ing for an increase in petro­le­um prices. (San Fran­cis­co Chron­i­cle, 6/24/2000, p. A2.)

6. In his first polit­i­cal cam­paign (a 1978 run for the con­gres­sion­al seat vacat­ed by the retir­ing Rep­re­sen­ta­tive George Mahon, Demo­c­rat of Texas) “Dubya” cam­paigned on a plat­form advo­cat­ing dereg­u­la­tion of oil and nat­ur­al gas prices, mir­ror­ing the actions of CIA, the oil com­pa­nies anb the Saud­is at that time. Bush lat­er said that he ran specif­i­cal­ly because of his antipa­thy for the poli­cies of Jim­my Carter, who had fired his father from CIA. (W — The Revenge of the Bush Dynasty, by Eliz­a­beth Mitchell, copy­right 2000, Hype­r­i­on, ISBN 0–7868-6630–6, p.158.)

7. Bill Clin­ton has attempt­ed to enlist the Depart­ment of Ener­gy in an effort to stem ris­ing gas prices. (Los Ange­les Times, 6/17/2000, p. A8.)

8. Next, the pro­gram high­lights three arti­cles from June 15 of the year 2000, and intro­duces spec­u­la­tion that the three may be relat­ed. The “miss­ing hard dri­ve” scan­dal at the Los Alam­os Nation­al Lab­o­ra­to­ry has weak­ened the Depart­ment of Ener­gy and sub­vert­ed Ener­gy Sec­re­tary Bill Richard­son’s Vice-Pres­i­den­tial pos­si­bil­i­ties, under­min­ing both the Clin­ton Admin­is­tra­tion’s attempts to bring the oil com­pa­nies to heel and Gore’s poten­tial appeal to Lati­no vot­ers. (Richard­son is a Mex­i­can Amer­i­can.) (Los Ange­les Times, 6/15/2000, p. A6.)

9. The same Los Alam­os scan­dal also pro­pelled Gen­er­al John Gor­don (deputy direc­tor of the CIA, the agency with which George W’s father is affil­i­at­ed) into the direc­tor­ship of the Nation­al Nuclear Secu­ri­ty Agency, a divi­sion of the Depart­ment of Ener­gy. This move had been opposed by Sec­re­tary Richard­son and the con­gres­sion­al Democ­rats. (San Jose Mer­cury News, 6/15/2000, p.11A.) Mr. Emory spec­u­lates about the pos­si­bil­i­ty that ele­ments of the CIA may have been involved in the cre­ation of the scan­dal (as they appar­ent­ly were in the de-sta­bi­liza­tion of the Carter admin­is­tra­tion.)

10. Inter­est­ing­ly (and per­haps sig­nif­i­cant­ly) at the time that the events engulf­ing the Depart­ment of Ener­gy were unfold­ing, George W was con­sult­ing (as he often does) with his father. (The New York Times, 6/15/2000, p.1.)

11. The pro­gram con­cludes with a look at the Kennedy admin­is­tra­tion’s attempts at increas­ing tax­es on oil indus­try prof­its, through reduc­ing the oil deple­tion allowance and the pas­sage of the Kennedy Act. (The lat­ter removed the dis­tinc­tion between repa­tri­at­ed prof­its and prof­its re-invest­ed abroad. The mea­sure was aimed large­ly at the oil com­pa­nies.) (Farewell Amer­i­ca, James Hep­burn, copy­right 1968 by Fron­tiers Pub­lish­ing, ISBN 68–57391, p.234.)

12. George H. W. Bush’s name crops up in con­nec­tion with the Kennedy assas­si­na­tion in a num­ber of dif­fer­ent con­texts. The broad­cast con­cludes with a review of Bush’s pres­ence in the air over Dal­las’ Love Field on 11/22/63. (W — The Revenge of the Bush Dynasty, p.63.)


One comment for “FTR #236 Trouble on Oiled Waters, Part 4: Climbing the Bush Family Tree”

  1. This next arti­cle based on an inves­ti­ga­tion by the non­prof­it Pub­lic Account­ing ini­tia­tive details how police foun­da­tions are par­tial­ly fund­ed by by large cor­po­ra­tions includ­ing Chevron, Shell, Marathon Petro­le­um, Exelon, and Wells Far­go in cities such as Seat­tle, Chica­go, Wash­ing­ton, New Orleans and Salt Lake City.

    Some of the key por­tions of the arti­cle state the fol­low­ing:

    Big cor­po­ra­tions accused of dri­ving envi­ron­men­tal and health inequal­i­ties in black and brown com­mu­ni­ties through tox­ic and cli­mate-chang­ing pol­lu­tion are also fund­ing pow­er­ful police groups in major US cities, accord­ing to a new inves­ti­ga­tion.

    Some of America’s largest oil and gas com­pa­nies, pri­vate util­i­ties, and finan­cial insti­tu­tions that bankroll fos­sil fuels also back police foun­da­tions – opaque pri­vate enti­ties that raise mon­ey to pay for train­ing, weapons, equip­ment, and sur­veil­lance tech­nol­o­gy for depart­ments across the US.

    The inves­ti­ga­tion by the Pub­lic Account­abil­i­ty Ini­tia­tive, a non­prof­it cor­po­rate and gov­ern­ment account­abil­i­ty research insti­tute, and its research data­base project Lit­tle­Sis, details how police foun­da­tions in cities such as Seat­tle, Chica­go, Wash­ing­ton, New Orleans and Salt Lake City are par­tial­ly fund­ed by house­hold names such as Chevron, Shell and Wells Far­go.

    Police foun­da­tions are indus­try groups that pro­vide sub­stan­tial funds to local depart­ments, yet, as non­prof­its, avoid much pub­lic scruti­ny.

    But crit­ics argue police depart­ments are already over­fund­ed. Nation­wide about $100bn is spent on polic­ing each year, and cities hand over 20% to 45% of their gen­er­al bud­gets to police depart­ments, accord­ing to advo­ca­cy group the Cen­ter for Pop­u­lar Democ­ra­cy Action.

    Police foun­da­tion mon­ey is addi­tion­al, and this mon­ey is much hard­er to trace since they are not sub­ject to the same trans­paren­cy rules as pub­lic enti­ties such as law enforce­ment agen­cies.


    Posted by Mary Benton | July 31, 2020, 11:59 am

Post a comment