Family of Secrets
We don't understand our country's present and future because we don't understand the past--even the very recent past.
In trying to comprehend how the improbable world leader George W. Bush rose to the top and executed an array of radical policies, I began digging into the Bush family's history for clues. During my five years of research, I found that I had to re-examine the conventional wisdom and even my assumptions--not just about George W. Bush, but also about his father. Once I started taking a hard look at the particulars of both men's lesser-known activities over their lifetimes, I began finding that the public personas of the two men little reflected their true mindset or most enduring alliances.
There is not space here to detail the many revelations found in Family of Secrets and backed up with documents, named sources and more than a thousand footnotes. But I will begin this conversation by pointing out that the Bushes, father and son, can be best understood as promoting and defending the power and prerogatives of allied families and industries that had been accruing influence behind the scenes for generations. A turning point came when I discovered that the elder Bush, long before he was CIA Director, led a double life--behind his public roles as an oilman, politician and diplomat--working on highly sensitive covert projects with the intelligence community. This research into George H.W. Bush's clandestine activities led me to a profoundly new understanding of several seminal events in this country's history, including the JFK assassination, Watergate, and the destabilization of the Carter and Clinton administrations. Nearly as remarkable were the traces of global covert operations I found in little-known companies associated with the young George W. Bush as well.
When this nation's conversational gatekeepers speak of power elites shaping and dominating a political system, more often than not, they are referring to developing countries. There is a virtual taboo on exploring the true domestic reach of the wealthy, banking interests, the spy services, military and military contractors. Our elected leaders are routinely depicted as singular actors upon the stage of history. And we personalize everything, and get caught up in debate about what are in essence distractions--W's purported religious conversion, his troubled relationship with his father, the genius of Karl Rove and "evil nature" of Dick Cheney. We prefer to view politics as if it were a sporting competition, and discourage efforts to better understand how elites in our own society maintain their wealth, power and influence.
The two George Bushes, different as they appeared to be, both presided over administrations whose hallmark was extreme secrecy and the aggressive projection of military might to secure, among other goals, commercial opportunities for their friends and allies. This was no accident. As I make plain in Family of Secrets, the Bush policies were but the ultimate expression of a powerful if largely obscured current running through our country's history. Once we begin coming to terms with the real history of this country and the influences that shape it, we will have a better sense of the difficulties faced by Barack Obama, and the tremendous pressures upon him to continue serving those narrow interests, rather than the public good.





















I've been quite critical of both Bush 41 and Bush 43, but I differ a bit from Russ in that I see very sharp differences between the two. More specifically, I see W's religiosity, his relationship with his father, and the roles of Rove and Cheney as much more than distractions.
For all his flaws, Bush 41 was a pragmatic realist(at times, a very brutal one) not an ideologue. And he hated the neocons. Brent Scowcroft, 41's best friend, saw the neocons swarming around "W" as early as '98, when Bush was still in Austin. He failed, of course, but I'm convinced he tried quite hard to stop the Iraq War--with 41's assent. That's a very real difference.
In addition, even though I believe W lied about how he was converted to Christianity(it wasn't Billy Graham who converted him, it was a guy named Arthur Blessitt), I talked to enough evangelicals(some in W's Bible study group) to take W's conversion quite seriously. Even if you don't, the Christian Right did. In any case, W was the de facto leader of the Christian Right when he was in the White House. His father was basically a secularist.
And this, I think, is the fundamental issue with W. He became the vehicle through whom two powerful movements came together--the Christian Right, a mass movement of tens of millions of evangelicals, and the neocons, a movement of right wing 'intellectual' policymakers.
As a result,the father and son differed profoundly on the Middle East--an issue where the neocons and the Christian Right come together. Yes, Bush senior was close to the Saudis, but there were also legitimate realists in his administration who took a very different tack from W in Middle East.
May 26, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the Oedipal tensions were overstated for our consumption.
W also knew before his presidency the advantage of appearing dumber than he actually was.
W was a politician since he was 13, wanted to run for Congress at 25, and worked on a stream of national campaigns (including his own failed congressional campaign in his early 30's) before his supposed born-again epiphany at 40.
It is entirely possible, and in my opinion quite probable, that W's religious conversion was nothing but a calculated strategy to advance his political career.
He had already lost a congressional race to a fundy, folksy opponent who painted W as the upper-crust playboy carpetbagger that he was.
After his defeat, W swore that he would never get outflanked to the right again.
Keep in mind that W had the finest minds in the political and intelligence communities at his service, working to ensure the continuation of the dynasty.
Also keep in mind that Bush rarely spoke about God when he wasn't running for office or selling the Iraq war.
How else is a 40 year old drunk, rich, preppy, life-long politician going to get elected as a Republican in Texas besides finding God and jumping for Jesus in a cowboy costume?
May 26, 2009 10:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this a revenge for Obama's birth certificate stories?
Whatever it is, I just hope this book is not the same garbage written about the Clinton's and Hillary's evil machinations to rule the world by marrying up while being a closet lesbian.
May 26, 2009 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
not at all revenge or crackpot notions, Lalo, but an actual turn-over-a-rock history and see who and what's been the driving political and policy force in this country since the 1970s (and before, really).
all heavily documented and authenticated. Baker's put it all out there for us. you just have to open your eyes and read, skeptically or not. it's true grist that will make shallow and lazy political historians ashamed and envious that they hadn't bothered to do the work themselves.
they're not called the Bush crime family for nothing.
May 26, 2009 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
There has always been a taboo on discussing the class structure of this country, we like to pretend that it doesn't exist or that it's defined by money.
May 26, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
This country has been in transformation for a long time. Post WWII got the ball rolling, with a great many of the changes occurring behind the scenes.
At the center of the change is our national government where an all too apparent corruption is all but impossible to challenge. A simple but horribly flawed concept which assigns attributes of citizenship to corporations is but one stark example of the reformulations that have taken place. A more recent phenomena that has come into full bloom is simply ignoring existing law or our government taking actions that are completely contrary to existing law. It just takes your breath away to watch this and listen to congressional leaders express the rightness of these obviously flawed actions.
May 26, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great to see you here, Russ. I enjoyed your chat at firedoglake a month or two ago.
It is rather annoying that as Obama reveals himself to be Cheney-light, and Bush Co. defender in chief, that the systemic influences are so under-analyzed.
Who are the behind-the-scenes advisers shaping Obama's pro-Executive Power legal positions, which are a 180 from his campaign promises and warnings?
What are the connections between the handful of dominant, untouchable lobbies in this country, the banks/credit cards, defense, pharmaceutical, health care, and pro-Israel?
Learning about
Operation Mockingbird:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mockingbird
and the history of Time Magazine, The Washington Post, and CBS forces one to wonder the extent of CIA infiltration and manipulation of media outlets today.
Until our intelligence agencies are widely accepted as engaging in pervasive, anti-democratic manipulation of our campaigns, legislation, policy formation, and news coverage, we will be at the mercy of the financial elites who ultimately control our intelligence agencies.
Thanks again for your brave effort.
P.S., did you read Webster Tarpley's "The Unauthorized Biography of George Bush" as part of your research? Is it credible?
http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm
The Walker/Bush connections to the rise of Hitler are fascinating.
May 26, 2009 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Once we begin coming to terms with the real history of this country and the influences that shape it, we will have a better sense of the difficulties faced by Barack Obama, and the tremendous pressures upon him to continue serving those narrow interests, rather than the public good.
It makes you wonder why any decent person would want to be President of the United States in the first place.
Do you think Obama knows what he's up against? Or is he a naif?
May 26, 2009 11:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Baker,
Thanks for an outstanding, if deeply unsettling, piece of investigative journalism. I particularly enjoyed your ruminations about the dangers of being perceived as a conspiracy nut, in the last chapter. I've tried to share with friends some of the facts you've dredged up, and they think I'm crazy.
In some respects, though, this country has been a PR stunt put on by plutocrats from the very beginning, with the exception of the golden age of Jefferson, Madison and Monroe. Look at how we started out with Native Americans and African slaves. We've been headed downhill ever since Andrew Jackson, our first imperial president.
The Bush Crime Syndicate has certainly given Machiavelli a "Spy vs. Spy" twist, with remarkable results. Too bad Americans are too lazy and shortsighted to actually care, though. That's what these criminals are counting on--our ridiculously short national attention span.
May 27, 2009 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
If this is so important, why are you forcing us to pay money to learn more about it in your book?
May 27, 2009 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obviously, asking a journalist and writer to forego earning a living is a bit silly. In any case, no one is forcing you to buy a book. You can always visit your local public library. But Family of Secrets is a complex book, it takes quite a while to come to terms with the abundant revelations, and it is, according to many, an "evergreen"--something you will want on your shelves for future reference.
May 29, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink