`` The Wedding Invitation: A Possible "Conventional Explanation" for Bush's "Courier Mission"?

The Wedding Invitation:

A Possible "Conventional Explanation" for Bush's "Courier Mission"?

We have discussed throughout this Site the various scenarios of a Bush "out of pocket" quality during World War II. Given the Bush family's ties to Standard Oil and Allen Dulles (given the latter two's now demonstrated illegal activities during the War), much has been speculated on, as to the meaning of any discrepancies or "funny looking" qualities about or in records pertaining to GHW Bush in that War.

However, as one might expect, as with so many other things, a more conventional explanation of Bush's "courier mission" could be presented. That explanation is, that the meeting in which Bush allegedly "delivered a message to an admiral for delivery to the Japanese", (in the words of Mr. Thomas in the "Ad Confirm" chapter of this Site, as well as intimated by things in the records about Bush in WW2 elsewhere on this Site), and which may even have been the subject of a now-suppressed or never-published book, is described by Bush squadron member and later author Robert Stinnett, a source we've also cited numerous times elsewhere on this Site.

In his book George Bush: His World War II Years (DC: Brassey's, 1991), Robert Stinnett tells briefly of the visit by Bush to Admiral James L. "Reggie" Kauffman while Bush and his crew were on board the USS Lexington subsequent to the water landing off Guam in June 1942. According to Stinnett, Bush met with Kauffman to deliver to him a message that included a wedding invitation (77). (Stinnett even includes a photo of Bush standing with Kauffman on the same page.)

Bush, says Stinnett, was thankful that the Navy Pacific Fleet's destroyer, the CK Bronson had picked he and his crew up and gotten them to safety during the Battle of the Philippines Sea on June 19, 1944. (The exact things that may have happened, when, where, how, etc., have been discussed elsewhere on this website.) That was one part of the message he delivered to Kauffman, according to Stinnett (77).

However, says Stinnett, a major reason Bush contacted Admiral Kauffman was to relay to him the message that his daughter was marrying Bush's older brother, Prescott Bush, jr., later that year. Stinnett tells us later in the book that the wedding was in 1945, after George had returned home to the states.

As we've noted elsewhere on this Site, (see, for example, "Encountering Prescott Bush", several things involving Bush's father, Prescott Bush, Sr., suggest that Prescott, sr., was involved in illegal activities. We've cited Tarpley and Chaitkin's book The Unauthorized Biography of George Bush (NY: Ben Franklin, 1989) numerous times in this context. They tell us, for example, that Prescott sent a clipping from the New York Times of March 19, 1934 about the new attempt by Poland to stand up to the new Nazi owners of much of Poland's mining economy. Because of his and his Union Banking Company's numerous ties to the Silesian-American Mining Company in Poland, then largely controlled--at great profit to its American owners--by Nazis, Bush expressed "concern" in his attached note, to the possible effects of more control over their own mining industry by the Poles. As Tarpley and Chaitkin put it, "this issue was resolved in Prescott's favor by the Nazi invasion of Poland in September 1939." (See Chapter Two, "The Hitler Project," of Tarpley and Chaitkin's online Unauthorized Biography of George Bush by clicking here, then scrolling to the section titled "Hitler's Ladder to Power" for more on this.)

Bush squadron member Chester Mierzejewski was of Polish descent. Much has been written, here and elsewhere, about "Ski's" allegations or questions about Bush's activities near Chi Chi Jima in September 1944. I have noted that Ski's questions about Bush's wisdom in not water-landing off Chi Chi Jima as he allegedly had off Guam earlier that year, may have implied that Ski doubted Bush had ever done a water-landing, opening the door on questions as to what exactly happened with Bush in June 1944. Ski could have been led to anxieties and doubts about Bush's activities, due to his Polish background and a greater-than-average knowledge and awareness of how much the Bush family, via Prescott, Sr.'s ties to Nazi-controlled Silesian-American Mining prior to the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939, may have been involved in illegal activities.

This could explain Ski's continuing doubts about Bush, and possibly also explain his "antenna" about the fact Bush delivered such a message to an admiral while on the Lexington, a ship that ordinarily was the intelligence hub of the Seventh Fleet. (Numerous eyebrows were raised by Bush's being put on the Lexington in the first place, strongly suggesting an early tie to Allen Dulles's OSS. Normally, crewmen weren't sent there unless they had intelligence to share. For example, almost exactly 24 hours later, a similar situation of a water landing involved Dick Houle in Bush's squadron, did not "qualify" him to be sent to the Lexington before being sent back to his home carrier, the San Jacinto.

Several other items have suggested Bush may have been a CIA asset as early as 1959, when, as owner of the Zapata Oil Company, he allowed one of his ships, the "Barbara" to partcipate in CIA-backed Cuban exile activities against Castro. IF Bush was CIA in 1959, he was there while Dulles headed the Agency.

Anyway, the question could still be, was a message involving Bush's older brother Prescott, who was in South America for much of the War, a coded message? Was Prescott, Jr., as I've speculated elsewhere on this Site, in fact involved in some of Rockefeller's and Standard Oil's schemes to sell oil to the Axis from South America? Or was Prescott involved in communicating to the Axis indirectly that new "apparatus" was being installed on US tankers? Prescott, Jr., had officially been exempt from direct military service due to an eye problem, but had served his country by helping install such new security apparatus on US tankers that would make them less vulnerable to submarine attack. He did this work in South America, according to Hyams.

Did Standard take its own independent track in communicating this information to the Axis? Was it concerned that FDR's administration might try to use now less-vulnerable tankers as targets to draw out enemy subs, so that US ships and aircraft could attack them? Though it might be inferred that FDR would have authorized it to be announced that such new apparatus was on the tankers, perhaps Rockefeller, in his contempt for FDR, didn't want to wait for the Axis to know about it, and saw to it that this was communicated early on.

If so, such a message could have been gotten out a little earlier via "channels" including Admiral Kauffman. In the course of his conversation about Prescott, Jr., with Admiral Kauffman, perhaps Bush let him know that his brother was now finished with the development, testing and installation of the new "apparatus." Kauffman could then have seen to it that some "release" of this fact was out "in the air" prior to FDR's planned press release. Was this the "message"?

We may never know, but certainly, several alternate scenarios possible here.

The main thing, is to realize how many possible "undercurrents" there are to this period of time, and throughout our lives.

Go back to "Confirmation of Ad"

Go back to The George Bush-Undercurrents Website