Did an e-zine called "The Web Enquirer" "invent" evidence...

[SDuderstadt]

that George H.W. Bush was somehow involved in the JFk assassination?

Another poster has offered a link to what is claimed to be an article that appeared in "The Nation", written by Joseph McBride, implicating George H.W. Bush in the JFK assassination.

http://inquirer.gn.apc.org/bush_story.html

There's one big problem. The link is not to an "article" at all but, rather, what appears to be some sort of bulletin board on an e-zine called the "The Web Enquirer". Unfortunately for "The Web Enquirer" and, especially, the DU poster who didn't fact-check his "source" and got snookered in the process, "The Nation" website allows you to search the back issues. Entering "Joseph McBride" into the search engine doesn't yield anything remotely like what "The Web Enquirer" or the DU poster claim. More damaging, of course, is that "The Nation" archives the last 14 decades of articles and, as you might suspect, a search of the archives yields nothing remotely like what "The Web Enquirer" or, especially, the DU poster claim. Oops.

http://www.thenation.com/search/apachesolr_search/joseph%20McBride

So, that warrants a question and an observation. Did "The Web Enquirer" manufacture "evidence". More importantly, the moral of the story here is to make sure you fact-check bullshit instead of just uncritically buying it. Promising to "report the bug" just makes it all that more embarrassing.

[SDuderstadt]

1. Kick...n/t

[zappaman]

2. is it possible

that BUSHCO managed to wipe out the online archive for that particular article?
I bet that's what happened and you can't blame Blofish for getting snookered.

[SDuderstadt]

3. I think it's more likely that the "Nation" has never even existed and has...

been "greenscreened" in somehow.

[William Seger]

4. It appears to be legit

It's odd that The Nation's archives don't show those articles, but I tracked down Joseph McBride, who says:

Dear Mr. Seger,

Thanks for writing. Yes, I am the author of those articles.
The easiest way to find them is
to get a copy of Mark Lane's book
PLAUSIBLE DENIAL. The two
articles appear in an appendix. The
book was a bestseller, and new
and used copies can be purchased
through Amazon.

Best wishes,

Joseph McBride

[SDuderstadt]

5. Well, I have that book...

although it's packed away right now. I should be getting to that box in the next day or so.

This still makes little sense. Why don't they appear in the "Nation"s" archives? Why would they be "indexed" in Mark Lane's book?

Thanks for the info, WS.

[Octafish]

6. Told you.

Dude.

[SDuderstadt]

7. You didn't say anything about a book, dude...

and now this is McBride saying it. For all we know, either McBride or Lane or both fabricated it. I want to know why it doesn't appear in the "Nation" archives and why nothing shows up when you do a Google search. You would insist on the same if the shoe was on the other foot. I also don't buy your story that you remembered having read the hardcopy version of the article and that you would recall the citation. Also, your initial reference to it, which you claimed to be a link to the article itself, was actually a link to where it was referenced in the "Web Enquirer".

You're not off the hook yet, dude.

[OnTheOtherHand]

8. oh, y'know...

What I entered into Google just now: THE NATION, July 16/23, 1988 (no quotation marks)

The first hit:

http://www.aarclibrary.org/notices/George_Bush_CIA_Operative_by_Joseph_McBride.pdf

Sometimes online archives aren't very reliable -- bad OCR or whatever. ETA: Given the provenance of this, I guess I can't rule out that the issue was spiked after this fax was sent, although I don't think that makes any sense. I think it would already have been in the mail (and, anyway, what would be worth spiking?). It's too bad that the Nation archive doesn't have a browse feature.

[SDuderstadt]

9. Finally...

thanks, OTOH.

Some questions remain, of course. Why doesn't it show in "The Nation" archives? More importantly, why did Octafish initially misrepresent his link as landing on the "Nation" article rather than properly cite it as leading to the mish-mash on the "Web Enquirer"?

Also, what do you mean by the provenance of the fax? Do you think it's possible the article never ran?

[OnTheOtherHand]

11. I'll spell that out, for what it's worth

As you know, but for the benefit of anyone out there who is trying to avoid downloading a PDF or whatever, I linked to a three-page PDF of a fax dated 7/7/88, apparently from the offices of The Nation "for Joe McBride," that shows the cover of the July 16/23, 1988 Nation. That's a pretty unusual way to source an article.

So, yes, I was playing with the idea that the article was readied for the front page but didn't actually run. It doesn't make much sense to me (especially since Octafish remembers reading it at the time -- he could be remembering that wrongly, but I have no reason to think so). I think it's more plausible that the article ran but is missing from the archive.

I'm giving Octafish a pass on this one. It wasn't quite right to say "Here's the article, hosted by another website," but that link does include quite extensive and apparently accurate excerpts from the article.

[SDuderstadt]

10. I see what you mean now by...

the "provenance" of the article and, yes, I don't trust them. In another post, I addressed the issue of the JFK assassination conspiracy theory community "echo chamber" and, frankly I don't trust the involvement of either Fensterwald or Lesar. The assassination "community" is not exactly known for their attention to pesky little things like detail and, has been known, on numerous occasions, to outright fabricate materials.

I'd still like to know from "The Nation" why the article(s) is not indexed in their archives.

[spooked911]

12. I'm not surprised if "The Nation" censored something like that.

Lots of damaging articles disappear from archives. Why would that be at all surprising at this point?

This is a decent round-up of the case for Bush at the JFK assn:
http://www.tomflocco.com/fs/FbiMemoPhotoLinkBushJfk.htm

[SDuderstadt]

13. "tomflocco.com"

Nevermind, Spooked.

[spooked911]

16. typical "shoot the messenger" response

oh well

[SDuderstadt]

17. Tom Flocco is...

an idiot, dude.

[zappaman]

14. "Lots of damaging articles disappear from archives."

care to back that claim up?
I won't hold my breath.

[spooked911]

15. one example

here:
http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2008/08/secret-spies-everywhere.html

The Chicago Tribune story (linked in the post) has disappeared.

Try searching for it.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/

Anyway, why on earth is this even a controversial point?

[SDuderstadt]

18. TPTB are...

screwing with you again, dude.

[Octafish]

19. Wrong, as always, zappaman.

Fire destroyed many of Cheney's records as veep.

Securities and Exchange Commission destroyed records documenting George H.W. Bush's business dealings.

FBI Agent Hosty destroyed a note written by Lee Harvey Oswald threatening to "blow up the FBI" a few hours after Oswald was murdered while in police custody.

There are more examples, but you should learn to look for them. Until then, you'll stand out with your perfect record of never once providing a post worth reading, zappaman.

[SDuderstadt]

20. Did you actually read Z-man's post, dude?

He was talking about articles disappearing from archives. Not about an accidental fire destroying records. Not about an FBI agent destroying an inculpatory note to avoid Hoover's wrath.

And, of course, your other "example" is from one of your typical goofy CT bullshit "sources" that doesn't document the claim in any way. As usual, you just buy it uncritically and present it as fact. And you wonder why many of us here do not take you seriously. Do you actually understand what research is?

[zappaman]

21. Bloviate all you want, Octafish

Your post is just another example of your futility.
How many years now?
Tick...tick...tick

[Ghost in the Machine]

22. SPAM all you want, zappaman

It's all you've got, because you have proven too many times that you are unable to contribute anything imtelligent, or relevant, to this website. You have nothing but nusiance/distraction tactics. You're an embarrassment to us all.

[zappaman]

23. LOL

:rofl:
bring on your evidence, ghost!
only then will I stop laughing at you and your brethren.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zappaman]

25. link to them all

Let us know when you bust the coverups!
In the meantime, keep posting debunked nonsense!
It makes me laugh when you guys just post the same bullshit over and over and over and over and over again!
:rofl:
Like dogs chasing their tails!
I'll be happy to eat crow and then vanish forever once you prove the conspiracy.
Any timetable for that?
It's been 47 years...not long enough?
Tick...tick...tick

[Ghost in the Machine]

26. I see reading comprehension isn't one of your strong points, either..

This isn't about any coverups, conspiracies or anything else other than your inability to post anything intelligent or relevant to any discussion. Thanks for playing though, too bad you don't even rate a booby prize for your participation. . . bless your little heart.

[zappaman]

27. It's not about conspiracies

Huh...I thought it was in the 9/11 section...my bad.
Bless your little heart and you DO rate a booby prize.

[Ghost in the Machine]

28. Thanks for proving your lack of reading comprehension skills yet again..

As long as you're happy being part of the nusiance/distraction brigade, an embarrassment to yourself and this site, and a member of the Inane Clown Posse there's nothing I can do about it.. except point and laugh at you.

Should you ever strive to become a productive, relevant member of this site and post something intelligent or relevant, please PM me with a link to the post so I can congratulate you on your choice.. and maybe even eat a little crow of my own.

It might benefit you to to look at some posts by jberryhill, Flatulo, AZCat and William Seger. At least they engage in intelligent debate, even though we disagree on almost everything, and they put their points across in clear, coherent manners. You? You got nothing, pal...

[zappaman]

29. Tell us more about the aliens

Would fit nicely in this forum.
Or maybe demonstrate some more of your lack of understanding about JFK's head wound.
I guess Seger and the rest suffer fools, like yourself, more easily than I do.
So, until you and the rest of your buddies come up with any real evidence...whether it be aliens, "no-planes" or all the people who killed JFK(suspects number what...over 300?), I will continue to
:rofl:

[Ghost in the Machine]

30. There's an alien claiming responsibility...

.. for eating your brain. He said he thought it was a tic tac...

Please link to anything I have discussed about JFK's head wound..

Yeah, they suffer fools alright, they put up with you...

I see that your retention skills suck as bad as, if not worse than, your comprehension skills because I've already told you that I don't give a flying fuck what you :rofl: at because you're irrelevant here. Straight up nuisance/distraction, nothing more nothing less. Run along now, little boy, and let the grownups talk...

Thanks,. .