DOES IT MATTER
that Kerry is an alumni of Skull and Bones?
In an interview with Pacifica Radio's Democracy Now, Alexandria
Robbins, who is the author of "Secrets of the Tomb: Skull and Bones, the
Ivy League, and the Hidden Paths of Power" who was formerly on the
Washington, DC staff of The New Yorker magazine
said:
(* Alexandra Robbins was also the first reporter to publish George W
Bush's transcript from Yale when he was a student there - which was also
posted to PNEWS-L)
"George W. Bush has put several Bonesmen into prestigious positions,
including Bill Donaldson, head of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, and the number two and number three officials in the U.S.
Justice Department. The general counsel of the Office of Homeland
Security, Ed McNally, and the Secretary of Defense's representative to
Europe are both Skull and Bones
members."
Amy Goodman of Democracy Now pointed out that the mainstream media is not
reporting that BOTH Kerry and Bush are members of this very secret
society. Could it be that Bonesman have too much influence in the
mainstream media and their ownership extends to the information that we
get? I know the answer. Do you?
When a spokesperson and representative of the Kerry campaign was asked
about Kerry's membership in the society by Democracy Now, the response was
blunt.
The spokesman said:
"John Kerry has absolutely nothing to say on that subject."
"On Democracy Now, Robbins described Kerry's attempts to recruit Jacob
Weissberg to Skull and Bones in 1986. Weissberg, editor of "Slate"
magazine was shocked at Kerry's attempt to recruit him in Kerry's
senate office in Washington. Weissberg, at the time an intern for the
"New Republic," rejected the offer, pointing out the Skull and Bones
was a longtime, elitist white men's club." [Indian Country Today
(Lakota Times); 2/4/2004; Brenda Norrell]
IS KERRY JUST LIKE BUSH?
Secret societies aside, suppose it is all just conspiracy theory???
There is no proof that these rich white guys have done anything
except support each other -- like most other fraternities have done for
fellow club members. Or have they?
Sure he voted for NAFTA, which is better for big business. It is true he
has supported "corporate-friendly trade pacts" and he even at one time
questioned affirmative action -- but did support it. He voted against the
war: Gulf War I, but for Gulf War II. He supported the war in Kosovo,
which now there are doubts being raised that this was really a good thing
and a result of intentional slanders against the
Serbs.
It is true too that like all the other Democratic senators he has
accepted contributions from special interests. He had 19 years in the
senate to do a lot of things and vote both ways on many, many issues
-- which works well in the Bush ads to discredit candidate Kerry.
But, he has also consistently voted to favor choice - for abortion rights
and the right environmental policies, and against dispoiling the Alaskian
wilderness to drill there for oil, something that Bush wants to do. He has
voted to support higher fuel economy standards. He has supported a minimum
wage. He has voted with those who are trying to reverse global warming,
something Bush denies even exists.
Can I vote for another Bonesman because I dislike Bush more than I
like Kerry and will it be enough to change the direction of America even
ever so slightly? Shouldn't Kerry resign from Skull and Bones? Can members
resign?
I read his autobiography. I was not that impressed. It was rather generic.
And writing this I find myself as uncertain as some of Kerry's policies.
Can I vote for anyone who says he will stay the course in a war that was
wrong then and is still wrong and to stay will not mean less life lost; it
will most assuredly lead to more. Has he forgotten what he said about
Vietnam? Who can ask anyone to be the last person to die in a bad war?
Kerry courting the Cuban vote says he will be tough on Cuba. We don't need
to be tough on Cuba, we need to open up more to Cuba and trade with Castro
and let Cubans and Americans travel freely between one of our closest
neighbors. Kerry, the opportunist, seems to say, just what he thinks other
people want him to say, to win votes from the Cuban-American community.
It is true that Kerry was instrumental in investigating Ronald Reagan's
involvement with the Contras and drug trafficking and reported that
"individuals who provided support for the contras were involved in drug
trafficking...and elements of the contras themselves knowingly received
financial and material assistance from drug traffickers." That was a good
thing.
It is true that his wife, the Heinz heiress, was a Republican. That was
bad. It is true she switched party affiliation and is now a Democrat. That
is good.
It is true that Kerry also investigated and discovered that BCCI, the Bank
of Credit and Commerce International, mostly controlled by the ruling
family of Abu Dhabi, facilitated drug trafficking and money laundering,
which included connections and involvement with drug dealers and
terrorists and arms dealers and was connected to prominent politicians.
That was good. It was bad that it took so long and 250,000 creditors in 40
countries had to lose billions of dollars.
It is true that Kerry also investigated Vietnam POWs and MIAs. and in
spite of all the conspiracies and mostly right wing claims that prisoners
were still being held, none were -- but the claim prevented normalization
of relations with Vietnam. Kerry's report that no POWS/MIAs were being
held ended that and today there are relations with Vietnam. That was a
good thing.
It is true that in the Senate, Kerry has voted both the Liberal and the
Conservative side of many issues. Is that reason not to vote for him -- or
is it a problem because he is a Bonesman? If that society is so secret,
how do we know the Bonesman are not deciding who and what other Bonesman
propose, support and dispose of in politics and if policies are set by
them and are favorable to the Bonesman in lieu of those who voted for him?
How do we know that?
Here is what he says about being a progressive:
"While we can't go back to the exact policies of the Clinton years--as a
progressive, I believe we should always be looking forward and embracing
change---it is hard to believe that most people wouldn't want to go back
to the kind of results they helped achieve. Instead, in the name of
ideology and on behalf of selfish interests, the Bush administration has
been systematically dismantling just about everything government
accomplished during the 1990s; environmental protection, international
displomacy, substantial investments in basic scientific and technological
research, fiscal discipline, and the commitment to a fairer society of
opportunity for all. Not surprisingly, its policies have begun to have
seriously alarming consequences; a sluggish economy, rising crime, the
largest budget deficits in history, and the weakening of our alliances and
standing around the world. Another four years of the Bush agenda,
especially if there is a Republican Congress, will take this country so
far off track that it could take a generation to put things right again."
(John Kerry in his autobiography, "A Call to Service" 2003)
Is it enough?
Hank Roth
http://pnews.org/
---
/ o o \ PNEWS Topic Specific Portals (Vortals)
===OO=====OO=================================================
http://pnews.org/vortal/ New World disOrder and Myth Busters
http://g0lem.net/vortal/ Insane Planet and Wacko World
http://g0lem.net/portal/ Bad-Ass Truth and TheGolemsPortal
http://pnews.org/portal/ Naked Truth and PNEWS Portal
=============================================================
\_/ \_/
