A Review of Vincent Bugliosi's book
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
by Gregg J. Farrier
When I was a boy and started picking out my own clothes, people would remark that I dressed /conservatively. /As the years went by I would espouse “conservative” causes.
I remember a Bible commentary by the late Dr. Wm. Hendriksen that was described as “doctrinal and conservative”.
To conserve something is to keep or save it. Perhaps we could also be “preservative”.
Well, a problem began to come to the forefront of my thinking. What do we really want to preserve or conserve?
Do we want to conserve the various confiscatory taxes?
How about the evolutionary/Marxist textbooks in the schools?
The state schools?
The Federal Reserve System?
Should we preserve the rent that we pay to the government so that they don't force us off “our” land and show us who really owns it, while they use those so-called taxes to do all the immoral things that governments do with our money?
All that is to say that there come times when things must change.
Over the years I've noticed that the so-called liberals are much more adept at finding out the “sins” of our country/society. The problem with the left is that their solutions are just more of the same.
The hippies of the 60s and 70s for example, though a motley bunch in large measure, and not attractive or persuasive to the average American, saw through the prevarications of our government and its war making.
The “conservatives”, however, looked upon them as cowards or traitors. Some were.
The “conservatives” of that time were thinking “status quo”. When confronted with the Viet Nam war and its moral/legal implications the conservative answers were void of any bedrock substance.
Were we threatened by the Viet Nam? Were we stopping communism? Was the war engaged legally?
The answers that I remember were based on obedience to the state. If you didn't support the war effort you were a coward , a communist or a traitor. “My country right or wrong”- “Support the troops - our brave fighting men and women”.
Our government actions brought on the killing of perhaps two million of their people and many thousands of our own people along with the innumerable injured from both sides.
It became like a football game – our team can beat their team. Don't quit or even ask why you are fighting them. We are superior to those “gooks” or “Japs” , Huns or “towel-heads”. Kill them all.
Looking back on our history (not that which you learned in the public school) through the efforts of some courageous writers, some of us are learning that many of our past administrations have put up false flags to push us into wars that we had no business in. Sadly, this has been to the profit of those who pushed us.
I have found the above writing necessary as a preparation for the following.
One could suggest that “the prosecution of the President for murder” is not a “conservative” thing to do.
According to Mr. Bugliosi (The “g” is silent.) his book was looked upon as “too hot to handle” by a “considerable number” of publishers.
It took one Mr. Roger Cooper of the Vanguard Press to show the courage and publish this book.
Such a thing has never been done before. Mr. Bugliosi says it must be done to preserve our “once great country”.
Mr. Bugliosi describes himself as a “moderate” and says that his purpose is a-political. He does attempt such an approach and in large measure succeeds.
However, is “ liberalism” colors much of his rhetoric. This does not weaken his case, because his rhetorical wanderings are just a minor distraction and don't hurt the facts of the case in my view.
Parts 1 and 2 of the book explain the perpetration of what Mr. Bugliosi describes as the crimes of this current administration and show how the case against George W. Bush and members of his administration can be put together.
Let me interject here that we should all be aware of the abusive prosecutor in our country.
Along these lines, we should all read _The Tyranny of Good Intentions_ /_How Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice_/ by Paul Craig Roberts and Lawrence M. Stratton, Three Rivers Press 2008.
Read this book as an antidote to keep you from trusting our justice system too far.
Mr. Bugliosi , a former, very successful prosecutor, sets this forth and presents the evidence. It all looks very thorough and professional to me.
He explains how a large number of prosecutors throughout the country are eligible to take on such a case.
He is very willing to act on a consulting basis.
The charges and evidences he brings are not unique with him.
For example, in May of 2006 Dave Lindorff , a journalist, and Barbara Olshansky an attorney, published _The Case for Impeachment_ _The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office_ , Macmillan Pub..
Their cases are set forth for all to see, but even most of the Democrats won't touch the issue.
Perhaps, they are complicit in these matters.
The conservative talk show hosts (largely shills for the administration) pooh pooh such charges and frankly, in my observations,use deception and talk show host dodges when confronted with the deceptions of this administration. I would hope that nobody would gain any delight in learning or proving that our country's office holders have committed such serious crimes, but they must be looked into. It is indeed a fearful thing.
Mr. Bugliosi is deadly serious and must be taken so. He has said during a congressional hearing,”...at this stage in my career I don't have time for fanciful reveries.” A weakness in the book is Mr. Bugliosi's adherence to the “standard” US history.
He exalts some past presidents of questionable ethics and compares them to the present one whom he loathes.
In this he gives a pass to deceptions and disasters of past administrations. Contemporary authors like Thomas DiLorenzo, Jim Powell and John V. Denson, among others have demonstrated that past administrations have not been truthful either to say the least.
I can remember the late historian Dr. C. Gregg Singer who taught at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary among other places referring to FDR as “that liar”.
FDR needed a war (or so he thought) to get us out of the depression. His tyrannical, socialistic programs were not working.
William Jennings Bryan resigned from the Wilson administration because he knew that Wilson was plotting to enter what we now know as WWI.
Dr. DiLorenzo suggests that when we see Lincoln's picture on a five dollar bill we should think of all the liberties he took away from us.
Another weakness is his making the typical liberal's mistake of thinking that government will solve the present problems – if we could just get the right people in to run things...
The fox will volunteer to guard the hen house for you.
If we as a people had known then what we know now about some past administrations perhaps a prosecutor of Mr. Bugliosi's high caliber would have written a similar book – and prosecuted them.
Part 3 is an impassioned rant describing the horror of the crime and the suffering it began. It is worthy of your time.
There are 72 pages of notes from the chapters, though not easily connected to the direct statements, are worth perusing. I just read them as a chapter occasionally looking back to the appropriate page.
The index is extensive.
I commend it to the reader ,or just go on /youtube.com ,/search out the authors name and listen to him particularly before the congressional committee meeting.
Alright! all you prosecutors , why would you or would you not take this case? Step up!
Now, you attorneys, who would take on and defend such a client?
by Gregg J. Farrier
When I was a boy and started picking out my own clothes, people would remark that I dressed /conservatively. /As the years went by I would espouse “conservative” causes.
I remember a Bible commentary by the late Dr. Wm. Hendriksen that was described as “doctrinal and conservative”.
To conserve something is to keep or save it. Perhaps we could also be “preservative”.
Well, a problem began to come to the forefront of my thinking. What do we really want to preserve or conserve?
Do we want to conserve the various confiscatory taxes?
How about the evolutionary/Marxist textbooks in the schools?
The state schools?
The Federal Reserve System?
Should we preserve the rent that we pay to the government so that they don't force us off “our” land and show us who really owns it, while they use those so-called taxes to do all the immoral things that governments do with our money?
All that is to say that there come times when things must change.
Over the years I've noticed that the so-called liberals are much more adept at finding out the “sins” of our country/society. The problem with the left is that their solutions are just more of the same.
The hippies of the 60s and 70s for example, though a motley bunch in large measure, and not attractive or persuasive to the average American, saw through the prevarications of our government and its war making.
The “conservatives”, however, looked upon them as cowards or traitors. Some were.
The “conservatives” of that time were thinking “status quo”. When confronted with the Viet Nam war and its moral/legal implications the conservative answers were void of any bedrock substance.
Were we threatened by the Viet Nam? Were we stopping communism? Was the war engaged legally?
The answers that I remember were based on obedience to the state. If you didn't support the war effort you were a coward , a communist or a traitor. “My country right or wrong”- “Support the troops - our brave fighting men and women”.
Our government actions brought on the killing of perhaps two million of their people and many thousands of our own people along with the innumerable injured from both sides.
It became like a football game – our team can beat their team. Don't quit or even ask why you are fighting them. We are superior to those “gooks” or “Japs” , Huns or “towel-heads”. Kill them all.
Looking back on our history (not that which you learned in the public school) through the efforts of some courageous writers, some of us are learning that many of our past administrations have put up false flags to push us into wars that we had no business in. Sadly, this has been to the profit of those who pushed us.
I have found the above writing necessary as a preparation for the following.
One could suggest that “the prosecution of the President for murder” is not a “conservative” thing to do.
According to Mr. Bugliosi (The “g” is silent.) his book was looked upon as “too hot to handle” by a “considerable number” of publishers.
It took one Mr. Roger Cooper of the Vanguard Press to show the courage and publish this book.
Such a thing has never been done before. Mr. Bugliosi says it must be done to preserve our “once great country”.
Mr. Bugliosi describes himself as a “moderate” and says that his purpose is a-political. He does attempt such an approach and in large measure succeeds.
However, is “ liberalism” colors much of his rhetoric. This does not weaken his case, because his rhetorical wanderings are just a minor distraction and don't hurt the facts of the case in my view.
Parts 1 and 2 of the book explain the perpetration of what Mr. Bugliosi describes as the crimes of this current administration and show how the case against George W. Bush and members of his administration can be put together.
Let me interject here that we should all be aware of the abusive prosecutor in our country.
Along these lines, we should all read _The Tyranny of Good Intentions_ /_How Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice_/ by Paul Craig Roberts and Lawrence M. Stratton, Three Rivers Press 2008.
Read this book as an antidote to keep you from trusting our justice system too far.
Mr. Bugliosi , a former, very successful prosecutor, sets this forth and presents the evidence. It all looks very thorough and professional to me.
He explains how a large number of prosecutors throughout the country are eligible to take on such a case.
He is very willing to act on a consulting basis.
The charges and evidences he brings are not unique with him.
For example, in May of 2006 Dave Lindorff , a journalist, and Barbara Olshansky an attorney, published _The Case for Impeachment_ _The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office_ , Macmillan Pub..
Their cases are set forth for all to see, but even most of the Democrats won't touch the issue.
Perhaps, they are complicit in these matters.
The conservative talk show hosts (largely shills for the administration) pooh pooh such charges and frankly, in my observations,use deception and talk show host dodges when confronted with the deceptions of this administration. I would hope that nobody would gain any delight in learning or proving that our country's office holders have committed such serious crimes, but they must be looked into. It is indeed a fearful thing.
Mr. Bugliosi is deadly serious and must be taken so. He has said during a congressional hearing,”...at this stage in my career I don't have time for fanciful reveries.” A weakness in the book is Mr. Bugliosi's adherence to the “standard” US history.
He exalts some past presidents of questionable ethics and compares them to the present one whom he loathes.
In this he gives a pass to deceptions and disasters of past administrations. Contemporary authors like Thomas DiLorenzo, Jim Powell and John V. Denson, among others have demonstrated that past administrations have not been truthful either to say the least.
I can remember the late historian Dr. C. Gregg Singer who taught at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary among other places referring to FDR as “that liar”.
FDR needed a war (or so he thought) to get us out of the depression. His tyrannical, socialistic programs were not working.
William Jennings Bryan resigned from the Wilson administration because he knew that Wilson was plotting to enter what we now know as WWI.
Dr. DiLorenzo suggests that when we see Lincoln's picture on a five dollar bill we should think of all the liberties he took away from us.
Another weakness is his making the typical liberal's mistake of thinking that government will solve the present problems – if we could just get the right people in to run things...
The fox will volunteer to guard the hen house for you.
If we as a people had known then what we know now about some past administrations perhaps a prosecutor of Mr. Bugliosi's high caliber would have written a similar book – and prosecuted them.
Part 3 is an impassioned rant describing the horror of the crime and the suffering it began. It is worthy of your time.
There are 72 pages of notes from the chapters, though not easily connected to the direct statements, are worth perusing. I just read them as a chapter occasionally looking back to the appropriate page.
The index is extensive.
I commend it to the reader ,or just go on /youtube.com ,/search out the authors name and listen to him particularly before the congressional committee meeting.
Alright! all you prosecutors , why would you or would you not take this case? Step up!
Now, you attorneys, who would take on and defend such a client?
posted by Chuck Demastus at 8:58 AM
2 Comments:
I had to look to see what the connection was between my grandfather (Hendriksen) and the prosecution of GWB. Interesting. I suspect I would learn and agree with a lot in this book. Thanks.
Hello Dawn,
I am admirer of Your G'father and met him a time or two in Boca around the time he was "hard at work" on his commentary on Luke.
When one wants to conserve Bible doctrine, that is good.
To conserve other things, they must be examined.
Your thoughts on the book would be of interest to me.
GJF
Post a Comment
<< Home