Kitty, the Bush family and Hitler

Interesting, isn't it, how the CBS debacle knocked all mention of Kitty Kelley's book off the radar screen?

I've been slowly skimming parts of the volume, and although her style sometimes annoys me -- she goes into her mind-reading act far too readily -- the book is more responsibly-written than advance word had led me to believe. Contrary to rumor, she does NOT mention the Paul Bonacci imbroglio. If this site had a soundtrack, you'd be hearing a relieved sigh.

She moderates her discussion of Prescott Bush's much-ballyhooed links to the Nazis. Those links certainly did exist, but she points out an alleged date discrepancy in the work of John Loftus, who has implied that Prescott ran afoul of the Trading With the Enemy Act. Prescott, says Kelley, ended his association with the Union Bank in 1940, thereby avoiding legal troubles. She also believes that Prescott's motivations were purely financial, not ideological.

Today's Guardian, however, provides a few facts that should put the Kelley version into rewrite:

His [Prescott's] business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.

Those of you wishing to look further into these issues should click here, where you can find all sorts of nice documentation. John Buchanan, proprietor of that site, deserves our thanks.

For my part, I'm too busy dealing with present woes to suss out every detail of the skullduggery surrounding the Bush dynasty and the Hitlerites. I would note, though, that Loftus (whose books may be familiar to some readers) arouses mixed feelings in me. He too often relies on unnamed sources within the intelligence community. Worse, his feelings toward Israel run toward gushing adulation. ("It's the only democracy in the Middle East!" Yes, John -- but only for those who belong to the "right" race.) I've heard at least one recorded interview where he spoke quite highly of W.

Hm...I seem to have drifted from my initial subject, haven't I? Well, I'll speak further of Kelley later. Initial signs, though, look good.

(Note: This post was slightly re-written after I discovered the afore-cited Guardian article.)