Evidence of Russian Arms in Iraq

I don't deny the anthrax the CDC supplied the Iraqis. I also don't deny that we supplied them with chemicals that had dual-use properties. I know it happened and it was a big mistake. But for you to imply that we and we alone armed Iraq is not correct. In fact, our support of Saddam's regime was lukewarm at best.

 

Thes are quotes from the info that Sam Fisher posted above.

December, 1982. Hughes Aircraft ships 60 Defender helicopters to Iraq. (9)

1982-1988. Defense Intelligence Agency provides detailed information for Iraq on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for air strikes and bomb damage assessments. (4)

November, 1983. A National Security Directive states that the U.S would do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq from losing its war with Iran. (1) (15)

November, 1983. Banca Nazionale del Lavoro of Italy and its Branch in Atlanta begin to funnel $5 billion in unreported loans to Iraq. Iraq, with the blessing and official approval of the US government, purchased computer controlled machine tools, computers, scientific instruments, special alloy steel and aluminum, chemicals, and other industrial goods for Iraq's missile, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs. (14)

October, 1983. The Reagan Administration begins secretly allowing Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt to transfer United States weapons, including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, and bombs to Iraq. These shipments violated the Arms Export Control Act. (16)

 

<i>National Security Archive</i>?

I seldom see people read & use articles from there.

Some really deep topics in that place.

 

The best source of information on how the government actually works. If not for the Freedom of Information Act, these sleezeballs could rewrite history ala Kissinger in their personal memoirs and none of us would know any better.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/the_archive.html

 

This statment is a perfect illustration of just why I've about given up debating these issues in here; because so many people are so intent on seeing what they want to see that they repeatedly start with a conclusion and try to fit in the facts to meet that objective...as in this case bama starts with the conclusion that the great and good US wouldn't supply arms to enemies of friends, completely in contradiction with fact, in which case US arms dealers have supplied more arms to anyone, friends, enemies, enemies of friends and friends of enemies than anyone else on the planet.

And you don't need a Rosetta Stone to figure this stuff out, it's on record. Hell, once we adjusted our perspective on supplying arms to Nazis post-war, we even had a lengthy series of trials and convictions for " war profiteering." As with the fact that we initially refused to help our European Allies until we had no choice, the fact that we were the largest foreign supplier of arms to the Nazis...including during combat with the British and French, with whom we had Treaties of Mutual Protection which we were ignoring...is among many people with Red, Whte and Blue sunglasses simply choose not to recognize as fact, or shrug off as a 'mistake'...


Here are just a few sources which are legion, and easy to find even for someone as inefficient with the internet as myself...


The URL for this article is www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/randy/swas1.htm


Nazis in the attic


By Randy Davis

www.tenc.net [emperors-clothes]

Documented Evidence of a Secret Business and Political Alliance Between the U.S. "Establishment" and the Nazis, Before, During and After World War II, up to the Present.

U.S. CORPORATIONS AND THE NAZIS

"A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime. . . .

"Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there."

-- William E. Dodd, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, 1937. (1)

A large volume of documentary evidence exists that reveals that many of the richest, most powerful men in the United States, and the giant corporations they controlled, were secretly allied with the Nazis, both before and during World War II, even after war was declared between Germany and America. This alliance began with U.S. corporate investment during the reconstruction of post-World War I Germany in the 1920s and, years later, included financial, industrial and military aid to the Nazis.

On the pages which follow we will review which prominent Americans and corporations were involved, what aid and comfort they gave our nation's enemies - treasonable offenses during time of war, and investigations into these matters which produced evidence of a US/Nazi corporate conspiracy TO BRING A FASCIST STATE TO AMERICA, and eliminate competition in the industrial raw materials market in order to force world-wide dependance on oil-based petrochemicals.

WILLIAM RANDOLPH HEARST

According to journalist George Seldes:

". . . Hitler had the support of the most widely circulated magazine in history, 'Readers Digest,' as well as nineteen big-city newspapers and one of the three great American news agencies, the $220-million Hearst press empire.

". . . William Randolph Hearst, Sr., . . . was the lord of all the press lords in the United States. The millions who read the Hearst newspapers and magazines and saw Hearst newsreels in the nation's moviehouses had their minds poisoned by Hitler propaganda.

"It was . . . disclosed first to President Roosevelt (by Ambassador Dodd) almost on the day it happened, in September 1934, and it is detailed in the book 'Ambassador Dodd's Diary,' published in 1941, and again in libel-proof documents on file in the courts of the state of New York. William E. Dodd, professor of history (at the University of Chicago), told me about the Hearst sell-out . . .

"According to Ambassador Dodd, Hearst came to take the waters at Bad Nauheim in September 1934, and Dodd somehow learned immediately that Hitler had sent two of his most trusted Nazi propagandists, Hanfstangel and Rosenberg, to ask Hearst how Nazism could present a better image in the United States. When Hearst went to Berlin later in the month, he was taken to see Hitler."

Seldes reports that a $400,000 a year deal was struck between Hearst and Hitler, and signed by Doctor Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister. "Hearst," continues Seldes, "completely changed the editorial policy of his nineteen daily newspapers the same month he got the money."

In the court documents filed on behalf of Dan Gillmor, publisher of a magazine named "Friday," in response to a lawsuit by Hearst, under item 61, he states: "Promptly after this said visit with Adolf Hitler and the making of said arrangements. . . said plaintiff, William Randolph Hearst, instructed all Hearst press correspondents in Germany, including those of INS (Hearst's International News Service) to report happenings in Germany only in a friendly' manner. All of such correspondents reporting happenings in Germany accurately and without friendliness, sympathy and bias for the actions of the then German government, were transferred elsewhere, discharged, or forced to resign. . . ."

In the late 1930s, Seldes recounts, when "several sedition indictments (were brought by) the Department of Justice . . . against a score or two of Americans, the defendants included an unusually large minority of newspaper men and women, most of them Hearst employees." (2)

ANDREW MELLON

"Thurman Arnold, as assistant district attorney of the United States, his assistant, Norman Littell, and several Congressional investigations, have produced incontrovertible evidence that some of our biggest monopolies entered into secret agreements with the Nazi cartels and divided the world up among them," states Seldes in his book, "Facts and Fascism," published in 1943. "Most notorious of all was Alcoa, the Mellon-Davis-Duke monopoly which is largely responsible for the fact America did not have the aluminum with which to build airplanes before and after Pearl Harbor, while Germany had an unlimited supply." (3)

Alcoa sabotage of American war production had already cost the U.S. "10,000 fighters or 1,665 bombers," according to Congressman Pierce of Oregon speaking in May 1941, because of "the effort to protect Alcoa's monopolistic position. . ."

"If America loses this war," said Secretary of the Interior (Harold) Ickes, June 26, 1941, "it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America."

"By its cartel agreement with I.G. Farben, controlled by Hitler," writes Seldes, "Alcoa sabotaged the aluminum program of the U.S. air force. The Truman Committee (on National Defense, chaired by then- Senator Harry S. Truman in 1942) heard testimony that Alcoa's representative, A.H. Bunker, $1-a-year head of the aluminum section of O.P.M., prevented work on our $600,000,000 aluminum expansion program." (4)

DU PONT AND GENERAL MOTORS

General Motors is included here because, by 1929, the Du Pont corporation had acquired controlling interest in, and had interlocking directorships with, General Motors.

Irenee du Pont, "the most imposing and powerful member of the clan," according to biographer and historian Charles Higham, "was obsessed with Hitler's principles.

"He keenly followed the career of the future Fuhrer in the 1920s, and on September 7, 1926, in a speech to the American Chemical Society, he advocated a race of supermen, to be achieved by injecting special drugs into them in boyhood to make their characters to order." Higham's book on this subject, "Trading with the Enemy: An Expose of the Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949," is highly recommended.

Du Pont's anti-Semitism "matched that of Hitler" and, in 1933, the Du Ponts "began financing native fascist groups in America . . ." one of which Higham identifies as the American Liberty League: "a Nazi organization whipping up hatred of blacks and Jews," and the "love of Hitler."

"Financed . . . to the tune of $500,000 the first year, the Liberty League had a lavish thirty-one-room office in New York, branches in twenty-six colleges, and fifteen subsidiary organizations nationwide that distributed fifty million copies of its Nazi pamphlets. . . .

"The Du Ponts' fascistic behavior was seen in 1936, when Irenee du Pont used General Motors money to finance the notorious Black Legion. This terrorist organization had as its purpose the prevention of automobile workers from unionizing. The members wore hoods and black robes, with skulls and crossbones. They fire-bombed union meetings, murdered union organizers, often by beating them to death, and dedicated their lives to destroying Jews and communists. They linked to the Ku Klux Klan. . . . It was brought out that at least fifty people, many of them blacks, had been butchered by the Legion." (5)

Du Pont support of Hitler extended into the very heart of the Nazi war machine as well, according to Higham, and several other researchers: "General Motors, under the control of the Du Pont family of Delaware, played a part in collaboration" with the Nazis.

"Between 1932 and 1939, bosses of General Motors poured $30 million into I.G. Farben plants . . ." Further, Higham informs us that by "the mid-1930s, General Motors was committed to full-scale production of trucks, armored cars, and tanks in Nazi Germany." (6)

Researchers Morton Mintz and Jerry S. Cohen, in their book, "Power Inc.," describe the Du Pont-GM-Nazi relationship in these terms:

". . . In 1929, (Du Pont-controlled) GM acquired the largest automobile company in Germany, Adam Opel, A.G. This predestined the subsidiary to become important to the Nazi war effort. In a heavily documented study presented to the Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly in February 1974, Bradford C. Snell, an assistant subcommittee counsel, wrote:

"'GM's participation in Germany's preparation for war began in 1935. That year its Opel subsidiary cooperated with the Reich in locating a new heavy truck facility at Brandenburg, which military officials advised would be less vulnerable to enemy air attacks. During the succeeding years, GM supplied the Wehrmact with Opel "Blitz" trucks from the Brandenburg complex. For these and other contributions to (the Nazis) wartime preparations, GM's chief executive for overseas operations (James Mooney) was awarded the Order of the German Eagle (first class) by Adolf Hitler.'"

Du Pont-GM Nazi collaboration, according to Snell, included the participation of Standard Oil of New Jersey (now Exxon) in one, very important arrangement. GM and Standard Oil of New Jersey formed a joint subsidiary with the giant Nazi chemical cartel, I.G. Farben, named Ethyl G.m.b.H. (now Ethyl, Inc.) which, according to Snell: "provided the mechanized German armies with synthetic tetraethyl fuel (leaded gas). During 1936-39, at the urgent request of Nazi officials who realized that Germany's scarce petroleum reserves would not satisfy war demands, GM and Exxon joined with German chemical interests in the erection of the lead-tetraethyl plants. According to captured German records, these facilities contributed substantially to the German war effort: 'The fact that since the beginning of the war we could produce lead-tetraethyl is entirely due to the circumstances that, shortly before, the Americans (Du Pont, GM and Standard Oil) had presented us with the production plants complete with experimental knowledge. Without lead-tetraethyl the present method of warfare would be unthinkable.'" (7)

At about the same time the Du Ponts were serving the Nazi cause in Germany, they were involved in a Fascist plot to overthrow the United States government.

"Along with friends of the Morgan Bank and General Motors," in early 1934, writes Higham, "certain Du Pont backers financed a coup d'etat that would overthrow the President with the aid of a $3 million-funded army of terrorists . . ." The object was to force Roosevelt "to take orders from businessmen as part of a fascist government or face the alternative of imprisonment and execution . . . "

Higham reports that "Du Pont men allegedly held an urgent series of meetings with the Morgans," to choose who would lead this "bizarre conspiracy." "They finally settled on one of the most popular soldiers in America, General Smedly Butler of Pennsylvania." Butler was approached by "fascist attorney" Gerald MacGuire (an official of the American Legion), who attempted to recruit Butler into the role of an American Hitler.

"Butler was horrified," but played along with MacGuire until, a short time later, he notified the White House of the plot. Roosevelt considered having "the leaders of the houses of Morgan and Du Pont" arrested, but feared that "it would create an unthinkable national crisis in the midst of a depression and perhaps another Wall Street crash." Roosevelt decided the best way to defuse the plot was to expose it, and leaked the story to the press.

"The newspapers ran the story of the attempted coup on the front page, but generally ridiculed it as absurd and preposterous." But an investigation by the Congressional Committee on Un-American Activities - 74th Congress, first session, House of Representatives, Investigation of Nazi and other propaganda - was begun later that same year.

"It was four years," continues Higham, "before the committee dared to publish its report in a white paper that was marked for 'restricted circulation.' They were forced to admit that 'certain persons made an attempt to establish a fascist organization in this country . . . (The) committee was able to verify all the pertinent statements made by General Butler.' This admission that the entire plan was deadly in intent was not accompanied by the imprisonment of anybody. Further investigations disclosed that over a million people had been guaranteed to join the scheme and that the arms and munitions necessary would have been supplied by Remington, a Du Pont subsidiary." (8)

The names of important individuals and groups involved in the conspiracy were suppressed by the committee, but later revealed by Seldes, Philadelphia Record reporter Paul French, and Jules Archer, author of the book, "The Plot to Seize the White House." Included were John W. Davis (attorney for the J.P. Morgan banking group), Robert Sterling Clark (Wall Street broker and heir to the Singer sewing machine fortune), William Doyle (American Legion official), and the American Liberty League (backed by executives from J.P. Morgan and Co., Rockefeller interests, E.F. Hutton, and Du Pont-controlled General Motors). (9)

THE US/NAZI CARTEL AGREEMENT

"On November 23, 1937," states Higham, "representatives of General Motors held a secret meeting in Boston with Baron Manfred von Killinger, who was . . . in charge of West Coast espionage (for the Nazis), and Baron von Tipplekirsch, Nazi consul general and Gestapo leader in Boston. This group signed a joint agreement showing total commitment to the Nazi cause for the indefinite future. . . ." (10)

Seldes describes the plotters as "the great owners and rulers of America who planned world domination through political and military Fascism" including "several leading American industrialists, members of the Congress of the United States, and representatives of large business and political organizations . . ."

He obtained the text of the agreement, and published it in his newsletter, "In Fact," on July 13, 1942. The plan "goes much further than the mere cartel conspiracies of Big Business of both countries," writes Seldes, "because it has political clauses and points to a bigger conspiracy of money and politicians such as helped betray Norway and France and other lands to the Nazi machine. The most powerful fortress in America is the production monopolies, but its betrayal would involve, as it did in France, the participation of some of the most powerful figures of the political as well as the industrial world." (11)

STANDARD OIL OF NEW JERSEY (Now Exxon)

"On February 27, 1942," according to Higham, "Arnold, with documents stuffed under his arms, . . . strode into the lion's den of Standard at 30 Rockefeller Plaza. Just behind him were Secretary of the Navy Franklin Knox and Secretary of the Army Henry L. Stimson." They confronted Standard official William Farish and "Arnold sharply laid down his charges" that "by continuing to favor Hitler in rubber deal and patent arrangements," Standard Oil "had acted against the interests of the American government . . . suggested a fine of $1.5 million and a consent decree whereby Standard would turn over for the duration all the patents" in question.

"Farish rejected the proposal on the spot. He pointed out that Standard" was also selling the U.S. a "high percentage" of the fuel being used by the Army, Navy, and Air Force "making it possible for America to win the war. Where would America be without it?"

Blackmail? Yes, says Higham. And effective. Arnold was finally reduced to asking the oil company official "to what Standard Oil would agree. After all, there had to be at least token punishment. . . . Arnold, Stimson, and Knox soon realized they had no power to compare with that of Standard."

The price Standard Oil "agreed" to pay for its crime? A modest fine of a few thousand dollars divided up among ten defendants. "Farish paid $1,000, or a quarter of one week's salary, for having betrayed America."

In New Jersey, charges of "criminal conspiracy with the enemy" were filed against Standard, then "dropped in return for Standard releasing its patents and paying the modest fine." But Arnold, and his ally, Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes, weren't finished with Standard Oil just yet. They approached Senator Truman, chairman of the Senate Special Committee Investigating the National Defense Program. "With great enthusiasm Give 'em Hell Harry embarked on a series of hearings in March 1942, in order to disclose the truth about Standard."

Between the 26th and the 28th of March, 1942, Arnold "produced documents showing that Standard and Farben in Germany had literally carved up the world markets, with oil and chemical monopolies all over the map," according to Higham. (12)

Mintz and Cohen describe the confrontation:

"Four months after the United States entered World War II, the Justice Department obtained an indictment of Exxon and its principal officers for having made arrangements, starting in the late 1920s with I.G. Farben involving patent sharing and division of world markets. Jersey Standard agreed not to develop processes for the manufacture of synthetic rubber; in exchange, Farben agreed not to compete in the American petroleum market. After war broke out in Europe, but before the attack on Pearl Harbor, executives of Standard Oil and Farben, at a meeting in Holland, established a 'modus vivendi' for continuing the arrangements in event of war between the United States and Germany - although the arrangements interfered with the ability of the United States to make synthetic rubber desperately needed after it entered the war in December 1941. Rather than face a criminal trial, Exxon and the indicted executives entered no-contest pleas - the legal equivalent of guilty pleas - and were fined the minor sums which were the maximum amounts permitted by law. A few days later, on March 26, 1942, the Senate Special Committee Investigating the National Defense Program held a hearing at which Thurman Arnold, chief of the Antitrust Division, put into the record documents on which the (criminal) indictment had been based, including a memo from a Standard Oil official on the 'modus vivendi' agreed to in Holland. After the hearing, the committee chairman, Harry S. Truman, characterized the arrangements as treasonable." (13)

Another source book on this subject of US / Nazi corporate activities is "The Secret War Against the Jews," by Mark Aarons and John Loftus. Here is their version of the events:

"Before the war Standard of New Jersey had forged a synthetic oil and rubber cartel with the Nazi-controlled I.G. Farben," which "worked well until the United States joined the war in 1941. . . . Next to the Rockefellers, I.G. Farben owned the largest share of stock in Standard Oil of New Jersey. Among other things, Standard had provided Farben with its synthetic rubber patents and technical knowledge, while Farben had kept its patents to itself, under strict instructions from the Nazi government."

Evidence which Thurman Arnold turned over to the Truman Committee, which Truman would declare "treasonous," included "Standard's 1939 letter renewing its agreement, which made it clear that the Rockefellers' company was prepared to work with the Nazis whether their own government was at war with the Third Reich or not. Truman's Senate Committee on the National Defense was outraged and began to probe into the whole scandalous arrangement, much to the discomfort of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Suddenly, however, the whole matter was dropped.

"There was a reason for Rockefeller's escape: blackmail. According to the former intelligence officers we interviewed on this point, the blackmail was simple and powerful: The Dulles brothers (John Foster, later Secretary of State, and Allen, later director of the CIA) had one of their clients threaten to interrupt the U.S. oil supply during wartime."

When confronted by Arnold on the Standard - Farben arrangement "Standard executives made it clear that the entire U.S. war effort was fueled by their oil and it could be stopped. . . . The American government had no choice but to go along if it wanted to win the war." (14)

July 13, 1944, Ralph W. Gallagher, attorney for Standard Oil, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government's seizure of the contested patents. "On November 7, 1945, Judge Charles E. Wyzanski gave his verdict," according to Higham. "He decided that the government had been entitled to seize the patents. Gallagher appealed. On September 22, 1947, Judge Charles Clark delivered the final word on the subject. He said, 'Standard Oil can be considered an enemy national in view of its relationships with I.G. Farben after the United States and Germany had become active enemies.' The appeal was denied." (15)

One aspect of this Standard - I.G. Farben relationship, revealed in testimony during the Patents Committee hearings, chaired by Senator Homer T. Bone in May 1942, is of interest to those who seek direct evidence of a conspiracy by big oil companies to suppress development of synthetic substitutes to petrochemical products such as industrial chemicals, aircraft lubricants and fuel, all of which can be made from hemp:

"On May 6th, John R. Jacobs, Jr., of the Attorney General's department, testified that Standard had interfered with the American explosives industry by blocking the use of a method of producing synthetic ammonia. As a result of its deals with Farben, the United States had been unable to get the use of this vital process even after Pearl Harbor. Also, the United States had been restricted in techniques of producing hydrogen from natural gas and from obtaining paraflow, a product used for airplane lubrication at high altitudes. . . ."

On August 7th, "Texas oil operator C.R. Starnes appeared to testify that Standard had blocked him at every turn in his efforts to produce synthetic rubber after Pearl Harbor. . . ."

On August 12th, "John R. Jacobs reappeared in an Army private's uniform (he had been inducted the day before) to bring up another disagreeable matter: Standard had also, in league with Farben, restricted production of methanol, a wood alcohol that was sometimes used as motor fuel." (16)

The restriction against methanol production apparently did not apply to the Nazis, however. "As late as April 1943," Higham reveals, "General Motors in Stockholm (Sweden) was reported as trading with the enemy. . . . Further documents show that, as with Ford, repairs on German army trucks and conversion from gasoline to wood-gasoline production were being handled by GM in Switzerland." (17)

The use of hemp as a source of methanol was known to the Nazis.

The Nazis considered hemp a vital war material that could be used to produce methanol, or "wood gas," at the same time, in 1943, that Du Pont-controlled General Motors in Switzerland was "converting from gasoline to wood-gasoline production." This, taken into consideration along with the earlier statement that Standard Oil- I.G. Farben had "restricted production of methanol" and the GM- Standard Oil-I.G. Farben joint venture, Ethyl, Inc., whose profitability depended on the production of lead-tetraethyl for oil- -based petrochemical gasoline - in direct competition with the alternative methanol, or "wood gas," certainly opens new avenues of investigation into the existence of a conspiracy against hemp as an alternative, and competing, industrial raw material, by these very same corporations which sold America out to the Nazis for profit and control of world resources and markets.

"Just after Pearl Harbor," writes Seldes, "the Assistant Attorney General, Mr. Thurman Arnold, issued a sensational report of the sabotage of the national (war production) program, the first report naming the practices which were later to be referred to as the treason of big business in wartime. Said Mr. Arnold:

"Looking back over 10 months of defense effort we can now see how much it has been hampered by the attitude of powerful basic industries who have feared to expand their production because expansion would endanger their future control of industry.

"'Anti-trust investigations during the past year have shown that there is not an organized basic industry in the United States which has not been restricting production by some device or other in order to avoid what they call "ruinous overproduction after the war."' (19)

By "ruinous overproduction," of course, they meant free-market competition. So, to question the existence of an industrial conspiracy against competition, during the 1930s and 1940s, is pointless. It has long been totally documented by volumes of evidence, available in the public record. And among this list of convicted corporate conspirators are murderers, racists, pro-Nazi collaborators, blackmailers and American Fascists who plotted at least one armed take-over of the U.S. government. And the list is not yet complete.

THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY

Henry Ford, writes Higham, "admired Hitler from the beginning, when the future Fuhrer was a struggling and obscure fanatic. He shared with Hitler a fanatical hatred of Jews."

"Ford's book 'The International Jew' was issued in 1927. A virulent anti-Semitic tract, it was still being distributed in Latin America and the Arab countries as late as 1945. Hitler admired the book and it influenced him deeply. Visitors to Hitler's headquarters at the Brown House in Munich noticed a large photograph of Henry Ford hanging in his office. Stacked high on the table outside were copies of Ford's book. As early as 1923," when Hitler heard that Ford was planning to run for President, he "told an interviewer from the 'Chicago-Tribune,' 'I wish that I could send some of my shock troops to Chicago and other big American cities to help.'"

As late as 1940, Ford Motor Company "refused to build aircraft engines for England and instead built supplies of the 5-ton military trucks that were the backbone of German army transportation." (20)

The Ford Motor Company was also aware of the potential of hemp as an alternative industrial resource, devoting many years research to the subject.

In a 1989 ABC Radio broadcast, Hugh Downs reported that in the 1930s, "the Ford Motor Company also saw a future in biomass fuels. Ford operated a successful biomass conversion plant that included hemp at their Iron Mountain facility in Michigan. Ford engineers extracted methanol, charcoal fuel, tar, pitch, ethyl acetate, and creosote - all fundamental ingredients for modern industry, and now supplied by oil- related industries. . . . Henry Ford's experiments with methanol promised cheap, readily-available fuel." (21)

As reported in "Popular Mechanics" in December, 1941, Ford's research represented "an industrial revolution in progress . . . a revolution in materials that will affect every home." (22) ... ...

**************************************************

WALL STREET AND THE RISE OF HITLER --article posted subsequently due to length limitations.

**************************************************


I myself have easier and more straightforward hard text on this...it's not debatable...but in the end this will be ignored, qualified, or marginalized so as to leave us with the conclusion, at the end of the day, that US actions are excusable for reasons X, whereas other nations actions are worthy of only condemnation, irrespective of their 'excuses'. When the USSR invaded Afghanistan, did anyone here actually know or care about the reasons the USSR gave to defend it's action? No...but we are more than willing to swallow load ofter load of crap...even when that crap is more clearly exposed for what it is as each day goes by...to excuse ourselves for a similar action we would condemn any other nation save Isreal for committing.


As with the argument about the intel confirming the threat Iraq posed to us...Bush et al repeatedly cited this as caussi belli, but when the NIE report stated categorically that the intel organs of the US had told Bush et al that Iraq represented no threat, direct or indirect...most war supporters in here ignored, qualified or marginalized it. Despite posting it 10 times at least, I would still be asked repeatedly where, exactly, this was said...repost it...and see it ignored again. Or, even more ludicrous, they would point out other areas in which the intel was inaccurate, completely missing the point, which was never whether or not the NIE report was accurate, but whether US intel was telling Bush et al what they claimed, which it wasn't. Sideroads into the accuracy of intel only serve to avoid the issue that our eyes and ears were contradicting what Bush was telling us we were seeing and hearing.

There are countelss other examples of this myopia in the cause of jingoistic fervour, but this statement of bama's serves to sum up much of that very kind of active subjectivity.


As to the point raised in this thread...aside from bama's dellusional contention about past US actions in this vein, several key elements appear to be being overlooked, particularly the timeline, about which the article is notably vague. Exactly when the French et al were to have supplied these items, whether or not the items in question constitute a breach of any agreement, if not whether the US is allowed to set the rules of trade conduct for all other nations when in the process of ignoring their positions on an issue, whether or not these items were acquired directly or indirectly, whether or not US arms were also being used in Iraq, etc. All of these are central questions, most of which haven't been substatially addressed.

 

Couldn't fit this in last post...


WALL STREET AND THE RISE OF HITLER
Anthony C Sutton 1976
Chapter 12
CONCLUSIONS
We have demonstrated with documentary evidence a number of critical associations between Wall Street international bankers and the rise of Hitler and Nazism in Germany.

First: that Wall Street financed the German cartels in the mid-1920s which in turn proceeded to bring Hitler to power.

Second: that the financing for Hitler and his S.S. street thugs came in part from affiliates or subsidiaries of U.S. firms, including Henry Ford in 1922, payments by I.G. Farben and General Electric in 1933, followed by the Standard Oil of New Jersey and I.T.T. subsidiary payments to Heinrich Himmler up to 1944.

Third: that U.S. multi-nationals under the control of Wall Street profited handsomely from Hitler's military construction program in the 1930s and at least until 1942.

Fourth: that these same international bankers used political influence in the U.S. to cover up their wartime collaboration and to do this infiltrated the U.S. Control Commission for Germany.

Our evidence for these four major assertions can be summarised as follows:

In Chapter One we presented evidence that the Dawes and Young plans for German reparations were formulated by Wall Streeters, temporarily wearing the hats of statesmen, and these loans generated a rain of profits for these international bankers. Owen Young of General Electric, Hjalmar Schacht, A. Voegler, and others intimately connected with Hitler's accession to power had earlier been the negotiators for the U.S. and German sides, respectively. Three Wall Street houses - Dillon, Read; Harris, Forbes; and, National City Company - handled three-quarters of the reparations loans used to create the German cartel system, including the dominant I.G. Farben and Vereinigte Stahlwerke, which together produced 95 per cent of the explosives for the Nazi side in World War II.

The central role of I.G. Farben in Hitler's coup d'etat was reviewed in Chapter Two. The directors of American I.G. (Farben) were identified as prominent American businessmen: Walter Teagle, a close Roosevelt associate and backer and an NRA administrator; banker Paul Warburg (his brother Max Warburg was on the board of I.G. Farben in Germany); and Edsel Ford. Farben contributed 400,000 RM directly to Schacht and Hess for use in the crucial 1933 elections and Farben was subsequently in the forefront of military development in Nazi Germany.

A donation of 60,000 RM was made to Hitler by German General Electric (A.E.G.), which had four directors and a 25-30 percent interest held by the U.S. General Electric parent company. This role was described in Chapter Three, and we found that Gerard Swope, an originator of Roosevelt's New Deal (its National Recovery Administration segment), together with Owen Young of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Clark Minor of International General Electric, were the dominant Wall Streeters in A.E.G. and most significant single influence.

We also found no evidence to indict the German electrical firm Siemens, which was not under Wall Street control. In contrast, there is documentary evidence that both A.E.G. and Osram, the other units of the German electrical industry - both of which had U.S. participation and control - did finance Hitler. In fact, almost all directors of German General Electric were Hitler backers, either directly through A.E.G. or indirectly through other German firms. G.E. rounded out its Hitler support by technical co-operation with Krupp, aimed at restricting U.S. development of tungsten carbide, which worked to the detriment of the U.S. in World War II. We concluded that A.E.G. plants in Germany managed, by a yet unknown manoeuvre, to avoid bombing by the Allies.

An examination of the role of Standard Oil of New Jersey (which was and is controlled by the Rockefeller interests) was undertaken in Chapter Four. Standard Oil apparently did not finance Hitler's accession to power in 1933 (that part of the "myth of Sidney Warburg" is not proven). On the other hand, payments were made up to 1944 by Standard Oil of New Jersey, to develop synthetic gasoline for war purposes on behalf of the Nazis and, through its wholly owned subsidiary, to Heinrich Himmler's S.S. Circle of Friends for political purposes. Standard Oil's role was technical aid to Nazi development of synthetic rubber and gasoline through a U.S. research company under the management control of Standard Oil. The Ethyl Gasoline Company, jointly owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey and General Motors, was instrumental in supplying vital ethyl lead to Nazi Germany - over the written protests of the U.S. War Department - with the clear knowledge that the ethyl lead was for Nazi military purposes.

In Chapter Five we demonstrated that International Telephone and Telegraph Company, one of the more notorious multi-nationals, worked both sides of World War II through Baron Kurt von Schröder, of the Schroder banking group. I.T.T. also held a 28-percent interest in FockeWolfe aircraft, which manufactured excellent German fighter planes. We also found that Texaco (Texas Oil Company) was involved in Nazi endeavours through German attorney Westrick, but dropped its chairman of the board Rieber when these endeavours were publicised.

Henry Ford was an early (1922) Hitler backer and Edsel Ford continued the family tradition in 1942 by encouraging French Ford to profit from arming the German Wehrmacht. Subsequently, these Ford-produced vehicles were used against American soldiers as they landed in France in 1944. For his early recognition of, and timely assistance to, the Nazis, Henry Ford received a Nazi medal in 1938. The records of French Ford suggest Ford Motor received kid glove treatment from the Nazis after 1940.

The provable threads of Hitler financing are drawn together in Chapter Seven and answer with precise names and figures the question, who financed Adolf Hitler? This chapter indicts Wall Street and, incidentally, no one else of consequence in the United States except the Ford family. The Ford family is not normally associated with Wall Street but is certainly a part of the "power elite."

In earlier chapters we cited several Roosevelt associates, including Teagle of Standard Oil, the Warburg family, and Gerard Swope. In Chapter Eight the role of Putze Hanfstaengl, another Roosevelt friend and a participant in the Reichstag fire, is traced. The composition of the Nazi inner circle during World War II, and the financial contributions of Standard Oil of New Jersey and I.T.T. subsidiaries, are traced in Chapter Nine. Documentary proof of these monetary contributions is presented. Kurt von Schroder is identified as the key intermediary in this S.S. "slush fund."

Finally, in Chapter Ten we reviewed a book suppressed in 1934 and the "myth of 'Sidney Warburg.'" The suppressed book accused the Rockefellers, the Warburgs, and the major oil companies of financing Hitler. While the name "Sidney Warburg" was no doubt an invention, the extraordinary fact remains that the argument in the suppressed "Sidney Warburg" Book is remains that the argument in the suppressed "Sidney Warburg" book is remarkably close to the evidence presented now. It also remains a puzzle why James Paul Warburg, fifteen years later, would want to attempt, in a rather transparently slipshod manner, to refute the contents of the "Warburg" book, a book he claims not to have seen. It is perhaps even more of a puzzle why Warburg would choose Nazi von Papen's Memoirs as the vehicle to present his refutation.

Finally, in Chapter Eleven we examined the roles of the Morgan and Chase Banks in World War II, specifically their collaboration with the Nazis in France while a major war was raging.

In other works, as in our two previous examinations of the links between New York international bankers and major historical events, we find a provable pattern of subsidy and political manipulation.

 

thanks, MacB. I too was pretty depressed to see anyone confidently discount the USA selling arms to Germany.

Hopefully, providing the facts will not be labeled "revisionist" (sic)history, but instead will sink in given time.

 

To me, this is more of an idictment of Bush's judgement than anything else. I mean, I knew it was a joke when he came out talking about looking into Putin's eyes and all that crap, but to have it actually confirmed in such a manner should really make people question there support of the guy.

 

We supply trucks, aircraft engines and other things that CAN be used for military purposes and that is arms dealing? Half the world flies American airliners and if they were used as military transports, that in your twisted rationale would be arms dealing. Give me a break.

We sold oil and scrap metal to the Japs, hells-bells! But we did not sell ARMS to the Germans as defined by this definition:

The Germans used GERMAN planes, GERMAN tanks, GERMAN machine guns, GERMAN ships and GERMAN bombs. Our military technology at the time was far inferior, especially when it came to fighter aircraft and tank technology. Explain why the Brits, fighting for their lives, would send back fighters we built because they were vastly inferior? That said, how could we have been the:

Name one weapons system besides some trucks (dual civilian/military use there) that we sold to the Nazis. I double-dog dare ya. I'll answer for you: not a damned one! You can't name one! Your statement is a bold-faced LIE and I'm calling you on it.

So what if Wall Street made loans to the Nazis. So what if we sold some aluminum and oil to them? We have resources, consumers have needs, we fill them. Haven't you heard of international trade? We weren't at war with them at the time. Sure, it wasn't necessarily the right thing to do, but cripes, we weren't exactly using the "Arsenal of Democracy" to supply the SS. So what if Ford and a lot of the evil capitalists you hate so much liked Hitler? They are entitled to their opinion and although it was monsterous to even admire that socialist, murdering SOB, it's not like they were going to supply our enemies while we were at war with them. Your distrust of corporations is getting to the point of absurdity.

I believe a lot of this sounds borderline, conspiracy theory-type material. Why are you always so darned happy to dwell on every little so-called negative thing our nation is ever done. Why do you look at America and see every bit of wrong? I don't look at America through rose-colored spectacles because I know we've not always done the right thing. But does it need to be dwelt upon ad nauseum by you?

 

Uh, I meant to say, hopefully providing the facts will provoke a vehement, multicolor defensive post of entrenchment. My bad.

 

What would norimially be met with something akin to pleasure...seeing someone with whom you are debating prove your point for you...is tempered in this case with the realization that it is unlikely he will even see that he has done so, and impossible that he will admit same. Still...

Interesting. Defining " night-vision goggles and radar-jamming equipment" as sure arms apparently qualifies without any sound of protest from you...but munitions, oil, engines, military trucks ( these were not garden variety trucks) and raw materials we knew were being transfered into arms doesn't? As I said, interesting. Also terrifying, as I have it on good authority that possession of night goggles and radar jamming equipment is fairly common by private industry and citizens in the US...a pending liberal coup, no doubt.


Allow me to point out this refrain from my first post...get used to it..."I myself have easier and more straightforward hard text on this...it's not debatable...but in the end this will be ignored, qualified, or marginalized so as to leave us with the conclusion, at the end of the day, that US actions are excusable for reasons X, whereas other nations actions are worthy of only condemnation, irrespective of their 'excuses'. "

Which brings me to this gem...

As I predicted, a convenient excuse, which apparently doesn't extend to the Russians or French at this time, unless A) International trade as we know it has been redefined, or B) They were at war with Iraq in the last 5 or so years without telling anyone.

A) Hitler wasn't Socialist, unless a name defines something categorically, in which case you would find uncomfortable bedfellows being hatched in the form of the Republican party and the People's Republic of China.

B) Where have I ever expressed hatred or distrust of corporations? Carefull how you use that brush.

Shockingly, you have a point, although it works against you. Yes, German military technology was superior...which is why what they needed most desperately was not finished products, but the materials to make same. I'm assuming that you are not so obtuse as to try and draw a semantic line of definition between raw materials for arms and arms...but even if you are, no one else does, which is precisely why, when outlawing German re-ARMAMENT, the Treaty of Versailles outlawed acquisition of raw materials to produce same as synonomous with armament, and it was this acquisition which first promted Churchill to warn against the rise of Nazi Germany. It was also in pursuit of raw materials which lead both Germany and Japan to seek expansion through military means.

I believe a lot of this sounds borderline, conspiracy theory-type material. Why are you always so darned happy to dwell on every little so-called negative thing our nation is ever done. Why do you look at America and see every bit of wrong? I don't look at America through rose-colored spectacles because I know we've not always done the right thing. But does it need to be dwelt upon ad nauseum by you? [/B][/QUOTE]


But I've left the best to last...even if, in contravention of all that is recognized, all the trials which followed WWII, all contemporary definitions of what does and does not constitute supplying arms, you try and retreat to a narrow definition of same to attempt to avoid the issue, as seen here...

...well, bama, even there you fall short.


INTERNATIONAL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH

Even after Pearl Harbor, ITT was working for the Nazis, reports Higham: ". . . the German army, navy, and air force contracted with ITT for the manufacture of switchboards, telephones, alarm gongs, buoys, air raid warning devices, radar equipment, and thirty thousand fuses per month for artillery shells used to kill British and American troops."

ITT also "supplied ingredients for the rocket bombs that fell on London," and other devices as well, without which "it would have been impossible for the German air force to kill American and British troops, for the German army to fight the Allies in Africa, Italy, France, and Germany, for England to have been bombed, or for Allied ships to have been attacked at sea." (24)

In 1938, "following a series of meetings with Luftwaffe chief Herman Goring, (ITT founder and chairman Sosthenes) Behn encouraged ITT's Lorenz subsidiary to purchase 28 percent of the Focke-Wulf firm, manufacturer of the bombers that were to sink so many Allied ships during the war," according to researcher and author Jim Hougan. (25)

Anthony Sampson, in "The Sovereign State of ITT," reports on what is perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the US/Nazi corporate partnership, war reparations:

". . . ITT now presents itself as the innocent victim of the Second World War, and has been handsomely recompensed for its injuries. In 1967, nearly thirty years after the events, ITT actually managed to obtain $27 million in compensation from the American government, for war damage to Focke-Wulf plants - on the basis that they were American property bombed by Allied bombers." (26)

The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission was responsible for this payment to ITT, and other U.S. corporations as well.

Bradford Snell reports that "After the cessation of hostilities, GM and Ford demanded reparations from the U.S. Government for wartime damages sustained by their Axis facilities as a result of Allied bombing. By 1967 GM had collected more than $33 million in reparations and Federal tax benefits for damages to its warplane and motor vehicle properties in formerly Axis territories . . . Ford received a little less than $1 million, primarily as a result of damages sustained by its military truck complex at Cologne." (27)

ALLEN DULLES: ARCHITECT OF THE US-NAZI NETWORK

Contemporary history records Allen Dulles as one of America's top spymasters, from his early days in the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in World War II, to his position as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the 1950s and early 1960s (until President John F. Kennedy fired him over the Bay of Pigs disaster in 1961), and finally to his membership on the controversial Warren Commission, which investigated President Kennedy's assassination. Until recently, his pivotal role in promoting a U.S. corporate relationship with the Nazis was little known. Loftus and Aarons describe the post-World War I role of Allen, and his brother, John Foster, in the following terms:

"We first turn to Dulles's creation of international finance networks for the benefit of the Nazis. In the beginning, moving money into the Third Reich was quite legal. Lawyers saw to that. And Allen and his brother John Foster were not just any lawyers. They were international finance specialists for the powerful Wall Street law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell. . . .

"The Dulles brothers were the ones who convinced American businessmen to avoid U.S. government regulation by investing in Germany. It began with the Versailles Treaty, in which they played no small role. After World War I the defeated German government promised to pay war reparations to the Allies in gold, but Germany had no gold. It had to borrow the gold from Sullivan & Cromwell's clients in the United States. Nearly 70 percent of the money that flowed into Germany during the 1930s came from investors in the United States, many of them Sullivan & Cromwell clients. . .

"Foster Dulles, as a member of the board of I.G. Farben, seems to have had little difficulty in getting along with whoever was in charge. Some of our sources insist that both Dulles brothers made substantial but indirect contributions to the Nazi party as the price of continued influence inside the new German order. . . ." (28)

Hmmm...hard to get more literal than bomb fuses used on England, no? In addition to all the rest...this is just one of many examples, bama...sorry to dissapoint you.

I had stated that people who support the war tend to excuse what we do with minute qualifiers while simultaneously condemning other nations for same...example being that we identify Americans as individuals...see you qualifying US arms to Germany as originating from " a few industrialists", implication being ' see them as individuals, not as representative of our nation...' from the same man who has repeatedly sought to discredit international opposition to the war on the grounds that a couple of contracts with " individual industrialists" exist in France, etc., which it is argued explains why over 95% of the rest of the world's population was against the war, the greedy bastards...So here we have my point in crystal. WE are made up of individuals, and even when those individuals make 'mistakes', the blame is partioned off individually. But when anyone who opposes us...and happens to be among THEY...does something, it is logical to allocate judgments on all of THEM collectively.

I hadn't actually asked for you to provide an example of the kind of thinking with which I expressed exhaspiration, but I thank you all the same for taking the time.

As you double dog dared me, called me a liar, and were proven wrong...and as you based your stance on this was premsed on us not supplying Germeny with arms...I assume that you will now;

1) apologize for the "liar" remark
2) reconsider your position
3) admit that your argument in here was incorrect, founded on supposition intended to support a previously held belief ( like the war argument itself), and retract previous conclusions....
4) Do whatever a double-dog darer proven wrong does...


...right?

Yeah, didn't think so. Point proven.

 

Your arrogance knows no bounds. The only thing you proved is that you will go any length of distance to prove me wrong, which you obviously did not if all you can come up with is some bomb fuses. In fact, if you did a little reading, you'd find that the BRITISH supplied the damned Germans with their newest aircraft engine on the commercial market (the Kestrel) in the early 1930's. So we did no worse than the Brits.

You didn't answer the question, do the alleged help provided by U.S. companies to the Nazi regime constitute arms as defined by my definition taken straight from the damned dictionary? I didn't think so. These loans, trucks and other sundry items could be used in a non-military capacity whereas NVG's and radar jamming equipment could not be (are you that stupid to even think that there could be a non-military use for radar jammers?).

Uhhh, I hate to poop on your parade (which I do quite often) but we were not at war with Germany in 1938. And besides, what is so different between Renault buying an interest in Nissan and ITT buying into Focke-Wulf, a company that made mostly civilian aircraft before the war?

link
What were you saying about the Nazis not being socialists? The term SOCIALIST is in their name. What kind of fool are you? Are you so educated that you can not see the damned forest for the trees? Hitler nationalized industries, which is.....ding-ding, socialist. Hitler believed in govt. control of many aspects of the economy, which is ding-ding, a major tenet of the socialist ideology you Canucks love so much. And guess what, I even found a Canadian who confirms what I'm saying here!
link
Apology.....ha! I'm just a bit distressed at the monotony of "yes, that's wrong, but look what America did wrong too, so they're no better than anyone else, moral equivalism" posts. Don't hold your breath for that apology, because you frankly owe one to the United States of America, which has shouldered the burden for Canada's (and your) defense for far too long.

 

Uh, how to break this to you, bama, as you insult people so freely...

Fascism was definied, by Il Duce himself, as corporatism. Enjoy the translated NAZI acronym all you like, but what largely defined Germany and Italy in the late thirties was a grotesque marriage of corporate power and government control. Hmmmm.

 

I told my European history teacher when I was in h/s that the political spectrum should be a doughnut, since the extreme right and the extreme left meet rather neatly. I still believe in that principle.

 

In a strictly poli sci context, IIRC "Corporatism" doesn't imply state ownership of industry at all, as Marxism would, it merely means that the state and private industry collaborate/cooperate to determine policy/legislation etc.

Example: When Dick Cheney goes into a room with Ken Lay and assorted other Big Energy types and comes out with the President's energy bill, that's corporatism, but the result is far from communist.

 

That's kind of a myth. When extrmes use tyranny to excercise their power, you'll see inherent power related similarities, but not based on their ideologies, where far right and far left are, in fact, far apart, especially in key areas like how they see the role between individual and State, the authority of government, and the distribution of property.

Any political system, be it socialist, capitalist, theocratic, oligarchic,monarchial, etc. will resemble another of a different type if they are both held in power by the practical workings of despotism.

 

in the end...the far left and the far right look a lot alike.

Max, in many ways I agree with you on this one. What you need to understand is that Cheney and the cabal who control the information getting through to Bush are extreme rightists who believe it is ok to lie, cheat and kill (at least Iraqis) to further their political goals.
.
This is what more mainstream Republicans or moderates like Ambassador Wilson and ex Secretary O'Neil are telling us.

 

Your thought hasn't evolved since HS?

Seriously, though, nothing meets neatly and they are not all the same. I will sound like a broken record from two or so years ago, but anarchism/libertarian socialism is the farthest extreme of the left.

Fascism on both sides is more like a divergence from the erroneous spectrum, or, in your case, doughnut.